Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances

[posthuman]

That is a presumption, Jesus is our rest true but to say that we don't need to keep the sabbath because Jesus is our rest is a presumption. He is our rest every day all the time. The Sabbath is commanded to be kept on the 7th day and to keep it because God rested on that day. Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
To just think Jesus is now my rest so i can forget about the 7th day is a presumption. The Sabbath was not a shadow of Christ. It was created before sin.

it is exactly the same presumption you make when you say it would be contrary to keep feast days or other ceremony. you say, Jesus is our sacrifice, so it would be sin to practice sacrifice. you agree with Jackson, Jesus is our rest -- but then you say it would be sin not to keep the shadow of rest in a ceremony? for a reason, you point to Law of the Sinai marriage covenant. that same covenant is the one that says make sacrifices, wear tzitzit, keep kosher diet, isolate yourself for period of days if you touch a dead body, etc.

why do we baptize in H[SUB]2[/SUB]O when we know that actual baptism that is effective is not H[SUB]2[/SUB]O but Spirit and fire?
why do we take little sips of wine and eat little nips of bread when the true bread and the true wine is Christ's body and blood?

 

[posthuman]

Can you prove that they didn't keep the Sabbath?

The difference is that the weekly sabbath was given at creation as a gift from God and the yearly sabbaths were introduced after sin when the yearly feasts and ordinances were introduced as a shadow that pointed to Christ (Passover).

can you prove Adam and Eve didn't have a flying carpet? that they didn't wear tzitzit? that they weren't baptized? that Eve didn't wear a veil over her face?
i can make any wild assumption i want and tell you it's up to you to prove it's not true. it's not a solid argument; it's presumption.


sabbath was not recorded as being commanded to anyone until manna was given, Exodus 16. there, details of how it must be kept were also given: this is evidence that they did not already keep it and did not know how to keep it; they had to be told to do it, and how to do it had to be explained to them. that's what the record of scripture says. not presumption, record.

 

[Cee]

Paul didn’t put Gentiles under the Law of Moses. He continually protected them from Law keepers. Who sought to frustrate the grace of Christ because they were jealous of the believers’ freedom.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Paul didn’t put Gentiles under the Law of Moses.

Paul didn't, but the Jerusalem Council did (partially and minimally). Study Acts 15.

 

[Cee]

I believe it was something like: Don’t fornicate, abstain from sacrifices, don’t drink blood, and you will do well.

 

[Nehemiah6]

I believe it was something like: Don’t fornicate, abstain from sacrifices, don’t drink blood, and you will do well.

Exactly. And some of these go back to the time of Noah.

Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. (Gen 9:3,4)

The consumption of blood is forbidden to Christians, but all meats are acceptable as above (which means that the dietary laws of Moses are null and void). Yet there are some Christians who wish to maintain those dietary laws, and they are welcome to do so, as long as it is a private matter for *weaker brethren*.

 

[PS]

is the Sinai Covenant Law the new covenant?

My spiritual home is Zion and not Sinai.

 

[PS]

Whatever was nailed to the cross, will not be part on God's New Covenant
and the Law Books are conspicuous by their absence. Here is why:


Galatians 4:5 so that He might redeem those who were under the Law,
that we might receive the adoption as sons.

Romans 6:14 For sin shall not be master over you,
for you are not under law but under grace.

John 1:17 For the Law was given through Moses;
grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.

Romans 7:4 Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law
through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another,
to Him who was raised from the dead,
in order that we might bear fruit for God.​

 

[JaumeJ]

All I have ever repeated of the Gospel about Law is to learn of Jesus Christ all He teaches on it, it is easy for His burden is light.

Hello JaumeJ
Some believe that since there Is only one GOD and HE spoke In the old and new testament and since HIS WORD doesn’t change,we should try to keep the law and also be under grace at the same time.

The only thing about keeping the law Is when the law was given the way Into the Most Holy place was not yet,I mean CHRIST had not yet fulfilled the law and died on the cross satisfying the demand of the law on OUR behalf so then those trying to fulfill the law before grace was made available would have to be perfect In their own strength and would come short and those today trying to keep the law have fallen from grace and Into the merit system.

 

[Ralph-]

I don't know what this means. Moses wrote the law on a scroll at Sinai.

The argument is that since Paul is referring to the 'handwriting of ordinances' he could only be referring to the add on rabbinical judgments of men about the law (rabbinical tradition) because the Jews did not reproduce the actual law of Moses in writing to communicate it and teach it to others. That was only done orally out of reverence for the word of God.

I guess I'm not remembering the details of the argument correctly because a quick Google search shows that the rabbinical traditions existed only orally as well until well after the resurrection.

I had some good debates with some well rounded Messianic believers years ago on-line about this and other passages and it helped me to see what Paul was saying in this and other passages. I've never been convinced that we must keep the literal ceremonies of the law as a matter of faith like we must 'do not steal' as a matter of faith, but I did learn tons about the church's misunderstanding of what Paul is talking about when he warns the church about law keeping. Law keeping for the sake of justification is what is absolutely forbidden and wrong about law keeping in this New Covenant, not law keeping itself.

 

[Jackson123]

The argument is that since Paul is referring to the 'handwriting of ordinances' he could only be referring to the add on rabbinical judgments of men about the law (rabbinical tradition) because the Jews did not reproduce the actual law of Moses in writing to communicate it and teach it to others. That was only done orally out of reverence for the word of God.

I guess I'm not remembering the details of the argument correctly because a quick Google search shows that the rabbinical traditions existed only orally as well until well after the resurrection.

I had some good debates with some well rounded Messianic believers years ago on-line about this and other passages and it helped me to see what Paul was saying in this and other passages. I've never been convinced that we must keep the literal ceremonies of the law as a matter of faith like we must 'do not steal' as a matter of faith, but I did learn tons about the church's misunderstanding of what Paul is talking about when he warns the church about law keeping. Law keeping for the sake of justification is what is absolutely forbidden and wrong about law keeping in this New Covenant, not law keeping itself.

if it is orally why it call handwriting?

 

[Ralph-]

as far as i know ((and i am not at all studied on the particulars)) there are no certain sets of laws that were never written down, that the Torah was quite definitely written down and as carefully as possible copied and preserved, and that 'tradition' is found in the Talmud ((also written down)) and consists of interpretation of The Law ((Torah, the books of Moses, in fact all of the OT)) -- for example a rabbi may take Leviticus 19:19 and after much thought, meditation and prayer, decide that in order to fully devote himself to keeping it, he should not only refrain from mixing cotton and wool, but cotton and silk, wool and any kind of flax, etc.
said rabbi would then teach all his disciples to keep the Law in this way, and he might draw philosophically a precept from 'mixing fabrics' to other applications, and forbid his disciples to do such things as using nails and wood in the same article of furniture, with the idea that he is keeping the spirit of the Law this way.

that's how we get 'eating with unwashed hands' -- not a Law given by God, but a tradition that arose from seeking to physically keep the Law ever more faithfully, with the idea that righteousness comes from physical observation, and the more physically stringent, the more righteous. this hand-washing was for ceremonial purification, not for germ-spread prevention.

thus by 'tradition of men' to focus on satisfying the righteousness of the law by stricter and stricter physical observation of it, customs arise and are 'added' by commonly agreed application of it to the elemental things of the world. as in Colossians 3, where Paul goes on to chastise the reader for foolishly submitting themselves to physical proscription ((do not handle! do not touch! do not eat!)) -- proscriptions that rise up from the very human tradition of trying to make themselves approved spiritually by what they do physically.


[HR][/HR][HR][/HR]


i appreciate you replying; didn't mean to drag you into what you don't wish to get yourself involved in. can't say as i blame ya

Good explanation of rabbinical law.

Here's the dilemma:

'Handwriting of ordinances'-Colossians 2:14 KJV


From Strong's it seems 'Handwriting' is an accurate meaning of the word Paul is using here (though only some translations use that translation). This would seem to indicate that he's talking about the law of Moses except that the word he uses for 'ordinances' means 'opinions of judgment'. So he seems to be speaking of judgments about the law (rabbinical law) that are written down, but since they are written down he can't be talking about the oral rabbinical add-on law.

So which is it? Is it the handwriting of rabbinical judgments which weren't written down that got nailed to the cross and no longer able to condemn us? Or is it the handwriting of the law of Moses (stored in permanent file in the temple, which are not the opinions of judgment) that got nailed to the cross and no longer able to condemn us?


Who's condemnation have we been delivered from by the death of Christ? The condemnation of rabbinical add-on law, or the condemnation of the actual law of Moses? The context shows he's clearly talking about rabbinical law, while vs. 14 suggests, by his use of 'handwriting', that he's talking about the law of Moses itself.


My answer? Both. For when our indebtedness to the law of Moses was nailed to the cross and marked 'paid in full', nullifying the necessity to have to perform the Festival cycle, every rabbinical law lost it's power over us to dictate how we were to keep that Festival cycle. And for that reason we are not to let anyone judge us "by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day"-Colossians 2:16. The rabbinical powers that ruled over the people of God and brought us into the bondage of their ridiculous, but binding, rabbinical rulings were disarmed and triumphed over by the cross:


14having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness (handwriting of ordinances), which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. 15And having disarmed the powers and authorities (the Rabbi's), he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross."-Colossians 2:14-15

 

[Ralph-]

if it is orally why it call handwriting?

And that's the $64.00 question.

I don't know.

The law of Moses was not communicated and taught by writing it down. And rabbinical law was (apparently) not written down at all anywhere.

The conclusion I've come to is Paul is talking about both the law itself and the rabbinical add-on law being nailed to the cross, though the context outside of vs. 14 is clearly addressing the specific topic of being delivered from the judgment and condemnation of rabbinical law.

When we no longer had to keep the Festival cycle of the law because of faith in Christ, any and all rabbinical judgments on how to keep the Festival cycle of the law ended too. Hence, Paul is saying we are no longer able to be condemned by those man-made, philosophically based, carnal requirements of rabbinical law. We are not to let any man judge and condemn us in regard to those laws anymore.


"16Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days"-Colossians 2:16

 

[posthuman]

My answer? Both. For when our indebtedness to the law of Moses was nailed to the cross and marked 'paid in full', nullifying the necessity to have to perform the Festival cycle, every rabbinical law lost it's power over us to dictate how we were to keep that Festival cycle. And for that reason we are not to let anyone judge us "by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day"-Colossians 2:16. The rabbinical powers that ruled over the people of God and brought us into the bondage of their ridiculous, but binding, rabbinical rulings were disarmed and triumphed over by the cross:


14having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness (handwriting of ordinances), which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. 15And having disarmed the powers and authorities (the Rabbi's), he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross."-Colossians 2:14-15

i agree, both - but rabbinical judgements were never against us according to His judgement; He calls them lying prophets who say He has spoken when He has not, and it has always been those that 'listen to God rather than men' that are approved by Him.

observation of what a person eats or drinks and their observation of & participation in religious feasts, new moon festivals and sabbaths are all in the Law of Moses, they're not 'invented' by rabbis/pharisees what have you. their may be added regulation, but here in Col 2:16 the specific things, which he calls shadows of Christ, are not extra-scriptural additions, they are what much of the law concerns: diet and days. feasts, which have high sabbaths, sabbaths for the new moon, how the calendar for observation of days is set, and weekly sabbath.
if this is about extra-Mosaic rabbinic addition in v. 16, not about the commands in the Pentateuch concerning the very same diet and days, then those human traditions are what are being called shadows of Him, aren't they? are they shadows of Him?

i agree, both. but both because the authority of the rabbis over the congregation of Israel was removed in spectacular fashion. Christ had said, listen to them, because they sit in the seat of Moses. but giving Himself to die for you and me, under the charge of blasphemy for making Himself equal to God, and rising to take up His life again so that if we believe this He has removed our sin and will raise us also, He made a spectacle of them by taking their chair right out from under them: not under law, but grace. the curtain: torn; a new and better covenant sealed - therefore let no one judge you in these things, things required of those under the covenant of that veil, and that temple, and the tabernacle before it, and the holy of holies. not on this mountain or some other any longer - Moses' seat is taken away by His intercession - where do the rabbis sit now?

 

[PS]

And that's the $64.00 question.

I don't know.

The law of Moses was not communicated and taught by writing it down. And rabbinical law was (apparently) not written down at all anywhere.

The conclusion I've come to is Paul is talking about both the law itself and the rabbinical add-on law being nailed to the cross, though the context outside of vs. 14 is clearly addressing the specific topic of being delivered from the judgment and condemnation of rabbinical law.

When we no longer had to keep the Festival cycle of the law because of faith in Christ, any and all rabbinical judgments on how to keep the Festival cycle of the law ended too. Hence, Paul is saying we are no longer able to be condemned by those man-made, philosophically based, carnal requirements of rabbinical law. We are not to let any man judge and condemn us in regard to those laws anymore.


"16Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days"-Colossians 2:16

Makes sense to me.

 

[seed_time_harvest]

That is a presumption, Jesus is our rest true but to say that we don't need to keep the sabbath because Jesus is our rest is a presumption. He is our rest every day all the time. The Sabbath is commanded to be kept on the 7th day and to keep it because God rested on that day. Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
To just think Jesus is now my rest so i can forget about the 7th day is a presumption. The Sabbath was not a shadow of Christ. It was created before sin.

In the old testament the bible DOES say to remember the Sabbath and keep It holy but under Grace the bible says not to have respect for a holy day,the body Is of CHRIST.

Since both of these scriptures are from GOD shouldn't they be harmonized together so they make sense or should they be sounding contradictory and confusing?

 

[JaumeJ]

Everyone who claims to believe Jesus Christ should at the v ery least learn what He teaches on the Law and how He has brought it up to the New Covenant, how it is to be observed and what it means today under mercy graced by His Blood.

I have posted to this effect many times on deaf ears, and I am not going to be shocked it this one is received the same.

 

[PS]

In the old testament the bible DOES say to remember the Sabbath and keep It holy but under Grace the bible says not to have respect for a holy day,the body Is of CHRIST.

Since both of these scriptures are from GOD shouldn't they be harmonized together so they make sense or should they be sounding contradictory and confusing?

Men added to OT law, whereas the New Testament commandments are all of Christ.

 

[PS]

Everyone who claims to believe Jesus Christ should at the v ery least learn what He teaches on the Law and how He has brought it up to the New Covenant, how it is to be observed and what it means today under mercy graced by His Blood.

I have posted to this effect many times on deaf ears, and I am not going to be shocked it this one is received the same.

You are right especially if we are going to follow Christ and his teaching, otherwise we cannot call ourselves Christians i.e., Christ's men and women.

 

[Grandpa]

Colossians 2:14-17

[SUP]14 [/SUP]Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
[SUP]15 [/SUP]And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
[SUP]16 [/SUP]Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
[SUP]17 [/SUP]Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

This is Paul expounding and explaining on what the Lord Jesus Christ has ALREADY said and what He has shown Paul.

Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Well it was fulfilled. Which means that people who have faith in Christ are no longer obligated to try and fulfill it themselves.

Galatians 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

I suppose the biggest question here is do you want to be Righteous or do you want to follow your own understanding of the law??

If you just want to follow the law because you think it is a fun thing to do then by all means have fun.

If you want to be righteous, however, you'll have to put your understanding of the law and how to follow it away and follow Christ. Which is what the Lord Jesus Christ directly tells you.

Matthew 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

​

​

​

​