A New Look At Colissians 2:14-17

[John]

Col 2:14-17

14 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;

15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them
openly, triumphing over them in it.

16 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:

17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
KJV

If one looks closely at these verses one can come to a conclusion of truth,
if read in context of corresponding OT scripture.

First we must look and see that "handwriting of ordinances" was NOT
the 10 commandments.This is clarified in verse 17"shadow of things to come".
Now most scholars agree, the cerimonial aspects of the mosaic law
repesented or symbolized Christ. They pointed forward to Christ.
The whole sacrificial system symbolized Christ.

Even some Adventist scholars no longer accept this.
They believe these verses are speaking of the moral law,
or the entire law. But a closer look reveals some interesting facts.
First, why does Paul include ONLY the 4th commandment
with other ceremonial aspects? If the Sabbath is a moral
imperative, just like "Thou shalt not committ adultry",
then why include it in verse 16?

This brings up the question raised by these scholars
when they say "holyday" is the same as "sabbaths".
So why would Paul repeat himself there?
The answer is, a holyday is not nessesarily
ONLY a sabbath day. Most Jewish holydays
were a number of days or weeks. Now ONE of THOSE
days WAS a sabbath.
But if you look closely at that verse and compare it to OT
scripture you will see the answer:
Lev 23:23-38
23 Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 24 "Speak to the children of
Israel, saying: 'In the seventh month, on the first day of the month, you
shall have a sabbath-rest, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, a holy
convocation. 25 You shall do no customary work on it; and you shall offer an
offering made by fire to the LORD.' "

26 And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying: 27 "Also the tenth day of this
seventh month shall be the Day of Atonement. It shall be a holy convocation
for you; you shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by fire to
the LORD. 28 And you shall do no work on that same day, for it is the Day of
Atonement, to make atonement for you before the LORD your God. 29 For any
person who is not afflicted in soul on that same day shall be cut off from
his people. 30 And any person who does any work on that same day, that
person I will destroy from among his people. 31 You shall do no manner of
work; it shall be a statute forever throughout your generations in all your
dwellings. 32 It shall be to you a sabbath of solemn rest, and you shall
afflict your souls; on the ninth day of the month at evening, from evening
to evening, you shall celebrate your sabbath."

33 Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 34 "Speak to the children of
Israel, saying: 'The fifteenth day of this seventh month shall be the Feast
of Tabernacles for seven days to the LORD. 35 On the first day there shall
be a holy convocation. You shall do no customary work on it. 36 For seven
days you shall offer an offering made by fire to the LORD. On the eighth day
you shall have a holy convocation, and you shall offer an offering made by
fire to the LORD. It is a sacred assembly, and you shall do no customary
work on it. 37 These are the feasts of the LORD which you shall proclaim to
be holy convocations, to offer an offering made by fire to the LORD, a burnt
offering and a grain offering, a sacrifice and drink offerings, everything
on its day-- 38 besides the Sabbaths of the LORD, besides your gifts,
besides all your vows, and besides all your freewill offerings which you
give to the LORD.
NKJV

Notice these verses describe "SABBATH DAYS" and as it says in verse 38,
these are seperate, as it says "BESIDES THE SABBATHS OF THE LORD".
There is a distinction made in verse 38 between the festival sabbaths
and the 7th day weekly sabbath.

So we see then, there are different sabbath days. Some included in
the feasts and holy convocations. Does this mean THE OTHER DAYS
weren't "HOLYDAYS"? For instance it says in verse 24, 'In the seventh month,
on the first day of the month, you shall have a sabbath-rest, a memorial of
blowing of trumpets, a holy convocation'. This was ONE day out of ALL the
"holydays" of that festival.
But were the other days "holydays"? Of course they were, as the festival
lasted more then one day.

So then the conclusion can be made, when Paul states in verse 16:
16 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:

He is speaking in context describing the festivals and holy days which also
had sabbaths.

It would make NO SENSE to include the 7th Day Sabbath, part of the
Decalogue,
in context with every other word describing a facet of the festivals.
Paul was giving a complete description of the Jewish festivals.
New moon, meat and drink offerings, holy convocations and sabbath days
were a description of ceremonial festivals.

Furthermore, what was an "ordinance"?
Here is an example:
Num 9:11-12
12 They shall leave none of it until morning, nor break one of its bones.
According to all the ordinances of the Passover they shall keep it.
NKJV

Notice here below "ordinance" is seperate from "law".

2 Kings 17:34
34 To this day they continue practicing the former rituals; they do not fear
the LORD, nor do they follow their statutes or their ordinances, or the law
and commandment which the LORD had commanded the children of Jacob, whom He
named Israel,
NKJV

Last point, the ceremonial and civil laws were not stored in the Ark of the
Covenant,
but the 10 commandments were.

God Bless,
John

[Ronald R. Walker, M.D.]

Dear John:

 

Some additional information to consider ...

 

Regarding WHAT was nailed to the cross in Colossians 2:14, it has been written:

 

... having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross.  (NIV)

 

The major problem with the interpretation, that "the written code" is the "Law of Moses", including the 10 Commandments, is that the "law" is not even being discussed in Colossians 2:14.  As a matter of fact, the Greek word "nomos", "law", is NEVER mentioned in Colossians AT ALL, which is remarkable, IF the apostle Paul were actually discussing the "law" in Colossians, whether this be the 10 Commandments or the Law of Moses.

 

The word that has been translated "written code", which some view as the "law", as in "the Law of Moses", is not "nomos", but the Greek word "cheirographon", a legal term meaning the "record-book of sin" in this case.

__________________________________________________

 

[NOTE: Robert Brinsmead, in his article "Sabbatarianism: Re-Examined", tries to argue against "cheirographon" being translated as "a document of indebtedness", "the record of our sins", as seen below --

__________

 

The meaning of cheirographon as a document of indebtedness is only one meaning of the word in nonbiblical Greek. Lenski points out that cheirographon does not always refer to a debtor's bond but may refer to a labor contract, to a document giving authority to act or even to business agreements.  It is misleading, therefore, to say that cheirographon means an instrument for remembering or recording a debt.  It simply means a written document.  The kind of written document referred to in Colossians 2:14 must be determined by the context.

 

We are not left in doubt as to the kind of written document Paul is referring to.  The cheirographon consists of "regulations" ("ordinances," "decrees," from the Greek word dogmasin).  Colossians 2:14 is not describing a document we have signed, much less written, but something which has been written in divine decrees, The same word dogmasin appears in Ephesians 2:15, where Paul is obviously discussing the Mosaic ministration of the law.

__________

 

However, a closer examination of Brinsmead's "analysis" shows that it is highly flawed.

 

IN THE CONTEXT of what the Apostle Paul is discussing in Colossians 2:14, "cheirographon" is NOT "a labor contract, a document giving authority to act or even to business agreements" and certainly NOT a corpus of law.  During the time of the apostle Paul, at a trial, the witnesses testifying against a person occupied a position in the middle of the court, where they presented a "cheirographon" or a "record-book of sin" against that person.  In Colossians 2:14 (according to the NIV), the apostle Paul uses the phrase, "took it away", which in Greek is literally "taking it out of the middle" -- the record-book of our sins was removed from those in "the middle [of the court]" who would accuse us of sin.

 

So, "we are not left in doubt as to the kind of written document Paul is referring to", as Brinsmead states.  Unfortunately for Brinsmead's argument, the only "written document" that was "tak[en] out of the middle" of anything was "the record-book of our sins".

 

In addition, the "cheirographon" is based on "dogma", regulations or ordinances, which again, in the context of a legal proceeding against us, makes the "cheirographon" a record-book of our violations of regulations or ordinances, i.e., a record-book of our sins.

 

Importantly, the Apostle Paul does NOT state that the "dogma" are nailed to the cross.  The object of the participle "exaleipsas" (having wiped out) should be in the ACCUSATIVE case, therefore, must be "to cheirographon" (accusative), and NOT "tois dogmasin", which is NOT ACCUSATIVE, but DATIVE, indicating the MEANS by which the charges were made against us, while the object of participle "proseeloosas" (having nailed) is "auto" (it), which is SINGULAR neuter, referring back to "to cheirographon" (SINGULAR neuter), NOT "tois dogmasin", (PLURAL neuter).  Interestingly, Brinsmead overlooks this basic grammar of the Greek in his "analysis".

 

The bottom line -- the record-book of our sins was wiped out/nailed to the cross, not the regulations or ordinances.]

__________________________________________________

 

Therefore, a better translation of Colossians 2:14 would be:

 

Having wiped out the record-book of our sins, which was against us, and having taken it out of the middle [of the court], having nailed it to the cross ....

 

As indicated in the "NOTE", above, during the time of the apostle Paul, at a trial, the witnesses testifying against a person occupied a position in the middle of the court, where they presented a "cheirographon" or a "record-book of sin" against that person.  This also explains the apostle Paul's phrase, "took it away" (NIV), which in Greek is literally "taking it out of the middle" -- the "record-book of our sins" was removed from those in "the middle [of the court]", removed from those who would accuse us of sin. 

 

This also explains the apostle Paul's subsequent statement, and it has been written:

 

Having disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public spectacle of them, having triumphed [over] them by it.  (Colossians 2:15)

 

Without the "cheirographon", our accusers before God, Satan and his host, the "rulers and authorities", have been "disarmed" -- they have no basis for their accusations, no proof of wrong-doing on our part.  This was the basis of the apostle Paul's use of the term "cheirographon".

 

Therefore, God did NOT nail the Law, Mosaic or any other Law, to the cross, for without the Law there would be no sin and no need for a Savior, but nailed "the record of our sins" to the cross.  Through our faith-love relationship with our Lord, when we sin, when we break the Law (and the differentiation between the Law of God and the Law of Moses in the writings of Paul is often an arbitrary one, not made by Paul), we realize that we have in actuality broken the heart of the Law-Giver, feel the utter sinfulness of our sins, confess our sins and ask for forgiveness.  When we are forgiven, we are cleansed from all unrighteousness, as it has been written:

 

If we are confessing our sins, He is faithful and righteous, that He will forgive us [our] sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.  (1 John 1:9)

 

When we are cleansed/purified from all unrighteousness, our "cheirographon" is removed from our accusers, replaced by the record of Christ Jesus' perfect obedience to the Law.

 

This is also the reason the apostle Paul said regarding "love" and it has been written:

 

[Love] ... does not behave disgracefully, is not self-seeking, is not provoked, does not keep a record of wrong[s].  (1 Corinthians 13:5)

 

Hopefully this has been helpful.

 

Doulos Xristou 'Ieesou,

 

Ronald R. Walker, M.D.

 

[John]

 

"Ronald R. Walker, M.D." <ron.walk...@starband.net> wrote in message news:yh4gc.1637$FB1...@fe25.usenetserver.com...

I can see that point, but I can only conclude that 2:16-17 are a different point

being made by Paul. Because it is obvious he is speaking in regard to the ceremonial

aspects of the mosiac law in those verses. Are the 10 commandments a shadow of Christ?

I don't believe so. It is the festivals and the sacrificial system that pointed to a future

Lamb of God. Moses had written the "ordinaces" with his hand. But it is Jesus who

wrote the 10 commandments with His finger.

 

John