Oldmantook

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2017
3,633
1,526
64
USA
✟99,173.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I find in the immediate context

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.

That the ordinances in the old testament were actually in the way of our salvation, so they were nailed to the cross. So we aren't supposed to let anyone judge us in regards to food or drink, since the matter is as superficial as a shadow is to a body.
The law or OT ordinances were never in the way of our salvation, rather they pointed the way to our salvation which is fulfilled in Jesus. Thus the law cannot have been "taken out of the way." The question then becomes what does the "handwriting of ordinances" then refer to if it is not the law? This passage taken from this link explains more fully:

Colossians 2:14-15 Commentary | Precept Austin
Certificate of debt (5498) (cheirographon from cheir = hand + grapho = write) is literally handwriting or a handwritten document and then a written record of a debt such as a promissory note. A document is written in one's own hand as a proof of obligation, e.g., a note of indebtedness. The word means primarily a bond written by a person pledging himself to make certain payments.

Friberg writes that figuratively in the only NT use in Colossians 2:14 cheirographon refers not to

the law itself, but to the record of charges (for breaking God's law), which stood against us and which God symbolically removed by "nailing it to the cross," handwritten account, record of debts (Friberg, T., Friberg, B., & Miller, N. F. Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament. Baker Academic)

Thayer writes that cheirographon means…

specifically, a note of hand, or writing in which one acknowledges that money has either been deposited with him or lent to him by another, to he returned at an appointed time

TDNT writes that in Colossians 2:14 cheirographon means

a “promissory note.” God cancels the bond that lies to our charge. This bond is not a compact with the devil, as in some patristic exegesis. It is the debt that we have incurred with God. The forgiveness of sins (Col 2:13-note) through identification with Christ in his vicarious death and resurrection means that this note is cancelled; God has set it aside and nailed it to the cross. (Kittel, G., Friedrich, G., & Bromiley, G. W. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Eerdmans)

For example, in Philemon we find an "IOU" Paul writing

I, Paul, am writing this with my own hand, I will repay it (not to mention to you that you owe to me even your own self as well). (Philemon 1:19)

The idea is that of list of our crimes or moral debt before God, a debt no imperfect person can completely pay. But it can be taken out of the way, by payment from a perfect man, Jesus Christ.

Cheirographon then described a note or bond written by hand thus obligating the writer to fulfill the debt that is written out. In other words it is analogous to an "IOU" signed by hand and obligating the signer to repay the debt. Paul's idea seems to be that the sins of mankind had piled up a list of "I.O.U.'s" so large that they could never be repaid. Paul uses cheirographon not as the law itself, but as the record of charges for breaking God's law and which therefore stood against us.
-----------
Since the debt of our sins and not the ordinances were nailed to the cross, Paul in Col 2:16 is instructing the Galatians to let no one judge them as they keep eating/drinking in celebration of their observances of the festivals, new moon, sabbaths. He is not telling them not to do them.
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Well, I don't want to start an argument over it, but while they are indeed nearly always mentioned in reference to Mosaic law, I can't agree with you that they always were. I think you are spiritualizing 2 Peter 3:10 too much. He uses a future tense verb in v.12, saying, "Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat."

I'm open to creative interpretation, and spiritualization, only it needs to hold up in context.

Blessings in Christ.

A couple things here... of course it was future tense... 2 Peter 3 was written years before 70AD, so the future tense in and of itself should not disqualify my interpretation from consideration, right?

Next, I find Scripture is always the best interpreter of scripture.

The "shaking/removal/dissolution of Heavens and Earth" is used through scripture to describe any number of Jehovah's past OT judgment comings upon nations and individuals:

On His coming Against Ancient Babylon
Isaiah 13:13
Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger.

Jeremiah 51:48
Then the heaven and the earth, and all that [is] therein, shall sing for Babylon: for the spoilers shall come unto her from the north, saith the LORD

On His coming Against King Saul
Psalms 18:7-10
Then the earth shook and trembled; the foundations also of the hills removed and were shaken, because he was wroth ... He bowed the heavens also, and came down: and darkness was under his feet. And he rode upon a cherub, and did fly: yea, he did fly upon the wings of the wind.

On His coming Against Persia during Zerubbabel's Day
Haggai 2:21
Speak to Zerubbabel, governor of Judah, saying, I will shake the heavens and the earth

So, getting back to the use of the phrase as it was used by Peter, we can see that He didn't mean the physical planet or material cosmos-- rather, it meant the passing away of the Old Covenant World and the planting of the New Covenant Kingdom. As the great Charles Spurgeon wrote:

C.H. Spurgeon On New Heavens and Earth (1865)
"Did you ever regret the absence of the burnt-offering, or the red heifer, of any one of the sacrifices and rites of the Jews? Did you ever pine for the feast of tabernacle, or the dedication? No, because, though these were like the old heavens and earth to the Jewish believers, they have passed away, and we now live under the new heavens and a new earth, so far as the dispensation of divine teaching is concerned. The substance is come, and the shadow has gone: and we do not remember it." (Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, vol. xxxvii, p. 354).

The reason not to take Heavens and earth as "the planet and outerspace" in those passages is because the Hebrew writers that wrote those passages did not take them as the planet and outerspace. That's important.

The phrase had many uses, which I listed above, and we know that in Hebrews 12:18-28 , for example, the shaking of heaven and earth was symbolic for the transition OUT of the Old Covenant world and INTO the New Covenant Kingdom. In total harmony with Hebrews 12:18-28, Jesus taught that Heaven and Earth and the Mosaic Law System would pass together (Matt 5:17-19). They did so at AD 70 when the Old Covenant vanished. This Harmonizes perfectly with 2 Peter 3:10... Peter did not teach anything different from Jesus, and Jesus did not teach anything different from the Prophets before Him regarding the nature and usage of phrases like "the passing" or "burning" or "receding" or "bowing" or "shaking" or "dissolution" of "heaven and earth".

I believe the onus is on the claimant to demonstrate where scripture teaches one must apply a POLAR OPPOSITE interpretation to this language when we find it in the NT, than we must interpret it, time and again, when we find it in the OT.

Can you demonstrate such a teaching from scripture?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gregory Thompson

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.
Supporter
Dec 20, 2009
28,362
7,742
Canada
✟721,286.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
The law or OT ordinances were never in the way of our salvation, rather they pointed the way to our salvation which is fulfilled in Jesus. Thus the law cannot have been "taken out of the way." The question then becomes what does the "handwriting of ordinances" then refer to if it is not the law? This passage taken from this link explains more fully:

Colossians 2:14-15 Commentary | Precept Austin
Certificate of debt (5498) (cheirographon from cheir = hand + grapho = write) is literally handwriting or a handwritten document and then a written record of a debt such as a promissory note. A document is written in one's own hand as a proof of obligation, e.g., a note of indebtedness. The word means primarily a bond written by a person pledging himself to make certain payments.

Friberg writes that figuratively in the only NT use in Colossians 2:14 cheirographon refers not to

the law itself, but to the record of charges (for breaking God's law), which stood against us and which God symbolically removed by "nailing it to the cross," handwritten account, record of debts (Friberg, T., Friberg, B., & Miller, N. F. Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament. Baker Academic)

Thayer writes that cheirographon means…

specifically, a note of hand, or writing in which one acknowledges that money has either been deposited with him or lent to him by another, to he returned at an appointed time

TDNT writes that in Colossians 2:14 cheirographon means

a “promissory note.” God cancels the bond that lies to our charge. This bond is not a compact with the devil, as in some patristic exegesis. It is the debt that we have incurred with God. The forgiveness of sins (Col 2:13-note) through identification with Christ in his vicarious death and resurrection means that this note is cancelled; God has set it aside and nailed it to the cross. (Kittel, G., Friedrich, G., & Bromiley, G. W. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Eerdmans)

For example, in Philemon we find an "IOU" Paul writing

I, Paul, am writing this with my own hand, I will repay it (not to mention to you that you owe to me even your own self as well). (Philemon 1:19)

The idea is that of list of our crimes or moral debt before God, a debt no imperfect person can completely pay. But it can be taken out of the way, by payment from a perfect man, Jesus Christ.

Cheirographon then described a note or bond written by hand thus obligating the writer to fulfill the debt that is written out. In other words it is analogous to an "IOU" signed by hand and obligating the signer to repay the debt. Paul's idea seems to be that the sins of mankind had piled up a list of "I.O.U.'s" so large that they could never be repaid. Paul uses cheirographon not as the law itself, but as the record of charges for breaking God's law and which therefore stood against us.
-----------
Since the debt of our sins and not the ordinances were nailed to the cross, Paul in Col 2:16 is instructing the Galatians to let no one judge them as they keep eating/drinking in celebration of their observances of the festivals, new moon, sabbaths. He is not telling them not to do them.
That wasn't very convincing, but thank you for sharing.

Since love doesn't keep a record of wrongs and God is love, the record of offenses idea doesn't seem to be talking about the same God.
 
Upvote 0

Hidden In Him

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 7, 2017
3,426
2,845
59
Lafayette, LA
✟544,986.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
A couple things here... of course it was future tense... 2 Peter 3 was written years before 70AD, so the future tense in and of itself should not disqualify my interpretation from consideration, right?

Yes. It dawned on me when I was out walking, LoL.
On His coming Against Ancient Babylon
Isaiah 13:13
Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger.

Jeremiah 51:48
Then the heaven and the earth, and all that [is] therein, shall sing for Babylon: for the spoilers shall come unto her from the north, saith the LORD

On His coming Against King Saul
Psalms 18:7-10
Then the earth shook and trembled; the foundations also of the hills removed and were shaken, because he was wroth ... He bowed the heavens also, and came down: and darkness was under his feet. And he rode upon a cherub, and did fly: yea, he did fly upon the wings of the wind.

On His coming Against Persia during Zerubbabel's Day
Haggai 2:21
Speak to Zerubbabel, governor of Judah, saying, I will shake the heavens and the earth

So, getting back to the use of the phrase as it was used by Peter, we can see that He didn't mean the physical planet or material cosmos-- rather, it meant the passing away of the Old Covenant World and the planting of the New Covenant Kingdom.

Well, you'd have to take each of these passages on an individual basis. The Isaiah quote I attribute to Him taking the occasion of Babylon's judgment to prophecy forward to the great and fearful Day of the Lord. The Psalm, on the other hand, I believe to be a use of imagery and metaphor. In verse 5 he says, "The sorrows of Hell compassed me about, and the snares of death prevented me," portraying himself as bound in Hades with no way out. Then comes the imagery of His God thundering from above to deliver him.

Out of curiosity, why are you opposed to futurist interpretations of a literal cataclysm? Are you amillennialist or preterist by any chance? Not that I'm trying to label you. Just curious what this belief is "packaged" with, so to speak.
 
Upvote 0

eleos1954

God is Love
Supporter
Nov 14, 2017
9,696
5,613
Utah
✟713,367.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Let me just say first off that this is not a set up question. I am definitely leaning in a certain direction, but the following is an honest inquiry for input.

In Galatians 4:3, Colossians 2:8, and Colossians 2:20, Paul used the expression τῶν στοιχείων τοῦ κόσμου, which as I will show in a second translates into "the principles of the world." What principles was he talking about by this repeated phrase, and why did he refer to them as such?

For starters, about the translation, he uses the phrase in combination with the phrase "the traditions of man" and the word "philosophies" in Colossians 2:8. The reading is "βλέπετε μή τις ὑμᾶς ἔσται ὁ συλαγωγῶν διὰ τῆς φιλοσοφίας καὶ κενῆς ἀπάτης, κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, κατὰ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου καὶ οὐ κατὰ Χριστόν" which translates as, "Take heed that there not be anyone making a prey of you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the traditions of man, according to the principles of the world, and not according to Christ." So there is a clear common element to these phrases; all refer in general to false, naturalistic (i.e. humanistic) teachings.

Then he uses just the word "principles" (στοιχεῖα) as a stand alone in Galatians 4:9, "how do you turn again to the weak and beggarly principles to which you again desire to serve anew?," referring back to the full phrase τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου in Galatians 4:3.

When you take all these things into consideration, the word alone must mean "principles" and the entire phrase means "principles of the world."

So the question again becomes: What principles specifically was he talking about by the use of this repeated phrase, and why did he refer to them as such?

Blessings in Christ. Any and all responses are appreciated.

It says in Galatians 4:9-11: 'But now, after you have known God or rather, known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements to which you desire again to be in bondage? You observe days and months and seasons and years. I'm afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain.'

The Jewish converts to Christianity were telling the Galatians and the Romans they now had to keep Passover, they had to keep all the Jewish holidays, Day of Atonement, Feast of Trumpets, so forth. Paul said you are telling them to observe these ceremonial shadows that pointed to Jesus. Jesus is the Substance they the ceremonial shadows all pointed to. It doesn't make since to worship a shadow when the real thing is there. And therefore it's going backwards ... back into the bondage of them.

When Jesus came, He fulfilled and nailed to the Cross the ceremonial/ordinances.

Paul also refers to this in Romans 14

Note: These are the ceremonial practices/ceremonial ordinances sabbaths and does not include the 7th day sabbath of our Lord which is in the middle of the 10 commandments and of which can not be separated from them and has not been done away with.

Colossians 2:20
the word rudiments in the Greek

Strong's Concordance
dogmatizó: to decree, to subject oneself to an ordinance
Original Word: δογματίζω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: dogmatizó
Phonetic Spelling: (dog-mat-id'-zo)
Definition: to decree, to subject oneself to an ordinance
Usage: I subject to regulations, decree; mid: I subject myself to regulations, am decree-ridden.
NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
from dogma
Definition
to decree, to subject oneself to an ordinance
NASB Translation
submit...to decrees (1).

God Bless.
 
Upvote 0

Hidden In Him

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 7, 2017
3,426
2,845
59
Lafayette, LA
✟544,986.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Paul also refers to this in Romans 14

Note: These are the ceremonial practices/ceremonial ordinances sabbaths and does not include the 7th day sabbath of our Lord which is in the middle of the 10 commandments and of which can not be separated from them and has not been done away with.

Ok, now THIS gets my attention. This sounds similar to something the SDAs may believe on this issue.

If you don't mind my asking, what is the scriptural basis for making a delineation between High Sabbaths and regular weekly sabbaths? I've never been convinced that there were in essence two dispensations of the law and that one carried a greater weight than the other, but maybe you can explain it to me in clear and succinct terms.

Blessings in Christ, and appreciate the reply.
 
Upvote 0

Oldmantook

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2017
3,633
1,526
64
USA
✟99,173.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
That wasn't very convincing, but thank you for sharing.

Since love doesn't keep a record of wrongs and God is love, the record of offenses idea doesn't seem to be talking about the same God.
Thanks for your reply but do you still believe that the law/ordinances was nailed to the cross based upon what I cited? You were not convinced because of what exactly? You do not owe me any reply if you choose not to. Just curious.

However, I think your last paragraph regarding God's love is not quite accurate. Our offenses/sins/transgressions that we committed in THE PAST were forgiven. Rom 3:25 states "whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins." This verse states that the propitiation of Jesus' blood was applied to our former sins - those sins that we committed in the past prior to our becoming saved. Our "record of offenses" was erased at that time when we came to Christ. However that does not apply to our present and future sins that still require repentance. God is love but he also requires our ongoing obedience.
"Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me.The one who loves me will be loved by my Father,and I too will love them and show myself to them.” Jn 14:21
This verse indicates that God's loves is not a fickle emotion but is based upon our faithfulness and obedience to him.
 
Upvote 0

Gregory Thompson

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.
Supporter
Dec 20, 2009
28,362
7,742
Canada
✟721,286.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Thanks for your reply but do you still believe that the law/ordinances was nailed to the cross based upon what I cited? You were not convinced because of what exactly? You do not owe me any reply if you choose not to. Just curious.

However, I think your last paragraph regarding God's love is not quite accurate. Our offenses/sins/transgressions that we committed in THE PAST were forgiven. Rom 3:25 states "whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins." This verse states that the propitiation of Jesus' blood was applied to our former sins - those sins that we committed in the past prior to our becoming saved. Our "record of offenses" was erased at that time when we came to Christ. However that does not apply to our present and future sins that still require repentance. God is love but he also requires our ongoing obedience.
"Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me.The one who loves me will be loved by my Father,and I too will love them and show myself to them.” Jn 14:21
This verse indicates that God's loves is not a fickle emotion but is based upon our faithfulness and obedience to him.
From reading this, I see that the pitfall of reading John with a sense of duty to the mosaic law is in effect. However, the righteous live by faith and continue to live by faith.
 
Upvote 0

Oldmantook

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2017
3,633
1,526
64
USA
✟99,173.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
From reading this, I see that the pitfall of reading John with a sense of duty to the mosaic law is in effect. However, the righteous live by faith and continue to live by faith.
Yes we continue to live by faith but that does not negate the mosaic law. The penalty of the law was nailed to the cross but the law served as a tutor which pointed to Jesus. Jesus himself stated that he did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it. Fulfill means to fill to the full so Jesus is the ultimate expression or fullness of the law; not the abolition of it. Paul himself warned against separating our faith from the law.
"Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law." Rom 3:31
We know that Jesus kept the law. He commanded us to follow him. We know that Paul still kept the law. He instructed believers hold on to the apostolic traditions. It seems to me that through the ages, the church has done the opposite and divorced itself from the law and the role that it plays in matters of faith.
 
Upvote 0

Gregory Thompson

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.
Supporter
Dec 20, 2009
28,362
7,742
Canada
✟721,286.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Yes we continue to live by faith but that does not negate the mosaic law. The penalty of the law was nailed to the cross but the law served as a tutor which pointed to Jesus. Jesus himself stated that he did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it. Fulfill means to fill to the full so Jesus is the ultimate expression or fullness of the law; not the abolition of it. Paul himself warned against separating our faith from the law.
"Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law." Rom 3:31
We know that Jesus kept the law. He commanded us to follow him. We know that Paul still kept the law. He instructed believers hold to the apostolic traditions. It seems to me that through the ages, the church has divorced itself from the law and the role that it plays in matters of faith.
It's not nullified, it's simply obsolete. Jesus gave us something better.

How much longer do we insist on playing in the box the present came in?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Oldmantook

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2017
3,633
1,526
64
USA
✟99,173.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
It's not nullified, it's simply obsolete. Jesus gave us something better.

How much longer do we insist on playing in the box the present came in?
Indeed something better but obsolescence as you noted is not the same as nullified. The law still exists does it not? Paul plainly stated that we UPHOLD the law. After all, we still abide by the dictates of the 10 Commandments don't we as that is part of the mosaic law. The Commandments are not obsolete are they?
 
Upvote 0

Gregory Thompson

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.
Supporter
Dec 20, 2009
28,362
7,742
Canada
✟721,286.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Indeed something better but obsolescence as you noted is not the same as nullified. The law still exists does it not? Paul plainly stated that we UPHOLD the law. After all, we still abide by the dictates of the 10 Commandments don't we as that is part of the mosaic law. The Commandments are not obsolete are they?
We have the law of liberty living within us, the slave instructions are no longer necessary.

Furthermore,

Ga 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
 
Upvote 0

throughfiierytrial

Truth-Lover
Supporter
Apr 7, 2014
2,836
794
✟516,876.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I see. So you are interpreting the phrase to mean following the social principles laid down in secular society, as opposed to true Biblical principles...

I think there's certainly a problem with doing so, yes. But I actually think this is more of a mistake the unsaved make than the typical Christian. Only the most superficial of believers would still be evaluating things by societal values after becoming saved.

But blessings in Christ, and thanks for the answer.
Oh, but there are many who are only infants in Christ...Paul addresses them often and speaks of their earthy thinking and their warns against our propensity to sin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hidden In Him
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Yes. It dawned on me when I was out walking, LoL.
I appreciate the honesty

Well, you'd have to take each of these passages on an individual basis. The Isaiah quote I attribute to Him taking the occasion of Babylon's judgment to prophecy forward to the great and fearful Day of the Lord.
Why?

There have been multiple “day of the lord” events recorded for us in scripture.
The Fall of Babylon to the Medes was but one of them.

I don't see anything in Isaiah 13 about the coming of Jesus. Can you point me to where you believe the subject matter changes from Babylon's pending fall to the Medes?

Isaiah 13:1 The burden against Babylon which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw.

In this chapter God is talking about the judgement that is to fall upon Babylon. The word burden is the Hebrew word massa', which is an utterance, chiefly a doom. This introduction sets the stage for the subject matter in this chapter and if we forget this, our interpretations of Isaiah 13 can go just about anywhere our imagination wants to go. This is not an oracle against the universe or world but against the nation of Babylon.
The terminology of a context cannot be expanded beyond the scope of the subject under discussion.

That bears repeating.

The terminology of a context cannot be expanded beyond the scope of the subject under discussion.

The spectrum of language surely cannot go outside the land of Babylon. If you were a Babylonian and Babylon was destroyed would it seem like the world was destroyed? Yes! Your world would be destroyed.

Weren't you admonsihing me to respect context earlier - you don't possess any exception to that rule yourself, do you?

So, Where does scripture teach you to futurize this passage beyond this event?

Isaiah 13:17 "Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, Who will not regard silver; And as for gold, they will not delight in it.

This is an historical event that took place in 539 BC. When the Medes destroyed Babylon the Babylonian world came to an end. This destruction is said in verse 6 to be from the Almighty, and the Medes constitute the means that God uses to accomplish this task. The physical heaven and earth were still in tact, but for Babylon they had collapsed. This is CLASSIC apocalyptic language.
This is the way the Bible, time and again, uses language of worldwide & even universal cataclysm to describe the fall of an individual nation, Kingdom or King in real history.

There is no scriptural instruction you can point to ANYWHERE for us to apply a polar opposite interpretation to this language documenting the nature of the OT day of the Lord events when we find the same language used to describe the nature of the NT day of the Lord.

The Psalm, on the other hand, I believe to be a use of imagery and metaphor. In verse 5 he says, "The sorrows of Hell compassed me about, and the snares of death prevented me," portraying himself as bound in Hades with no way out. Then comes the imagery of His God thundering from above to deliver him.
Well, at least it appears you'll allow for that language to be used as metaphor in scripture somewhere... that’s a point we can agree upon i suppose... But I can't help but wonder where you believe scripture teaches OT phrases such as "God rides a swift cloud" and was "Seen by the eyes of all nations" is to be understood as metaphor, while the near verbatim NT phrase "He is coming on the clouds and every eye shall see" must be Literal?

Out of curiosity, why are you opposed to futurist interpretations of a literal cataclysm?

Probably because Several scriptures teach the opposite.

And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done. (Genesis 8:21)

Holy Scripture teaches that the world will exist forever (Ecc 1:4; Ps 78:69; 89:36-37; 104:5; 148:4-6; Eph 3:21) and that human generations are perpetual (Ps 145:13; Dan 4:3,34; Dan 7:14,18,27; Lk 1:33)

When we read the scripture "world without end, Amen" (Ephesians 3:21)
Do people think scripture is joking?

Does God think the millions of us who fervently affirm and pray HIS WORDS, every day, in that scripture... are joking?...

Does He think we shouldn't take his words... seriously?
That it's just Lipservice?
Are you amillennialist or preterist by any chance? Not that I'm trying to label you. Just curious what this belief is "packaged" with, so to speak.
Of course I’m preterist.
So are you.
All Christians are.
We only vary by degree.

Seems I’m just a bit farther down the spectrum than you.... for now :)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Oldmantook

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2017
3,633
1,526
64
USA
✟99,173.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
We have the law of liberty living within us, the slave instructions are no longer necessary.

Furthermore,

Ga 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
Ironically, what you cited does not support your belief. Gal 2:21 simply affirms that righteousness never came by the law in the first place. That is why Jesus fulfilled the law and his death is not in vain. No one is righteous by the law. The law was our tutor/guardian pointing us to the truth. However as the scriptures plainly state, the law/truth was never abolished and thus we continue to uphold the law. With all due respect, you do not reconcile those scriptures with your view nor the fact that the 10 Commandments still apply today.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gregory Thompson

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.
Supporter
Dec 20, 2009
28,362
7,742
Canada
✟721,286.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Ironically, what you cited does not support your belief. Gal 2:21 simply affirms that righteousness never came by the law in the first place. That is why Jesus fulfilled the law and his death is not in vain. No one is righteous by the law. The law was our tutor/guardian pointing us to the truth. However as the scriptures plainly state, the law/truth was never abolished and thus we continue to uphold the law. With all due respect, you do not reconcile those scriptures with your view nor the fact that the 10 Commandments still apply today.
The law was, as you said. It no longer has a purpose.

The passages provided support my belief plenty, you being convinced is not necessary.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gregory Thompson

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.
Supporter
Dec 20, 2009
28,362
7,742
Canada
✟721,286.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
According the new covenant writings, following the mosaic law communicates the following things to God:

1) That you choose to be judged by the Mosaic law
2) That you choose to be under the curse of the law
3) That Jesus died in vain

Since I do not choose to be under the law, it does not apply to me.

If you choose to be under the law, don't try to infect others' freedom in the Holy Spirit.
 
Upvote 0

eleos1954

God is Love
Supporter
Nov 14, 2017
9,696
5,613
Utah
✟713,367.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Ok, now THIS gets my attention. This sounds similar to something the SDAs may believe on this issue.

If you don't mind my asking, what is the scriptural basis for making a delineation between High Sabbaths and regular weekly sabbaths? I've never been convinced that there were in essence two dispensations of the law and that one carried a greater weight than the other, but maybe you can explain it to me in clear and succinct terms.

Blessings in Christ, and appreciate the reply.

Hi,

High Sabbaths are considered to be a subset of the feast sabbaths. Only those feast sabbaths that coincide with the weekly Sabbath are regarded as High Sabbaths.

I encourage you to learn more about all the sabbaths feasts etc. The "picture" of Jesus is all over them .... it's quite fascinating/interesting. I found this link (appears to be accurate) .... not real sure who owns it ... but you can go do some internet research on them and find out about them. This link deals mostly with the sabbaths connected with passover week The Passover Week and the Two Sabbaths

The laws: Very Briefly

The law (often referred to the law of Moses) are those ceremonial/ordinances that were carried out in the earthly sanctuary. If one studies the sanctuary one will see the pattern of salvation within it through it's symbolism ... all pointing to Jesus (there's a lot to it). Anyway, so Moses law was what was nailed to the cross. Remember in the OT where God gave unbelievable explicit instructions on how it was to be built and how things were to be carried out ... when God speaks directly ... hugely important (not at all to say that His entire word isn't important) His Word is a master piece!

The eternal law: 10 Commandments. They were, have been and will always be. The first 4 represents His character in "condensed" form ... the relationship between Him and His intelligent beings (angels included). The last 6 represent mans' relationship to one another "condensed" focusing on the "major" topics of concern.

When you study ... keep this in mind (eternal law) ... and when studying Jesus' teachings ... one will see somehow or another His teachings are a magnification (adding more details) on the 10.

Feel free to PM me if you would like discuss some things ... I am not SDA (I study on my own) but so far I find many of their teachings quite solid (others will disagree of course)... that's fine (agree to disagree) ... each of us are responsible for what we believe. I certainly don't claim to know everything ... but if you would like to have conversations about various scriptures with someone with a agree to disagree attitude ... I'd be happy to do that with you.

May the Lord bless you richly and send you His Holy Spirit to guide you through your studies always. Amen
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Yes, you're right! I'm not Gandalf!
Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,123
9,946
The Void!
✟1,125,857.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
To tell you the truth, the word "philosophies" used to throw me as well, when I first started studying this passage. I assumed that it carried the same sense as it does today, and could therefore only apply to various forms of Greek philosophy. The trouble is the context. As I was saying in the previous post (#58), the identical phrase is employed in both Colossians and Galatians, and in Galatians they appear to be philosophies that made the believers "beggarly" in Paul's eyes. What Greek philosophies would make them beggarly in this sense? I suppose Stoicism would fit the bill, but if the heresy they were falling into were Stoicism then Paul would have said a LOT more about it. Plus, I'm not aware that the observance of days, weeks and years carried any importance for the Stoics.

Epicureanism, on the other hand, advocated hedonism and freedom from anxiety and mental pain, especially that which arose from needless fear of the gods, so it's a bit tough to say that particular philosophy was somehow reducing them to a "beggarly" state like what would have happened if they were subjecting themselves under Jewish cleanliness laws.

I take Paul's use of the term "philosophy" to be a loose reference to the philosophical Judaism that men like Philo engaged in, where Jewish law and reason were transformed into a "philosophy" by which wise men lived, albeit to make observance of Jewish law more palpable to the Greek understanding of what constituted "wisdom." Essenism, which I believe was what the Colossians were being influenced by, would have been an extremely strict version of it.

Sure, I see where you're coming from on this, and I wouldn't discount the presence of Jewish philosophical derivatives that floated around along with the other Hellenized odds and ends that permeated the culture of that time. You're description does seem sensible in an intertextual way, especially with the Hellenized, proto-Gnostic, ideas that were being contended with by Timothy and for which Paul felt he had to instruct him so as to stand resolute. It makes sense, really.

Thanks for the insight, HIH!
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Hidden In Him
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

paul becke

Regular Member
Supporter
Jul 12, 2003
4,011
814
83
Edinburgh, Scotland.
✟205,184.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Politics
UK-Labour
Let me just say first off that this is not a set up question. I am definitely leaning in a certain direction, but the following is an honest inquiry for input.

In Galatians 4:3, Colossians 2:8, and Colossians 2:20, Paul used the expression τῶν στοιχείων τοῦ κόσμου, which as I will show in a second translates into "the principles of the world." What principles was he talking about by this repeated phrase, and why did he refer to them as such?

For starters, about the translation, he uses the phrase in combination with the phrase "the traditions of man" and the word "philosophies" in Colossians 2:8. The reading is "βλέπετε μή τις ὑμᾶς ἔσται ὁ συλαγωγῶν διὰ τῆς φιλοσοφίας καὶ κενῆς ἀπάτης, κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, κατὰ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου καὶ οὐ κατὰ Χριστόν" which translates as, "Take heed that there not be anyone making a prey of you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the traditions of man, according to the principles of the world, and not according to Christ." So there is a clear common element to these phrases; all refer in general to false, naturalistic (i.e. humanistic) teachings.

Then he uses just the word "principles" (στοιχεῖα) as a stand alone in Galatians 4:9, "how do you turn again to the weak and beggarly principles to which you again desire to serve anew?," referring back to the full phrase τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου in Galatians 4:3.

When you take all these things into consideration, the word alone must mean "principles" and the entire phrase means "principles of the world."

So the question again becomes: What principles specifically was he talking about by the use of this repeated phrase, and why did he refer to them as such?

Blessings in Christ. Any and all responses are appreciated.

Briefly : the 'pecking order' of society : The best justice money can buy (both juridical and in relation to the ordering of society), and 'Money talks, b/s walks' are two of the world's watch-words, aren't they ?

A person with a very modest income would have difficulty obtaining a loan from a bank, whereas a glib type of character who looks as though he 'knows his way round the block' would be quite enthusiasrtically welcomed. It's beautifully illustrated by the Parable of the Dishonest Steward, who was commended by his employer for trying to 'twist' him ! Jesus was saying :

'You see how purposeful worldlings are in identifying their goals, and going all-out to obtain them ? How is it God's servants, his flock, are so ambivalent about what is precious to them so much of the time - unlike those scoundrels ? Stop wavering between two choices and choose what you know to be right, without shilly-shallying or worse.'

Moreover, the principles of this world include an idolatry of worldly wisdom not at all based on spiritual wisdom : what is generally termed, 'intelligence', but is mostly anything but. You often hear or see on the media a reference to someone who died in an accident or from sickness, stating : 'And he/she was so intelligent, as if worldly wisdom were the sovereign virtue, or indeed, necessarily a virtue at all.' Many highly intelligent men are complete idiots, while the world puts them on a pedestal.

Our very judges and top barristers, at least in the UK, are generally drawn from the most worldly level of society, the least apt to dispense justice in the context of human problems, but super-effective at solving problems where money or commerce are concerned. It's the way of the world.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0