Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us,

expos4ever said:

I do not understand your point. Thus far, I have (a) asserted an obvious fact - there is this thing called the Law of Moses; and (b) asserted that Paul believes it has a dark side - the Law energizes and empowers the sinful nature in man. I know that seems bizarre, but, to be frank, you will have to dig up old Paul and take the matter up with him. In Romans 7 (and actually elsewhere in his writings), Paul clearly places the Law of Moses in this odd and disturbing role.

Click to expand...

Ole sh'aul(paul) says no such thing.
He in fact speaks plainly about the goodness of Torah(law given moshe...
Romans 7:7
Romans 7:12
1 Timothy 1:8

Blessings Always

SkyWriting said:

Paul persecuted and even killed Christians. After conversion, he "converted" to hating a handful of his pet peeve "Sinners" which he often lists. People on this list have been hated and even killed ever since. This is not what Jesus proclaimed.

Click to expand...

Yes ole sh'aul persecuted the body of believers.
But no where in scripture is there any mention of him killing people.

pinacled said:

Ole sh'aul(paul) says no such thing.
He in fact speaks plainly about the goodness of Torah(law given moshe...
Romans 7:7
Romans 7:12
1 Timothy 1:8

Blessings Always

Click to expand...

What is Paul saying in these particular texts?:

But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me [h]coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead

for sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me

Please address these texts, and show how they are not implying that sin is empowered and or enabled by the Law of Moses.

expos4ever said:

No, you are simply disrespecting what Paul actually wrote. And is incorrect logic to assume that just because Paul delighted in the Law, this does not mean that the Law did not cause problems. I delight in cheeseburgers, but they cause problems (not the best analogy, but I hope you get my point).

Again:

But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind;

You guys are bending what Paul actually is saying. Here, Paul is saying that something he calls "sin" has produced coveting. Not "revealed" coveting, but produced coveting. How did it do this? It was enabled to do so through the Law! This is simply how reading works! Please stop denying the obvious just because it does not fit with your theological pre-conceptions.

And again here:

for apart from the Law sin is dead. 9 I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died; 10 and this commandment, which was [k]to result in life, proved to result in death for me

You guys more or less all do the same violence to this passage. Instead of what Paul actually writes:

I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive

....you take it upon yourselves to get out your editing pen and turn the above into this:

I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin was revealed

Click to expand...

While it is possible that Paul could have delighted in obeying a law that he also had problems with, you would need to explain why it would make sense to interpret Paul as speaking against a law that he delighted in obeying rather than against the law of sin. In Romans 7:22, he directly contrasted the Law of God that he delighted in obeying with the law of sin, which was holding him captive, so his problem was with the law of sin. Likewise, in 7:25, Paul said that he served God's law with his mind, but contrasted that with the law of sin, which he served with his flesh.

To use an analogy, a hammer is a good tool, but when a hammer is made available, someone can take the opportunity use it for destructive purposes, and you are equivalently trying to blame the hammer rather than the person. Paul said in Romans 7:12-13 that the law is good and that what is good did not bring death to him, yet you are acting like he was saying that the problem was with what is good instead of the problem being with sin taking advantage of what is good.

Romans 7:7 What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”

If God's law produced sin, then it would be sinful, but Paul said that God's law is not sinful, so the problem is not with God's law, but with the law of sin, which is sinful and produces sin. Paul said that he would not have known what sin is if it had not been for the law, so it is fair to say that the law reveals what sin is based on verse 7, and I was not editing verse 9. In Romans 3:20, God's law was given to give us knowledge of what sin is, in in 1 John 3:4, sin is defined as the transgression of God's law, so I don't see a lot of other options for how the Israelites could have know what sin is if it was not for God's law revealing it.

Soyeong said:

While it is possible that Paul could have delighted in obeying a law that he also had problems with, you would need to explain why it would make sense to interpret Paul as speaking against a law that he delighted in obeying rather than against the law of sin. In Romans 7:22, he directly contrasted the Law of God that he delighted in obeying with the law of sin, which was holding him captive, so his problem was with the law of sin. Likewise, in 7:25, Paul said that he served God's law with his mind, but contrasted that with the law of sin, which he served with his flesh.

Click to expand...

First, I trust you realize that you have avoided explain what you think Paul meant in the texts I cited. Perhaps I did not ask you to do this, but I am doing so now. If I am mistaken what, exactly, is Paul is saying in these particular texts?

But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me [h]coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead

for sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me

Please address these texts, and show how they are not implying that sin is empowered and or enabled by the Law of Moses.

Now to answer your question: Paul believes that the unredeemed person struggles with an inner tendency to sin - a "law", or fact of his nature that inclines him to sin. This, of course, is basic Christian doctrine - we have an inner sin nature. Paul also recognizes the Law of Moses that his mind, in his unredeemed state, sees as a good thing. So there is no real mystery here: to Paul, the Jew (who has not accepted Jesus) sees the Law as a good and wonderful thing, but also finds that he is fighting against his sin nature.

None of this is inconsistent with Paul's growing awareness that God have the Law to Israel to cause sin to be concentrated in her so that it (sin) can then be concentrated further onto Jesus and then condemned. And so we get this climactic verse at the very beginning of Chapter 8 (remember: the chapter boundaries were added later):

For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,

In other words, Jesus is not "punished" at the cross like so many believe, it sin that is condemned. Jesus, sadly, dies in the cross-fire, as it were.

Soyeong said:

To use an analogy, a hammer is a good tool, but when a hammer is made available, someone can take the opportunity use it for destructive purposes, and you are equivalently trying to blame the hammer rather than the person.

Click to expand...

Your real disagreement is with Paul; it is Paul, not me who clearly states that sin is aroused by, yes, the Law:

For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law

Now, you may well ask this: why would God give Israel a Law that would arouse and energize sin? Precisely because, per earlier posts, God is "tricking" sin into being concentrated in Israel, and then in Jesus. With sin thus "localized" in one place, it is vulnerable to being destroyed on the Cross. This, I suggest, is Paul's argument - the Law sets a trap for sin.

Soyeong said:

Paul said in Romans 7:12-13 that the law is good and that what is good did not bring death to him, yet you are acting like he was saying that the problem was with what is good instead of the problem being with sin taking advantage of what is good.

Click to expand...

No. I am saying that Paul is saying the Law is good in itself, but when a person with a sin nature try to obeys it, the power of that sin nature is thereby amplified.

Let's be clear: nothing I am saying should be taken as a claim that the Law is bad; what I am saying that human nature is bad, and when the Law acts on human nature, it makes things worse. But God has a plan: he is using the Law to concentrate sin in Israel so that it (sin) can later be lured into Jesus.

And then defeated on the Cross.

What a marvelous God we have.

Soyeong said:

If God's law produced sin, then it would be sinful,

Click to expand...

This is not correct logic. It is possible, of course, that the Law could "produce" sin if God is using this tactic as part of a larger plan to "lure" sin into Israel, and then into Jesus, with the goal of cornering it one place so that it can be defeated on the cross.

Studyman said:

I do not see this teaching in Rom. 7. or any of his letters.

8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.

9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

Click to expand...

You are avoiding my questions. You need to explain precisely why we should not take Paul at his word when he says (in verse 8) that the Law (commandment), provided sin with the "opportunity" (or "occasion" - "opportunity" is the literal translation) to "wreak all manner of concupiscence" in Paul.

You are, I humbly suggest, distorting what Paul actually writes in verse 8 into something like this:

8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, revealed in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead

The word "revealed" is not even close to the word "wrought" - you are bending what Paul is saying.

Likewise, with respect to verse 9, you are changing it to read:

For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin was revealed (or exposed), and I died.

Paul uses the word "revived". To revive something is not the same as exposing it - you are playing fast and loose with the meanings of words, I suggest.

Studyman said:

When, in Paul's entire life, did God's Laws not exist? So it is a Biblical Fact that God's Law existed before it came to Paul. Given Jesus said man shall live by Every Word of God, I believe it is prudent to consider other words of Paul as well. Shall we not consider and believe these words of Paul?

Click to expand...

Paul is focused on the Law of Moses in Romans 7. You cannot simply assume that the Law of Moses represents the totality of "every word of God", and that without the Law of Moses, there is nothing. In fact, we know that Paul believes that this is not the case:

for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law

Now this (from Romans 5) is a complex text, but, at the very least, it proves that Paul acknowledges that there was a time before the Law of Moses was given, and that sin still existed in the absence of this Law. So we need to realize the Law of Moses was issued at certain point in time, and was not in effect before that.

Studyman said:

Are you really saying that Paul is teaching a man isn't a sinner with sinful passions until God gives the man His Laws?

Click to expand...

I never said this. All I have done is present Paul's own words that demonstrate that he (Paul) believes the Law of Moses actually empowers, energizes, and strengthens the inner sin nature.

Studyman said:

Isn't it true that the Sinful Passions already existed in man, but was not known by that man until the Law Came, which "aroused" them, exposed them,..

Click to expand...

Do you see what you just did? You equated arousing with exposing. That is simply incorrect - no one would equate these words in normal circumstances - they have radically different meanings. It certainly appears that you are bending Paul's words to suit a theological agenda you are bringing to the text.

Studyman said:

Col. 2:14 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.

I have heard it proclaimed by religious men, who come in Christ's Name, that the "Handwriting of ordinances" which are against us, are the Good, Just, and Holy Laws, Commandments, and Statutes of God, given to Moses and Aaron to give to God's People.

I am interested in locating exactly where these handwritten ordinances, which were against God's People, are located as, for the life of me, I can not find a Command from God to HIS People that was "Against them".

In fact, the only "laws" I found in the Holy scriptures that were against men, was the doctrines and Commandments of men Jesus said the mainstream preachers of HIS Time burdened His People with. I am hoping to open up an honest, unbiased discussion about who's ordinances were taken out of the way, who were the "principalities and powers" which promoted these "handwritten ordinances", who was make a show of openly, and who was triumphed over.

If God's "handwriting of ordinances" are the ones that are against us, then God must be the "principalities and powers" that was "Spoiled". If God was the Author of the handwritten ordinances which was contrary to us, then did Jesus make a show of God openly? If God's Commandments and Laws are the handwritten ordinances that were against us, then did Jesus Triumph over God by "taking His Laws, Statutes, and Commandments "out of the way"?

Somehow I don't believe this is the message Paul was sending.

What do you think?

Click to expand...

Here’s the study I did in this passage which i also agree has been grossly misunderstood.

"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." Colossians 2:14-17

Perhaps this text more then any other has been used to refute those who observe the seventh day of the week (saturday) as the Sabbath. It is believe by the great majority of Christiandom that Paul is telling us here that the law was nailed to the cross. Is this really what Paul was trying to convey? Let's take a closer look.

(Col 2:13) And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses

(Col 2:14) 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;

If you look at the "context" what is "blotted out" is not the Law of God, but our sins. The subject being discussed here is the "forgiveness of our trespasses." vs 13.

In verse 14 he explains how he accomplished that. By "blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that were against us." There is no mention in Scripture anywhere of God "blotting out his Law." Here are several examples of what IS blotted out which is consistent with this passage in Col 2.

• Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions. Ps 51:1
• Hide thy face from my sins, and blot out all mine iniquities. Ps 51:9
• I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins. Isa 43:25
• I have blotted out, as a thick cloud, thy transgressions, and, as a cloud, thy sins: return unto me; for I have redeemed thee. Isa 44:22
• Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. Acts 3:19

The record of our transgressions, our sins and trespasses (these handwriting of ordinances), is most definitely "contrary to us and against us". Look what it says here in Isaiah which is confirmation of this:

"For our transgressions are multiplied before thee, and our sins testify 'against us': for our transgressions are with us; and as for our iniquities, we know them." Isa 59:12

These are the exact three things mentioned above that were "blotted out" that are "against us" - Our sins, transgressions and iniquities.

Now what does it mean when it says "and took it out of the way"? The word "way" if you look it up in the Greek, means "middle". Gk 33:19 In other words there was something in the way, something that stood in the middle, a wall separating us from God. Based upon what we have learned thus far, it was our sins that were "in the way", in the middle forming a wall between us and God.

But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear. Isaiah 59:2

This is exactly what sin does. It separates us from one another and from God, creating a barrier (i.e. a wall) between us. This was the sorrowful lesson Adam and Eve learned in the Garden.

Now with that in mind, let's look at a similar passage in Eph 2:11-17

11 Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;

12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.

14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

Who is the "both?" On one side you have the Gentiles that were far off and in the flesh, without Christ. On the other side you have the Israel of Godl, who DO have Christ.

Paul is speaking here of himself... "between us", that is between the gentiles and himself along with all the others of the commonwealth of Israel that accepted the Messiah. Christ comes and wipes the slate clean of all their sins, transgressions and iniquities. They are grafted in with the believing Jews making peace between not only the Jews and the Gentiles but more importantly with God. Christ accomplished this by removing from them all there sins through the offering of himself on the Cross.

15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:

Here Christ reconciles both groups to God by the cross by abolishing in his flesh the "enmity... the law of commandments contained in ordinances", those same "handwriting of ordinances that we read about in Col 2:14that were against them, creating a wall between them and God as well as the Jewish believers that Peter had such a hard time for an example.

That "enmity" is the worldly, carnal man in all his sins:

"Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God?" James 4:4

"Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." Rom 8:7

It is the "carnal mind" that is not subject to the law of God, not the "spiritual man." By contrast the spiritual man says:

"O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day." Ps 119:97

"Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them." Ps 119:165

"Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good." Rom 7:12

17 And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.

Peace comes when we take hold of God's strength to keep his commandments out of love, and our ways please the LORD

"When a man's ways please the LORD, he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him." Prov 16:7

"Or let him take hold of my strength, that he may make peace with me; and he shall make peace with me." Isa 27:5

(Col 2:15) And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

When Christ offered up his life on the cross for our sins, thereby blotting out the record and the Law itself that stood as a witness against us that we had transgressed God's holy law, what was the end result or effect of this blotting out of our sins?

(Col 2:15) And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

He "spoiled principalities and powers and made a show of them openly!" Just what were those "principalities and powers?"

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Eph 6:12

What stands "against us", what stands "in the middle" between ourselves a condemned sinner and the Judgment seat of Christ, is the prosecuting attorney with the all the charges that have been leveled against us, along with all the evidence of our guilt! When Jesus was nailed to the cross baring in his flesh all of our sins, he completely "spoiled the principalities and powers and the spiritual wickedness in high places and made a show of them openly" to the entire universe! He wiped our slate entirely clean of all charges the prosecution had against us along with all ordinances (or civil decrees) stating what should be done with such criminals!

(Col 2:16) Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

First of all, in order to understand who this "man" is, that we as believers in Christ are not to allow to judge us in the matters that follow, we need to look at the broader context of this verse reading what came before and after it. Context, context, context!

Beginning in verse 4 and continuing we see several references to who this "man" is that Paul is referring to:

4 And this I say, lest any man should 'beguile' (deceive) you with 'enticing words' (persuasive language).

8 Beware lest any man spoil you through 'philosophy' and 'vain deceit', after the 'tradition of men', after the 'rudiments (principles) of the world', and not after Christ.

18 Let no man beguile (defraud) you of your reward in a voluntary (one who delights in false) humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

The "man" we are NOT to allow to judge us in matters relating to food and drink or in regards to holy day (yearly festivals), a new moon (monthly), or the Sabbath days (weekly) is the man who:

1. Tries to deceive us with enticing words or persuasive language.
2. To spoil us through philosophy and vain deceit according to the traditions of men and the principles of the world.
3. Would defraud us of our reward through false humility and the worship of angels or through things they have not seen.
4. Are vainly puffed up in their fleshly mind.

In other words, it's the worldly, fleshly, puffed up, unconverted man that has no business judging matters of a spiritual nature. However, we the body of Christ, ARE able to judge in these matters".

"Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?" 1 Cor 6:2

But that judgment must be according to the Word of God, and not according to the "traditions of men" or "enticing words", through "philosophy", not Church Fathers or anything or anyone else! The Word of Christ alone is our judge.

"He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day." John 12:48

In respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days...

This is referring to as stated above to the yearly festivals called "holy days" (apparently they were still considered "holy" at the time of this writing. To "new moons", which are a time of re-dedication one oneself to God at the beginning of each new moon. And the "sabbath days", which refers to the weekly Saturday sabbath. The argument is made by many sabbatarians that this is referring to the annual holy day sabbaths, but this cannot be for it is already stated in this verse. In every reference in the bible to the words "sabbath days" it is always in reference to the weekly sabbath:

1. Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless? Matt 12:5
2. And, behold, there was a man which had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him. Matt 12:10
3. How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days.Matt 12:12
4. And he saith unto them, Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill? But they held their peace. Mr 3:4
5. And came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee, and taught them on the sabbath days. Lk 4:31
6. And certain of the Pharisees said unto them, Why do ye that which is not lawful to do on the sabbath days? Lk 6:2
7. Then said Jesus unto them, I will ask you one thing; Is it lawful on the sabbath days to do good, or to do evil? to save life, or to destroy it? Lk 6:9
8. And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, Acts 17:2

To summarize, what Paul is telling the believers in Colossi and all of us here today, is to be on your guard against any worldly minded person who is is puffed up in their fleshly mind, that will try to defraud you of your reward. Those who would attempt to deceive you through vain deceit, through philosophy and the traditions of men. Those who would come to you in a false piousness or humility and try to pass judgment on your for your observance of the laws of God concerning food and drink, the Feasts of the Lord, the New Moons and the weekly Sabbath.

I can testify to you, that these are the very "men" that I have had to contend with for the past 35 years of my life who try to pass judgment on me for my observance of these very things. They have come to me with all those attributes...puffed up minds, a false humility and piousness, traditions of men, rather then through the Scriptures to try and rob me of my reward reserved for me and all those who keep God's commandments that are "holy, just and good."

"Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city." Rev 22:14

(Col 2:17) Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

Finally, it is stated that all these things "are" a shadow of things "to come"...

It does not say a shadow of things that have or did come, but that are "to come.” In other words, they point to something that is yet future. How so?

The Fall Feasts of the Lord such as "the day of atonement" is still in progress as Christ is ministering in the true tabernacle of heaven as our Great High Priest just as the High Priest went into the holy of holies on this sacred day of the year. This is not over yet, Christ is still interceding for us in the heavenly courts in the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man. The true Feast of Tabernacles which follows the day of atonement is also still "to come" and also the great jubilee is also yet future.

"And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles." Zech 14:16

And the new moons and sabbaths also point to something that is yet future:

"And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord." Isa 66:23

I hope this exegesis on Colossians 2:14-17 has helped to see the importance of studying passages of Scripture in their proper context instead of using a verse here or a verse there out of its context to support a doctrinal belief.
Let the Bible interpret itself instead of relying upon the “traditions of men”. Amen

Studyman said:

Something "revived" must have existed prior to "revival". If the sin didn't exist before God gave the man his Law, then it would be impossible to "revive it".

Click to expand...

Strawman - I never said that sin did not exist before the Law. I merely accept Paul at his word - the sin that is innate to mankind is empowered, aroused, and strengthened by the Law.

What is Paul saying in these particular texts?:

But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me [h]coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin is dead

for sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me

Please address these texts, and show how they are not implying that sin is empowered and or enabled by the Law of Moses.

expos4ever said:

I think this is a great question. I believe that Paul is, in fact, referring to the Law of Moses (the 613 element code presented in the Old Testament). It is understandably confusing to grapple with the notion that these laws were "against" the Jew. But there is evidence that Paul does indeed believe that Law of Moses had a "dark" side. Please read Romans 7 with an open mind. Is Paul not quite clearly proclaiming that the Law of Moses empowers (rather than merely "exposing") our internal tendency to sin?

Click to expand...

Well going back to Romans 7 lets look at it this way. If you tell a child not to do something, all of a sudden the child is always tempted to do it. The law you just gave the child makes the desire to 'sin' stronger. A major component of Romans 7 and 8 is the contrast between living in the flesh vs living in the spirit. This makes all the difference with the impact that the law would have. For the man walking after the flesh, the law will come in and that person would find themselves a slave to sin. Because out sinful nature gravitates to whatever sin is and the more we learn what sin is, the more we will be slaves to sin but the spirit frees us from this not by removing the law, but by giving us spiritual strength to do according to God's will and not being bondage to our own fleshy desires.

SkyWriting said:

Paul was speaking against legalism, which he only partially rejected. He still embraced certain parts.

Click to expand...

Explain. What do you mean he still embraced certain parts. And also what do you understand legalism to mean

Studyman said:

Col. 2:14 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.

I have heard it proclaimed by religious men, who come in Christ's Name, that the "Handwriting of ordinances" which are against us, are the Good, Just, and Holy Laws, Commandments, and Statutes of God, given to Moses and Aaron to give to God's People.

I am interested in locating exactly where these handwritten ordinances, which were against God's People, are located as, for the life of me, I can not find a Command from God to HIS People that was "Against them".

In fact, the only "laws" I found in the Holy scriptures that were against men, was the doctrines and Commandments of men Jesus said the mainstream preachers of HIS Time burdened His People with. I am hoping to open up an honest, unbiased discussion about who's ordinances were taken out of the way, who were the "principalities and powers" which promoted these "handwritten ordinances", who was make a show of openly, and who was triumphed over.

If God's "handwriting of ordinances" are the ones that are against us, then God must be the "principalities and powers" that was "Spoiled". If God was the Author of the handwritten ordinances which was contrary to us, then did Jesus make a show of God openly? If God's Commandments and Laws are the handwritten ordinances that were against us, then did Jesus Triumph over God by "taking His Laws, Statutes, and Commandments "out of the way"?

Somehow I don't believe this is the message Paul was sending.

What do you think?

Click to expand...

So there is a verse in the bible that corresponds with the idea that the handwritings of ordinances were "against us". I dont know if you have seen it but here it is.

Deu 31:26 Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.

Just would like to point out that the 10 commandments were placed inside the ark while the book of the law was placed on the side of the ark.

But anyway, I guess we have to try to figure out what it means that the book of the law was a witness against them and if this is the same idea expressed in Colossians 2:14.

Now according to verse 16 and 17 it points out things that would have been included in the handwriting of ordinances and that these are a shadow of things to come. So lets go to Hebrews.

Heb 10:1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
Heb 10:8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;

In Hebrews 9 speaking of the first covenant it says this:

Heb 9:9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
Heb 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

Hebrews 9:10 and Colossians 2:16 seem to be talking about exactly the same thing. Hebrews 10:1 and Colossians 2:17 seem to be correlating.

So the handwriting of ordinances to me, seems to be referring to the ordinances, sacrifices and ceremonies that were contained in the law of Moses under the old covenant, as opposed to man-made laws that might have been added by the pharisees later on, because they did add a bunch of additional laws that were just a burden on the people.

But then there is verse 15 which I honestly never paid much attention to before. Now verse 15 is an example why it makes sense to read the entire chapter. After reading the entire chapter again with the emphasis to understand verse 15 I understand the point you are making because its actually stated in the previous verses. I will post a few of the previous verses in the ERV (Easy to Read Version) which I rarely use but I use it for situations like these.

Col 2:6 You accepted Christ Jesus as Lord, so continue to live following him.
Col 2:7 You must depend on Christ only, drawing life and strength from him. Just as you were taught the truth, continue to grow stronger in your understanding of it. And never stop giving thanks to God.
Col 2:8 Be sure you are not led away by the teaching of those who have nothing worth saying and only plan to deceive you. That teaching is not from Christ. It is only human tradition and comes from the powers that influence this world.
Col 2:9 I say this because all of God lives in Christ fully, even in his life on earth.
Col 2:10 And because you belong to Christ you are complete, having everything you need. Christ is ruler over every other power and authority.
Col 2:11 In Christ you had a different kind of circumcision, one that was not done by human hands. That is, you were made free from the power of your sinful self. That is the kind of circumcision Christ does.

So the powers in verse 8 seem to be what is referred in verse 15. The question is, can the "handwriting or ordinances" be a reference to both of these things? I am beginning to think so. It might be inclusive of both the ceremonial ordinances that took place under the old covenant and also the additional laws that were added.