anyone else not like Sunday worship?

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

FYI, dig enough and you'll find it wasn't unleavened they ate for communion either, they used leavening to commemorate Christ, the Head of the body, coming into the body fully....

We still do

 

[Sophrosyne]

First off there was never in the Law of Moses regarding the Sabbath a requirement to gather together and worship on that day. Second the early believers were Jewish and were required by Mosaic Law to observe the Sabbath which would preclude participating in a Christian church worship. Until Jesus died and was resurrected the Law was still in effect and because they were pretty much not allowed to worship as Christians in the synagogue on Saturday they likely gathered on Sunday to proclaim their belief in Jesus and learn about him. Further more Gentile believers were not allowed to participate in Sabbath worship at the synagogue so in order to learn about Jesus they would need to met on Sunday so the Jewish believers could be a part of the group and also teach from what was passed down from the Jewish Apostles to them. Also the church believed Jesus rose from the dead on Sunday, not Saturday. It would be sort of contradictory to do a "work" of resurrection on the Sabbath as it is supposed to be a day to rest and Jesus rested in the Tomb on that day.
Jesus is now our Sabbath in him we have rest.

 

[Hazelelponi]

We still do

cool...

 

[HIM]

or a feast
or a new moon
or a sabbath

Are three categories. And the listing together in a phrase is a listing of appointed times. We see this in long form in Numbers 28-29, where it gives the sacrifices for each appointed time.

We see a listing in short form in

Ezekiel 45:17 It shall be the prince's duty to furnish the burnt offerings, grain offerings, and drink offerings, at the feasts, the new moons, and the Sabbaths, all the appointed feasts of the house of Israel: he shall provide the sin offerings, grain offerings, burnt offerings, and peace offerings, to make atonement on behalf of the house of Israel.

We know that this listing encompassed the weekly Sabbath by the description of the details which follows:

Ezekiel 46:1 ‘Thus says the Lord God: “The gateway of the inner court that faces toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the Sabbath it shall be opened, and on the day of the New Moon it shall be opened. 2 The prince shall enter by way of the vestibule of the gateway from the outside, and stand by the gatepost. The priests shall prepare his burnt offering and his peace offerings. He shall worship at the threshold of the gate. Then he shall go out, but the gate shall not be shut until evening. 3 Likewise the people of the land shall worship at the entrance to this gateway before the Lord on the Sabbaths and the New Moons. 4 The burnt offering that the prince offers to the Lord on the Sabbath day shall be six lambs without blemish, and a ram without blemish; 5 and the grain offering shall be one ephah for a ram, and the grain offering for the lambs, as much as he wants to give, as well as a hin of oil with every ephah. 6 On the day of the New Moon it shall be a young bull without blemish, six lambs, and a ram; they shall be without blemish.

It spells out the other appointed times separately.

Now the breakdown of these three categories looks like this:

feast- three pilgrim feasts, Passover, Tabernacles, Pentecost.
New moon- New moon
Sabbaths- Weekly Sabbath, Day of Atonement and Trumpets.

The Day of Atonement and Trumpets are also Sabbaths to the Lord.

A key verse for seeing how each appointed time falls into the list is the following:

2Ch 8:13 as the duty of each day required, offering according to the commandment of Moses for the Sabbaths, the new moons, and the three annual feasts--the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks, and the Feast of Booths.

The "feasts" component is defined. It includes the "chag" or festivals, the three yearly festivals.

But the sabbaths are included in the sabbaths listing, the weekly, the Day of Atonement and the trumpets.

Now having said that the verse says let no one judge you regarding....

Acts 21 relates that the thousands of believing Jews in Jerusalem were zealous for the whole law. They continued to keep the law seeing Jesus as the fulfillment. This included the sacrifices as in Acts 21 some go to make a vow and sacrifices are included. But they recognized the sacrifices point to Jesus.

They go on to list requirements for gentiles as spelled out in Acts 15, and still maintained at that time.

Folks can debate it beyond that. But Colossians 2 is a listing of holy times and includes the Weekly Sabbath. So what you do with the feast and new moon components, you have to do the same with the Sabbath.

If you want to keep the Sabbath to the Lord you can. But understand that Jesus is the basis of salvation, not works observance.

It has already been pointed out that the early church assembled on Sunday early on, before Constantine.

We also know that they continued in some cases to observe both Sabbath and the Lord's day in some churches for centuries following that.

Context says different my friend.

We are buried and risen with Him through Faith. Having been dead in our sins He have quicken us together with Him. Forgiving us of all trespasses. Thereby, because they are needed any more, the handwriting of the ordinances were blotted out. That which was against us and contrary to us were the judgements that were contained in the handwriting of the ordinances, the Book of the Law which was placed on the side of the Ark. Not the Ten Commandments in which the Sabbath is of. Which were placed on the inside of the Ark. Symbolizing the New Covenant. The Ark being the Body of Christ, Us His Church and the Ten Commandments being placed in our midst through being part and of Him through His death and resurrection.

The meat, drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days mentioned in verse 16 are being said in context to verse 14 and 15. How do we know? Because of the word "therefore" being used and the context of the verse being judgement. Having spoiled principalities and powers due to the blotting out of the handwriting of the ordinances there is no more judgment in this respect. Because all judgement for us in Christ Jesus is not necessary because we are risen with him and have been forgiven of all trespasses.

Deut 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.

Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.
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 the ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
Col 2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
Col 2:16 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:

 

[GreekOrthodox]

cool...

Just as an FYI, this is what one of our prosphera (communion) loaves look like:

Once the loaf rises, a wood or plastic seal is pushed into the loaf, creating the markings you see. The center of the seal is cut out by the priest for the actual Eucharist, while the rest is cut up into bite sized pieces. These are then served after the service as antidoron, "instead of the gifts", that anyone can take, included non-Orthodox. I take a few pieces home and when I get up during the week, I will have a piece of antidoron while I say my morning prayers.

 

[tall73]

Context says different my friend.

We are buried and risen with Him through Faith. Having been dead in our sins He have quicken us together with Him. Forgiving us of all trespasses. Thereby, because they are needed any more, the handwriting of the ordinances were blotted out. That which was against us and contrary to us were the judgements that were contained in the handwriting of the ordinances, the Book of the Law which was placed on the side of the Ark.

A few questions to clarify: Do you think only the judgments or covenant curses were blotted out, or only the portions of the Book of the Law dealing with sacrificial aspects, or the entirety of the Book of the Law?

Now as to the meaning of blotting out the handwriting of ordinances...

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;

The handwriting of ordinances, was a handwritten note of bond or debt that required payment. In this case it is referring to our debt of sin that was owed. Jesus paid it by dying on the cross for us. He was nailed to the cross, paying our debts.

It is not referring to removing the laws regarding sacrifice. He didn't remove the sacrificial laws but fulfilled them by paying the debt of our sin.

You note the context, but the context supports that Jesus blotted out our sin, our record of debt, not the law itself:

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;
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;

Blotting out is a continuation of the thought right above it, "having forgiven you all trespasses". Both are participles referring back to the main verb, quickened, hath he quickened together with him

So in other words, we were dead in sin, and God made us alive together with Jesus. He forgave all of our trespasses. And He did that by blotting out the debt that was owed--our sin. He didn't remove the debt by blotting out the need to pay, but by actually paying it with His life.


Notice the following translations which make the connection to the certificate of debt:

NASB,

having canceled out (AH)the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us

Amplified:

4Having cancelled and blotted out and wiped away the handwriting of the note (bond) with its legal decrees and demands

ESV:

"by canceling the record of debt "

ASV

having blotted out the bond written in ordinances

HCSB

4 He erased the certificate of debt, with its obligations

 

[tall73]

Context says different my friend.

We are buried and risen with Him through Faith. Having been dead in our sins He have quicken us together with Him. Forgiving us of all trespasses. Thereby, because they are needed any more, the handwriting of the ordinances were blotted out. That which was against us and contrary to us were the judgements that were contained in the handwriting of the ordinances, the Book of the Law which was placed on the side of the Ark. Not the Ten Commandments in which the Sabbath is of. Which were placed on the inside of the Ark. Symbolizing the New Covenant. The Ark being the Body of Christ, Us His Church and the Ten Commandments being placed in our midst through being part and of Him through His death and resurrection.

The meat, drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days mentioned in verse 16 are being said in context to verse 14 and 15. How do we know? Because of the word "therefore" being used and the context of the verse being judgement. Having spoiled principalities and powers due to the blotting out of the handwriting of the ordinances there is no more judgment in this respect. Because all judgement for us in Christ Jesus is not necessary because we are risen with him and have been forgiven of all trespasses.

Deut 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.

Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.
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 the ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
Col 2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
Col 2:16 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:

Can you explain why the Jewish Christians were still offering sacrifices and taking vows in Acts 21 if the Book of the Law was removed?

 

[tall73]

Deut 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 the.

The book of the law was a witness against them because it showed what they must do--and they didn't do it. But the ten commandments did as well.

The Book of the law contained moral, as well as "ceremonial" laws.

It talks about:

- Oaths
- Sexual sins (homosexuality, inappropriate behavior with animals, incest, etc.)
- Responsibility and liability (if your animal gores someone, and you knew it had before, injuring someone in a fight, failing to cover a pit, animal grazing in neighbor's field)
- kidnapping
- self defense in a break-in
- no sorcery, necromancy, etc.
- not oppressing foreigners, orphans, widows, poor
-loans and interest
- respect for rulers
- Need to be proactively helpful (if you see your neighbor's animal wander away)
- bribes

Etc.

Even the two greatest commands were in the OT, but not the ten commandments. Upon those the whole law was said to hang.

That is to say, all the specifics within the law are the outflow of those two commands.

And any of the laws were "moral" in the sense that if you didn't do them you could die for it. They were all required, and all about right and wrong in the sense that God commanded them.

But we do distinguish as you indicated between civil, ecclesiastical etc. There are some things that are obvious lasting principles beyond the specific time and circumstances of the Israelites. And there are some that were to point to the remission of sins through Christ, and so they are fulfilled by His work.

But notice that in Matthew 5 Jesus talks about how He did not come to destroy the law--and it is not just the ten.

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

He then goes through to elaborate on the law, with the formula, "Ye have heard that it was said.

He references the murder and adultery commands. However, he also references other points of the law, outside the ten commandments:

- Divorce
- oaths
- loving your neighbor and hating your enemy

We at times see "law" and think it only means the ten commandments. But it went beyond that.

Now the ten commandments being on tables of stone did set them apart. And we can discuss why that was. But all of the law was required, and even the NT recognizes some of the moral requirements in the book of the law. Paul in I Corinthians 5 still condemns incest. In chapter 6, Romans 1, etc. he still condemns homosexuality. He even establishes that it is right to pay those who minister in the gospel by referencing the ox treading out the grain receives food, etc.

And Paul sums up this usage of the law in Timothy:

5 Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:
6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.

Now we agree that the need for sacrifices was fulfilled. However, it gets more complicated on laws related to other aspects. We recognize the principle of personal responsibility, if you are neglectful and a fire starts that burns your neighbor's land. The law addresses this too. We may not handle everything the way the law did in the specific application of the land of Israel. But we still see the moral principle behind it, and hold a person accountable when they have been neglectful.

In this sense even the ten commandments express moral principles, but within the specific context of Israel's covenant.

So for instance, we see:

12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.

The specific promise relates to their remaining in the promised land which He gave to them. But Paul still notes the validity of the command for those in Ephesus, but applying the promise more generally apart from the context of the holy land.

6 :1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.
2 Honour thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise;
3 That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.

So the principles behind the law are universal, and this includes laws in the book of the law. The mainly gentile audience of the Corinthian church were still expected to follow the principle against incest, despite never being under the mosaic covenant, because it was manifest from the law that God opposes it.

 

[HIM]

A few questions to clarify: Do you think only the judgments or covenant curses were blotted out, or only the portions of the Book of the Law dealing with sacrificial aspects, or the entirety of the Book of the Law?

Now as to the meaning of blotting out the handwriting of ordinances...

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;

The handwriting of ordinances, was a handwritten note of bond or debt that required payment. In this case it is referring to our debt of sin that was owed. Jesus paid it by dying on the cross for us. He was nailed to the cross, paying our debts.

It is not referring to removing the laws regarding sacrifice. He didn't remove the sacrificial laws but fulfilled them by paying the debt of our sin.

You note the context, but the context supports that Jesus blotted out our sin, our record of debt, not the law itself:

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;
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;

Blotting out is a continuation of the thought right above it, "having forgiven you all trespasses". Both are participles referring back to the main verb, quickened, hath he quickened together with him

So in other words, we were dead in sin, and God made us alive together with Jesus. He forgave all of our trespasses. And He did that by blotting out the debt that was owed--our sin. He didn't remove the debt by blotting out the need to pay, but by actually paying it with His life.


Notice the following translations which make the connection to the certificate of debt:

Certificate of debt. What we owe not what we did.



It is the handwriting or certificate of debt, what we owed in the or to the ordinances because we sinned that was against us and was taken out of the way, nailed to the cross.



The following is from the Biblehub. Link provided.
Lexicon
having canceled
ἐξαλείψας (exaleipsas)
Verb - Aorist Participle Active - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's Greek 1813: To plaster, wash over; I wipe off, wipe out, obliterate. From ek and aleipho; to smear out, i.e. Obliterate.

the
τὸ (to)
Article - Accusative Neuter Singular
Strong's Greek 3588: The, the definite article. Including the feminine he, and the neuter to in all their inflections; the definite article; the.

debt ascribed
χειρόγραφον (cheirographon)
Noun - Accusative Neuter Singular
Strong's Greek 5498: A handwriting, bond. Neuter of a compound of cheir and grapho; something hand-written, i.e. A manuscript (figuratively).

to
καθ’ (kath’)
Preposition
Strong's Greek 2596: A primary particle; down, in varied relations (genitive, dative or accusative) with which it is joined).

us
ἡμῶν (hēmōn)
Personal / Possessive Pronoun - Genitive 1st Person Plural
Strong's Greek 1473: I, the first-person pronoun. A primary pronoun of the first person I.

in the
τοῖς (tois)
Article - Dative Neuter Plural
Strong's Greek 3588: The, the definite article. Including the feminine he, and the neuter to in all their inflections; the definite article; the.

decrees
δόγμασιν (dogmasin)
Noun - Dative Neuter Plural
Strong's Greek 1378: A decree, edict, ordinance. From the base of dokeo; a law.

that
ὃ (ho)
Personal / Relative Pronoun - Nominative Neuter Singular
Strong's Greek 3739: Who, which, what, that.

stood
ἦν (ēn)
Verb - Imperfect Indicative Active - 3rd Person Singular
Strong's Greek 1510: I am, exist. The first person singular present indicative; a prolonged form of a primary and defective verb; I exist.

against
ὑπεναντίον (hypenantion)
Adjective - Nominative Neuter Singular
Strong's Greek 5227: Opposite to, adverse; subst: an adversary. From hupo and enantios; under contrary to, i.e. Opposed or an opponent.

us.
ἡμῖν (hēmin)
Personal / Possessive Pronoun - Dative 1st Person Plural
Strong's Greek 1473: I, the first-person pronoun. A primary pronoun of the first person I.

He took
ἦρκεν (ērken)
Verb - Perfect Indicative Active - 3rd Person Singular
Strong's Greek 142: To raise, lift up, take away, remove.

it
αὐτὸ (auto)
Personal / Possessive Pronoun - Accusative Neuter 3rd Person Singular
Strong's Greek 846: He, she, it, they, them, same. From the particle au; the reflexive pronoun self, used of the third person, and of the other persons.

away,
ἐκ (ek)
Preposition
Strong's Greek 1537: From out, out from among, from, suggesting from the interior outwards. A primary preposition denoting origin, from, out.

nailing
προσηλώσας (prosēlōsas)
Verb - Aorist Participle Active - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's Greek 4338: To fasten with nails, nail to. From pros and a derivative of helos; to peg to, i.e. Spike fast.

it
αὐτὸ (auto)
Personal / Possessive Pronoun - Accusative Neuter 3rd Person Singular
Strong's Greek 846: He, she, it, they, them, same. From the particle au; the reflexive pronoun self, used of the third person, and of the other persons.

to the
τῷ (tō)
Article - Dative Masculine Singular
Strong's Greek 3588: The, the definite article. Including the feminine he, and the neuter to in all their inflections; the definite article; the.

cross!
σταυρῷ (staurō)
Noun - Dative Masculine Singular
Strong's Greek 4716: A cross.

 

[DragonFox91]

I go back & forth on if it should be Saturday or Sunday.

These are the 2 teachings I understand: "the Jews observed it as Saturday so we should keep it that way" or "Christ resurrected on a Sunday, & 'the curtain was torn in two' , so it should be Sunday."

I don't think it's that important. I agree w/ OP I question a lot of what Catholics teach, but I don't hold this against them, if it was indeed them who changed it to Sunday.

(Shame on me for saying which day is not important. I've heard sermons 'It's one of the 10 Commandments. Of course what day it is should be important!'

There are several. The most often cited is Acts of the Apostles 20:7. Using the following link, be sure also to read Ellicott's Commentary near the bottom of that page.

Acts 20:7 On the first day of the week we came together to break bread. Since Paul was ready to leave the next day, he talked to them and kept on speaking until midnight. (biblehub.com)

Except didn't they view Saturday as the first day of the week?

EDIT: I'm reading some of the commmentary & came across this:
"In this case, the meeting of which we read would be held on what we should call the Saturday evening"

 

[tall73]

Certificate of debt. What we owe not what we did.

It is a record of what we owe, because of what we did. The certificate of debt had the debt, the reason, and the requirement to pay it. It is "in" decrees--to pay what is owed.

So for instance, Paul actually places a certificate of debt in his letter to Philemon.

17 If then you count me as a partner, receive him as you would me. 18 But if he has wronged you or owes anything, put that on my account. 19 I, Paul, am writing with my own hand. I will repay

It was a handwritten certificate guaranteeing what was owed, and why, and guaranteeing that it would be paid.

The book of the law, on the other hand, lists all the laws, penalties, sacrificial system, etc.

If I go out to dinner they bring me a menu listing everything to eat and what it costs (Book of the Law).

But when I have finished the meal they bring the bill listing what I actually owe, based on what I ate (certificate of debt of our sins, of which the penalty is death).

Jesus paid the bill. He died the death we deserve. We no longer have a debt.

Now if the Book of the Law were blotted out, why does Paul still quote from it to note moral principles?

 

[tall73]

I go back & forth on if it should be Saturday or Sunday.

These are the 2 teachings I understand: "the Jews observed it as Saturday so we should keep it that way" or "Christ resurrected on a Sunday, & 'the curtain was torn in two' , so it should be Sunday."

I don't think it's that important. I agree w/ OP I question a lot of what Catholics teach, but I don't hold this against them, if it was indeed them who changed it to Sunday.

(Shame on me for saying which day is not important. I've heard sermons 'It's one of the 10 Commandments. Of course what day it is should be important!'


Except didn't they view Saturday as the first day of the week?

You can see the arrangement in the account of the resurrection.

Mark 16:1 Now when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, that they might come and anoint Him. 2 Very early in the morning, on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen.

 

[tall73]

EDIT: I'm reading some of the commmentary & came across this:
"In this case, the meeting of which we read would be held on what we should call the Saturday evening"

Days were reckoned from sundown to sundown, just as in the creation you have evening, then morning.

We see this in Nehemiah 13:

19 So it was, at the gates of Jerusalem, as it began to be dark before the Sabbath, that I commanded the gates to be shut, and charged that they must not be opened till after the Sabbath. Then I posted some of my servants at the gates, so that no burdens would be brought in on the Sabbath day.

So the first part of the first day would be what we think of as Saturday night, in the dark portion.

 

[DragonFox91]

You can see the arrangement in the account of the resurrection.

Mark 16:1 Now when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, that they might come and anoint Him. 2 Very early in the morning, on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen.

You're right. It does.

 

[Albion]

Days were reckoned from sundown to sundown, just as in the creation you have evening, then morning.
.............................
So the first part of the first day would be what we think of as Saturday night, in the dark portion.

...which, according to the Catholic Church, is correct. That's why Catholics may attend Mass on Saturday evening and fulfil their "Sunday obligation."

It may not matter to a reader what the Catholic Church does or says, but many Seventh-day Adventists insist that the Catholic Church is responsible for every belief and practice that they reject. Not in this instance, however.

 

[DragonFox91]

I didn't know Catholics had Mass obligations

 

[Albion]

That's a joke, I take it.

 

[tall73]

...which, according to the Catholic Church, is correct. That's why Catholics may attend Mass on Saturday evening and fulfil their "Sunday obligation."

It may not matter to a reader what the Catholic Church does or says, but many Seventh-day Adventists insist that the Catholic Church is responsible for every belief and practice that they reject. Not in this instance, however.

And they tend to not recognize the Eastern Orthodox, Assyrian Church of the East, etc. who do things also, with a different relationship to the pope.

 

[HIM]

It is a record of what we owe, because of what we did. The certificate of debt had the debt, the reason, and the requirement to pay it. It is "in" decrees--to pay what is owed.

So for instance, Paul actually places a certificate of debt in his letter to Philemon.

17 If then you count me as a partner, receive him as you would me. 18 But if he has wronged you or owes anything, put that on my account. 19 I, Paul, am writing with my own hand. I will repay

Not related. The word χειρόγραφον is only use one time and that is in Col. 2:14.

The clause "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances" in the Greek is in the Dative Case. The dative case, answers the question where. It is indicated by the word "to" in most interlinears and should be in this case.

A direct translation looks like this.
χειρόγραφον (certificate of debt) τοις (to the) δόγμασιν (ordinances)

It is not the entire Book of the Law. Never said that. It is the Handwriting, the certificate of debt to the ordinances not the ordinances themselves and certainly not the Ten Commandments. Context points to this too. We have been forgiven all trespasses so there is no need for the certificate of debt to the, in the, or of the ordinances because Jesus has taken care of it.

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 the ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;


Couple that with the fact that verse 16 is being said in context to verse 14. This we know by the word "therefore" being used. With that being so we know that judgement that is mentioned not to judge in respect to meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days is that which is mentioned as being blotted out in verse 14. Hence why principalities and powers are spoiled


Col 2:15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
Col 2:16 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:

 

[tall73]

Not related. The word χειρόγραφον is only use one time and that is in Col. 2:14.

Of course it is related. It is an example of a hand written certificate of debt. It is an example of what the word in Colossians describes.

The clause "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances" in the Greek is in the Dative Case. The dative case, answers the question where. It is indicated by the word "to" in most interlinears and should be in this case.

There are various kinds of datives, and the form is also the same for locative and instrumental. There are scholars who argue for dative, and some for instrumental, and many take the meaning of as in consisting in. Note how the ESV renders it for instance:

Col 2:14 by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.

But that is the difficulty with cases, and why prepositions were already starting to be used in Koine. However, one was not used here, so it is open to a number of possibilities.

It is not the entire Book of the Law. Never said that. It is the Handwriting, the certificate of debt to the ordinances not the ordinances themselves and certainly not the Ten Commandments.

So the ordinances which required it were still there, and He forgave us our sins, that sounds like the certificate of debt was our record of sins.

If you indicate that it was the obligation to the laws, then why were the Jewish believers and Paul still doing them in Acts 21?

Context points to this too. We have been forgiven all trespasses so there is no need for the certificate of debt to the, in the, or of the ordinances because Jesus has taken care of it.

- If the handwritten certificate of debt was not the ordinances themselves, then that means the ordinances (and the ten commandments of course) were not blotted out. But then that means you lost the distinction between the Book of the Law and the tend commandments regarding what it applies to. It is not getting rid of the obligation to the law of God. It is forgiving our penalty that we owe due to sins.

-Which obligations in particular were blotted out? Why were the Jewish believers still performing sacrifices in Acts 21?

-Are you required to be circumcised, which is also in the law?

Couple that with the fact that verse 16 is being said in context to verse 14. This we know by the word "therefore" being used. With that being so we know that judgement that is mentioned not to judge in respect to meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days is that which is mentioned as being blotted out in verse 14.

Jesus paid for our sins, and blotted them out. That penalty for sin was what we owed. He paid for it with His life.