Replies

That is quite an amusing attempt to get out of what the verse says. I'm trying to show you that you are "reading" what you think it says into what it actually says. You are reading with a preconceived idea. You jump to vs 18 and ignore what 14-17 actually say In verse 14, Paul states that 'ordinances' were blotted out. Those ordinances were the rituals of the Jewish Law (Acts.6:14, Eph.2:15). I agree with you that these "ordinances" could very well have been rituals of Jewish law. Let's look at verse 14:

Well, we are off to a good start.

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; Here's what you're doing. You're reading the word translated "ordinances" and then jumping to the conclusion that these "ordinances" are God's commands and that they have been "done away with" by having them nailed to the cross. You[re further hindered in the fact that you won't consider ANY other translation other than the King James, the one you've locked yourself into. But I'm going to once again try.

First, you have to prove the King James is incorrect.

I'm going to look at two words. Let's start with "ordinances". ORDINANCES This is the greek word "dogma": from G1380; an opinion, (a public) decree: - decree (1), decrees (3), ordinances (1). In scripture "dogma" isn't used very much. But every time it does, it refers to manmade decrees, not decrees directly from God: Act 17:7 Whom Jason hath received: and these all do contrary to the decrees (dogma) of Caesar, saying that there is another king, one Jesus. Luk 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree (dogma) from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. Sometimes men who worship God make "dogma", as evidenced by the council of Jerusalems decision about the gentiles in Acts 15: Act 16:4 And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees (dogma) for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem. Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances (dogma); for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; In Ephesians, "dogma" refers to the added in laws of the Jewish religion. ADDED. They weren't original commands of God, but LAWS of the jewish religion. Traditions. Dogma of their faith. But let's actually look at the word "ordinances" as used in other places in the King James because this is why you're getting confused and being led astray. Luk 1:6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances (dikaioma)of the Lord blameless. Note that this is NOT "dogma". It's a different greek word, "dikaioma". DIKAIOMA dik-ah'-yo-mah From G1344; an equitable deed; by implication a statute or decision: - judgment, justification, ordinance, righteousness. Let's look at another: Rom 13:2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance (diatage) of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. Note once again that it's an entirely different greek word, which by definition conveys an entirely different concept. I won't both with definitions from here on out, I'll assume that you have access to a greek lexicon. 1Co 11:2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances (paradosis), as I delivered them to you. Yet one more: 1Pe 2:13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance (ktsis) of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; So in the King James, the word "ordinance" is substituted for at least 5 DIFFERENT greek words. But clearly here it must mean something a man made decree, considering that the rest of the chapter dwells upon this in some detail. Col 2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances (dogmatizo), Col 2:21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Col 2:22 Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men? Note that this "dogmatizo" (obligated to following dogma) is again translated "ordinance". And it's MANMADE. As I said, this is why you don't "get it". You're locked into YOUR English understanding of the word "ordinance". You've made the assumption, with NO biblical basis, that "ordinance" is a commandment of God.

But we KNOW that Paul believed in the Lord's Holy Days and God's laws.

There you go!

You accuse me of assuming something and it is you are 'begging the question'.

I wanted to see how long it would take you before you tried to sneak in your unproven assumptions.

Nowhere in scripture does it say that Paul believed in Holy Days and God's Laws (Jewish).

Act 24:14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

Yes, that had to do with the fact that Christ was the Messiah, not keeping Jewish days.

Note that he was clear. He believed ALL that was in the law and prophets. He did NOT believe ALL that was in the body of Jewish Law. They were, and are, two separate things.

Yes, he believed everything that proved that Jesus Christ was the Messiah,

(Acts 26:23) 22 Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come: 23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

But that's only part of your problem in trying to translate Colossians 2:14. Let's turn to the second word. HANDWRITING As in "handwriting of ordinances". This is going to be a little shorter because the greek word translated "handwriting" (in the King James) only occurs here in scripture. It is: cheirographon Thayer Definition: 1) a handwriting, what one has written by his own hand 2) 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 be returned at the appointed time The second is the definition that is pertinent. It's basically an IOU. There are other definitions of "writing" in the new testament and most often the greek word employed is "graphos". So if the verse had meant merely "writing" this is the word that would have been employed. So it's an "iou" a debt. So what is this "debt", this "iou", this "handwriting" that is against us? Most likely, as you said, it's JEWISH ritual, coupled with an ascetic gnostic viewpoint. The Jews HAD added a variety, a plethora, a whole body of manmade law to scripture. They used this AGAINST gentiles, to separate them from God. Christ took this dogma and nailed it to the cross. He cancelled out the debt. He got rid of the "iou".

Christ got rid of all of the Law,

Shall we look at Gal.3:10- 10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. Deut 27:26 James 2:10 11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. Hab 2:4 Rom 1:17 12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. Lev 18:5 Rom 10:5 13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: Deut 21:23

The Greek word for 'law' in Gal. 3:10-13 is the same that Christ uses in Matthew 5:17-18.

The Greek word (nomus) refers to the Jewish Mosaic laws.

Now, all the running to the "Greek' proved nothing.

The word has a context in English that defines it.

What was wiped out was the debt that we owed the Law, 'the wages of sin is death'.

Christ paid the debt that we owed and that the Law demanded.

Look, I don't mean to be so harsh about this, but many people don't interpret Paul's writing correctly and always have: 2Pe 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 2Pe 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction. 2Pe 3:17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness.

Oh, yes, and it was Peter who himself lapsed into returning to Jewish 'habits' (Gal.2) and was rebuked by Paul.

Paul was the one to whom was revealed the mystery of the Church,(Eph.3) that we are not under the law but grace.(Gal.3)

Peter KNEW that Paul's writings were hard for people to understand. But we would do well to heed his advice.

Yes, because people want to reject what Paul wrote about Grace and mix grace with the law, despite what scripture says on the matter.

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. (2Cor.3:6)

The reason that people do not want to stick with the King James is because it will not allow them to throw up smoke with appeals to the original or other translations.

You showed me a number of different meanings for Ordiance and than had to admit that it could mean exactly what I said it did, Jewish laws.

And Col2:16 is saying that we are not under any obligation to follow Jewish laws, e.g. sabbaths.