Colossians Chapter 2 Discussion

Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances (dogma) that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

Many commentators make the statement that ordinances/Dogma refers to Torah. They state that it was Torah that separated the Gentiles from God’s people which is totally in error. God himself said there was one Torah for the Israelites and the Gentiles. See EX 12:49, Lev 24:22, Num 15:16

Peter himself said:

Act 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath showed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

Peter says it was against the Law for him to enter a gentile’s house. Where is that in the Torah? It is not, but it is in the Oral Law.

In Acts 10, clearly God was not telling Peter that he no longer had to keep Torah. Instead he was teaching him not to put man’s traditions (Oral Law) ahead of his Law. That is why we see the word common (the Greek word koinos). The Jews held that something that didn’t reach their religious standard was common and they considered that equivalent to God’s unclean (the Greek word akathartos). In Acts 10, Peter was being taught that their religious rules should not outweigh His. “Do not call something common that I do not consider unclean”. God was telling Peter that he did not consider the Gentiles unclean, so Peter was not to consider them common, that is unclean. The same lesson is taught in Mark 7 and Romans 14. Both places the word is common, but many bibles translate it unclean. In Acts 10 you have both words so that they cannot translate it unclean.

This rule of “common” was a hedge that the Jews had put up to protect themselves, but it also had the effect of cutting the gentiles off from them. It was this hedge that Paul spoke of in Eph 2:

Eph 2:14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition (literally “hedge”)between us;
Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; (the Greek word dogma, just like in Col 2) for to make in himself of twain, one new man, so making peace;

Jesus broke down the caste system that the Jews had built up. There are many instances where Jesus, Paul and Peter talk about this. It also fits quite well with the arguments between the Shammai and the Hillel Pharisees of Jesus’ day.


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


Sounds to me like Paul is saying only let the body of Christ judge you. But who is the body of Christ? It is interesting that many translations including this commentator change from Body of Christ to something like: the body is of Christ, or but the substance or reality is of Christ. However, everywhere else that Paul uses the same words, they translate it Body of Christ. Look it up.

Paul is telling these former pagans, that the only people whose opinions they should value are other believers. Don’t let nonbelievers judge them because they keep the Sabbaths, New Moons, Holy Days or what they do or do not drink.

Here is the main question. If Paul wanted them to stop keeping the Torah, why did he not say in BIG BOLD LETTERS: STOP KEEPING THE TORAH! Yet he never does. I guess he was too wishy-washy to do something like that.

By saying that the Dogma has been done away with, he is saying that they are part of the children of Yaweh. Because they are:

no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; they should not let anyone judge them but the body of Christ.
(Eph 2:19)

They should Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, (Col 2:8)

And that they should Let no man beguile you of your reward, in a voluntary humility, and worshiping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, (Col 2:18)


And

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,
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?
Col 2:23 Which things have, indeed a show of wisdom in will-worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honor to the satisfying of the flesh.

Everything described here is pagan in origin or at the least Hellenistic, not Orthodox Jewish. He is telling them to stay away from the pagan rituals of angels and philosophy and traditions of men.

That’s right! He said traditions of men, not Traditions of God. Paul never refers to the Torah as a tradition of men.

Most commentators state their bias when they refer to the Old Jewish Laws, ie the old testament laws. In a nutshell they believe that Christ came to start a new religion and that the old religion has been done away with.

I still do not get how they can believe that. Jesus kept the feast days and Sabbaths. Paul kept the feast days and Nazarite vows. Peter continued to eat kosher ten years after the death of Jesus, yet the Law was done away with?


Show me one example of a disciple of Christ not keeping Torah and I will accept that He did away with it!


Shalom,
Jeff

Sin and Death

As someone who leads a messianic prison ministry, I am often caught between the roles of grace and law. Usually we spend time discussing the meaning of sin, but there might be a more important thing to define. What is the biblical meaning of death? Since death is the result of sin (breaking the law), maybe it would help the discussion if we discussed the meaning of “death”.

Adam was told that if they took of the “tree of knowledge” that they would die. However, when they did, they did not die, but instead they were cut off from the “tree of life”. Now most people will say they “died spiritually”, but that is not what is described here. What happened when they sinned? They were cut off from the presence of God. Prior to their sin, they “walked with God”, but afterwards they were blocked from the “Tree of Life”. Many talk of the “Tree of Life” as Torah, but it makes no sense that Yahweh would cut us off from that which explains sin if we sin. Interestingly, Kabalah says the “Tree of Life” is the “path to God”. So by that definition, Adam and Eve’s sin cause them to be blocked from free access to Yahweh.

Does that make sense? Well how many times are we shown this? If you sinned in Moses’ day, you were removed from the camp, from His Presence. If you were in sin, you could not “draw near” to Yahweh with your offering. Cain was not killed, but put out of the garden for murder. Throughout the bible we see examples where if we sin we are separated from God, which should be a punishment worse than death. But do we think of separation from God as worse than death? I don’t think so.

Most Christians today think that being in the perfect presence of God is what Heaven is, and that is what happens after death. Yet the bible shows Yaweh’s desire for us is to be in his presence here on earth. The Kingdom of Heaven (God) is Near (or as the rabbis say, the Kingdom of Heaven is offered). Maybe if we did a better job of helping the family desire the presence of God, then they would fear separation (death) and would desire to avoid death by understanding His Torah. Instead of trying to convince believers they need to keep the Torah, maybe the discussion should be how do we make them want the presence of God?

Shalom,
Jeff