Colossians 2:14-16 - The Law That Was Against Us

farouk said:

The chapter goes on to say that what we now have is better than the law.

Click to expand...

Randy Kluth said:

Now that Christ has already provided that final redemption, we no longer need to imitate the need to rest from our sins.

Click to expand...

Randy Kluth said:

I'm saying that when the Law was in effect it could bring temporal blessings to Israel when they obeyed God's commandments and rules. But that Covenant had a time stamp on it, namely when Israel completely failed under the Covenant to keep their part of the agreement. God had to cancel and annul it.

At the same time, God replaced that failed Covenant with a brand new covenant, the New Covenant. The Old Covenant, wanting to bring blessings to a whole nation, showed that this blessing could not last for any length of time. The Law itself would reveal all of the moral failings within the nation. Even if the failure started small, it spread like leaven all through the lump. It spread like mold all through the house.

So the New Covenant, although it also wishes to bring blessings to godly nations, focuses on final redemption for those who wish to succeed with God, and not turn to apostasy and false religion. If we live in righteousness, we will experience a degree of blessing, together with persecution. If an entire nation turns to righteousness, there will be blessings in that nation.

However, turning to righteousness in the NT time period no longer turns to rituals using physical elements to portray the need for final redemption. Animal sacrifices only did this, to show that Israel needed God's forgiveness regularly, and in the end, needed Christ himself as a perfectly righteous sacrifice. He simultaneously became the source of our forgiveness, by bearing our sins, and t he source of our righteousness through the Spirit. And so, we turn to a perfect standard, and to a complete forgiveness.

Sabbath observance is one of those rituals that merely portrayed a need for final redemption. Now that Christ has already provided that final redemption, we no longer need to imitate the need to rest from our sins. They are forgiven.

Click to expand...

Backlit said:

Absolutely. Very true. Christ and Christ alone is far better than our empty promises and all our efforts at righteousness. Christ alone has promised that the law will be written in and demonstrated by us through His power and not our own will. It is such a release of the burden when we come to rest in His grace and allow Him to do the work in us. That is in fact the focus of His work as High Priest... Sanctifying His people.

Click to expand...

quietthinker said:

you run yourself in circles with unpersuasive words.

Click to expand...

Backlit said:

So why baptism? Why communion? Aren't they rituals demonstrating redemption? Did you know that the entire population of the new earth will be observing the Sabbath? Why do you think that would be?

Click to expand...

Randy Kluth said:

I added a bit more to the previous post, to try to explain it more. The Law was given for sinners, but Christ himself was not under Law, because he was not a sinner. Even though we are saved by the righteousness of Christ, which we participate in, we remain in bodies of sin.

When we repent of our old ways, and determine to go forward with Christ's righteousness alone, we have an initiation ceremony into Christianity, baptism, which displays the fact we are sinners who are determining to shun our former way of life.

And we take Communion to remind ourselves, in our narrow sightedness, of the fact we must actually partake of Christ's righteousness, and also be rejected by this world, as he was. We are to be reminded that he had to suffer for our sins in order to redeem us, reminding us that we need to regularly shun the sin that he died for.

Redemption rituals under the Law were not done just to symbolize the need for Christ's redemption. They were also a temporary band aid for the sin that they had committed well before Christ could come.

But now that Christ has come, we don't need the "band aid." We don't need to rehearse the rituals of redemption to be reminded of a former time when they provided some temporary relief. We have relief in Christ now, of a better kind. Not only can we be forgiven for things we do wrong each day, but we can rest assured that we have eternal redemption.

There is absolutely no need for practicing any of the rules contained in the Law, as Israel once did. Not only were they only for Israel, but Israel broke that covenant, meaning that doing those things no longer have any value. They must now go to Christ, as we must, to obtain forgiveness.

Click to expand...

mjrhealth said:

You will never convince Him,, hes being at it for years, now there is three of them its a fight between them and the other mob, mother and daughter, The law is not of faith, they seek to be judged by their works, seems their works are greater than His.
God bless

Click to expand...

Randy Kluth said:

We should only "scrap" what the Lord Himself has "scrapped." On the cross Jesus himself put away any need, under the Law, for further attempts at self-justification. Works of the Law could never, after all, self-justify. They could only provide obedience, resulting in temporal blessings--they could not bring eternal life.

So any efforts at self-justification through Sabbath-keeping, were done away with, or "scrapped," at the cross. To try to bring that law back does an affront to Christ, as the NT Scriptures say. This would insult the "Spirit of Grace."

Heb 10.29 How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace?

Paul makes a very big issue out of this by denouncing those who continued to pursue justification under the Law.

Gal 3.10 For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, as it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” 11 Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.”

Obviously, nobody can perfectly "continue under the Law." Having a sin nature, we will always sin, as long as we live in these fallen bodies. So we can experience blessings for obedience in this life, by practicing righteousness. But without eternal atonement, we can never receive eternal life.

For Paul, living by faith was a matter of entering into the righteousness of Christ apart from any rituals to justify access to it. It was a free gift, not requiring any act under the Law in a preliminary way. To engage in Sabbath observance was rejected by Paul.

Col 2.16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.

To pursue circumcision itself, the very act of male entry into the Covenant of Law, was showing disrespect for Jesus' death, if the act of circumcision was taught as anything but a tradition.

Gal 6.15 Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is the new creation.

Even the OT priesthood was contaminated, and could only bring temporal blessings--not eternal justification. It was shown under the Law that even the priests were unclean and had to be atoned for.

In the same way, all works of the Law had to be brought to an end at the crucifixion of Christ, where all the works of men were shown to be unclean, and incapable of eternal justification. Righteousness continues to be needed and is still required by God. But the Law proved incapable of being the vehicle through which eternal justification could come, and was done away with when Israel failed under that system.

Eternal Life therefore comes only by embracing the free righteousness that comes to us when we repent of living our own life, apart from God. All rituals of the Law, including Sabbath Law, have to go by the wayside, or "scrapped." Israel failed under that system, and we all would.

Click to expand...

quietthinker said:

farouk, because another has paid your fine for breaking the law and you are now liberated from paying its penalty, does that mean the law is scrapped? does it mean it no longer makes its claims on you? does it mean it was changed so that you are guiltless when breaking it? does that mean you can disregard it with impunity?.....or do you just want permission to break the precepts of the 10 Commandments, mouth truisms and be guiltless?

Click to expand...

BarnyFife said:

There is a strange belief on the part of many that the great God-written law of the Ten Commandments was actually a part of the ceremonial law of Moses which contained scores of specific regulations. They do not see the decalogue as being distinct and totally unique because of its divine authorship. Neither do they see the clear limitation which the Bible sets for this moral code by calling it the TEN Commandments.

It seems quite obvious that one would effectively do away with the “Ten Commandments” by mingling them with ninety or a hundred others and calling them “ordinances” instead of commandments. Such a radical effort has been made to dilute the force of the only words of the Bible which God wrote with His own hand. Furthermore, the claim has been advanced that since the Ten Commandments were a part of the mosaic law of ordinances which ended at the cross, we are no more obligated to obey the decalogue than we are to offer lambs in sacrifice.

Is there proof positive in the Scriptures that there was no such blending of the ceremonial and moral law into one? Can it be shown that the Ten Commandments were of a permanent, perpetual nature while the ceremonial law of statutes and ordinances came to an end when Jesus died? Indeed there is abundance of evidence to answer these questions with a resounding yes!

God made known this distinction to His servant Moses, and Moses explained it to the people at Mt. Horeb. “And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone. And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it” (Deuteronomy 4:13, 14).

Please notice how Moses clearly separated the Ten Commandments, which “he commanded you,” from the statutes which “he commanded me” to give the people. The big question now is whether those statutes and judgments, which Moses passed on to the people, were designated as a separate and distinct “law.”

God answers that important question in such a way that no doubt can remain. “Neither will I make the feet of Israel move any more out of the land which I gave their fathers; only if they will observe to do according to all that I have commanded them and according to all the law that my servant Moses commanded them” (2 Kings 21:8). Here we are assured that the statutes which Moses gave the people were called a “law.” Any child can discern that two different laws are being described. God speaks of the law “I commanded” and also the “law ... Moses commanded.” Unless this truth is understood properly, limitless confusion will result.

Click to expand...

BarnyFife said:

There is a strange belief on the part of many that the great God-written law of the Ten Commandments was actually a part of the ceremonial law of Moses which contained scores of specific regulations. They do not see the decalogue as being distinct and totally unique because of its divine authorship. Neither do they see the clear limitation which the Bible sets for this moral code by calling it the TEN Commandments.

It seems quite obvious that one would effectively do away with the “Ten Commandments” by mingling them with ninety or a hundred others and calling them “ordinances” instead of commandments. Such a radical effort has been made to dilute the force of the only words of the Bible which God wrote with His own hand. Furthermore, the claim has been advanced that since the Ten Commandments were a part of the mosaic law of ordinances which ended at the cross, we are no more obligated to obey the decalogue than we are to offer lambs in sacrifice.

Is there proof positive in the Scriptures that there was no such blending of the ceremonial and moral law into one? Can it be shown that the Ten Commandments were of a permanent, perpetual nature while the ceremonial law of statutes and ordinances came to an end when Jesus died? Indeed there is abundance of evidence to answer these questions with a resounding yes!

God made known this distinction to His servant Moses, and Moses explained it to the people at Mt. Horeb. “And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone. And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it” (Deuteronomy 4:13, 14).

Please notice how Moses clearly separated the Ten Commandments, which “he commanded you,” from the statutes which “he commanded me” to give the people. The big question now is whether those statutes and judgments, which Moses passed on to the people, were designated as a separate and distinct “law.”

God answers that important question in such a way that no doubt can remain. “Neither will I make the feet of Israel move any more out of the land which I gave their fathers; only if they will observe to do according to all that I have commanded them and according to all the law that my servant Moses commanded them” (2 Kings 21:8). Here we are assured that the statutes which Moses gave the people were called a “law.” Any child can discern that two different laws are being described. God speaks of the law “I commanded” and also the “law ... Moses commanded.” Unless this truth is understood properly, limitless confusion will result.

Click to expand...

BarnyFife said:

There is a strange belief on the part of many that the great God-written law of the Ten Commandments was actually a part of the ceremonial law of Moses which contained scores of specific regulations. They do not see the decalogue as being distinct and totally unique because of its divine authorship. Neither do they see the clear limitation which the Bible sets for this moral code by calling it the TEN Commandments.

It seems quite obvious that one would effectively do away with the “Ten Commandments” by mingling them with ninety or a hundred others and calling them “ordinances” instead of commandments. Such a radical effort has been made to dilute the force of the only words of the Bible which God wrote with His own hand. Furthermore, the claim has been advanced that since the Ten Commandments were a part of the mosaic law of ordinances which ended at the cross, we are no more obligated to obey the decalogue than we are to offer lambs in sacrifice.

Is there proof positive in the Scriptures that there was no such blending of the ceremonial and moral law into one? Can it be shown that the Ten Commandments were of a permanent, perpetual nature while the ceremonial law of statutes and ordinances came to an end when Jesus died? Indeed there is abundance of evidence to answer these questions with a resounding yes!

God made known this distinction to His servant Moses, and Moses explained it to the people at Mt. Horeb. “And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone. And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it” (Deuteronomy 4:13, 14).

Please notice how Moses clearly separated the Ten Commandments, which “he commanded you,” from the statutes which “he commanded me” to give the people. The big question now is whether those statutes and judgments, which Moses passed on to the people, were designated as a separate and distinct “law.”

God answers that important question in such a way that no doubt can remain. “Neither will I make the feet of Israel move any more out of the land which I gave their fathers; only if they will observe to do according to all that I have commanded them and according to all the law that my servant Moses commanded them” (2 Kings 21:8). Here we are assured that the statutes which Moses gave the people were called a “law.” Any child can discern that two different laws are being described. God speaks of the law “I commanded” and also the “law ... Moses commanded.” Unless this truth is understood properly, limitless confusion will result.

Click to expand...

BarnyFife said:

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (Matthew 5:17)

Either Jesus and Paul are contradicting each other (not possible) or one of these passages is being misinterpreted (and I don't think it's the simple one in Matthew).

What do you think of this?

2 Peter 3
15And 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; 16As 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.

Click to expand...

BarnyFife said:

People love to say this, and what they usually mean is that, until Sinai, we didn't know what sin is. I don't know exactly who "we" includes but the topic of "sin" is found throughout the book of Genesis and God's people at that time (long before Sinai) seemed to know what "sin" was, including Cain (Genesis 4:7), Joseph (Genesis 39:9), Jacob (Genesis 31:36), Abraham (Genesis 18:20-33), and even Abimelech, the heathen king of Gerar (Genesis 20:6-9).

Click to expand...