RPW question on Colossians 2

[earl40]

In Colossians 2 Paul says let no man judge you for not "observing in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day". Are these ceremonial OT practices? The confusion I am having is that he says before and after this section "traditions and teachings of men". Are these "traditions and teachings" based on OT practices or ceremonial OT prescribed practices?

 

[Hamalas]

I would recommend doing a quick search on "Colossians 2". You will find more than a few threads discussing this very topic.

 

[earl40]

I would recommend doing a quick search on "Colossians 2". You will find more than a few threads discussing this very topic.

Did this already. Here is something I am thinking after I posted this. Could Colossians 2 be speaking of two different things?

Here #1 this is speaking of the OT cermonial law....
"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.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."

And #2 here speaking of man made traditions....
"18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,19 And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.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,21 Touch not; taste not; handle not;22 Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men?23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh."

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Colossians is written to a church, where Paul had never been (although, it seems likely to me that one of the men trained by Paul had planted "the Upper Lycus Valley Church"). He writes to them in answer to several challenges to the ministry there. He probably writes to them at the same time he writes his letter to Ephesians, and conceives of his writing project as a "double-circular" letter. Which is to say (as indicated in 4:16) one letter is left at Ephesus to begin its journey upriver (and toward the four winds of heaven); and the second is taken directly to Colosse; and it will eventually move downriver, from congregation to congregation.

The issues facing the Colossians must be "extracted" from the text of Paul's reply. Like most of the churches in those days, the church faced battles for its identiy and purity from two directions. One was the Greco-Roman direction, with its pantheistic idolatry, incipient Gnostic cults, philosophic (speculative) schools; not to mention the raw cultural decadence. The other was from Judaism--meaning the relics of OT religion clung to by those who had rejected the Messiah. Paul is opposed to both, and both aspects of the challenge are probably present in some form in the context of Colossian ministry.

I don't think there is a single "Colossian heresy" or single set of coherent false teachings that the church in Colosse is up against. Rather, it is the combination of Greek-minded contradictions, and Jewish-minded contradictions to the truth that Paul confronts in combined fashion, through a clear gospel-based, Christocentric defense of the church, as unique and apostolic.

The main subject of the Letter to the Ephesians has been identified as "The Church of Christ." And the subject of Colossians has been identified: "The Christ of the Church." Together, these letters stand as the first and last refutation of every high-imagination exalted against the knowledge of God (2Cor.10:5), Jewish or pagan.

 

[earl40]

Colossians is written to a church, where Paul had never been (although, it seems likely to me that one of the men trained by Paul had planted "the Upper Lycus Valley Church"). He writes to them in answer to several challenges to the ministry there. He probably writes to them at the same time he writes his letter to Ephesians, and conceives of his writing project as a "double-circular" letter. Which is to say (as indicated in 4:16) one letter is left at Ephesus to begin its journey upriver (and toward the four winds of heaven); and the second is taken directly to Colosse; and it will eventually move downriver, from congregation to congregation.

The issues facing the Colossians must be "extracted" from the text of Paul's reply. Like most of the churches in those days, the church faced battles for its identiy and purity from two directions. One was the Greco-Roman direction, with its pantheistic idolatry, incipient Gnostic cults, philosophic (speculative) schools; not to mention the raw cultural decadence. The other was from Judaism--meaning the relics of OT religion clung to by those who had rejected the Messiah. Paul is opposed to both, and both aspects of the challenge are probably present in some form in the context of Colossian ministry.

I don't think there is a single "Colossian heresy" or single set of coherent false teachings that the church in Colosse is up against. Rather, it is the combination of Greek-minded contradictions, and Jewish-minded contradictions to the truth that Paul confronts in combined fashion, through a clear gospel-based, Christocentric defense of the church, as unique and apostolic.

The main subject of the Letter to the Ephesians has been identified as "The Church of Christ." And the subject of Colossians has been identified: "The Christ of the Church." Together, these letters stand as the first and last refutation of every high-imagination exalted against the knowledge of God (2Cor.10:5), Jewish or pagan.

Bruce how does this fit in with Romans 14 where Paul says to be gracious to those who are weak in the faith? in your opinion are these weak people Jews who for conscience sake are having a hard time giving up what was commanded? If so was Romans written way before Galatians and Colossians which do not encourage patience but rejection of the OT continued practice of the cermonial law.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Earl,
In the first place, we have to let each church and each situation stand in its own context, each congregation having a different makeup or composition, culturally and ethnically. As well as having its own combination of outside pressures.

Second, I believe Galatians is Paul's first letter, and yet I don't think that Paul "mellowed" at all by the time he wrote Romans from his strong condemnations of gospel-compromise so characteristic of his early polemic. Colossians was written after Paul was already imprisoned in Rome, making the present passage in question one of his later statements.

Third, I consider the Colossian challenges to be arising mainly from people and movements outside the church, and therefore not the "weak-in-faith" sort who need a gentle hand. In the Roman-church context, the church had already been through some major flux. A presumably Jew-dominant church had seen its Jewish contingent all but wiped out overnight (essentially), in the expulsion under Claudius, mentioned in Act.18:2 (and ref. Seutonius in his "Lives of the Caesars"). By the time Paul wrote his letter, Jews including Christians had returned to the capital, and found themselves a minority in a Gentile-dominated church. As we know already from Acts and Galatians, Jewish transition from pride-of-place in the divine economy to being homogenized into the transnational NT church was sometimes rough. But we are talking about believers in such cases.

The Galatians situation was one of the earliest situations of the NT age, where the question of Christian identity was at stake. Would Christianity ultimately be reckoned as just another Jewish sect, along with the Pharisees, Saducees, Essenes, and suchlike? You essentially had rivals within the church contending for the very nature of the Christian message, some claiming to represent the Apostles in Jerusalem over against Paul who they said was being stupidly indifferent to the continuing requirements for Gentiles to transition to a circumcised (i.e. Mosaic) colored commitment to Christ.

I believe the Jerusalem Council (Act.15), following the letter to Galatians in time, clarified for the whole church the issues at stake, allowing for Jewish believers to retain their cultural trappings (if they so desired) but not imposing any such conditions on the Gentiles. Instructions given to Gentile converts were limited to certain principles, and guidance on the use and utility of the Old Testament (the then-current Bible). Paul's subsequent guidance on brotherly concern for those whose consciences were still bound to what God had previously and quite clearly commanded (positively) simply builds on and clarifies the intent of the Council's deliverance.

So if those observations hold and are accurate, then it appears to me that the Colossians face challenges that are already outside the church. Epaphras had probably been trained in Paul's "seminary" (Act.19:9-10), and taught to guard against Judaising infiltration of the body. Not that Jewish converts were unwelcome, but that the leadership of the church cannot simply receive someone who claims to have a Jewish background, and accepts Jesus as the Messiah. In the early going, that was just about sufficient to grant someone admission to the NT church; and probably put them in the lead running to assume leadership. People like that had moral fiber, Bible knowledge, experience in a synagogue structure. But once it was clear that the church could not function if appended to Judaism (even if it came to dominate the tribe), this added a layer to the induction process.

 

[earl40]

Thank you for your answer. So is this an acculturate summary? Romans 14 is speaking of those within the church (Jewish believers) who still practiced days that were commanded in the OT and Paul said to allow them if they wish but to treat them with tenderness as someone who is weak in the faith. The Colossian passage is speaking of those outside the church and Paul is commanding to not be taken captive to observing the OT commands of the ceremonial law.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

I think that's a decent summary.