Quote:
Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa
Absolutely, and therefore they contradict the other verses in the discussion.
The argument also goes along with meat offered to idols, and the effect that was having on the early church. Paul didn't advocate eating at the shambles, or breaking the law of Moses, or else the accusation against Paul in Acts 21:21, would of been true. Just like today (just without the internet, Facebook, or AFF) there were differing opinions on how to keep "ecclesiastically kosher?" Yet, the sabbath was never in question, yet, sabbaths, feast days, new moon observances were. Just as endless genealogies were also muddying the water, hence the keeping of Rabbinical traditions. |
What I think a lot of people miss, and which I myself missed for many years in reading this passage, is that the Colossians were being judged or critiqued for doing certain things, not for not doing certain things.
The words "meat... drink" are actually participles. Eating and drinking. Paul said let no man judge you in your eating and drinking. The eating and drinking were something the Colossians were doing, for which they were being judged. Which the grammar demands the respecting the holy days, new moons, and sabbaths were also something the Colossians were doing, for which they were being judged by outsiders.
Also, because of the common misreading of the passage (people read that the Colossians were being criticised for NOT doing things, including the use of the Biblical calendar), people assume the problem causers in Colosse were Jews or Judaizers. But I believe that isn't the case at all.
When Paul had to deal with Judaizers the issue of circumcision vs uncircumcision is always in the forefront. Which of course we would expect. But in Colossians the issue in the forefront of the apostle's polemic is the gospel vs vain philosophy based on traditions about and derived from the cosmic elements.
Colossians 2:18 and 2:23 are generally recognised as two of the most difficult verses in the NT to translate. A very close and studious unpacking of those verses, within the larger context of the first 2 chapters, I believe shows what's actually going on. Basically, followers of the Cynic school of Greek philosophy had encountered and witnessed the Christian worship of the Colossians, and had begun criticising them for the Lord's Supper and other liturgical aspects of their faith (including their use of the Biblical calendar). Historically, these were main points of contention and criticism by Cynics - eating and drinking (liturgical feasting), and recognition of religious calendars and time keeping in general. Other points Cynics focused on in their harangues of others included ascetism and abuse of the body, ethics and humility, and the superiority of (Cynic) philosophy to all religion. Their philosophy was also based upon a cosmological view of reality and the "elements of the kosmos", from which they derived their entire outlook and manner of living.