Articles | About Us | More Studies | Contact Us
   

I thought it was Jesus that was nailed to the cross


 

(Some of the Bible verses quoted in this study have had comments added in brackets. The sole purpose of this study technique is to emphasise or introduce a line of thought. All verses KJV unless otherwise stated).

In this study, we are going to investigate the intended meaning of a section of Scripture in Colossions 2.
The verses in question have been given many and varied explanations of what they are referring to; but as you know, there can only be one truth.

We will begin by introducing the verses;

(Col 2:13) And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he (Jesus) quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
(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;
(Col 2:15) And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it.
(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.

On there own, these verses could be left open to multiple explanations. A clear picture of their intended meaning can only be established by using the following principle;
(Isa 28:9) Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine?…
(Isa 28:10) For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

We need to look at other parts of Scripture (which uses similar terms and precepts), to establish the intended meaning of these verses.

The first 3 verses of this Col 2 segment, are showing us things, which have been accomplished through the death and resurrection of Christ;
(Col 2:13) And you….hath he (Jesus) quickened together with him,
1/ having forgiven you all trespasses; (Col 2:14)
2/ 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; (Col 2:15)
3/ And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

And as a result of these things which Jesus has accomplished, it goes on to say;
(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:

So what is this saying?
Some say that no one can judge you on these 'ordinances' because they were 'blotted out'?
Others say no one can judge you because you are fulfilling the requirements of these ordinances?
One thing is clear.
Whatever the intended meaning is; it relates to EVERY aspect of the verse.

For example; if this verse is saying the 'feasts' are an ordinance requiring our observance today, then it must also be saying the same about the meat and drink offerings, new moons, etc.

Interestingly, the Col 2:16 verse is associated with offerings;
(Eze 45:17) And it shall be the prince's part to give burnt offerings, and meat offerings, and drink offerings, in the feasts, and in the new moons, and in the sabbaths, in all solemnities of the house of Israel:…

It is important to understand that the reference to Sabbath in Col 2:16 is not speaking about the 4th commandment requirement; of not working on the 7th day.
The 4th commandment is not a hand written ordinance; but rather a commandment written by the finger of God, on stone. However, there was an ordinance given in the Law of Moses relating to offerings that were required each Sabbath;
(Num 28:10)  This is the burnt offering of every sabbath, beside the continual burnt offering, and his drink offering.

So, the main questions which need addressing, to gain a clear understanding of the Col 2 verses, are;
1/ What are the 'handwritten ordinances' which Jesus has blotted out?
2/ In what context are 'meat', 'drink', 'holy days', 'new moons' and 'sabbaths'; "a shadow of things to come"?

From the way the verses are worded, they show us that there is a direct relationship between the 'meat', 'drink', 'holy days', etc; and the 'handwriting of ordinances';
(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;….
(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;….

Let's begin by looking at how 'meat', 'drink', 'holy days', etc; are "a shadow of things to come".
The book of Hebrews is the only other place the phrase "shadow of things to come" is mentioned, (which happens to be by the same author, Paul);
(Heb 10:1) For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

The sacrifices and offerings were a shadow of things to come.
So which 'law' involved offering sacrifices?;
(2Ch 23:18) …to offer the burnt offerings of the LORD, as it is written in the law of Moses,…

According to Heb 10:1 above, the sacrifices which were offered (in accordance with the Law of Moses), were a shadow of things to come.
It is quite logical that these sacrificial offerings were a shadow of the sacrifice, which Christ was coming to accomplish.
So, that would account for 'meat' and 'drink' (being offerings) in Col 2:16.
But what about the 'holy days' (feast days) in Col 2:16?
Would they also fit the category of being a shadow of good things to come?
Well, the 'holy days' actually go hand in hand with sacrificial offerings; because according to the Bible, the whole purpose of the feast days, was to make specified sacrifices and offerings, in their appointed seasons.

Having listed all the feast days in Leviticus 23, along with their prescribed offerings, it goes on to say;
(Lev 23:37) These are the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD, a burnt offering, and a meat offering, a sacrifice, and drink offerings, every thing upon his day:

So that would account for sacrifices being associated with the 'holy (feast) days'; but what about the last aspects of the verse; the new moon and sabbath days?
(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:

Well, the new moon and sabbath days also had links to sacrifices;
(Num 28:9) And on the sabbath day two lambs of the first year without spot, and two tenth deals of flour for a meat offering, mingled with oil, and the drink offering thereof:
(Num 28:10)   This is the burnt offering of every sabbath, beside the continual burnt offering, and his drink offering.
(Num 28:11) And in the beginnings of your months (new moons) ye shall offer a burnt offering unto the LORD; two young bullocks, and one ram, seven lambs of the first year without spot;

All these offerings were made in accordance with the Law of Moses (handwritten ordinances);
(Jos 8:31) As Moses the servant of the Lord commanded the children of Israel, as it is written in the book of the law of Moses, an altar of whole stones,…they offered thereon burnt offerings unto the LORD, and sacrificed peace offerings.

About 800 years later, Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon; and Israel went into captivity as a result of their rebellion against God. The prophet Ezekiel was given plans to build a replacement 2nd temple, along with the associated temple ordinances they were to perform. This information was to be shown to Israel, ONLY if they repented of their deeds;
(Eze 43:11) And if they be ashamed of all that they have done, show them the form of the house, (the temple) and the fashion thereof,… and all the ordinances thereof,…and write it in their sight, (ie, these are handwritten ordinances) that they may keep the whole form thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and do them.

As a condition of the remnant returning to God, at the end of the Babylonian captivity (approx. 535 BC), they were still required to make the sacrificial offerings as prescribed in the Law of Moses;
(Eze 46:3) Likewise the people of the land shall worship….before the LORD in the sabbaths and in the new moons.
(Eze 46:4) And the burnt offering that the prince shall offer unto the LORD in the sabbath day shall be six lambs without blemish, and a ram without blemish.
(Eze 46:5) And the meat offering shall be an ephah for a ram, and the meat offering for the lambs as he shall be able to give, and a hin of oil to an ephah.
(Eze 46:6) And in the day of the new moon it shall be a young bullock without blemish, and six lambs, and a ram:…

Looking at the list in the following verse; there is no doubt that this is the context of Col 2:16, that is, the offerings that were required on these particular days;
(Eze 45:17) And it shall be the prince's part to give burnt offerings, and meat offerings, and drink offerings, in the feasts, and in the new moons, and in the sabbaths, in all solemnities of the house of Israel:…
Compare our Col. verse;
(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:

So, were these sacrifices and offerings to continue after Jesus death and resurrection?
(Heb 10:4) For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

However, it is possible through the blood of Jesus;
(1Jo 3:5) And ye know that he (Jesus) was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
(1Jo 1:7) …the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

So did Jesus therefore nail this part of Moses Law (sacrifices and offerings) to the cross?
(Heb 8:3) For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man (Jesus) have somewhat also to offer.
(Heb 8:4) For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
(Heb 8:5) Who serve unto the example and shadow (again we see these gifts and sacrifices referred to as a shadow) of heavenly things,….
(Heb 8:6) But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
(Heb 8:7) For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

As we have seen so far; the Law of Moses (the first covenant) involved sacrifices and offerings;
(2Ch 23:18) …to offer the burnt offerings of the LORD, as it is written in the law of Moses,…

So, 'in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: are all related to sacrifices and offerings prescribed within the law of Moses.

Another theory states that the 'handwriting of ordinances' actually refers to the entire Law of Moses (Book of the Law).
But before we investigate this theory, it is important to point out that the Law of Moses is a separate and distinct covenant to the Ten Commandments.
The Ten Commandments had not even been given to Israel, when the sprinkling of blood ratified the Mosaic covenant;
(Exo 24:7) And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient.
(Exo 24:8) And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words (in the book).
Moses actually sprinkled the book also;
(Heb 9:19) For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,
(Heb 9:20) Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

Then notice how the Ten Commandments covenant was given 4 verses later;
(Exo 24:12) And the LORD said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach them.

The Ten Commandments are God's covenant;
(Exo 34:28) And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

The Ten Commandments are the Covenant.
This covenant was not an 'add on' to the Mosaic covenant. Deu 5:7 to 5:21 lists the Ten Commandments, then it goes on to say;
(Deu 5:22) These words (the Ten Commandment covenant) the LORD spoke unto all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice: and he added no more. And he wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me.

So; back to the theory that the 'handwriting of ordinances' refers to the entire Law of Moses.
This would be harmonious with the Col 2 verses; only if it can be demonstrated that the Law of Moses (the first covenant)
'was against us', 'was contrary to us' and 'was nailed to the cross'.

We saw earlier that Israel were at fault with the requirements of the first covenant;
(Heb 8:6) But now hath he (Jesus) obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
(Heb 8:7) For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
(Heb 8:8) For finding fault with them (Israel),…

So does Jesus establishing a second covenant, cancel out the first?
(Heb 10:8) … Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law (of Moses);
(Heb 10:9) Then said he (Jesus), Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He (Jesus) taketh away the first, (took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross) that he may establish the second.

So what are the implications of taking away the first covenant?
(Heb 9:1) Then verily the first covenant had also (handwritten) ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
(Heb 9:8) The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
(Heb 9:9) Which was a figure for the time then present (ie, a shadow of things to come), in which (the first covenant) were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect,…
(Heb 9:10) Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

This clearly shows that the 'meat and drink' and other carnal 'ordinances' were only imposed on them until the time of reformation.
So, has the 'time of reformation' been?
If not, we had better fire up the sacrificial altars; because according to the above verse, it would mean that meat and drink offerings ARE still required.

Reading on, we see that Christ actually established the reformation;
(Heb 9:11) But Christ being come a high priest of good things to come,
(Heb 10:1, For the law having a shadow of good things to come)
by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
(Heb 9:12) Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

If Jesus blood has 'obtained eternal redemption for us', is there any more need for the blood of animals?
No.
To offer up animal sacrifices today, would be to deny that Jesus' blood has atoned for our sins.

Other verses confirm how Jesus also took out of the way the requirements of the Levitical priesthood, being another aspect of the Law of Moses;
(Deu 31:9) And Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi, which bore the ark of the covenant of the LORD,…
(Ezr 6:18) And they set the priests in their divisions, and the Levites in their courses, for the service of God,… as it is written in the book of Moses.

So what does Paul say about this law?;
(Heb 7:5) And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law (of Moses), that is, of their brethren,…
(Heb 7:11) If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law (of Moses), what further need was there that another priest should rise…
(Heb 7:12) For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. …
(Heb 7:18) For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment (of verse 5) going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.
(Heb 7:19) For the law (of Moses) made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God….
(Heb 7:22) By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament….
(Heb 7:24) …this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
(Heb 7:27) Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.
(Heb 7:28) For the law (of Moses: see Deu 31:9 and Ezr 6:18 above) maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law (of Moses), maketh the Son, who is consecrated forevermore.

Yet again, Paul shows the intended purpose of the Law of Moses;
(Gal 3:10) For as many as are of the works of the law (of Moses) are under the curse: for it is written (in the Book of the Law), Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law (of Moses) to do them.

[Can we be sure that the above verse is relating to the Law of Moses?
Yes, the book of the Law (Law of Moses) contained the curses;
Dan 9:11 …the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses]

Having established which 'law' is the context of this passage, let's continue;
(Gal 3:11) But that no man is justified by the law (of Moses) in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
(Gal 3:12) And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
(Gal 3:13) Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written (in Deu 21:23), Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

So how did Christ redeem us from the curse of the law?
By taking away the first covenant, or by removing the curses out of the first covenant?
The curses were actually an integral part of the covenant. So let's read on for some clarification;
(Gal 3:14) That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith…
(Gal 3:16) Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
(Gal 3:17) And this I say, that the covenant (made with Abraham), that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law (of Moses), which was four hundred and thirty years after (the covenant was made with Abraham), cannot disannul, that it should make the promise (of Abraham's covenant) of none effect.
(Gal 3:18) For if the inheritance (ie, the promise) be of the law (of Moses), it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
(Gal 3:19) Wherefore then serveth the law (of Moses) It was added because of transgressions (against God's Law), till the seed should come (ie, Jesus) to whom the promise was made;….
(Gal 3:21) Is the law (of Moses) then against the promises of God? God forbid (it was needed until the seed should come): for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
(Gal 3:22) But the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
(Gal 3:23) But before faith came, we were kept under the law (of Moses), shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
(Gal 3:24) Wherefore the law (of Moses) was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
(Gal 3:25) But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

So we see that "before faith came", they "were kept under the law", and in fact until that time, the law was their righteousness;
(Deu 6:25) …it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the LORD our God, as he hath commanded us.

The theme we just saw in Galatians, is also seen in the following verse;
(Eph 2:15) Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances;…

So, if the 'handwriting of ordinances' does refer to the entire Law of Moses; where in Scripture does it imply that the Law of Moses 'was against us', and 'was contrary to us';?
(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;….

We'll start with the New Testament;

(Act 15:1) And certain men which came down from Judea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
(Act 15:2) When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas,….should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.
(Act 15:3) And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phoenicia and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles:….
(Act 15:5) But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses….
(Act 15:7) And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them,…
(Act 15:8) God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
(Act 15:9) And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
(Act 15:10) Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?…. (by requiring them to be circumcised and to keep the law of Moses)
(Act 15:12) Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul,…
(Act 15:13) And after they had held their peace, James answered,…
(Act 15:19) Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
(Act 15:20) But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. …
(Act 15:23) And they wrote letters by them after this manner;…
(Act 15:24) Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law (of Moses: see verse 5 above): to whom we gave no such commandment:…
(Act 15:28) For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things (from the Law of Moses);
(Act 15:29) That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well,…

So the Apostles and elders concluded that the above 4 aspects of the Law of Moses are recommended, and that no greater burden than these necessary things, was required. If any other aspects of Moses law were seen as being necessary; this is where the apostles would have listed them.
So would this mean Sabbath keeping is not required; because it is not in the list of Acts 15:29?
No; the topic of discussion is the Law of Moses, not the Ten Commandments.
For example, refraining from murder is not listed in Acts 15:29 either; so would that mean murder is now OK?
The context of Acts 15 clearly defines which Law is being discussed!

We saw earlier that the Law of Moses contained curses;
(Jos 8:34) And afterward he read all the words of the law, the blessings and cursings, according to all that is written in the book of the law.

We have also just seen aspects of Moses law being referred to as a burden. But does Scripture imply that the Law of Moses was 'against us';
(Deu 31:26) Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.

(Dan 9:11) Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him.
(Dan 9:12) And he hath confirmed his words (contained in Law of Moses), which he spoke against us, and against our judges that judged us, by bringing upon us a great evil:…
(Dan 9:13) As it is written in the law of Moses, all this evil is come upon us:…

Does that sound like being against someone; having curses looming, as a result of not complying with that covenant?
Most would conclude that it is contrary to us, to have curses hanging over our heads;
(Deu 29:20) The LORD will not spare him, but then the anger of the LORD and his jealousy shall smoke against that man, and all the curses that are written in this book shall lie upon him, and the LORD shall blot out his name from under heaven.
(Deu 29:21) And the LORD shall separate him unto evil out of all the tribes of Israel, according to all the curses of the covenant that are written in this book of the law:
(Deu 29:22) So that the generation to come of your children that shall rise up after you, and the stranger that shall come from a far land, shall say, when they see the plagues of that land, and the sicknesses which the LORD hath laid upon it;
(Deu 29:23) And that the whole land thereof is brimstone, and salt, and burning, that it is not sown, nor beareth, nor any grass groweth therein, …
(Deu 29:27) And the anger of the LORD was kindled against this land, to bring upon it all the curses that are written in this book:

Does that sound like it is was against us, and was contrary to us?;
Remember, the covenant contained the curses. They were not an 'add on' clause that was an optional part of the covenant.

(Deu 28:58) If thou wilt not observe to do ALL the words of this law that are written in this book, that thou mayest fear this glorious and fearful name, THE LORD THY GOD;
(Deu 28:59) Then the LORD will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues of thy seed, even great plagues, and of long continuance, and sore sicknesses, and of long continuance.
(Deu 28:60) Moreover he will bring upon thee all the diseases of Egypt, which thou wast afraid of; and they shall cleave unto thee.

And as a part of this covenant, they even had other curses looming, which were not even written in the book of the Law;
(Deu 28:61) Also every sickness, and every plague, which is not written in the book of this law, them will the LORD bring upon thee, until thou be destroyed….

Now if that can't be referred to as being 'against' someone, what can?
Do you consider it 'contrary to you', to have a curse hanging over your head?
The curses were an integral part of the Mosaic covenant. The only way one could no longer be under the curse, is to no longer be under this particular covenant;
(Jer 11:2) Hear ye the words of this covenant, and speak unto the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem; (ie, these words describe the covenant).
(Jer 11:3) And say thou unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel; Cursed be the man that obeyeth not the words of this covenant,
(Jer 11:4) Which I commanded your fathers in the day that I brought them forth out of the land of Egypt…
(Jer 11:8) Yet they obeyed not, nor inclined their ear, but walked every one in the imagination of their evil heart: therefore I will bring upon them all the words of this covenant,…

Israel (and Paul) understood that this covenant was 'against them';
(2Ki 22:13) …for great is the wrath of the LORD that is kindled against us, because our fathers have not hearkened unto the words of this book, to do according unto all that which is written concerning us.

(2Ch 34:24) Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, and upon the inhabitants thereof, even all the curses that are written in the book

So yes; the Mosaic covenant is described in Scripture, as being against those who are under this covenant.

Moving on to the next aspect.
Does the Law of Moses fulfil the handwriting of ordinances?
(Col 2:14) Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us,…

Firstly, was the Law of Moses referred to as an ordinance?
The following are all requirements of the Mosaic covenant;
(Exo 12:17) And ye shall observe the feast of unleavened bread; for in this selfsame day have I brought your armies out of the land of Egypt: therefore shall ye observe this day in your generations by an ordinance forever.
(Eze 46:14) And thou shalt prepare a meat offering for it every morning,…a meat offering continually by a perpetual ordinance unto the LORD.
(Num 19:2) This is the ordinance of the law which the LORD hath commanded, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring thee a red heifer without spot,…

These individual aspects of Moses Law are referred to as ordinances. But what about the Law of Moses as a whole?;
(2Ch 33:8) …so that they will take heed to do all that I have commanded them, according to the whole law and the statutes and the ordinances by the hand of Moses.

And what about direct reference to our verse in question?
(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:

Can we see more directly that this verse in question is about ordinances?
Yes;
(2Ch 2:4) ….to burn before him sweet incense, and for the continual shewbread, and for the burnt offerings morning and evening, on the sabbaths, and on the new moons, and on the solemn feasts of the LORD our God. This is an ordinance forever to Israel.

And one last aspect requiring harmony;… was the Law of Moses handwritten?
Yes;
(2Ch 33:8) ….so that they will take heed to do all that I have commanded them, according to the whole law and the statutes and the ordinances by the hand of Moses.
(2Ch 35:6) …that they may do according to the word of the LORD by the hand of Moses.

Conclusion

We have seen from Scripture, that the sacrificial aspects of the Mosaic covenant, fit harmoniously with all aspects of Col 2;

(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;….
(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:

We have also seen that the entire Mosaic covenant, also fits harmoniously with all aspects of Col 2;

Blotting out
(Heb 10:9) …He (Jesus) taketh away the first (covenant), that he may establish the second.

the handwriting of ordinances
(2Ch 33:8) …according to the whole law …and the ordinances by the hand of Moses.

that was against us,
(Deu 31:26) Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant…that it may be there for a witness against thee.
(Dan 9:11-12) … the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses …And he hath confirmed his words, which he spoke against us,

which was contrary to us
(Act 15:5) …command them to keep the law of Moses….
(Act 15:10) Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;….
(Gal 3:25) But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

And because we are no longer under a schoolmaster;
(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:

Which are all carnal ordinances of the Mosaic Law;
(2Ch 2:4) …the burnt offerings morning and evening, on the sabbaths, and on the new moons, and on the solemn feasts of the LORD our God. This is an ordinance forever to Israel.

Because these ordinances,
(Col 2:17) …. are a shadow of things to come;….
(Heb 10:1) For the law having a shadow of good things to come,

Now some may still wish to protest, that as with the Ten Commandments, the Law of Moses still requires our observance.
What did the Apostles say about that?;
(Act 13:38) Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man (Jesus) is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:
(Act 13:39) And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

So we are left to decide; does the Col 2 segment refer to just the sacrificial aspects of the Mosaic covenant; or the entire Mosaic covenant?
We have seen that either scenario meets all the specifications of the verses in question.
It really comes down to this.
Can you fulfill the requirements of a covenant by keeping part of the covenant?
Some may say; but certain parts of the Mosaic covenant were ordinances forever; and those parts are therefore still in force today, eg;
(Lev 16:29) And this shall be a statute forever unto you: that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, ye shall afflict your souls, and do no work at all,…

If being 'a statute forever' is proof that this feast (of the Mosaic covenant) is still binding by law today, then what about this;
(Lev 10:15) The heave shoulder and the wave breast shall they bring with the offerings made by fire of the fat, to wave it for a wave offering before the LORD; and it shall be thine, and thy sons' with thee, by a statute forever;…
(2Ch 2:4) …the burnt offerings morning and evening, on the sabbaths, and on the new moons, and on the solemn feasts of the LORD our God. This is an ordinance forever to Israel.

'Forever' has a different meaning (to what we commonly think of), when used in relation to covenants.
For example,
(Exo 21:5) And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:
(Exo 21:6) Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him forever.

So was the servant given eternal life, in order to serve his master forever?
No.
'Forever' in relation to covenants, simply means as long as the contract or covenant is in force.
In this particular case, the covenant ended (ie, forever ended) at the death of the servant.
So we cannot use 'forever' as proof that certain aspects of the Mosaic covenant are still binding today.

Scripture makes it quite clear; that many aspects of the Mosaic Law have ceased.
For example, is the following still required today;
(2Ch 30:16) And they stood in their place after their manner, according to the law of Moses the man of God: the priests sprinkled the blood, which they received of the hand of the Levites.

From the above example, most will agree that at least certain aspects of the Mosaic Law, appear to have been made obsolete through the sacrifice of Christ.
As a result however, there are still those who want to keep some of the Mosaic Law, as a means of meeting the requirements of this covenant.
What did the Apostles say about that?;
(Gal 5:3) For I testify again to every man that is circumcised (a requirement of the Mosaic Law), that he is a debtor to do the whole law (of Moses).
(Gal 5:4) Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law (of Moses); ye are fallen from grace.

If someone chooses to keep certain aspects of the law, that is their choice; and we are not to judge them on that;
(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:

God will do the judging.
But how would God judge?
For example, some people like to acknowledge the feast days (through personal choice), as a source of learning; and others maintain that keeping the feasts today is still binding by the Mosaic law.
As we saw earlier, the whole purpose of the feasts was to make the prescribed offerings and sacrifices;
(Lev 23:37) These are the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, (and here is there purpose) to offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD, a burnt offering, and a meat offering, a sacrifice, and drink offerings, every thing upon his day:

So what happens to keeping the feasts (by law), if sacrifices and offerings are no longer required?
And if you want to demonstrate obedience to God, through keeping the feasts (as required by the law); are you actually keeping it God's way or your own way?
For example, this is how God instructed the feast of tabernacles to be kept;

(Neh 8:14) And they found written in the law which the LORD had commanded by Moses, that the children of Israel should dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month:
(Neh 8:15) And that they should publish and proclaim in all their cities, and in Jerusalem, saying,… fetch olive branches, and pine branches, and myrtle branches, and palm branches, and branches of thick trees, to make booths, as it is written.
(Neh 8:16) So the people went forth, and brought them, and made themselves booths, every one upon the roof of his house, and in their courts, and in the courts of the house of God,…
(Neh 8:18) Also day by day, from the first day unto the last day, he read in the book of the law of God. And they kept the feast seven days (by dwelling in the booths); and on the eighth day was a solemn assembly, according unto the manner.

Notice that even though they had tents at that time, they did not use tents as temporary dwellings, but were to build 'booths' from various tree branches, according to the Law.
Would anything different be acceptable to God, if this law is still binding today?
Was God happy when Cain brought for an offering; fruit of the ground, instead of a lamb as instructed?
Would God accept us ceasing from our work on the first day of the week, in place of the 7th day as instructed?
If you choose to keep the Mosaic Law (as being legally binding), be sure to keep it correctly.

Notice Paul's words to the Galatians;
(Gal 3:1) O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth,…
(Gal 3:2) This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law (of Moses), or by the hearing of faith?
(Gal 3:3) Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? …
(Gal 3:10) For as many as are of the works of the law (of Moses) are under the curse: for it is written (in the Law of Moses), Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law (of Moses) to do them.

Note that it is not possible to meet the requirements of this covenant, by keeping just SOME of the covenant.
Paul goes on to say;
(Gal 4:21) Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law (of Moses), do ye not hear the law?
(Gal 4:22) For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
(Gal 4:23) But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
(Gal 4:24) Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai (Mosaic covenant), which engendereth to bondage, which is Hagar.
(Gal 4:25) For this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jeruslem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
( Gal 4:26) But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all….
(Gal 4:28) Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise….
(Gal 4:30) Nevertheless what saith the Scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

We are not denying that it is very important to study all aspects of the Mosaic Law, as this teaches us much about the ways of God. However, the Mosaic covenant contains everything within that covenant.
Where are we given instructions to keep part of a covenant?
If we keep 9 of the Ten Commandments, does that satisfy the requirements of that covenant?
You decide.
If you put yourself under the Mosaic covenant; God speed to you; just be sure you keep it according to all the Law;

(Jos 1:7) Only be thou strong and very courageous, that thou mayest observe to do according to all the law, which Moses my servant commanded thee: turn not from it to the right hand or to the left, that thou mayest prosper whithersoever thou goest.
(Jos 1:8) This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.

Have any pages been torn out of the book of the law?
Not according to Paul.
With regards to how much of the Mosaic covenant must be kept, Paul makes the same statement that Joshua did;
(Gal 3:10) For as many as are of the works of the law (of Moses) are under the curse: for it is written (in the Law of Moses), Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law (of Moses) to do them.

Paul makes it clear that the curses are still a part of the Mosaic covenant.
He would not have made the above statement, if it was acceptable in God's sight to keep part of the Law, in order to meet the requirements of this covenant.
Can you see this?
This is important, so I'll repeat it in another way.
If it is possible, to fulfil the requirements of the Mosaic covenant, by keeping parts of this covenant; then Paul would have no need to make the above statement.

Based on Paul's statement, the only way to be freed from the curses, is to be freed from that covenant.