Verse Analysis — What Was Abolished at the Cross?¶
Passage-by-Passage Analysis of the Seven Primary Abolition Texts¶
1. Colossians 2:14-17 — "The Handwriting of Ordinances Nailed to the Cross"¶
Context: Paul writes to the Colossian church warning against false teaching (2:4, 8). He describes believers as "complete in him" (2:10), having experienced a spiritual circumcision (2:11), burial with Christ in baptism (2:12), and forgiveness of all trespasses (2:13). The passage then states what Christ accomplished at the cross.
Direct statement (v.14): "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances (cheirographon tois dogmasin) that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross."
Greek vocabulary for the thing abolished: - cheirographon (G5498) = "handwriting" / "certificate of debt." Hapax legomenon -- appears only here in the entire NT. Compound of cheir (hand) + grapho (write) = "something hand-written." - tois dogmasin (G1378, dative plural) = "of/in ordinances" / "consisting in decrees." Dogma in the NT refers to civil decrees (Luke 2:1; Acts 17:7), ecclesiastical decrees (Acts 16:4), and ceremonial ordinances (Eph 2:15; Col 2:14).
Greek vocabulary for the act of abolition: - exaleipsas (G1813, aorist active participle) = "having blotted out" - proselosas (G4338, aorist active participle) = "having nailed" - auto (G846, accusative singular neuter) = "it" -- the pronoun that refers back to cheirographon (neuter)
Key observations: 1. The object nailed to the cross is "it" (auto, neuter), referring to the cheirographon -- not nomos (masculine) or entole (feminine). 2. Cheirographon means "hand-written." The Decalogue was written by "the finger of God" (Exo 31:18; Deu 9:10), not by human hands. The book of the law was written by Moses' hand (Deu 31:24). Prior study law-04 established this distinction as an E-item. 3. The qualifying term is dogmasin -- the same word used in Eph 2:15 for what was abolished. Dogma never refers to the Decalogue in any NT usage. 4. The cheirographon is described as "against us" (kath hemon) and "contrary to us" (hupenantion hemin). In Greco-Roman legal usage, a cheirographon was a bond of indebtedness signed by the debtor.
Vv.16-17: "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: which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ."
The "therefore" (oun) connects this to v.14 -- because the cheirographon was nailed to the cross, these items should no longer serve as a basis for judgment. The items listed are: brosis (food), posis (drink), heorte (feast/holyday), neomenia (new moon), sabbaton (sabbath). The phrase "which are a shadow (skia) of things to come" applies to these listed items.
The referent of "sabbath days" (sabbaton) is debated. The sequence "holyday, new moon, sabbath" mirrors the annual-monthly-weekly ceremonial calendar pattern found in 1 Chronicles 23:31; 2 Chronicles 2:4; 31:3; Nehemiah 10:33; Ezekiel 45:17; Hosea 2:11. In all these OT passages, the pattern describes the ceremonial calendar system, not the weekly Sabbath in isolation. Prior study law-04 classified this as I-B, resolved Moderate toward Continues (the annual/ceremonial sabbaths of Lev 23).
Vv.20-22: "Why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances (dogmatizesthe, G1379), (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men (entalmata kai didaskalias ton anthropon)?"
The examples Paul gives of the "ordinances" -- "touch not, taste not, handle not" -- are ascetic regulations that "perish with the using." He identifies them as "commandments and doctrines of men" (entalmata, G1778; didaskalias, G1319). The entalmata here are human rules, not divine commandments. This confirms the passage addresses ceremonial/human regulations, not the moral law.
Does this passage explicitly name the Decalogue as the thing nailed? No. The vocabulary (cheirographon, dogma, dogmatizo) consistently points to ceremonial ordinances and human regulations.
2. Ephesians 2:15 — "Having Abolished the Law of Commandments in Ordinances"¶
Context: Paul discusses the Jew/Gentile division. Gentiles were "Uncircumcision" (v.11), "without Christ, aliens from the commonwealth of Israel" (v.12), but now "made nigh by the blood of Christ" (v.13). Christ "hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition" (v.14). The purpose: "to make in himself of twain one new man" (v.15).
Direct statement (v.15): "Having abolished (katargesas) in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances (ton nomon ton entolon en dogmasin)."
Greek vocabulary for the thing abolished: - ton nomon (G3551, accusative singular masculine) = "the law" - ton entolon (G1785, genitive plural feminine) = "of commandments" - en dogmasin (G1378, dative plural neuter) = "in ordinances/decrees"
Greek vocabulary for the act of abolition: - katargesas (G2673, aorist active participle) = "having abolished/rendered inoperative"
Key observations: 1. The phrase "ton nomon ton entolon en dogmasin" is a layered construction: "the law" is specified by "of commandments" which is further specified by "in ordinances." The dogma qualifier narrows the scope to those commandments that consist in ceremonial ordinances/decrees. 2. This "law of commandments in ordinances" is identified as "the enmity" (ten echthran) -- it was the barrier creating the Jew/Gentile divide. The Jew/Gentile wall of partition was built by ceremonial regulations (circumcision, food laws, purity rules) that separated Jews from Gentiles. 3. The Decalogue commandments ("Thou shalt not kill," "Thou shalt not steal," etc.) do not create a Jew/Gentile wall. Murder, theft, and adultery are universally prohibited. The wall-creating laws were the distinctively Jewish ceremonial practices. 4. The context (vv.11-12) explicitly frames this in terms of "Circumcision" and "Uncircumcision" -- ceremonial distinction. 5. The same dogma vocabulary appears here as in Col 2:14 -- the same type of ordinances.
Cross-reference: Heb 7:16 uses a parallel construction: "the law of a carnal commandment" (nomou entoles sarkines) -- where entole similarly describes the Levitical/priestly appointment law.
Does this passage explicitly name the Decalogue as the thing abolished? No. The law abolished is qualified by dogmasin (ordinances) and identified contextually as the Jew/Gentile barrier -- the ceremonial system.
3. Hebrews 7:12 — "The Priesthood Being Changed, a Change Also of the Law"¶
Context: The author of Hebrews builds an extended argument from Psalm 110:4 ("Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec") to demonstrate Christ's superior priesthood. The entire chapter compares the Melchizedek and Levitical priesthoods.
Direct statement (v.12): "For the priesthood being changed (metatithemenes tes hierosunes), there is made of necessity a change also of the law (nomou metathesis)."
Greek vocabulary: - metatithemenes (G3346, present passive participle genitive singular feminine) = "being changed/transferred" -- agrees with hierosunes (priesthood, feminine) - metathesis (G3331, nominative singular feminine) = "a change/transfer" -- the noun form of the same verb - nomou (G3551, genitive singular masculine) = "of [the] law"
Key observations: 1. The argument is: priesthood change necessitates law change. The "law" that changes is the law governing the priesthood. The text specifies the connection: because Jesus is from Judah (v.14), not Levi, the law mandating Levitical priesthood must change. 2. The word metathesis means "transfer/change" -- not katargeo (abolish). The priesthood is transferred from Levitical to Melchizedek order; the law governing priesthood changes accordingly. 3. The context identifies the specific "law" and "commandment" in view: - v.5: "commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law" = Levitical tithe law - v.11: Levitical priesthood could not bring perfection - v.16: "not after the law of a carnal commandment" = the law of fleshly/hereditary succession - v.18: "a disannulling of the commandment going before" = the Levitical succession law 4. The entole "disannulled" in v.18 is explicitly the priestly succession commandment -- it is called "weak and unprofitable" (v.18). Paul calls the Decalogue "holy, just, good, spiritual" (Rom 7:12, 14). These are incompatible characterizations if the same law is meant.
Does this passage explicitly name the Decalogue as the thing changed? No. The entire chapter specifies the priesthood law / Levitical succession law as the law that changes.
4. Hebrews 9:10 — "Carnal Ordinances Imposed Until the Time of Reformation"¶
Context: Hebrews 9 describes the earthly tabernacle (vv.1-5), the priestly service (vv.6-7), and the Holy Spirit's lesson from it (v.8): "the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest."
Direct statement (v.10): "[Which stood] only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances (dikaiomata sarkos), imposed on them until the time of reformation (mechri kairou diorthoseos)."
Greek vocabulary for the thing abolished: - dikaiomata (G1345, nominative plural neuter) = "ordinances/regulations" - sarkos (G4561, genitive singular feminine) = "of flesh" (= "carnal")
Key observations: 1. The "carnal ordinances" are explicitly defined by the text itself: "meats (bromasin) and drinks (pomasin), and divers washings (baptismois)." These are ceremonial regulations pertaining to physical purity -- food laws, drink regulations, and ritual washings. 2. The temporal limitation is stated: "imposed (epikeimena) UNTIL (mechri) the time of reformation." The word "until" marks these as temporary by design. 3. The word dikaioma in this context means "regulation/ordinance" (ceremonial). The same word in Romans 8:4 means "the righteous requirement of the law" (moral) -- demonstrating that the word is context-dependent. 4. The passage explicitly identifies the abolished items as ceremonial (meats, drinks, washings). The Decalogue does not consist of food laws, drink regulations, and washings.
Does this passage explicitly name the Decalogue as the thing abolished? No. The text names "meats, drinks, washings" -- clearly ceremonial.
5. Hebrews 10:1-9 — "He Taketh Away the First, That He May Establish the Second"¶
Context: The author continues the argument about the superiority of Christ's sacrifice over the animal sacrificial system.
Direct statements: - v.1: "The law having a shadow (skian) of good things to come...can never with those sacrifices (thusiais) which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect." - v.4: "It is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins." - v.9: "He taketh away (anairei) the first (to proton), that he may establish (stese) the second (to deuteron)."
Greek vocabulary: - skian (G4639) = "shadow" -- the same word used in Col 2:17 - thusiais (G2378) = "sacrifices" -- the explicit content of "the law" having a shadow - anairei (G337, present active indicative) = "He takes away/removes" - to proton (G4413, accusative singular neuter) = "the first [thing]" - to deuteron (G1208, accusative singular neuter) = "the second"
Key observations: 1. "The law" in v.1 that has "a shadow" is defined by its content: "those sacrifices which they offered year by year" (v.1), "burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin" (v.5-6, 8). This is the sacrificial law. 2. "The first" (to proton) that is taken away (v.9) is identified by the immediately preceding context: "sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin" (v.8). "The second" that is established is "thy will, O God" (v.7) -- Christ's obedience. 3. The same passage that describes the removal of the sacrificial "first" also affirms the writing of God's laws on hearts: "I will put my laws (nomous) into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them" (v.16, quoting Jer 31:33). The law CONTINUES in the new covenant -- it is the location that changes (stone to heart), not the law's existence. 4. The juxtaposition in this very passage is: sacrificial system removed (vv.1-9) AND moral law written on hearts (v.16). This is the Continues position's framework -- ceremonial abolished, moral continued.
Does this passage explicitly name the Decalogue as the thing taken away? No. The passage explicitly names "sacrifice and offering" as "the first" taken away, and explicitly states God's laws will be written on hearts.
6. 2 Corinthians 3:7-13 — "The Ministration of Death...Which Glory Was to Be Done Away"¶
Context: Paul contrasts two ministrations: the ministration of death/condemnation (old covenant) and the ministration of the spirit/righteousness (new covenant). He references the Exodus 34 account of Moses' shining face.
Direct statements: - v.7: "But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which [glory] was to be done away (ten katargoumenen)." - v.11: "For if that which is done away (to katargoumenon) was glorious, much more that which remaineth (to menon) is glorious." - v.13: "that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished (tou katargoumenou)."
Greek vocabulary for the thing "done away": - v.7: ten katargoumenen (G2673, present passive participle accusative singular FEMININE) = "being done away" - v.11: to katargoumenon (G2673, present passive participle nominative singular NEUTER) = "that which is being done away" - v.13: tou katargoumenou (G2673, present passive participle genitive singular NEUTER) = "of that which is being abolished"
Critical grammatical finding: In v.7, katargoumenen is FEMININE singular. It agrees grammatically with ten doxan (the glory, feminine) -- the glory of Moses' face. It does NOT agree with ho nomos (the law, masculine). What is "done away" in v.7 is THE GLORY of Moses' countenance, not the law itself.
In vv.11 and 13, the participles are NEUTER, agreeing with neither diakonia (ministration, feminine) nor nomos (law, masculine). The neuter refers to the entire glory-system being compared -- the old ministry's fading splendor vs. the new ministry's surpassing and remaining splendor.
Key observations: 1. The passage explicitly says the law was "written and engraven in stones" (v.7) -- a direct reference to the Decalogue (Exo 31:18; 32:16). The passage acknowledges the Decalogue's glorious origin. 2. What is "done away" (katargeo) is the GLORY (doxa) of that ministration -- the splendor of Moses' face -- not the law itself. The grammar confirms this in v.7 (feminine participle agrees with feminine doxa, not masculine nomos). 3. The passage contrasts two MINISTRATIONS (diakoniai), not two laws. The ministration of condemnation (which uses the law to condemn sinners) gives way to the ministration of righteousness (which writes the law on hearts). The law itself is the same; the ministry changes. 4. The prior study on 2 Corinthians 3 (2-corinthians-3-ministration) confirmed this grammatical analysis. 5. Paul's own usage of katargeo in the same epistle context: in Romans 3:31, he asks "Do we then make void (katargeo) the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law." If 2 Cor 3 were saying the law itself is abolished, Paul would contradict himself.
Does this passage explicitly name the Decalogue as abolished? No. It names the Decalogue as the basis for the old ministration's glory, but what is "done away" is the glory/splendor, not the law.
7. Galatians 3:13 — "Christ Hath Redeemed Us from the Curse of the Law"¶
Context: Paul argues against justification by law-works. He establishes that "as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse" (v.10), citing Deuteronomy 27:26. "The just shall live by faith" (v.11).
Direct statement (v.13): "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree."
Greek vocabulary: - exegorasen (G1805, aorist active indicative) = "redeemed/bought out" - ek tes kataras tou nomou = "from the curse of the law" - genomenos = "having become" - katara (G2671) = "a curse"
Key observations: 1. The object of redemption is "the curse OF the law" (kataras tou nomou) -- not the law itself. Christ redeems FROM the curse/penalty, not from the law. 2. The "curse" is defined by v.10 (citing Deu 27:26): "Cursed is every one that continueth not in ALL things which are written in the book of the law." The curse is the penalty for disobedience. 3. Christ "became a curse" (genomenos katara) by hanging on a tree (Deu 21:23). He absorbed the penalty. This is substitutionary atonement -- Christ bore the curse so we do not have to. 4. The passage does not say the law is abolished. It says the law's CURSE/PENALTY upon us is removed. If the law were abolished, there would be no curse to redeem from -- you cannot be cursed by a non-existent law. 5. Galatians 3:10 cites "the BOOK of the law" (biblio tou nomou) -- Moses' written book (Deu 31:24-26), not the stone tablets.
Does this passage explicitly name the Decalogue as abolished? No. It states that Christ redeemed us from the law's CURSE, not from the law itself.
Additional Abolition-Adjacent Passages¶
Hebrews 8:7-13 — "A New Covenant...the First Old"¶
Direct statement (v.13): "In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away."
Key observations: 1. What is "vanishing away" is "the first" COVENANT arrangement, not the law itself. 2. The new covenant's content is stated in v.10 (quoting Jer 31:33): "I will put my laws (nomous) into their mind, and write them in their hearts." The law is not abolished in the new covenant -- it is relocated from stone/external to heart/internal. 3. The "fault" was not with the law but with "them" (v.8): "finding fault with them." The old covenant failed because the people could not keep it by their own strength, not because the law was defective.
Romans 7:1-6 — "Dead to the Law...Delivered from the Law"¶
Direct statements: - v.4: "Ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ" - v.6: "We are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held"
Key observations: 1. The same chapter immediately clarifies: "Is the law sin? God forbid" (v.7), "the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good" (v.12), "the law is spiritual" (v.14). 2. Paul uses a marriage analogy (vv.1-3): a woman is bound to her husband while he lives but free when he dies. The believer has "died" to the law's condemnation through Christ's death -- not that the law ceases to exist, but that its condemning power over the believer is broken. 3. The purpose of being "delivered from the law" is stated: "that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter" (v.6). The mode of obedience changes (spirit vs. letter), not the law itself.
Romans 10:4 — "Christ Is the End of the Law"¶
Direct statement: "For Christ is the end (telos) of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth."
Key observations: 1. Telos (G5056) has a semantic range including both "termination" and "goal/purpose." It is used as "goal/purpose" in 1 Timothy 1:5 ("the end [telos] of the commandment is charity"), James 5:11 ("the end [telos] of the Lord" = the Lord's purpose), 1 Peter 1:9 ("the end [telos] of your faith" = faith's goal, not faith's termination). 2. The qualifying phrase "for righteousness" (eis dikaiosunen) is significant. Christ is the telos of the law FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS -- He is what the law aimed at, the goal the law pointed toward. He is not the termination of the law's existence. 3. This is classified Neutral in the master evidence file (E061) because telos is genuinely ambiguous.
Matthew 5:17-19 — Jesus' Own Declaration¶
Direct statements: - v.17: "Think not that I am come to destroy (katalusai) the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." - v.18: "Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." - v.19: "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven."
Key observations: 1. Jesus explicitly denies coming to kataluo (destroy/demolish) the law. He uses the emphatic negative: "Think not" + "I am not come to destroy." 2. The duration: "Till heaven and earth pass" -- heaven and earth have not passed. 3. The scope: "one jot or one tittle" -- the smallest marks of the Hebrew text. 4. v.19 threatens consequences for breaking or teaching the breaking of "these least commandments" -- in the kingdom, not before the cross.
Acts 15:28-29 — The Jerusalem Council¶
Direct statement: "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication."
Key observations: 1. The dispute was about circumcision and the "law of Moses" (v.5) -- whether Gentiles had to undergo Jewish ceremonial initiation. 2. The council retained the moral prohibition against fornication (porneia) while releasing Gentiles from circumcision and the Mosaic ceremonial system. 3. The retention of fornication as "necessary" demonstrates that moral law was not abolished -- it was never in question. The council addressed ceremonial requirements only.
Patterns Identified¶
Pattern 1: Different Greek Vocabulary Identifies Different Things Being Abolished¶
Each passage uses distinct vocabulary for what was abolished: - Col 2:14: cheirographon tois dogmasin (handwriting of ordinances) - Eph 2:15: ton nomon ton entolon en dogmasin (the law of commandments in ordinances) - Heb 7:12: nomou (law -- of the priesthood, contextually identified) - Heb 9:10: dikaiomata sarkos (carnal ordinances = meats, drinks, washings) - Heb 10:1-9: thusia kai prosphora (sacrifice and offering) - 2 Cor 3:7-13: ten doxan (the glory) / to katargoumenon (that which is done away -- neuter) - Gal 3:13: kataras tou nomou (the curse of the law)
The vocabulary is not monolithic. These are not seven descriptions of the same thing. They are seven descriptions of different aspects of what was removed at the cross: ceremonial ordinances, the Jew/Gentile wall, the Levitical priesthood law, food/drink/washing regulations, the sacrificial system, the fading glory of the old dispensation, and the law's curse upon sinners.
Pattern 2: Dogma (G1378) Is the Consistent Abolition Term -- Never Used for the Decalogue¶
Dogma appears in Col 2:14 and Eph 2:15 -- the two primary "nailed/abolished" passages. It never refers to the Decalogue anywhere in the NT. Its other occurrences are civil decrees (Luke 2:1; Acts 17:7) and the Jerusalem Council's decisions (Acts 16:4).
Pattern 3: The Same Passages That Describe Abolition Also Affirm Law Continuity¶
- Heb 10:1-9 removes the sacrificial "first" (vv.1-9) AND writes God's laws on hearts (v.16)
- 2 Cor 3:7-13 describes fading glory AND acknowledges the law was "written and engraven in stones" by God
- Gal 3:13 removes the curse AND Paul says "we establish the law" (Rom 3:31)
- Heb 8:7-13 makes the first covenant old AND writes God's laws on hearts (v.10)
Pattern 4: No Passage Explicitly Names the Decalogue as Abolished¶
In all seven passages examined, the research found NO instance where the text explicitly identifies the Ten Commandments, the Decalogue, the moral law, or any specific Decalogue commandment as the thing abolished, nailed, done away, or changed.
Pattern 5: Cheirographon (Hand-Written) vs. God-Written Distinction¶
The only thing said to be "nailed to the cross" (Col 2:14) is the cheirographon -- "something hand-written." The Decalogue was written by "the finger of God" (Exo 31:18). The book of the law was written by Moses' hand (Deu 31:24). These are different documents by different authors on different media.
Connections Between Passages¶
The Hebrews 7-10 Connected Argument¶
Hebrews 7-10 forms a sustained argument: 1. Heb 7: Melchizedek > Aaron --> priesthood changes --> law governing priesthood changes 2. Heb 8: New covenant replaces old covenant arrangement --> but the new covenant INCLUDES law on hearts (v.10) 3. Heb 9: Earthly tabernacle was a figure --> carnal ordinances were temporary (meats, drinks, washings) 4. Heb 10: Sacrificial system removed --> God's will established --> laws written on hearts
The arc of the argument: the ceremonial/sacrificial/priestly system is replaced by Christ's superior priesthood and sacrifice, while the moral law is internalized through the new covenant.
Paul's Consistency Across Epistles¶
Paul uses katargeo in multiple law-related contexts: - Romans 3:31: "Do we make void (katargeo) the law? God forbid; we establish it." Paul explicitly denies making the law katargeo. - Ephesians 2:15: "Having abolished (katargesas) the law of commandments in ordinances (dogmasin)." Paul abolishes the law OF commandments IN ordinances -- not the law itself unqualified. - 2 Corinthians 3:7-13: katargeo applies to the GLORY (feminine) and the fading system (neuter), not to the law (masculine).
Paul is consistent: the law itself is established (Rom 3:31), holy/just/good/spiritual (Rom 7:12, 14); what is abolished is the ceremonial system (Eph 2:15), the fading glory of the old dispensation (2 Cor 3), and the law's condemning curse (Gal 3:13).
Word Study Insights¶
Katargeo (G2673) -- 27 NT Occurrences¶
The word means "to render inoperative, make idle." It is used for abolishing death (2 Tim 1:10), destroying the body of sin (Rom 6:6), bringing political powers to naught (1 Cor 15:24). In the law contexts, the grammar determines what is rendered inoperative: the glory (2 Cor 3:7), the neuter system (2 Cor 3:11, 13), the veil (2 Cor 3:14), the law of commandments in ordinances (Eph 2:15). The law itself is explicitly NOT made katargeo (Rom 3:31).
Dogma (G1378) -- 5 NT Occurrences¶
All five occurrences: Luke 2:1 (Caesar's decree), Acts 16:4 (Council decrees), Acts 17:7 (Caesar's decrees), Eph 2:15 (ordinances abolished), Col 2:14 (ordinances nailed). Dogma is a decree/ordinance term, never used for the Ten Commandments. Its consistent association with abolition passages and its absence from moral-law passages constitutes a vocabulary pattern.
Cheirographon (G5498) -- 1 NT Occurrence¶
Hapax legomenon. "Hand-written" document. The distinction between hand-written (Moses) and God-written (Decalogue) is established by multiple OT texts (Exo 31:18; 32:15-16; Deu 9:10; 31:24-26).
Difficult Passages¶
2 Corinthians 3:7 -- "Ministration of Death, Written and Engraven in Stones"¶
The difficult element: Paul calls the law "written and engraven in stones" -- clearly the Decalogue -- and associates it with a "ministration of death." This appears to characterize the Decalogue negatively.
Analysis: Paul's argument is about the MINISTRATION (diakonia), not the law itself. The law written on stone, administered through the old covenant by the letter, becomes a "ministration of death" because sinners cannot keep it by their own power. The law condemns; it does not save. But this is a problem with the old-covenant ADMINISTRATION, not with the law's content. The same law, written on hearts by the Spirit (the new covenant), becomes a "ministration of righteousness" (v.9). The law's content is the same; the ministry/administration changes.
The grammar confirms: katargoumenen (v.7) modifies doxan (glory, feminine), not nomos (law, masculine). The glory fades; the law does not.
Galatians 3:19 -- "The Law Was Added Because of Transgressions"¶
"Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come."
Analysis: "The law" (ho nomos) is ambiguous here. The phrase "added because of transgressions" fits the ceremonial/sacrificial system, which was "added" to address transgressions through sacrificial atonement "till the seed should come." The Decalogue was not "added" -- it existed before Sinai (E082, E084) and continues after the seed came (E031-E033). The "added" law is the mediatorial legislation that came "in the hand of a mediator" (v.19b) -- through Moses, not directly from God. This is classified Neutral in the master evidence file (E058) because the referent of "the law" is genuinely ambiguous.
Galatians 3:24-25 -- "No Longer Under a Schoolmaster"¶
"The law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ...after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster."
Analysis: The paidagogos (schoolmaster/tutor/guardian) was a slave who supervised a child until maturity. The function of "guardian/supervisor" ends at maturity, but the moral standards the guardian enforced do not become immoral at that point. We are no longer "under" the law's custodial supervision (the ceremonial system that guarded and regulated Israel), but the moral principles the law embodies remain. This is classified Neutral (E059) because "the law" is ambiguous.
Analysis completed: 2026-02-23 Files referenced: 02-verses.md, 04-word-studies.md, raw-data/greek-parsing.md, raw-data/cross-testament-parallels.md