Traditions - Part 1

Okay, we need to put the last four weeks into our mind as we go into Colossians 2:8-12

Paul has made his case for you and told you to be careful of deception:

He is up against people who are fighting to keep their traditions

Here is the thing about traditions…

You have them, and here, in church, you think tradition means:

Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Years, Easter, 4th of July

Family gatherings, recipes, birthdays

How we do church, songs, decor, etc.

Baptism, communion, etc.

All of these, which are a part of your culture, are deeply ingrained.

When something comes along to challenge them or put them at risk, you will fight for your tradition

For instance…

Our form of government is a tradition

It is handed down from generation to generation

And you likely hold that our form of government is ‘right’

When it is challenged, your whole world is challenged

And you want to fight to keep it in place

Overall, Romans viewed worship as a reciprocal contract: human piety ensured divine blessings for personal and collective success, while neglect risked calamity.

So, you can understand why Paul and these people of ‘The Way,’ this new Jewish sect, are receiving pushback.

Imagine:

In Roman culture during the Apostolic era (roughly the 1st century AD), worship was deeply intertwined with the perceived success and stability of various societal structures, from the family to the empire. This connection stemmed from a polytheistic worldview where piety toward the gods was believed to secure divine favor, prosperity, and protection.

Links Between Worship and Success in Roman Society

Family: Roman households centered on the paterfamilias (male head of the family), who conducted daily rituals to honor the Lares (household guardian spirits) and Penates (gods of the pantry and family welfare). These acts, including offerings at a home altar (lararium), were seen as essential for family health, fertility, and economic success. Neglecting them was thought to invite misfortune, such as illness or crop failure, as the gods were believed to directly influence domestic life. Families also participated in ancestor veneration, linking worship to generational continuity and inheritance.

City: Civic religion involved public festivals, sacrifices, and temples dedicated to gods like Jupiter or local patron deities (e.g., Mars for Rome). These rituals were credited with ensuring the city's prosperity, safety from disasters, and victory over enemies. Magistrates and priests (flamines) performed them on behalf of the community, fostering social cohesion and attributing urban successes—like abundant harvests or infrastructure stability—to divine approval. Participation was a marker of citizenship and loyalty.

Government: The state religion (religio Romana) blended politics and worship, with officials invoking gods in assemblies and decisions. Success in governance, such as legal stability or expansion, was attributed to maintaining pax deorum (peace with the gods) through vows, auguries, and public oaths. Foreign cults were often incorporated to bolster imperial unity, reflecting the government's role in religious oversight.

Army: Military campaigns began with sacrifices and auspices to gods like Mars or Victoria, seeking omens for victory. Soldiers swore oaths (sacramentum) to the gods and emperor, linking discipline and triumph to religious fidelity. Battlefield successes were celebrated with triumphs involving temple dedications, reinforcing the belief that divine favor won wars and protected the legions.

Caesar (Emperor): By the 1st century AD, the imperial cult deified living or deceased emperors (e.g., Augustus as divus), portraying them as intermediaries with the gods. Worship of the emperor's genius (divine spirit) was tied to the empire's success, with refusals seen as threats to state security. Military and civic oaths included emperor veneration, crediting imperial achievements—like conquests or peace (Pax Romana)—to this cult.

See that no one will be the one leading you away as spoil through the philosophy and empty deceit according to the tradition of men, according to the elemental principles of the world and not according to Christ; because in him dwells all the fullness of the deity bodily, and you are in him having been filled, who is the head of every rule and authority… (Colossians 2:8-12)

Threats to Family Traditions from Paul's Message

Paul's teachings, as seen in letters like Colossians or Ephesians,

urged exclusive devotion to Christ,

rejecting idol worship and pagan rituals (e.g., Colossians 2:8–10 warns against "philosophy and empty deceit" rooted in human tradition; Acts 17:22–31 critiques Athenian idolatry).

This directly challenged Roman family traditions, which were passed down through generations and centered on household gods and ancestral rites.

Families risked losing their sense of identity and continuity, as abandoning the Lares or Penates could be seen as betraying forebears and inviting familial curses, such as infertility or poverty.

The paterfamilias' authority, derived from leading these rituals, would be undermined, potentially fracturing household hierarchy and unity.

Early Christians' refusal to participate in family offerings or festivals labeled them as antisocial, heightening internal tensions.

It would be the equivalent of saying to your family, I am no longer going to participate in

Thanksgiving, Christmas, Easter…

Fourth of July, voting, free speech

Broader Threats Felt by Family, City, and Nation

Family:

Conversion to Christianity's monotheism threatened the family's perceived divine protection, as ceasing pagan worship might be blamed for personal misfortunes (e.g., illness or failed harvests).

Socially, families faced isolation or stigma, as non-participation in shared rituals could lead to exclusion from inheritance or community support, evoking fears of generational downfall.

City:

Local cults and festivals bound communities; Christians' abstention was viewed as disloyalty, potentially angering patron gods and causing civic disasters like plagues or defeats.

Cities relied on collective piety for prosperity, so a shift to Christ-worship could spark resentment, as it disrupted social harmony and economic ties (e.g., temple-related trade).

Nation (Empire):

The empire's stability hinged on unified worship, including the imperial cult, which symbolized loyalty to Rome.

Paul's call to forsake gods for Christ was perceived as subversive, akin to treason, risking divine wrath on the state (e.g., military losses or unrest).

Emperors like Nero exploited this fear, portraying Christians as threats to pax deorum, leading to persecutions.

Nationally, it evoked anxieties over imperial decline, as abandoning traditional gods could undermine the ideological foundation of Roman supremacy.

Which you see playing out today:

The Kirk murder has heightened this tension of…

We don’t want things to change

We want things to change

And every Jewish person in that church would be cheering!

Yeah! Paul is right! Listen to Paul...

But Paul also addressed the Jewish people

He spoke to the gentile Roman citizens

Now he will address the Jewish people

…in whom also you were circumcised with a circumcision not made by hands in the putting off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of the Christ, having been buried with him in baptism… (Colossians 2:8-12)

Paul's shift from warning against Roman-influenced philosophy to redefining circumcision would profoundly disrupt 1st-century Jewish communities in Colossae, a city with a significant Jewish diaspora influenced by Hellenistic culture.

By stating circumcision is "not made by hands," emphasizing non-physical agency and tied to Christ's "circumcision", Paul elevates a spiritual process over the Torah's physical command, achieved through baptism as a burial and resurrection.

This passive voice underscores divine action via faith, contrasting with the active, human-performed rite in Genesis 17.

For Jewish families, this threatened core traditions:

circumcision as a rite of passage on the eighth day marked entry into the covenant, fostering generational continuity and ethnic distinction from Gentiles.

Replacing it with baptism, a rite accessible to all without physical marking, could erode family authority, as the paterfamilias or mohel's role in performing the cut (מול) diminished, potentially leading to internal divisions or accusations of apostasy.

Communities feared loss of identity, as physical circumcision symbolized separation and purity; spiritualizing it risked assimilation into broader Hellenistic society, inviting social ostracism or economic boycotts within synagogues.

On a communal level, Jewish groups in Colossae, influenced by Phrygian syncretism, viewed Torah observance as essential for divine protection and prosperity.

Paul's implication that physical circumcision is insufficient without Christ's fulfillment challenged the covenant's perpetuity (בְרִית עוֹלָם, "eternal covenant," Genesis 17:13), seen as undermining Mosaic Law and provoking divine judgment,

similar to fears of communal punishment for non-observance (נִכְרְתָה, "cut off," Genesis 17:14).

This could spark theological debates or expulsions from synagogues, heightening tensions with Roman authorities who tolerated Judaism as an ancient religion but viewed innovations suspiciously.

Nationally, for the Jewish people under Roman rule, circumcision affirmed resilience and distinctiveness amid diaspora pressures.

Paul's teaching risked portraying Judaism as obsolete, fueling anti-Jewish sentiments or internal schisms, as seen in early Christian-Jewish conflicts.

It threatened the nation's spiritual integrity, potentially weakening resistance to assimilation and imperial cults, evoking fears of cultural erasure akin to Hellenistic reforms under Antiochus Epiphanes.

And every Gentile is cheering!

Yeah!

We don’t have to be circumcised and follow your traditions!

But Paul is not done…

…in whom also you were raised together through the faith of the working of God the one raising him from the dead. (Colossians 2:8-12)

Both traditions are set aside for one unifying resurrection from the dead.

Which is Paul’s point.

He is pleading, pleading, pleading for unity in Christ

And he is putting to death…

Traditions

Philosophies

Doctrines

Because Paul knows they divide.

The moment you unify around any of those things, you create division.

Scripture already does that, but it is a document inspired by God, so it carries the ability and authority to do it well.

I met someone the other day who left their tradition to marry someone from another tradition, and it broke their family…

Traditions - Part 1