Shared ground

Paul’s basic point is clear: people who “died with Christ” should not be treated as still under the same controlling “world” system of rule-making (Colossians 2:20–23). He highlights strict commands (“don’t handle… don’t taste… don’t touch”) and says they focus on things that are temporary and get “used up” (v. 22). He also locates their authority in “human” teaching (v. 22).

Paul grants that these practices can look wise: they signal seriousness through chosen acts of religion, humility, and harsh treatment of the body (v. 23). Yet he concludes they are ineffective at the deeper target—restraining “the indulgence of the flesh” (v. 23). Explicitly, the passage contrasts outward rule-systems with the inner problem of disordered desire.

Where interpretation differs (only where needed)

What “the elements of the world” means (v. 20). Some understand it mainly as basic religious principles and social-religious systems that organize life through rules and boundary markers (food, purity, calendar). Others think Paul is also pointing to hostile spiritual powers associated with the world’s old order. Both readings fit the wider argument in Colossians that Christ is sufficient and that believers should not be captured by “elemental” structures.

What “self-imposed worship” refers to (v. 23). Some read it broadly as any religion humans invent or add on top of Christ—extra rules and rituals marketed as “next-level” spirituality. Others think it points more specifically to a package of practices (ascetic restrictions and possibly fascination with intermediaries) hinted at earlier in the chapter (2:18–19). Either way, Paul’s critique is that the program is self-authored and therefore misdirected.

What “indulgence of the flesh” means (v. 23). Some take “flesh” primarily as the inner human drive toward sin—desires that run past proper limits. Others think Paul is especially targeting pride and self-promotion that can hide inside strict religion (the ego fed by appearing disciplined). The text itself emphasizes the failure to restrain desire, whether the desire is more obviously bodily or more socially “respectable.”

Why the disagreement exists Paul’s phrases are compact and can point in more than one direction. “Elements of the world” can name either controlling structures or spiritual powers (or both). “Self-imposed worship” is a rare term, so interpreters lean heavily on the immediate context (2:16–19) and on the flow of Paul’s argument. “Flesh” can mean bodily impulses, the broader fallen human orientation, or the hidden motivations behind outward displays.

What this passage clearly contributes

1. It links Christian identity (“died with Christ”) to freedom from being ruled by human decrees (v. 20).
2. It critiques a spirituality built around prohibitions focused on perishable things (vv. 21–22).
3. It exposes a common dynamic: outward severity can create an appearance of wisdom and humility, while still failing to curb inner excess (v. 23).
4. It frames the core problem as deeper than behavior management: rules can regulate contact with objects, but they cannot, by themselves, re-train the desires that drive behavior.