Is observation of the Sabbath day a requirement for Christians?

[Cassandra]

Thanks Barn, that was a great compliment sir, I like you as well, but being the idiot I am sometimes I confuse you with the other Barney, but I have it pretty well straight now. Paul said we are not to judge those who do or do not observe the Sabbath, the point I am trying to make is if you choose to obey it then obey it, I am dead set against hypocrisy. I have the utmost respect for those who practice what they preach even if it is not in harmony with the Bible, because they are not trying to get me to do what they are unwilling to do.

On the subject of the Sabbath however, it is an extremely serious law, and habitual violators of it will not inherit God's Kingdom, that is if it is still in force. Everyone I know violates it regularly, including myself, and no doubt everyone you know as well. If the Sabbath is still being enforced, so very few would even have a chance at everlasting life.

All of the laws are serious.
Your letter of the law attitude does not hold true. You believe you are to keep "from things strangled and from blood". How's that hamburger tasting?

You can dog somebody else and walk right over what you do. I just don't get it.

 

[Robert Gwin]

Neither have I been giving you my "opinion."

You sure have, undocumented truth is opinion Scott.

 

[Phoneman777]

The works of His hands are verity and justice;
All His precepts are sure.
They stand fast forever and ever,
And are done in truth and uprightness.
He has sent redemption to His people;
He has commanded His covenant forever:
Holy and awesome is His name.
(Psalm 111:7-9)​

per the psalm all these stand forever:

• the works of His hands
• truth and justice
• all His precepts
• redemption
• His covenant

nothing here says 'the 10 commandments are not part of the law'
not one jot or tittle is removed

If you can't see how plainly this refers to the Ten Commandment tables of stone which are "the works of His hands" and are "His commandments" and that they will always be kept "forever and ever", you're just not reading the Bible with eyes open. Please open them.

 

[Phoneman777]

this is the word in Psalm 111:7

Strong's 6490 --
piqqud: a precept
Original Word: פִקּוּד
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: piqqud
Phonetic Spelling: (pik-kood')
Definition: a precept



compare:

Strong's 4687 --
mitsvah: commandment
Original Word: מִצְוָה
Part of Speech: Noun Feminine
Transliteration: mitsvah
Phonetic Spelling: (mits-vaw')
Definition: commandment

Your constant appeals to etymology in order to "disprove" truth always end up as anticlimactic as the infamous Geraldo Rivera broadcast of Al Capone's vault excavation. God's made the tables of stones containing His commandments with His hands because the very absolute, infallible, and eternal nature of them is such that He couldn't even trust a man to write them.

However, when I show you that the entire passage of Hebrews 4:1-10 KJV uses "kataposis" over and over for "rest" except when we get to verse 9 where it says "Sabbatismos" -- which is why Lamsa correctly translates it as "keep the Sabbath" -- all of a sudden etymology means nothing for you.

 

[ScottA]

You sure have, undocumented truth is opinion Scott.

No...confirmation of scripture is not "opinion", it is how "every word is established."

 

[post]

If you can't see how plainly this refers to the Ten Commandment tables of stone which are "the works of His hands" and are "His commandments" and that they will always be kept "forever and ever", you're just not reading the Bible with eyes open. Please open them.

kjv is not accurate in Psalm 111.
the actual word is "precepts" not "commandments" ((and there are more than 10 commandments, not that you care))
you have a completely unsupportable view of Psalm 111 that you don't even care is absolute rubbish.
the only thing that matters to you is having preeminence so you can justify yourself to yourself in order to attack others.

BTW last week i thought you were a "Lamsa-only" disciple?

you keep changing your loyalties. it's disconcerting.

but it makes sense overall, because you are clearly more concerned with your private interpretations than you are with the truth.

you don't care about the truth. you just want to be personally superior to other Christians. that's why you spend 90% of your effort on finding clever ways to condemn actual believers.

 

[post]

Your constant appeals to etymology in order to "disprove" truth

we are not talking about "etymology" -- we are talking about two completely different words.

the truth is that the word "commandments" is not found in Psalm 111 at all.

not that you care.

but going around referencing Psalm 111 as tho it's some kind of supposed 'proof' that Exodus 20 doesn't count as part of "the law" as defined by scripture??? while you have a Bible in your house in which Romans 7:7 exists???
and one hour you are "kjv only!!!!!!" and the next hour you are "George Lamsa only!!!!" ??????
wow dude you are so transparently wrong it's not just laughable but genuinely sad.

WTF do you think you getting banned from major Christian websites is no kind of indication that you might actually be a heretic & false teacher??
while you spend your whole life trying to convince Christians that they are not saved???
no red flags there??
zero self-examination???
huh??

while you repeat the absolutely weakest and stupidest arguments over and over and over with literally dozens of learned people patiently explaining to you the faults in them for a period of literal years????
and you reply to each one with transparently spurious slander??
over and over and over and over and over???

dude.

get a grip.
you a mess.
a serious mess.

not that you care at all


just, wow
wow
humans never cease to amaze me with their idiocy

does it not occur to you that maybe she had a good reason for leaving
that possibly you ain't all that
that it could be the case you're like every other human: wrong, yet vain
that you actually need mercy?

 

[post]

anyone want to talk about everlasting?

the lovingkindness of the LORD is everlasting​

amen!!
praise the LORD, all the earth and everything within it!

 

[post]

today is the sabbath of the Jews

are you meditating on law & works & a supposed righteousness of your own willpower & achievements?
or are you meditating on Christ our LORD and the One Work He did that saves?

 

[post]

((prepares self for telephone-person to respond with nothing but spurious personal attacks and old arguments previously thoroughly disproven multiple times yet again...))

because there's nothing new under the sun.
God knows the thoughts of men, that they are vanity

hence JESUS OF NAZARETH

my Lord, my Husband
amen

 

[Phoneman777]

kjv is not accurate in Psalm 111.
the actual word is "precepts" not "commandments" ((and there are more than 10 commandments, not that you care))
you have a completely unsupportable view of Psalm 111 that you don't even care is absolute rubbish.
the only thing that matters to you is having preeminence so you can justify yourself to yourself in order to attack others.

BTW last week i thought you were a "Lamsa-only" disciple?

you keep changing your loyalties. it's disconcerting.

but it makes sense overall, because you are clearly more concerned with your private interpretations than you are with the truth.

you don't care about the truth. you just want to be personally superior to other Christians. that's why you spend 90% of your effort on finding clever ways to condemn actual believers.

Good gravy, "precepts" can be limited to "ten" if necessary, and in the case of Psalms 111:7-8 KJV those Ten are the ONLY "precepts" God made with His hands that are eternal in nature are the Ten Commandments.

Unless you can point to any one of the Ten that we'll be able to disregard at some point in the future.

Can you?

Please, which of the Ten will we be at liberty to break in heaven?

You claim they aren't eternal. You claim we're under no obligation to keep them. You claim we can freely break them and then flash our OSAS License to Sin and gain entrance to heaven, while totally ignoring Revelation 22:14 KJV.

Please, tell us how His Ten Commandments won't "stand fast forever and ever" when the Bible points to no other conclusion?

 

[Jim B]

Good gravy, "precepts" can be limited to "ten" if necessary, and in the case of Psalms 111:7-8 KJV those Ten are the ONLY "precepts" God made with His hands that are eternal in nature are the Ten Commandments.

Unless you can point to any one of the Ten that we'll be able to disregard at some point in the future.

Can you?

Please, which of the Ten will we be at liberty to break in heaven?

You claim they aren't eternal. You claim we're under no obligation to keep them. You claim we can freely break them and then flash our OSAS License to Sin and gain entrance to heaven, while totally ignoring Revelation 22:14 KJV.

Please, tell us how His Ten Commandments won't "stand fast forever and ever" when the Bible points to no other conclusion?

Christians are not under OT law but under NT grace. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

Romans 6:14 makes this perfectly clear, "For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace."

 

[Phoneman777]

we are not talking about "etymology" -- we are talking about two completely different words.

the truth is that the word "commandments" is not found in Psalm 111 at all.

not that you care.

but going around referencing Psalm 111 as tho it's some kind of supposed 'proof' that Exodus 20 doesn't count as part of "the law" as defined by scripture??? while you have a Bible in your house in which Romans 7:7 exists???
and one hour you are "kjv only!!!!!!" and the next hour you are "George Lamsa only!!!!" ??????
wow dude you are so transparently wrong it's not just laughable but genuinely sad.

WTF do you think you getting banned from major Christian websites is no kind of indication that you might actually be a heretic & false teacher??
while you spend your whole life trying to convince Christians that they are not saved???
no red flags there??
zero self-examination???
huh??

while you repeat the absolutely weakest and stupidest arguments over and over and over with literally dozens of learned people patiently explaining to you the faults in them for a period of literal years????
and you reply to each one with transparently spurious slander??
over and over and over and over and over???

dude.

get a grip.
you a mess.
a serious mess.

not that you care at all


just, wow
wow
humans never cease to amaze me with their idiocy

does it not occur to you that maybe she had a good reason for leaving
that possibly you ain't all that
that it could be the case you're like every other human: wrong, yet vain
that you actually need mercy?

Debating Post is like trying to herd cats. Folks, what follows is a typical exchange between Post and me:

Phoneman777: OSAS needs a proper burial because in the contrast made by Jesus between the "many" of Matthew 24:12 KJV and the saint in the following verse, these "many" who allow widespread iniquity to kill their agape cold and dead, leaving them unable to endure to the end and wind up saved...are saints.

Post: You're wrong because the wicked can partake of agape...so they're the wicked.

Phoneman777: They can't possibly be the wicked because "agape" is demonstrated only by happily keeping God's commandments (1 John 5:3 KJV), yet the wicked can't keep them even if they wanted to (Romans 8:7 KJV).

Post: OK, fine, they're saints, but "cold" agape ain't "dead" agape so they're still going to heaven.

Phoneman777: Jesus will spit the "lukewarm" out of His mouth, and a blind man can see that "cold" is far more spitworthy a spiritual condition than "lukewarm".

Post: Jesus said both cold and hot are welcome to the mouth party - only the lukewarm get spit out.

Phoneman777: Really? So now Jesus is happy with those on His side of the spiritual fence and the other side of the spiritual fence, just as long as we don't straddle it?

These are actual sentiments expressed by him. This is the kind of warped reasoning that liberal Christianity breeds, due to the satanic blindness with which these poor souls are afflicted. Pray without ceasing for them, please.

 

[post]

"precepts" can be limited to "ten" if necessary

"precept"

Definition from Oxford Languages
noun.
a general rule intended to regulate behavior or thought.

these can be reduced to two: Deuteronomy 6:4 & Leviticus 19:18
neither of which don't happen to be part of Exodus 20, and both of which you claim are "nailed to the cross" and no longer relevant; "mere writings of Moses, not from God" - completely dismissed in your view next to the glory of uselessly & endlessly repeated legal ceremonial physical inaction according to the flesh.


as it stands you have nothing to stand on, per Christ, who says the whole law stands on these, because you reject The Foundation in favor of a rite
but you weirdly glory in your willpower nevertheless

and slander, endless slander, pours out of your mouth.
this never occurs to you as unclean????

you a mess dude.
a real mess

 

[post]

Debating Post is like trying to herd cats. Folks, what follows is a typical exchange between Post and me:

Phoneman777: OSAS needs a proper burial because in the contrast made by Jesus between the "many" of Matthew 24:12 KJV and the saint in the following verse, these "many" who allow widespread iniquity to kill their agape cold and dead, leaving them unable to endure to the end and wind up saved...are saints.

Post: You're wrong because the wicked can partake of agape...so they're the wicked.

Phoneman777: They can't possibly be the wicked because "agape" is demonstrated only by happily keeping God's commandments (1 John 5:3 KJV), yet the wicked can't keep them even if they wanted to (Romans 8:7 KJV).

Post: OK, fine, they're saints, but "cold" agape ain't "dead" agape so they're still going to heaven.

Phoneman777: Jesus will spit the "lukewarm" out of His mouth, and a blind man can see that "cold" is far more spitworthy a spiritual condition than "lukewarm".

Post: Jesus said both cold and hot are welcome to the mouth party - only the lukewarm get spit out.

Phoneman777: Really? So now Jesus is happy with those on His side of the spiritual fence and the other side of the spiritual fence, just as long as we don't straddle it?

These are actual sentiments expressed by him. This is the kind of warped reasoning that liberal Christianity breeds, due to the satanic blindness with which these poor souls are afflicted. Pray without ceasing for them, please.

you a mess dude.

you don't care about Christ; all you care about is personally attacking those who correct you.
your private doctrines have been refuted 1,000 times but you just can't let go
vain

all you do is slander.
& pat yourself on the back for it.

wow

such a mess
disgraced, banned, refuted, still vain
still determined to condemn the saved -- your entire life-goal, damn all who are redeemed
trying to destroy the grace of God

look at yourself, wow
what in the world makes you think you are doing right??

a mess.

 

[Jim B]

Debating Post is like trying to herd cats. Folks, what follows is a typical exchange between Post and me:

Phoneman777: OSAS needs a proper burial because in the contrast made by Jesus between the "many" of Matthew 24:12 KJV and the saint in the following verse, these "many" who allow widespread iniquity to kill their agape cold and dead, leaving them unable to endure to the end and wind up saved...are saints.

Post: You're wrong because the wicked can partake of agape...so they're the wicked.

Phoneman777: They can't possibly be the wicked because "agape" is demonstrated only by happily keeping God's commandments (1 John 5:3 KJV), yet the wicked can't keep them even if they wanted to (Romans 8:7 KJV).

Post: OK, fine, they're saints, but "cold" agape ain't "dead" agape so they're still going to heaven.

Phoneman777: Jesus will spit the "lukewarm" out of His mouth, and a blind man can see that "cold" is far more spitworthy a spiritual condition than "lukewarm".

Post: Jesus said both cold and hot are welcome to the mouth party - only the lukewarm get spit out.

Phoneman777: Really? So now Jesus is happy with those on His side of the spiritual fence and the other side of the spiritual fence, just as long as we don't straddle it?

These are actual sentiments expressed by him. This is the kind of warped reasoning that liberal Christianity breeds, due to the satanic blindness with which these poor souls are afflicted. Pray without ceasing for them, please.

Ah, there is that buzzword again: "liberal". It's de rigueur to use it in a pejorative sense, but that just shows the work of Satan to poison people's minds and divide the body of Christ. I've got news for you: it ain't liberals who are blinded by Satan, it's you, whom he has convinced to turn against other Christians.

 

[post]

agape...

done.

you have zero legitimate argument.

this was settled years ago.



you are such a mess; it's ridiculous.
you are a very sad man, and i don't blame her

she had good reasons.
get over it.
look at yourself.

 

[Phoneman777]

Christians are not under OT law but under NT grace. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

Romans 6:14 makes this perfectly clear, "For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace."

Ah, the Roman cherries are ripe for the picking, I see - allow me to help:

Q. Does being under grace allow us to break the commandments?
A. Romans 6:15 KJV: "Shall we sin because we're not under the law but under grace? God forbid."

Q. What happens to the grace-saved Christian who breaks them?
A. Romans 6:16 KJV: "Know ye not to whom you yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants you are to whom you obey, whether sin unto death or obedience unto righteousness."

Q. So, then, what does "not under the law" mean?
A. Contextually, it means "not under the curse of the law but yet under obligation to the law".

Pretextually, it means anything y'all want it to, right?

 

[Phoneman777]

you a mess dude.

you don't care about Christ; all you care about is personally attacking those who correct you.
your private doctrines have been refuted 1,000 times but you just can't let go
vain

all you do is slander.
& pat yourself on the back for it.

wow

such a mess
disgraced, banned, refuted, still vain
still determined to condemn the saved -- your entire life-goal, damn all who are redeemed
trying to destroy the grace of God

look at yourself, wow
what in the world makes you think you are doing right??

a mess.

Get along, little kitties

 

[Jim B]

Ah, the Roman cherries are ripe for the picking, I see - allow me to help:

Q. Does being under grace allow us to break the commandments?
A. Romans 6:15 KJV: "Shall we sin because we're not under the law but under grace? God forbid."

Q. What happens to the Christian who breaks them?
A. Romans 6:16 KJV: "Know ye not to whom you yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants you are to whom you obey, whether sin unto death or obedience unto righteousness."

Q. So, then, what does "not under the law" mean?
A. Contextually, it means "not under the curse of the law". Pretextually, it means anything y'all want it to, right?

Your post makes no sense. What is it that you can't understand about being under grace, not under the law? Even your quote from Romans 6:15 clearly says that we're not under the law but under grace.

What happens to Christians who break the OT commandments? Nothing!!! The penalty for all sin has been paid for by the atoning death of Jesus Christ!

Do you not understand what "not under the law" means? Really? It means that those who have accepted Christ are not under the law!!!
Contextually/pretextually is rhetorical BS.