• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Should Christians Be Keeping the Sabbath?

So the whole Old Testament and ten commandments no longer apply to Christians (except, of course when verses can be cherry-picked to support the Christian right's political agenda)?

Why don't we just discard the whole OT, then, and go exclusively with the updated dispensation?

But didn't Jesus say He wasn't changing even a jot or a tittle (whatever jots and tittles are:rolleyes:), and wouldn't that include the commandment to observe the Shabbat?

As I understand it, the Sunday 'Sabbath' was institued early in church history, when the Christian church was trying hard to seperate itself from the Jewish community, of which it had originally been just another sect.
"Judaizing" by observing the Sabbath was ruled heretical and the day of rest moved to Sunday -- in contravention of the commandment.
The Seventh Day Adventist Church has a lot of historical documentation on this. You could probably Google them for a more accurate history.
They also left the monotheistic God of the ot for the Babylonian trinity. they don't keep the 10 because they don't know God.they have a repentless religion Babylonian in nature and they use the Babylonian phallus of the sun god Baal they call it a steeple
 
Sounds a bit contradicting. So what you are saying is that we do have to obey the 10 except one, but you are not saying that we should keep nine???? James implied the 10 stand and fall together (Jas 2:10). We know he's talking about the 10 because in the very next verse he summarizes two of them.

Jas 2:10-11 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For He who said, "DO NOT COMMIT ADULTERY," also said, "DO NOT MURDER." Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.​

Unless you are ready to admit the other 8 commandments do not have to be obeyed, the fourth commandment has to be kept or you break them all.
If you eliminate the self proclaimed apostle Paul and Yeshua's teachings snd his real apostles teachings are very clear about the 10
 
Isn't it arguable that Christians should be keeping Shabbat since they claim to follow the ten commandments? Certainly Jesus and the disciples kept it, seeing as they were Jews. What argument can really be brought forward that Christians shouldn't be keeping it, and do the gospels anywhere explicitly suggest Jesus wouldn't want his followers to?
3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.

4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
 

james2ko

Well-Known Member
If you eliminate the self proclaimed apostle Paul and Yeshua's teachings snd his real apostles teachings are very clear about the 10

I do not believe Paul eliminated any of the 10 commandments. I've thoroughly studied all of the passages claiming abolishment of the fourth commandment by Paul, and none stand up to contextual scrutiny.
 
I do not believe Paul eliminated any of the 10 commandments. I've thoroughly studied all of the passages claiming abolishment of the fourth commandment by Paul, and none stand up to contextual scrutiny.
well actually Paul means nothing to me since he was not a real apostle. But
3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.

4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
 

james2ko

Well-Known Member
well actually Paul means nothing to me since he was not a real apostle. But

3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

That's good enough for me..
 
That's good enough for me..
christians who reject the 10 hate this
I Never Knew You
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
 

Yes

Oh how I love the Word of God!
christians who reject the 10 hate this
I Never Knew You
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
Jesus says he never knew them because they were workers of iniquity.

The were workers of iniquity.

Iniquity is sin.
 

JM2C

CHRISTIAN
Rom 4:1 combined with vs 16 as well as the new covenant promise, which Paul said only pertains to Israelites (Rom 9:4; Heb 8:8-10), reveal both faith and ancestry are required. It's not either or, both are required!
Romans 4:1 says “Abraham our father, as pertaining or according to the flesh” meaning Abraham the father of the 12 tribes of Israel. IOW, Gentiles are not descendants of Abraham “as pertaining or according to the flesh”.

If you say “ancestry is required” or as one of the requirements to partake on God’s promise to Abraham then Gentiles are eliminated or are not included base on this criteria alone.

As we read the Romans 4 Paul explained the differences between work and faith. In V2 Paul says: “For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.”

NLT says: “Was it because of his good deeds that God accepted him? If so, he would have had something to boast about. But from God’s point of view Abraham had no basis at all for pride.”

IOW, Abraham’s descendants cannot boast in front of God base on work/Law alone or base on “Ancestry” alone. Therefore, “Ancestry” is not or never one of God’s requirement, but "faith" alone both for the Jews and the Gentiles. Remember what you said “both faith and ancestry are required. It's not either or, both are required”

The most beautiful thing about the bible is, sometimes you don’t need to expound the verses because it speaks by itself.

Gal 3:6 Consider Abraham: “He believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”
Gal 3:7 Understand, then, that those who believe are children of Abraham.
Gal 3:8 The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.”
Gal 3:9 So those who have faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.
Gal 3:10 All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.”
Gal 3:11 Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, “The righteous will live by faith.”
Gal 3:12 The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, “The man who does these things will live by them.”

Cleary it says here that “ancestry –Gal. 3:10-12” is not even a requirement at all, but “faith” is the only requirement to become “children of Abraham –Galatians 3:7”.

So, your premise that “both faith and ancestry are required. It's not either or, both are required” is false.
 

james2ko

Well-Known Member
Romans 4:1 says “Abraham our father, as pertaining or according to the flesh” meaning Abraham the father of the 12 tribes of Israel. IOW, Gentiles are not descendants of Abraham “as pertaining or according to the flesh”. If you say “ancestry is required” or as one of the requirements to partake on God’s promise to Abraham then Gentiles are eliminated or are not included base on this criteria alone.As we read the Romans 4 Paul explained the differences between work and faith. In V2 Paul says: “For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.”

NLT says: “Was it because of his good deeds that God accepted him? If so, he would have had something to boast about. But from God’s point of view Abraham had no basis at all for pride.” IOW, Abraham’s descendants cannot boast in front of God base on work/Law alone or base on “Ancestry”alone. Therefore, “Ancestry” is not or never one of God’s requirement, but "faith" alone both for the Jews and the Gentiles. Remember what you said “both faith and ancestry are required. It's not either or, both are required”

Rom 4:1 What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our (plural) forefather according to the flesh?

1. In Rom 4:1, Paul announces and confirms his and his Roman audiences' (plural) ancestral identity , similar to how he identified his (singular) own ancestry (Israelite Jews from the two tribes of Judah who were rejecting Paul's message) to the same audience in Rom 9:3:

Rom 9:3 "For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my (singular) kinsmen according to the flesh.

Notice he uses a plural second person pronoun in Rom 4:1 and a singular first person pronoun in Rom 9:3 to identify Paul's and his Roman congregants' kinsmen--the physical descendants of Jacob through Abraham----Israelites--according to the flesh!!!

In verse 2 Paul introduces the subject matter to his Israelite audience -- justification by faith not deeds. Nothing here remotely states ancestry is excluded. Ancestry was identified prior to Paul's introduction of the subject matter in both chapters.

The ancestry (not color or race) of the Galatians and all of Paul's audience is confirmed in Hebrews:

Heb 8:8-10 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: 9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
Israelite ancestry (outside of nationality, race, color) is required to take part of the New covenant. Non-Israelites are excluded, until the millennium (Isa 56)

The most beautiful thing about the bible is, sometimes you don’t need to expound the verses because it speaks by itself.

Gal 3:6 Consider Abraham: “He believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”
Gal 3:7 Understand, then, that those who believe are children of Abraham.
Gal 3:8 The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.”
Gal 3:9 So those who have faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.
Gal 3:10 All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.”
Gal 3:11 Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, “The righteous will live by faith.”
Gal 3:12 The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, “The man who does these things will live by them.”

Cleary it says here that “ancestry –Gal. 3:10-12” is not even a requirement at all, but “faith” is the only requirement to become “children of Abraham –Galatians 3:7”.

2. Scripture speaks for itself only when the immediate and broad context is correctly determined and the original languages consulted. Gal 3:10-12 says nothing about excluding ancestry and the Greek adverb "only" [monon-G3440] appears once in the chapter (vs2) and has nothing to do with "only" requiring faith, as you suggest. Paul condemns Jews from the two tribes of Judah who were teaching the deeds (ie..,circumcision) of the law would justify them.

The only ones who will be justified by God in this age are Jews from the two tribes of Judah and those from the 10 tribes living and identified as 'gentiles' in the NT--all 12 tribes:

Isa 45:25 In the LORD all the descendants of Israel Shall be justified, and shall glory.

Nothing here or anywhere else in scripture, when taken in its proper context, suggest non-Israelites are justified. The Israelite ancestry of the Galatians is revealed in Gal 3:23-28.

Gal 3:23-28 But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the [Old Covenant] law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Since the “you” in verses 26 and 27 represent the Jews and Greeks from verse 28, to be contextually consistent we have to conclude the “we” in verses 23, 24, and 25 are also Jews and Greeks. The Apostle Paul described those people, who were both Jews and Greeks, as having been previously “under the tutor” [law]. What group of people had been given God’s Law or were considered under God’s Law? :

Deu 33:4 Moses commanded a law for us [twelve tribes], A heritage of the congregation of Jacob

Psa 78:5 For He established a testimony in Jacob, And appointed a law in Israel, Which He commanded our fathers, That they should make them known to their children.

Rom 9:4 who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises.

Psa 147:19-20 God gave his laws and teachings to the descendants of Jacob, the nation of Israel.[12 tribes] 20 But he has not given his laws to any other [gentile/goy] nation. Shout praises to the LORD! (CEV)

God’s Law was given exclusively to the Israelites. Hence suggesting the Galatians gentiles were Israelite descendants from the ten tribes unwittingly living as Greek citizens. Similar to myself and the African Buba Clan. If the Greek Galatians were non-Israelites, God broke his promise in Psa 147:19-20 by giving his laws (which includes the law of love) to another [gentile] nation!!!

So, your premise that “both faith and ancestry are required. It's not either or, both are required” is false.
3. I have to disagree. My premise agrees with history and every aspect of God's word. Perhaps you didn't see my request in my prior reply which you did not address: Can you find me an OT reference where all twelve tribes were definitively referred to as Jews?

Also, I would like for you to tell me how you interpret this passage:

Joh 7:35 Then the Jews said among themselves, "Where does He intend to go that we shall not find Him? Does He intend to go to the Dispersion among the Greeks and teach the Greeks?​
 
Last edited:
Romans 4:1 says “Abraham our father, as pertaining or according to the flesh” meaning Abraham the father of the 12 tribes of Israel. IOW, Gentiles are not descendants of Abraham “as pertaining or according to the flesh”.

If you say “ancestry is required” or as one of the requirements to partake on God’s promise to Abraham then Gentiles are eliminated or are not included base on this criteria alone.

As we read the Romans 4 Paul explained the differences between work and faith. In V2 Paul says: “For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.”

NLT says: “Was it because of his good deeds that God accepted him? If so, he would have had something to boast about. But from God’s point of view Abraham had no basis at all for pride.”

IOW, Abraham’s descendants cannot boast in front of God base on work/Law alone or base on “Ancestry” alone. Therefore, “Ancestry” is not or never one of God’s requirement, but "faith" alone both for the Jews and the Gentiles. Remember what you said “both faith and ancestry are required. It's not either or, both are required”

The most beautiful thing about the bible is, sometimes you don’t need to expound the verses because it speaks by itself.

Gal 3:6 Consider Abraham: “He believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”
Gal 3:7 Understand, then, that those who believe are children of Abraham.
Gal 3:8 The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.”
Gal 3:9 So those who have faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.
Gal 3:10 All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.”
Gal 3:11 Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, “The righteous will live by faith.”
Gal 3:12 The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, “The man who does these things will live by them.”

Cleary it says here that “ancestry –Gal. 3:10-12” is not even a requirement at all, but “faith” is the only requirement to become “children of Abraham –Galatians 3:7”.

So, your premise that “both faith and ancestry are required. It's not either or, both are required” is false.
paul never knew Yeshua. And you are correct, his "gospel" contradicts what Yeshua and his real apostles taught.
The Test of Knowing Him
3 Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. 4 He who says, “I know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 5 But whoever keeps His word, truly the love of God is perfected in him. By this we know that we are in Him. 6 He who says he abides in Him ought himself also to walk just as He walked.
I Never Knew You
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
Yep the self proclaimed "apostle" who never knew Yeshua, who attempted to murder James Yeshua's brother, who participated in the murder of Steven, who persecuted and murdered many, who changed his conversion story every time he told it, who by his own admission was rejected by the churches, the same churches who in rev 2 were commended for doing so, taught you a false gospel. Either James was Yeshua were liars or Paul was.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Isn't it arguable that Christians should be keeping Shabbat since they claim to follow the ten commandments? Certainly Jesus and the disciples kept it, seeing as they were Jews. What argument can really be brought forward that Christians shouldn't be keeping it, and do the gospels anywhere explicitly suggest Jesus wouldn't want his followers to?

The only real purpose in the Romans using the OT as far as I can see is linage. Works ok as long as you don't examine it too closely.

Here's something which claims to be the word of God. In monotheism that's pretty important.
 

JM2C

CHRISTIAN
paul never knew Yeshua. And you are correct, his "gospel" contradicts what Yeshua and his real apostles taught.
Sir, I did not say Paul’s "gospel contradicts what Yeshua and his real apostles taught”

If you read it carefully I was not even comparing gospels at all.

Paul never knew nor met the Lord Jesus during His earthly ministry, but according to Acts 9, i.e., after the resurrection and ascension of the Lord Jesus, he did.
 
Sir, I did not say Paul’s "gospel contradicts what Yeshua and his real apostles taught”

If you read it carefully I was not even comparing gospels at all.

Paul never knew nor met the Lord Jesus during His earthly ministry, but according to Acts 9, i.e., after the resurrection and ascension of the Lord Jesus, he did.
according to his own lying testimony. He lied! Yeshua warned us about someone like him coming around. Paul was a "wise master builder" He was a murderer and a liar. He taught men to not keep God's 10 commandments. he was never never never approved by Yeshua and never confirmed by Yeshua or his real apostles as an apostle. this is something you biblically can not get around.
 

JM2C

CHRISTIAN
Rom 4:1 What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our (plural) forefather according to the flesh?

1. In Rom 4:1, Paul announces and confirms his and his Roman audiences' (plural) ancestral identity , similar to how he identified his (singular) own ancestry (Israelite Jews from the two tribes of Judah who were rejecting Paul's message) to the same audience in Rom 9:3:

Rom 9:3 "For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my (singular) kinsmen according to the flesh.

Notice he uses a plural second person pronoun in Rom 4:1 and a singular first person pronoun in Rom 9:3 to identify Paul's and his Roman congregants' kinsmen--the physical descendants of Jacob through Abraham----Israelites--according to the flesh!!!
”Abraham “OUR” father, according to the flesh” -Romans 4:1 Paul used the “OUR” or “WE” or “US” as first person PLURAL pronoun, and not the “YOU” as the second person PLURAL pronoun. The same thing in Romans 9:3 “MY” Paul used first person singular.

Either way, Rom 4:1 and 9:3, Paul was talking about his “brothers or kinsman” according to the flesh or as NIV puts it “those of my own race”. He was not talking about the Gentiles on either verse.
 
”Abraham “OUR” father, according to the flesh” -Romans 4:1 Paul used the “OUR” or “WE” or “US” as first person PLURAL pronoun, and not the “YOU” as the second person PLURAL pronoun. The same thing in Romans 9:3 “MY” Paul used first person singular.

Either way, Rom 4:1 and 9:3, Paul was talking about his “brothers or kinsman” according to the flesh or as NIV puts it “those of my own race”. He was not talking about the Gentiles on either verse.
when the SELF PROCLAIMED apostle Saul says "in the flesh" he basically means in reality. like in reality his actions are one way but in his mind/spirit his actions are another way. "according to the flesh" yea the physical body. People who accept this self proclaimed apostle don't keep the 10 commandments "in the flesh", only in their minds do they keep them
 

JM2C

CHRISTIAN
according to his own lying testimony. He lied! Yeshua warned us about someone like him coming around. Paul was a "wise master builder" He was a murderer and a liar. He taught men to not keep God's 10 commandments. he was never never never approved by Yeshua and never confirmed by Yeshua or his real apostles as an apostle. this is something you biblically can not get around.
It’s really hard to argue from opinions. If you can substantiate your statement with facts, of course from the bible, then we can argue or see our differences.
 
Top