Is Sabbath, Saturday or Sunday.

[Paul Christensen]

I'm not going to waste the time reading all of this when it all hinges on one fact: I'm dismissing things. When the curtain tore, that which made things like the Arc valuable left. Therefore, things like the arc are now to be dismissed as worthless since that which gave it value is gone. The sabath once held use but now that which made it valuable is gone. Anything not worth dismissing left with the Spirit of God, so I have done no wrong since I only dismiss that which remained. Also, you're an arrogant idiot. You spout of these verses with no idea what they are. Learn to understand the spirit of truth rather than empty shells

Can I ask you a non-judgmental question:
Are you a good person?

 

[Paul Christensen]

Another question is, are the other nine Commandments as flexible as you assert the Sabbath Commandment being if one is born again? ....further, if the Sabbath Commandment is not linked to our salvation are the other nine also dispensable?

When we all stand before God in the Judgment, we will be judged on whether we have kept or violated any or all of the Ten Commandments. Sin is the violation of the Ten Commandments. God hates sin, and He is not only a God of love, but He is a God of justice as well. Therefore if we have broken the law, we can expect justice.

What would think of a judge who lets a rapist go free without justice. On what basis does the judge sentence a rapist to a term in prison? Isn't it the law? The law says that rape is a crime, so a fellow who rapes three women and slit their throats would be sentenced to the electric chair would he not? What if we don't have laws? There would be chaos.

So God has His moral law, expressed in the Ten Commandments. He will judge every one of us according to His law, and because we have not kept the Commandments, we will be judged guilty, whether we be Jew or Gentile.

So, if you are a thieving, lying, blasphemous, adulterer at heart, and a sabbath breaker, as we all are, would you not be found guilty at the Judgment?

So, would you expect a God of justice to let you go free just because He is loving and compassionate? If He did, then the Ten Commandments would mean nothing, and that anything goes, in the same way that if a court judge lets a three time rapist and murder go free just because he is a loving and compassionate person in himself. Wouldn't that make the law of the land meaningless, and that anyone can do whatever they please, even going around raping women and children and then murdering them?

 

[Paul Christensen]

I reckon those who keep Sunday are keeping the commandment. But I do not like the way this conversation is going and I want nothing to do with it.
.

What I am doing is to bring the conversation back to the foundation of the gospel, seeing that this is a Christian forum.

I know I have said in previous posts that we don't have to comply with the Jewish Saturday Sabbath as a requirement, but I have learned that keeping the Sabbath Day is the fourth Commandment, along with the others; but the Scripture says that six days we shall labour and the seventh we rest. So a shift worker could work Sunday to Friday and rest on Saturday, but another shift worker could work Tuesday to Sunday and rest on Monday, so from what I see from the Scripture is that these people are keeping the fourth Commandment, because they are working six days and resting on their seventh.

In the First Century, they did not have workers working at night, nor were they working in shifts as we have with many industries and government departments today. People worked from dawn to dusk from Sunday to Friday. Sunday was a work day in Judea, so new working Jew could rest on Sunday, so it had to be Saturday.

Jesus said that man was not made for the Sabbath, but Sabbath was made for man, so the principle was that one day a week was needed as a rest day in order to provide a healthy work/life balance.

 

[RonaldMcjeraldMcjerald]

Can I ask you a non-judgmental question:
Are you a good person?

The fact that you ask that just proves how blind you are. Also, refute the arguement. It still stands strong and your point is crushed

 

[Paul Christensen]

The fact that you ask that just proves how blind you are. Also, refute the arguement. It still stands strong and your point is crushed

I asked you a direct, respectful question and expected a respectful answer, not an abusive one. If you don't know whether you are a good person or not, that would have been an acceptable answer. So, why not calm down, stop being defensive, and just answer my question?

 

[RonaldMcjeraldMcjerald]

I asked you a direct, respectful question and expected a respectful answer, not an abusive one. If you don't know whether you are a good person or not, that would have been an acceptable answer. So, why not calm down, stop being defensive, and just answer my question?

It was a judgmental question: you assumed by nature of asking it it wasn't obvious. As for calming down, when someone insults you to this degree this level of annoyance is warranted. In reality, you need to understand you are wrong in this and stop being prideful. Accept you are wrong and stop attempting to uphold air. Air is air, it just falls through

 

[Paul Christensen]

It was a judgmental question: you assumed by nature of asking it it wasn't obvious. As for calming down, when someone insults you to this degree this level of annoyance is warranted. In reality, you need to understand you are wrong in this and stop being prideful. Accept you are wrong and stop attempting to uphold air. Air is air, it just falls through

I don't understand. I never said you were or were not a good person. I merely asked whether you thought you were. I think your abusive response is an indication that you don't want to answer that question. So, be honest, and say that you don't want to answer the question. Then I will know that you don't want to acknowledge whether you are a good person or not.

If I had said outright that you were not a good person, or even if I said you were, that would have been a judgmental comment either way. But the question, "Do you think that you are a good person" is not judgmental at all.

Perhaps if you are feeling that you are being judged by the question, the sense of judgment may be coming from somewhere else and not me, because all I asked was a non-judgmental question.

So, it puzzles me why you are feeling judged by my question and what is causing you to be so defensive and abusive when all I did was to ask you a respectful question with a non-judgmental attitude?

 

[RonaldMcjeraldMcjerald]

I don't understand. I never said you were or were not a good person. I merely asked whether you thought you were. I think your abusive response is an indication that you don't want to answer that question. So, be honest, and say that you don't want to answer the question. Then I will know that you don't want to acknowledge whether you are a good person or not.

If I had said outright that you were not a good person, or even if I said you were, that would have been a judgmental comment either way. But the question, "Do you think that you are a good person" is not judgmental at all.

Perhaps if you are feeling that you are being judged by the question, the sense of judgment may be coming from somewhere else and not me, because all I asked was a non-judgmental question.

So, it puzzles me why you are feeling judged by my question and what is causing you to be so defensive and abusive when all I did was to ask you a respectful question with a non-judgmental attitude?

If something is obviously true and then a question about whether that obvious truth is true or not, then that's an insult. As for the abusive response, that's on your head for acting like that which is isn't. Also, you again have failed to refute the argument. Refute the argument I posed against yours or admit you were wrong. Or, third option, just stop responding since you're going very offtopic

 

[Paul Christensen]

If something is obviously true and then a question about whether that obvious truth is true or not, then that's an insult. As for the abusive response, that's on your head for acting like that which is isn't. Also, you again have failed to refute the argument. Refute the argument I posed against yours or admit you were wrong. Or, third option, just stop responding since you're going very offtopic

Well, you are intent on avoiding my question, so I believe you are judging yourself in some way, so we can't progress any further until you are willing to answer it instead of avoid it by continuing to discredit me by giving the impression that I have no right to ask the question.

 

[RonaldMcjeraldMcjerald]

Well, you are intent on avoiding my question, so I believe you are judging yourself in some way, so we can't progress any further until you are willing to answer it instead of avoid it by continuing to discredit me by giving the impression that I have no right to ask the question.

It's so obvious you don't have the right to ask that question lol

 

[Paul Christensen]

It's so obvious you don't have the right to ask that question lol

Okay, I'll just let the Holy Spirit to ask the question in your conscience, to examine whether you are complying with the Ten Commandments or not.

 

[RonaldMcjeraldMcjerald]

Okay, I'll just let the Holy Spirit to ask the question in your conscience, to examine whether you are complying with the Ten Commandments or not.

You again have a lack of understanding which is causing your pride to well up. However, you refuse to understand so I guess that's on your head. As for the Spirit, it's what's condeming you right now

 

[Paul Christensen]

You again have a lack of understanding which is causing your pride to well up. However, you refuse to understand so I guess that's on your head. As for the Spirit, it's what's condeming you right now

The Word of God says that Satan is the accuser of the brethren (Revelation 12:10).

 

[RonaldMcjeraldMcjerald]

The Word of God says that Satan is the accuser of the brethren (Revelation 12:10).

Then I guess you, the being accusing me, must be his pawn

 

[Paul Christensen]

Then I guess you, the being accusing me, must be his pawn

I'm not accusing you of anything. All I did was ask you a question, and made a general post directed at no one in particular. But you are accusing me of everything except stealing the kitchen sink!

 

[RonaldMcjeraldMcjerald]

I'm not accusing you of anything. All I did was ask you a question, and made a general post directed at no one in particular. But you are accusing me of everything except stealing the kitchen sink!

You REALLY need to understand the inderect logical implications of what you say. However, I guess are direct since they are subtly direct. You don't even realise how devious you're being. I'll bring these shadows to light. You say the Spirit accusing you is Satan, and that means I, his endorer, am an endorser of Satan.

 

[Paul Christensen]

You REALLY need to understand the inderect logical implications of what you say. However, I guess are direct since they are subtly direct. You don't even realise how devious you're being. I'll bring these shadows to light. You say the Spirit accusing you is Satan, and that means I, his endorer, am an endorser of Satan.

But by your own admission, you don't believe the Bible to be the direct inspired Word of God, so we are debating from different foundations. That is why you can post abusive, accusative and nasty comments and not know that they do not reflect the fruit of the Spirit that is characteristic of a believer who is living and walking in the Spirit (Galatians 5:25). If you look at Galatians 5:19-23, you will see that hatred, strife, variance and wrath are works of the flesh and anyone who persists in them will not inherit the kingdom of God. So, because I see elements of these works of the flesh in your responses to me, I just can't help forming an impression of where you are coming from. So, it would be natural of me to wonder what Jesus you are referring to as the Word of God.

 

[RonaldMcjeraldMcjerald]

But by your own admission, you don't believe the Bible to be the direct inspired Word of God, so we are debating from different foundations. That is why you can post abusive, accusative and nasty comments and not know that they do not reflect the fruit of the Spirit that is characteristic of a believer who is living and walking in the Spirit (Galatians 5:25). If you look at Galatians 5:19-23, you will see that hatred, strife, variance and wrath are works of the flesh and anyone who persists in them will not inherit the kingdom of God. So, because I see elements of these works of the flesh in your responses to me, I just can't help forming an impression of where you are coming from. So, it would be natural of me to wonder what Jesus you are referring to as the Word of God.

I believe in the Spirit of God while you believe in the Bible. The fact that you chose the words over the Spirit that inspires is just appauling. Also, that's not the reason why you say these things. You say accusitive things because, in truth, your insperation is the accuser (and he is disguised as the reason you gave).

 

[Paul Christensen]

I believe in the Spirit of God while you believe in the Bible. The fact that you chose the words over the Spirit that inspires is just appauling. Also, that's not the reason why you say these things. You say accusitive things because, in truth, your insperation is the accuser (and he is disguised as the reason you gave).

If you feel that you are being accused by anyone, it is not by me, but it could very well be by the Bible itself.

 

[RonaldMcjeraldMcjerald]

If you feel that you are being accused by anyone, it is not by me, but it could very well be by the Bible itself.

Unfortunatly, this Bible is just your own conjecture, so it is your voice