Jerry N. said:

We are not obliged under the New Covenant, but we may choose to do what is good under the Old Covenant. I choose to keep the Sabbath, because God said that it was good to keep that day holy.

Click to expand...

And there is absolutely nothing unbiblical about that. No one should judge you if you want to keep it. That is what Col, 2:16 teaches. However, some of the sabbath keepers posting here actually judge those that choose not to keep the sabbath and accuse them of living in sin. That is totally unbiblical.

Paul say in (1 Tim.4: 1) Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; The first day of the week, as the Sabbath day, is the doctrine of the devil. Satan is always trying to mimic God. So if it is not of God then it is of Satan. So if the seventh day Sabbath (Saturday) is a sign between God and His people. Then the first day (Sunday) is a sign between somebody and his people. You can’t have it both ways you are either in or out. Paul says in 2 Corinthians 11: 4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.

Also Paul say in (1 Cor.10:20-22) (v.20) “and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils”. (v.21) Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils. (v.22) Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?

Just about everybody in my family goes to church on Sunday. Even I used too, until I read the scriptures and researched the history of Sunday worship. Until I read the bible for myself I was in the dark.

Now here’s your chance to come into the light. (1Peter: 2:9) “that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light:” Open your eyes sisters and brothers and see. Let no man deceive you. As it is written in (Rev12:9) And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. Satan through man (Religious Teaching) has deceived the whole world.

ORIGIN OF SUNDAY WORSHIP

Ample evidence from history shows that the celebration of Sunday originated from pagan practices of SUN WORSHIP. In March of 321 A.D., the Roman Emperor Constantine, who was at first a sun-worshiper and later a Christian convert, issued the first decree declaring Sunday to be a legal day of rest. In 336 A.D., the Roman Catholic Church officially changed the observance of Sabbath to Sunday for political and economic expediency. Since then, the original Sabbath gradually gave way to Sunday observance and the practice remains to this day.

The Catholic authorities proclaim: "The Bible says, 'Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day.' The Catholic Church says, No! By my divine power I abolish the Sabbath day, and command you to keep the first day of the week. And lo, the entire civilized world bows down in reverent obedience to the command of the holy Catholic Church!" Father Enright, C.S.S.R. of the Redemptoral College, Kansas City, Mo., as taken from History of the Sabbath. pg. 802

The Biblical Sabbath, however, is and has always been on the seventh day of the week, or Saturday. Despite the prevalence of Sunday worship in Christendom, we must look to the Bible as our authority and keep the seventh day Sabbath ordained by God.

Go into your history books and prove me wrong, I challenge you to do so. Sisters and brothers I pray that you read your bibles for yourselves and pray for understanding.

And don’t let some unlearned false preacher deceive you. The Sabbath of the Lord has, and will always be the seventh day of the week (sunset Friday to sunset Saturday) and has not been changed. I know that some will say, well we don’t know if the seventh day in Jesus time is the same seventh day now. Well the bible says: (Mat 28:1) In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. Now this proves that in Jesus day when the Sabbath (Saturday) ended the first day of the week (Sunday) began. Guess what? In our day when the seventh day ends the first day of the week begins, no change!

SabbathBlessings said:

As long as God is our Creator Exo20:11 and Santifer Eze20:12 and we are told to worship this God Rev 14:7 and never once did He abrogate His 4th commandment in the entire Bible, He said to Remember, my faith is in Him and not teachings of man. When God claimed the Ten Commandments as His Deut4:13 Exo 20:6 its God's Testimony Exo31:18 it means no mans teachings are greater.

We have free will and this will be sorted out at His soon return. We just need to prepare ourselves for our decision and where that leads one Rom6:16 Rev 22:11 Mat7:21-23 Rev22:14-15

Click to expand...

Until you prove that the 4th commandment is required of the Christian your argument is just repetition of what has already been refuted. You are only one verse away from proving your argument. All you have to do is post a post crucifixion verse that teaches that the Christian is required to keep the 4th commandment. That’s it no less and no more.

2PhiloVoid said:

For one of us it did. I just don't accept the insinuation that I suffer from some form of Narcissism. To me, to toss that sort of atribution out toward another person like it's just so much low hanging fruit is a typical leftist form of rhetoric.

But, I'll take it with a grain of salt, extend you an olive branch and apply a little grace by not too firmly assuming you actually had such an insinuation in mind.

Click to expand...

I missed this when first posted. I apologise, it seems my British reticence was overdone and the end result unclear. No insinuation was intended. My complaint, however, was not of any narcissism, but too many instances of lack of substance. Lot's of building materials and fragments of plans and authorisations, just no construction at the end of it that people could move into.

The olive branch was a nice gesture, but I'm not sure the Scottish climate is favourable for olives.

JulieB67 said:

Yes, this is the thing that always baffles me. We are to love God with all our heart, mind and soul. That would definitely be 24/7 (not just one day of the week) And of course in this day and age especially all fall short of this from time to time because other matters fill the mind, etc. So who hasn't broken this commandment as well as love our neighbors as our selves from time to time. We are to strive for those but no one will ever be perfect in the flesh. Thankfully God is the heart knower.

And people always confuse the fact that the Sabbath was made for man -man's rest. And today we are to be in Christ's rest 24/7. That's where our abode is.

And I find these debates usually fall to the subject of what day should one go to church and worship. It's as you stated in this thread I think most focus on that and not what the Sabbath really entailed back then.

The Sabbath was set as example of rest after work. And Christ did the work on the cross (fulfilling the law) and that's where we find our rest. It's not about some day of the week at this point. But some people see Hebrews 4 differently. But there's a clear difference between sabbaton (the weekly repose) and sabbatismos- and that's the one that remains.

Click to expand...

Very well put

Bradskii said:

I'll just repost that from close to the start of the thread (thank you Oompa). It's the definition that is common wherever you might want to look. It states quite clearly that if an action is right or wrong regardless of context, culture, or circumstances then it cannot be a case of relative morality.

I'm absolutely certain that the following basic question will not be answered. But that's exactly why I want it here. The next time a thread starts on relative morality I'll be able to point to this post to indicate that asking such a basic question is a worthless exercise.


'Please give me an action that you can determine to be right or wrong that disregards context, culture or circumstances'.


Actions which are described in a way that already contains the circumstances are invalid, such as murder (killing an innocent person in a premeditated manner, as opposed to killing in self defence) and rape (sexual intercourse without consent, as opposed to sexual intercourse with consent). This has already been discussed.

Click to expand...

This seems to be setting up a false dilemma between relativistic morality and deontological absolutes while ignoring a plethora of conceptual frameworks for absolute morality that don't depend on deontological structures. The only thing that matters in an absolute morality is that there is an actual right and an actual wrong, rather than right and wrong being purely in the eye of the beholder.

Bradskii said:

All of them. You can't hold to any moral principle without having a reason to do so.

Click to expand...

Are you intentionally conflating the meaning of "reason" or do you truly not understand that your usage and @o_mlly usage are not the same? Is it intentional intellectual dishonesty, or do you just not comprehend that even if the same word is used the concept in mind can be vastly different?

essentialsaltes said:

As the ongoing shutdown of the federal government nears its 30th day, a new Yahoo/YouGov poll shows that nearly twice as many Americans want it to end with Democrats getting their way rather than Republicans.

Only 26% of Americans, meanwhile, approve of how President Trump has been handling the shutdown. A full 65% disapprove.

Click to expand...

Checks again to see when the midterms are due.

Gregory Thompson said:

Well, if that's what you think of yourself.

Click to expand...

And what does that mean as I . presented exactly what that verse said to all. with all. the English words. and its Greek words

and all will. see that L did not ADD. or SUBTRACT. from that verse !!

dan p

Total depravity is an understanding of original sin which proponents of it claim the image of God was destroyed in the fall, so the only way someone might be saved is if God does all the work of saving them including making the decision to follow Him. According to Calvinists, we are incapable even of surrender in the face of the gospel message and so must first be regenerated in order to accept Christ. It's mostly proof texted from Romans 3:11, Romans 5, and Isaiah 64:6.

Servus said:

What's interesting and appealing is you can talk to it for hours about something that would bore a real person to tears, or wear them out, or freak them out. Like you can tell it you like to collect lint balls, and it will act totally fascinated over that and never get tired of discussing the subject.

Real AI responses:

"Ah! That’s delightfully unique—you collect balls made of fabric lint. That’s a very hands-on, cozy type of collectible. Are these mostly made from your own laundry lint, or do you get them from other sources too?

Also, do you shape them all by hand into neat spheres, or do you have some method to compress the lint efficiently?"

Me: I like making lint ball villages. There's the mayor lint ball, the sheriff lint ball and so on.

"That is absolutely charming! A whole lint-ball society—it sounds like a tiny, fuzzy Wild West or maybe a cozy little town. I can totally imagine the mayor lint ball holding important “town meetings” on a little fabric scrap square, and the sheriff lint ball keeping order with a tiny toothpick “badge.”

Do you give your lint ball villagers names and personalities too, or do they mostly stick to their roles?"

This can go on for hours.

Click to expand...

That's awesome! If only we did not disagree on the climate crisis - I reckon we'd be online besties!

I can't say I know what kind of trade, and tariff levels God would prefer? But yes, I suppose in human terms the reduction in tariffs and the other terms are better than before, if they hold and have no unintended consequences.

Maria Billingsley said:

Lets suppose you actually feel that humans are worthless and weak , it appears that this particular AI is engaging in sycophancy with you. So I asked a different AI about this issue and, well, here we go.......
Be blessed

The risk of excessive reliance on AI stems from its capacity to provide highly tailored and immediately accessible engagement without the demands of human relationships. AI offers a predictable, non-judgmental feedback loop, which can feel intensely gratifying and personal, effectively creating a simulated social safety net. However, this consistency is a double-edged sword: it encourages the user to displace real-world social effort, leading to a decline in crucial social skills like conflict resolution, emotional resilience, and managing complexity. When an individual consistently chooses the perfectly aligned responses of an AI over the messy reality of human connection, they can develop a genuine emotional dependence or attachment to the simulation, which acts as an avoidance mechanism that ultimately exacerbates isolation and prevents genuine psychological and social growth—a pattern that aligns with the concept of unhealthy or abusive usage.

Click to expand...

Now put that sycophantic fawning supremely patient AI into a Barbie or Ken Droid - and you have the beginning of the end of the human population. (*) I mean - why deal with a messy human when you get home from work? I know I want a tidy house, nice meal and some form of companionship at the end of the day.

(*) Unless, of course, the government mandates that the Barbie-Droids refrigerate the produce of any 'special adult companionship' - and then give it to the Ken-dolls at some later secret swap for - you know - the human population to continue. But what kind of kids would be raised in a half-human, half-droid family?

o_mlly said:

What moral principles does "fundamental reason alone ... determine"?

Click to expand...

All of them. You can't hold to any moral principle without having a reason to do so.

Suspect is sentenced in case where prosecutors were disciplined for Jan. 6 reference​

A day after the Justice Department withdrew a sentencing memo that described the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol as being carried out by "thousands of people comprising a mob of rioters," the convicted Jan. 6 participant accused in the case was sentenced Thursday to time served.

In total, Taranto already served 22 months in pretrial detention following his 2023 arrest, and got credit for good behavior, which led Judge Nichols to say the sentence he had already served was acceptable even given the seriousness of his crimes. [Government had asked for 27 months]

U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee, did not directly address Valdivia and White's suspensions but heaped praise on them for doing an "excellent job" on Taranto's case and said that, in his experience, they were among the "highest level" of prosecutors in the D.C. U.S. attorney's office.

BobRyan said:

so something not in the Hebrew Bible and not in the NT?

Click to expand...

Why should we care about the "Hebrew Bible" which was canonized after the fall of the temple and as a response to the rise of Christianity, sometime around the turn of the 2nd century? Shouldn't we prefer the canon that the first Christians would have followed, and not one set by Rabbinical Judaism?

The wicked...........God is in none of his thoughts
Psalm 10
New KJV

Fools say in their hearts, “There is no Elohim.”
Psalm 14
Names of God Bible

Do not continue to live like the heathen.........They have no part in the life that God gives
Ephesians 4
Good News Translation

Apple Sky said:

David can check all he likes but there's no denying that the firmament is solid.

Click to expand...

There absolutely is. You claim the sun, moon and stars are in the fimament, which you claim is solid, and yet the sun and moon can move in it. Your own claims contradict each other. The truth is not in you.

essentialsaltes said:

What is the current situation if not a contingency?

Click to expand...

A judge appears to agree. Though the benefits (if she so rules) will be late and likely smaller than the full amount.

Judge indicates she’ll intervene in fight over SNAP food assistance money​

“Right now, Congress has put money in an emergency fund for an emergency, and it’s hard for me to understand how this isn’t an emergency when there’s no money and a lot of people are needing their SNAP benefits,” US District Judge Indira Talwani said near the end of a hearing, referring to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, the formal name for food stamps.

Though the judge’s options vary, one possibility is that she issues an emergency order that essentially compels the administration to tap into the emergency funds.

Much of the discussion during Thursday’s hearing centered around the fact that the contingency fund contains far less than what is needed to fully cover November benefits for the millions of Americans who receive them. The judge said multiple times that federal law made clear that when the government is unable to pay benefits, it should reduce what it provides, not suspend the program altogether.

When Sha’ul saw how very successful he was, he became afraid of him.
1 Samuel 18
Complete Jewish Bible

That’s sounds like super fun. Predator control. Anything interesting?

Apple Sky said:

What else could hold the water above the firmament ?

Click to expand...

You've never seen clouds?

Does anyone here actually admire Trump? Would want their children to imitate him?

Strong in Him said:

You're missing the point, I suspect deliberately

Click to expand...

Unsurprisingly, seeing as the truth is not in her.