The commandment to rest on the Sabbath was changed by the Christian Bible

Rebuttal Pro quoted the passage in Acts 15 I previously gave, but Pro failed to fully address my points with regard to the passage. Pro failed to explain why Acts 15 mentions the Laws of Moses being preached in the synagogues. Pro asserts that Acts 15 does not mention keeping the Sabbath, and thus it is not 'required'. Using a double standard, Pro then asserts from other passages that the Gentile believers are 'required' to love other people, even though there is no mention of this requirement in Acts 15. If I could interview Pro, I'm sure Pro would agree that there are other 'requirements' not mentioned in Acts 15. Additionally, Acts 15 instructed Gentiles to not eat food sacrificed to idols, but the whole chapter of 1 Corinthians 8 is dedicated to explaining why it is not a sin to eat meat sacrificed to idols. 1 Corinthians 10 further confirms this. So not only does Acts 15 not give an exhaustive list of requirements for Gentile believers, but the list of requirements given include things that are not considered sinful by the Christian Bible! Acts 15 cannot be used as a good reference for right and wrong, thus it cannot be used to support Pro's resolution. The verse Pro quoted from Matthew 19:16-19 is clearly about salvation. Pro and I agree that keeping the Sabbath is not a requirement for salvation. Also, if one reads on to verse 22, one will find that the rich young ruler in the story kept all the commands Pro listed from his youth, yet he still lacked something that was going to prevent him from entering into eternal life. If Yeshua Jesus had intended to publicly claim that the Law of Moses need not be kept, there would have been a scene. The same is true anywhere in the Gospels, such as John. It was a contentious issue, even for the early Christians. Even Peter, who was there, was shocked that Gentiles were allowed to become Christians [Acts 10:44-46]. Closing arguments Pro and I agree that salvation is by faith, not by keeping any laws. We certainly agree that keeping the Sabbath has nothing to do with salvation. Similarly, we both agree that stealing is sinful, and that it is possible for someone who steals to have salvation. However, this debate was about sin, not salvation. I affirm that the Christian Bible gives us no reason to believe that breaking the law about Sabbath is less sinful today than it was when the law was first given. Although Pro has given a few passages, I have been able to show from context and modern Christian scholarship that none of them give us freedom to break Sabbath. Furthermore, I have shown that there are plenty of examples given in the Christian Bible of both Jews and Gentiles observing the Sabbath. I claimed early in this debate that there are no counter examples to this, and Pro has failed to rebut that claim. In some passages we went through, I showed that the original meaning required either insight into the early church problems (Gnostic heresy), or the practices of the early Jewish Christians (havdalah), or common terminology (first day of the week starts Saturday at sundown). Some of the verses shown seem to imply things that they don't actually. If Pro proceeds to bring forth new verses after my closing statements, I will not have the opportunity to properly address them. So I ask voters to discount them. Thank you all. @Truth_Seeker Thanks again for having this debate with me. It's been a pleasure.