Prophecy and End Time Series. - Israel

[Shammu]

My personal belief is that when one says that they do not want to debate/agrue with me; it usually means that they can't defend their position. I try extremely hard to only present my views that I am prepared to defend.

BigD, this is nothing against you. It is not an attack, or a put down.

The reason I will not debate you, is you get people confused, least you confuse me. You have a habit of turning things around. Where you confuse me, every single time. To where the orginal post doesn't read anything like it was posted, and means something different to me.

I know you are a debater, and thats fine. I myself, will not debate you. I under stand the Bible, maybe not to the degree you understand, it. My understanding, is to seek the truth, not to confuse believers. More often simple is best, remember that we do have 8 year old children reading these posts. When you confuse a child, they wonder, whats going on.

Resting in the Lords arms.
Bob

[2nd Timothy]

When, and if either of you two gentlemen can show me that my view is in error, I will be more then willing to change my views.

When was the last time a debate has changed your views brother?  I have already stated my views in this very thread and you have already said you disagree, yet you insist you are right and I am wrong.   There is nothing more to say except we disagree.  God alone is right, and we struggle to understand the simple things.  We all acknowledge that Gods word is the benchmark of truth, yet we arrive at differing views.  Will that be settled by debate, or much prayer, seeking, and teaching, from the Holy Spirit and His word?   All truth seekers should know this answer.

Stick to the benchmark which you acknowledge.   This is the truth that changes mens hearts with power, and what truth seekers eagerly hunger for.   Debate only proves who uses the language better, not who really understands.  Look to the Truth Giver and the word to test your views, because His word alone is everlasting.

Blessings!

[Shammu]

Nov. 28, 2004 21:55
Shalom calls EU pro-Palestinan
By ASSOCIATED PRESS

Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom Sunday accused the European Union of bias in favor of the Palestinians, hours before leaving to attend a meeting of European and Arab foreign ministers in the Netherlands.

EU officials have said they see Yasser Arafat's death on Nov. 11 as providing a window of opportunity for renewed Mideast peace efforts.

European diplomats have stepped up contacts over the past two weeks. "I believe it shows that the EU would like to get involved in a peace process in the region," Shalom told a conference of overseas supporters of Israel in Jerusalem Sunday.

He repeated, however, Israel's accusation that the Europeans are not impartial brokers in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.

"It can't be that they adopt in advance 100 percent of the demands of the Palestinian side if they want to become a mediator or facilitator between us and them," he said.

EU officials' response to that frequent accusation is that Israel wants to expand its lucrative trade with the expanding EU bloc of around 450 million consumers without giving the Europeans more of a voice in Mideast peacemaking.

European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana attended Arafat's funeral in the West Bank city of Ramallah and met with Palestinian leaders afterward.

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw held talks with both sides last week, and Shalom is scheduled to meet Solana on the sidelines of the biannual meeting of EU foreign ministers and their counterparts from 10 eastern Mediterranean countries in The Hague, on Monday and Tuesday.

Talks on the EU's "Neighborhood Policy," seeking to draw nonmember neighbors closer to the union, have come up against Israeli objections to references in the draft agreement to the internationally backed "road map" peace plan, which calls for a Palestinian state alongside Israel, because it ignores Israeli objections, the officials said.

The Israelis are also balking at references to the role of the so-called Quartet of Mideast peacemakers, including Europe and Russia, and to clauses on human rights and weapons of mass destruction.

Israel refuses to confirm or deny reports of its nuclear weapons arsenal and has been regularly accused by human rights groups of abusing Palestinians.

The Hague meeting groups the 25 EU member states with nonmembers Israel, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, and Turkey, what is known as the "Euromed" partnership.

The Foreign Ministry said that in addition to the plenary session, Sharon will hold bilateral meetings with the foreign ministers of several EU states and of Jordan, Turkey and Mauritania, which is attending as an observer.

Despite his criticisms, Shalom said Israel is eager to thaw its often chilly relationship with Europe.

"We are investing great efforts to promote out political and economic ties with the EU," he said Sunday. "Close relations with Europe are in our interest as well as theirs."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1101615865296

Resting in my Lords arms, Jesus Christ.
Bob

[BigD]

BigD posted:

My personal belief is that when one says that they do not want to debate/agrue with me; it usually means that they can't defend their position. I try extremely hard to only present my views that I am prepared to defend.

DW responded:

BigD, this is nothing against you. It is not an attack, or a put down.

The reason I will not debate you, is you get people confused, least you confuse me. You have a habit of turning things around. Where you confuse me, every single time. To where the orginal post doesn't read anything like it was posted, and means something different to me.

BigD replies:
My intent is to not confuse anyone. I am SORRY if I have done that to you. However, I enjoy reading about what others believe, and when views are expressed that are different from what I believe the Bible Teaches, I do attempt to point them out. In many cases, I'm sure that it might seem that, like you say: ''the orginal post doesn't read anything like it was posted and means something different to me."

DW continues:[.b]

I know you are a debater, and thats fine. I myself, will not debate you.

BigD responds:
My participating in forums is not for the purpose of debate, but for discussion. However, if one wishes to call that debating, then so be it.

I have requested to those who's views differ from mine, that they show me the error of my view. If my view is in error, I most diffenatly wish to be corrected. I don't consider that debating.

DW goes on:

I under stand the Bible, maybe not to the degree you understand, it. My understanding, is to seek the truth, not to confuse believers.

BigD responds:
It speaks highly of you that you "seek the truth." That should be the goal of everyone, even the non-believers. That has always been my goal as long as I can remember.

It no doubt is my father's experience in my life that molded my present day belief system. Although many of my views differ from the ones he held; to include prophesy. I can remember back in WWII days when preachers were teaching that it was the fulfillment of prophesy. Even I believed it.

Earlier I wrote of my very early Calvinist background. My father was, at one time, a very strong Calvinist. However, He also studied the Bible and took it literally.

I now have to take you back to pre 1948. Being I am 72 years of age, I do remember those days. The Calvinist teachings prior to then is that Israel was no longer a nation and never would again be a nation. That the Church was now "spiritual" Israel and that we would inherit all the blessings that were promised to physical Israel. That, they considered, was "sound doctrine." (This was in a small Dutch community with 7 Reformed Churches. No other chruches existed in that town at that time.)

Well, from my dad's personal study of the Bible, he believed that Israel would again be a nation. When he spoke his views at the Wednesday night "Men's Society" (Bible study), he was told that he was crazy. And, I am sure, many thought that it was a confusing message. Because my dad would not change his views, he was considered a "heretic" and excommunicated from the church. He had no other church to attend, but my mother and the rest of the family attended the Reformed Chruch and I attended their "Christian school."

Being my dad not no church to attend, he primarily just studied the Bible. He then saw more and more that didn't agree with Calvinism.

Well, as you know, Israel became a nation on May 14, 1948. My dad died on May 31, 1948.

At school we had our daily Bible Study and once a week we had our weekly catechism class (Calvinist doctrine). While studying the night before, my dad would read my catechism lession and then have me ask a question of my teacher/pastor pertaining to what my catechism lesson taught and what the Bible said on the subject.

You know, I never got an answer to the question. However, I did learn a great deal about their feeling concerning my dad.

My dad really never told me just what he actually believed. When I look back, I think it was because it was contrary to what my mother believed and he just wanted to keep family harmony. However, he did instill in me not to believe everything I was told.

Being I was taught that I had to read my Bible everynight, which I did, and that I had to live everything the Bible taught, I began to see the Bible as a contradictory book. When I asked my teachers and pastor to explain the seemingly contradictions, all I got were chruch doctrine answers that never answered my questions. When I "pushed" for further clarification, the stock reply was: "Well some things we just have to take by faith." I continued to ready (study) my Bible and kept getting more and more confused.

While still in high school, we had moved out of state to a much larger city. (From 2,000 to 45,000). My dad died shortly thereafter.

When I graduated from high school, I continued my search for truth from the different denominational and non-denominational churches. I kept looking for answers to my questions but only got chruch doctrine answers. The pastors kept telling me that what they taught was scriptural and that the other denominations were wrong. How could that be?

I finally came to the the conclusion that the church that was the most scriptural had to be the one to attend. I concluded that it must be between the Baptist and the Pentecostal churches, and I was leaning to the Pentecostals.

Then, I saw a film  about the "snake handlers." To me they were the most scriptural. Well, you show me a snake, and I will demonstrate a coward. It was then that I gave up on all churches for far too many years. However, I always had a longing for truth. I even had to quit reading my Bible for fear of going crazy by not being able to figure it out.

As a very young man, I did give my life to Christ. I was taught, and believed, that to get to heaven I had to read my Bible everyday, confess my sins every night, live by the 10 commandments, and not "backslide." Well, no matter how hard I tried, I just knew that if I died, that I was not "good enough" to make it to heaven. Therefore, I just gave up trying and went the way of the world, but still had a longing in my heart for truth.

In 1952 I joined the Army and made it a career. I went unchurched until 1964. Being I was married at that time and had 3 children, I did send them to Sunday School, but my wife and I didn't attend any church.

In 1964, while stationed in South Chicage, circumstances led me to a small non-denominational church one Sunday morning. That Sunday morning turned my life around. In one sermon, just about all the questions I had in my youth were answered, and I didn't even ask a question. I sat dumbfounded.

The teacher that morning was beginning a series of studies on the book of the Acts. That Sunday morning he gave an overview of the book. That book was the stumbling block in my life. To me it was full of contratictions. But the teacher had shown me that the book of the Acts was a transitional book from the dispensation of the Law to the dispensation of Grace, from the setting aside of the nation of Israel to the start of the Body of Christ, the Church of today.

For all those years, I was trying to live Law and Grace at the same time. I didn't know how to do that, and failed miserably trying to. I believed the church was spiritual Israel, and learned that the Church, the Body of Christ is not spiritual Israel. Also, I learned that all the Bible is FOR ME but not all TO ME. No one had ever shown me differently. What I thought were contradictions in the Bible were not that at all; it was transtion from the dispensation of the Law to the dispensation of Grace.

Little did I know that the chruch I attened that Sunday morning did not have a pastor. The teacher that day was just "filling in" until they found a pastor. The teacher that day was not other then Pastor C.R.Stam, founder and president of the Berean Bible Society. I consider it a rare privilege to say that I had gotten to know him personally while living in South Chicage. I have, and have read all of his writings.

Once I was shown the above, the Bible became a joy to read. The confusion vanished, and that is not to say that I understand all of it yet. I am still in the learning mode.

Being in the military and being stationed in different parts of the country and world, I had a very hard time finding churches that were "dispensational Grace Chruches." Therefore, a great deal of my learning came from reading different commentaries. Because of my new hunger for truth, I guess that is why I have so many books by so many different authors.

I had no intention to tell you of my life experience. It is because of what you wrote concerning your 8 year old son, that compelled me to do it. Many times I look back and thinK "If only I had been shown these things in my youth, Would my life would have been different?" I think it would have.

(to be cont'd)

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

[BigD]

DW goes on:

More often simple is best, remember that we do have 8 year old children reading these posts. When you confuse a child, they wonder, whats going on.

BigD responds:
Simple can be best is it correct/proper. I took the simple way out and discontinued searching for thruth because it appeared I would never find it. I felt like the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8 when Philip asked him "Understandest thou what thou readest?" I had no one to show me. If only my dad could have "shown me" instead of trying to keep family unity.

IMHO, it is good for you son to read other views. I do hope he asks questions about them. It is your duty as a father to show him if those views are right or wrong. Be like a Berean and "...search the Scriptures daily, whether those thing were so" (Acts 17:11).

I do not look for debate/agruement, but I do enjoy discussion on Scriptural subjects. If you do not wish to dialogue with me, I can accept that.

DW posted:

Resting in the Lords arms.

BigD responds:
THERE IS NO BETTER PLACE.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

[BigD]

BogD posted:

When, and if either of you two gentlemen can show me that my view is in error, I will be more then willing to change my views.

2T responded:

When was the last time a debate has changed your views brother?

BigD replies:
Well, just within the last couple of months.

I had been taugh and believed, for as long as I can remember, that when Christ was teaching here upon the earth; that He was offering the kingdom to Isreal.

In our Sunday School we are going through the book of the Acts verse by verse. When we got to the part in Acts 2, where Peter is offering the kingdom to Israel if they would repent, It was pointed out to me that Jesus had never offered the kingdom to Israel, and Peter was offering it for the first time. We had some very good discussion (some would call it debate) on the subject. Guess what? I CHANGED MY VIEW. I'm still in the learning mode and learned something NEW. This has been happening for years now.

2T continues:

I have already stated my views in this very thread and you have already said you disagree, yet you insist you are right and I am wrong.   There is nothing more to say except we disagree.

BigD responds:
I will admit that did point out to you that which I felt was in error. Didn't realize that I was that insistant.

Had you pointed out to me what you disagreed with me on, and would have corrected me, then I would have been more then happy to discuss it with you.  

You should be able to justify what you write, as I feel I can defend (justify) what I express. I do no consider that debate/arguing.

My request above, was for others to show me that my views were in error. I have always tried to keep an open mind to others views, and look forward to their imput. Seems like they have no desire to help me.

2T goes on:

God alone is right, and we struggle to understand the simple things.  We all acknowledge that Gods word is the benchmark of truth, yet we arrive at differing views.  Will that be settled by debate, or much prayer, seeking, and teaching, from the Holy Spirit and His word?   All truth seekers should know this answer.

BigD responds:
Everything that God wants us to know is written in the Bible. It is TRUTH.

We are instructed in 2 Timothy 2:15 that we must "rightly divide the word of truth."

When Paul preached what was revealed to him (that "which was kept secret since the world began), the Bereans didn't say we don't want to debate or argue with you, or even discuss it, "...they received the Word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, where those things were so" (Acts 17:11). That is all that I am asking for others to do. If they believe my view are in error, then I wish they would point out my error, then I will search the Scriptures to see if thier views are so. I AM STILL IN THE LEARNING MODE.

I am not saying that I have all the truth that was revealed to Paul, but I am Pauline in my doctrine. I do not read his epistles into the Old Testament or the Gospels.

Yes, I do agree with you that we pray and ask for guidance from the Holy Spirit. Too many people do that, then they follow the "doctrines of men," which is denominationalism.

2T goes on:

Stick to the benchmark which you acknowledge.   This is the truth that changes mens hearts with power, and what truth seekers eagerly hunger for.

BigD responds:
That I attempt to do and consider that EXCELLENT ADVICE. I agree.

2T goes on:

Debate only proves who uses the language better, not who really understands.

BigD responds:
Well, I don't really agree with that. In the past I have changed my views in many areas after listening to a debate and even participating in them.  

[2T continues:[/b]

Look to the Truth Giver and the word to test your views, because His word alone is everlasting.

BigD responds:
I can agree with that. Be a Berean.

In closing I will just say that if you do not wish to dialogue with me, I can accept that.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

[Shammu]

DW goes on:

More often simple is best, remember that we do have 8 year old children reading these posts. When you confuse a child, they wonder, whats going on.

BigD responds:
Simple can be best is it correct/proper. I took the simple way out and discontinued searching for thruth because it appeared I would never find it. I felt like the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8 when Philip asked him "Understandest thou what thou readest?" I had no one to show me. If only my dad could have "shown me" instead of trying to keep family unity.

IMHO, it is good for you son to read other views. I do hope he asks questions about them. It is your duty as a father to show him if those views are right or wrong. Be like a Berean and "...search the Scriptures daily, whether those thing were so" (Acts 17:11).

I think you misunderstood that I had say. Christians Unite, have some children, as low as 8 years old reading the posts. How do I know this? A few of the children from my Church read the posts. I have gotten asked, what does this mean, or that means, from the children.

I do not look for debate/agruement, but I do enjoy discussion on Scriptural subjects. If you do not wish to dialogue with me, I can accept that.

I still love you brother.

DW posted:
Resting in the Lords arms.

BigD responds:
THERE IS NO BETTER PLACE.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

Amen BigD

[nChrist]

Brothers and Sisters,

This thread does not involve Salvation issues, and there is no hint of anything here but a Bible Study. As a result, I really don't care about agreement or disagreement. Most, if not all, of the folks involved in this thread do their own independent Bible Studies, even when the material comes from their own pastor.

I would simply like to thank everyone for some fascinating additions to my own personal Bible Study. Just about everyone who studies Bible Prophecy has varying opinions, primarily because it is difficult material to study, even for mature Christians. This is one reason why many Christians don't study Bible Prophecy. It involves a lot of work on your own, prayer, and the knowledge that PROBABLY no two Christians agree completely, including Bible scholars. I'm not a Bible scholar, but I do enjoy the study of Bible Prophecy. It's in the Bible for a purpose, and that purpose causes the exploration of just about the entire Bible if one really wants to study.

2nd Timothy and Dreamweaver, I really do want to study and I appreciate all the work you have done in this thread and others on the topic of Bible prophecy. I'm really enjoying the study of several books of the Holy Bible and hope to contribute something to these threads soon. In the meantime, please accept my sincere thanks for all of the work you are doing.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Psalms 35:9  And my soul shall be joyful in the LORD: it shall rejoice in his salvation.

[at_the_Cross]

Isaiah 1:18) Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

[Shammu]

Nov. 27, 2004 11:52
Every Iranian wants the bomb
By ABRAHAM RABINOVICH

The queries he receives from Iran about converting to Judaism say less about the lure of the Jewish faith than about the abysmal situation in the land of the ayatollahs, according to veteran Iran hand Menashe Amir.

"The main reason they ask about conversion is that people want to get out of Iran and it has become more difficult to obtain visas to Europe and elsewhere," says Amir, the longtime director of the Iranian desk at the Israel Broadcasting Authority. "They believe that if they convert to Judaism they can receive refuge in Israel."

However, for a small number, religious searching may play a role.

"The regime in Teheran is so oppressive, it has made Islam hateful to many Iranians. Some convert to Christianity, despite the fact that it could cost them their lives if it were discovered. A few think about converting to Judaism."

Several dozen queries about conversion have come to Amir in recent years, mostly through a weekly call-in program he conducts. The callers in Iran dial a number in Europe and are rerouted automatically to the IBA Jerusalem studio. Many openly criticize the regime in Teheran and some do not even mind giving their names. There have been no reports of the government hunting them down.

"The regime apparently sees this as a way to let off steam," says Amir.

The Jewish community in Iran, which numbers 23,000 compared to 80,000 before the revolution, retains its vitality. In Teheran, there are 11 active synagogues serving 15,000 Jews. There are four synagogues in Shiraz and several in other towns.

"The Jews are doing all right economically and their educational institutions function," says Amir.

The community avoids contact with Israel or international Jewish organizations but maintains contact, with the tacit approval of the Iranian regime, with the large Iranian Jewish communities in England and the US.

Amir and his team closely monitor the Iranian pulse via the Iranian media - radio, press, television, Internet - and "other sources." The IBA broadcasts a daily 35-minute news program in Farsi to an audience estimated at one-to-two million Iranians. Amir believes that the broadcasts have earned high credibility because of the detail they offer about events in Iran and the incisiveness of analysis provided by a veteran team.

"We stick to the facts," he says. "The situation in Iran is so terrible there is no need to distort." Revolutionary regimes, by their nature, begin enthusiastically but are slowed down by life's underbrush like bureaucracy, economic thickets and human ornariness.

"It's clear that the regime in Iran has reached a dead-end after 25 years," says Amir, himself a Teheran native. "The country has become much poorer. The population has grown from 37 million to 67 million. They need to provide 800,000 new jobs each year but can't. Poverty is spreading and many turn to prostitution. Even senior clerics in their Friday sermons speak out against the cost of living. When I ask callers why there has been no uprising, they say the regime is brutal and people are afraid. They point out that without American intervention, neither Afghanistan nor Iraq would have been freed of their oppressive regimes."

There is no leadership around which the various opposition groups have been able to rally, he says, and there is little cooperation among the dissidents. When university students took to the streets, no other segments of the population joined them.

Amir believes that the Iranian people would welcome an American incursion "with open arms," an appraisal that may raise eyebrows in view of similar appraisals by experts about Iraq before the US invasion of that country. However, Amir believes that the Iranian regime is ripe for falling, even without the intervention of foreign troops.

"If America invested in encouraging opposition groups inside and outside Iran, it would not need to send in a single soldier."

If such an effort were made, he believes, the results could be felt within the coming American presidential term.

"President Bush has made some encouraging declarations about support for Iranians' struggle for liberation but that's not enough. America has to help practically by uniting the opposition."

As for the Iranian bomb, dissidents want it as much as the regime, notes Amir, although they would not like to see the ayatollahs get their hands on it.

"Iran is a nation without a natural ally and it always feels threatened by outside forces. Every Iranian wants the bomb. They want deterrence."

Would relations with Israel be restored if the present regime falls?

"I have no doubt about it," says Amir. "Iran and Israel are both isolated in the region and need allies. You would have an Israel-Iran-Turkey axis."

After the regime falls, he says, Iran would need serious reconstruction in many sectors. "Israel is in a position to help."
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1101356020078

[Brother Love]

2nd Timothy:
You have gone to great leangths to show that you do not understand that we are not living in the "end times" of Biblical prophesy.

We may very well be living in the "last days" of this dispensation of grace, "which was kept secret since the world began."

There are, no doubt, events happening today that are leading up to the fulfillment of the Biblical prophesies.

When one studies Acts 3:15-20, one can see that the "last days" (Tribulation) had already started at Pentecost. Those "last days" are the 70th week of Daniels prophesy in chapter 9. Joel speaks of them in 2:28-32. In fact, Peter, in Acts 2, quotes Joel almost word for word.

Peter knew exactly where he was in the timetable of prophesy because he was speaking "as the Spirit gave them utterance" (vs 4), and Jesus, before returning to heaven, had opened the understanding of the OT Scirptures to His disciples (Luke 24:45).

The Tribulation that started in Acts 2 was interrupted when God set the nation of Israel aside after the stoning of Stephen in Acts 7, and ushered in this unprophesied "dispensation of grace"; with the raising up of Saul/Paul (Acts 9). The Tribulation will again resume after ths "dispensation of grace" has been raptured. That will be when "the fulness of the Gentiles be come in" (Rms11:25).

In order to fully understand exactly were we are in God's timetable today, we must understand "the Mystery" that was revealed to the Apostle Paul, Not the prophetic Scriptures of the OT.

In his book "Things That Differ" Pastor Stam list 14 basic things between PROPHECY (P) AND THE MYSTERY (M).

1. (P) Concerns a kingdom; a political organization (Dan. 2:44, Matt. 6:10).

(M) Concerns a body; a living organism (I Cor. 12:12,27, Eph. 4:12-16).

2. (P) The kingdom to be established on earth (Jer. 23:5, Matt. 6:10).

(M) The body given a position in heaven (Eph. 1:3, 2:5-6, Col 3:1-3).

3. (P) Christ to be its King (Jer. 23:5, Isa.9:6,7).

(M) Christ its living Head (Eph. 1:19-23,Col. 1:18).

4. (P) The kingdom prophesied "since the world began" (Luke 1:68-70, Acts3:21).

(M) The body chosen in Christ before the world began, but "kept secret sincethe world began" (Rom. 16:25, Eph.1:4-11, 3:5-9).

5. (P) Israel to be given supremacy over the nations (Isa. 60:10-12, 61:6).

(M) Jew and Gentile placed on the same level before God (Rom. 10:12, 11:32,Eph. 2:16,17).

6. (P) The Gentiles to be blessed through Israel’s instrumentality (Gen.22:17,18, Zech. 8:13).

(M) The Gentiles blessed through Israel’s obstinacy (Acts 13:44-46,Rom. 11:28-32).

7. (P) The Gentiles to be blessed through Israel’s rise (Isa. 60:1-3, Zech. 8:22,23).

(M) The Gentiles blessed throughIsrael’s fall (Acts 28:27,28, Rom.11:11, 12, 15).

8. (P) Prophecy mainly concerns nations as such (Isa. 2:4, Ezek. 37:21, 22).

(M) The mystery concerns individuals (Rom. 10:12, 13, II Cor. 5:14-17).

9. (P) Prophecy concerns blessings, both material and spiritual, on earth (Isa.2:3, 4, 11:1-9, etc.).

(M)The mystery concerns "all spiritual blessings in the heavenlies" (Eph.1:3, Col. 3:1-3).

10. (P) Prophecy concerns Christ’s coming to the earth (Isa. 59:20, Zech. 14:4).

(M)The mystery explains Christ’s present absence from the earth (Eph. 1:20-23, Col. 3:1-3).

11. (P) In prophecy salvation by grace through faith alone is not contemplated.

(M) Salvation by faith alone lies at the very heart of the mystery (Rom. 3:21-26, 4:5, Eph.2:8,9).

12, (P)The proclamation of the prophetic program committed particularly to the twelve (Matt. 10:5-7, Acts 1:6-8, 3:19-26).

(M) The proclamation of the mystery committed particularly to Paul (Eph.3:1-3, 8-9, Col. 1:24-27).

13 (P) The prophetic program revealed through many of God’s servants (Luke 1:70, II Pet. 1:21).

(M) The mystery revealed through one man; Paul (Gal. 1:1, 11, 12, 2:2, 7, 9,Eph. 3:2,3).

14. (P) Old testament writers frequently did not understand the prophecies made known through them (Dan. 12:8-10, 1 Peter 1:10-12).

(M) Paul both understood and longed that others might understand the mystery revealed through him. (Eph.1:15-23, 3:14-21, Col. 1:9 -10, 2:1-3).

I highly recommend that you read this book. It can be read on line and is shown at the end of Brother Love's postings.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Much and Love The Lord!

[size=3]AMEN!!!!![/size]

[nChrist]

Brothers and Sisters,

There is no need to let semantics start a debate in a Bible study we are trying to have. We are all talking about the end times of the Dispensation of Grace. This should be painfully obvious, but maybe not for some. All of the participants know about the Tribulation Period and the 1,000 year rule and reign of Christ, so implying otherwise appears to be trying to start an argument in a Bible study over semantics. It's really less than semantics, rather a challenge to a non-existent thought from any of the participants.

I don't think that any of the participants want anything except a study, certainly not a debate or argument. Those who want a debate, take it to the debate section with someone who wants to debate.

Love In Christ,
Tom

[Shammu]

Nov. 30, 2004 8:39
A tentative effort to foster Jewish-Muslim dialogue begins in Paris
By JEWISH TELEGRAPH AGENCY
Paris

Although French Jews and Muslims have launched an organization to promote dialogue between them, the path to true friendship remains rocky.

An interfaith gathering last month at Paris's City of Sciences and Industry marked the launch of the Jewish-Muslim Friendship Association, a group its founders hope will usher in a new era in relations between France's Jewish and Muslim communities.

The group – whose patrons are to be Simone Weill, president of France's Holocaust Foundation and a former president of the European Parliament, and Lebanon's former ambassador to France, Stetie Salah – has set up a 12-person executive committee, six members from each faith.

The absence of official backing from the French Muslim Council, whose two leading factions – the Federation of French Muslims and the Union of French Islamic Organizations – have touchy relationships with mainstream Jewish groups, put a slight blight on what was widely regarded as a successful and well-attended gathering.

Based on a model that already exists between Jewish and Christian groups, the organization is the brainchild of Rabbi Michel Serfaty, the leader of an Orthodox congregation in Paris and a longtime advocate of interfaith dialogue.

Serfaty, the victim of a racially-motivated attack last year, was able to bring together an impressive list of Jewish and Muslim clerics for the event, including Paris Chief Rabbi David Messas and Dalil Boubakeur, the rector of the city's Grand Mosque.

However, Boubakeur, a moderate known for his close ties with Jewish groups, attended only in his capacity as head of the mosque rather than as an official representative of the council, of which he is president.

Discussions and debates on religious and cultural themes took place throughout the November 21 event, while various local Muslim and Jewish groups welcomed visitors to some 30 stalls dotting the hall, highlighting such varied themes as circumcision rites, wedding ceremonies and philanthropic initiatives.

Speaking to JTA shortly after the rabbis and imams were replaced on the stage by Jewish and Muslim musicians in a concert culminating the event, Serfaty described the gathering as "a great success." "This is the first path toward greater understanding between Muslims and Jews in France," he said.

Many of those attending also expressed hope that the event could be the catalyst for more positive dialogue.

Claudine Frand, an executive member of the Abraham Brotherhood, an interfaith group, said it is a pity that such an initiative had taken so long to come about.

"There's always been dialogue between Jews and Christians and between Christians and Muslims, and there's such a great atmosphere here," she said. "Of course, there's always going to be people who want to pour oil on the fire, but religion can be used as a tool for us all to build solidarity and fraternity."

That spirit of brotherhood was well illustrated at a stall where members of the Jewish and Muslim scout associations were engaged in friendly banter.

Muhammad Rouahbi, a senior chaplain with the French Muslim Scouts, described the event as "an historic day," adding that "we have to build on this to pass this message of tolerance on to the youth who have lost their way."

At the back of the hall, Ben Omar Taif, who heads the French Muslim Council's halal committee in Marseille, was busy chatting away with Daniel Messiha, a kosher food trader from Paris.

Messiha had suggested to Taif that he come up to the capital for the event after the two worked together at a recent ethnic food show. Here, they jokingly exchanged gifts: Taif's official halal listings and Messiha's kashrut guide from the Paris Consistoire, French Jewry's main religious group.

Taif said that food is a good place for dialogue to start because, "When you come together around a table, you don't just eat, you talk, you negotiate."

Many organizations at the event welcomed the opportunity to provide a showcase for positive elements of their respective faiths.

For Roger Cukierman, the president of the CRIF umbrella organization of French Jews, the event showed that "things are moving in the right direction," while the absence of some of the more radical Muslim groups was "just a little argument among factions in the council and shouldn't concern us."

"The fact that the principal organizers are the Paris Mosque and the Consistoire shows that there is a tradition of cooperation in this city," he said.

Serfaty, too, said that "we can only work with those who want to work with us."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1101709701598

[Shammu]

 Fatah´s Farouk Kadumi: "Two States" Just a Temporary Solution
23:59 Dec 02, '04 / 19 Kislev 5765

A top PA official has reiterated the end-goal of the creation of a Palestinian state alongside Israel: a Palestinian state instead of Israel.

In a seeming re-affirmation of the PLO's 1974 "destroy Israel" program, commonly known as the Phased Plan, Fatah co-founder Farouk Kadumi termed the struggle for a two-state solution just a “stage” on the road to “only one [state].”

Kadumi spoke on Nov. 29th with Iran’s Al-Aram television station. When the interviewer asked Kadumi, “What is the future of Palestine?” the PLO leader answered: “At this stage there will be two states. Many years from now there will be only one.”

Asked why he has not softened his stance against Israel’s existence, Kadumi replied, "Our enemy always says, 'This is Judea and Samaria' ... They haven't changed their discourse. If they change theirs, we will change ours, and if not, we will keep saying that armed resistance is the way to Palestine."

He expressed confidence in the Arabs' ultimate victory, saying, “[There are] 300 million Arabs, while Israel has only the sea behind it.”

The basic principle of the 1974 Phased Plan is that the PLO would struggle to initially establish an "independent combatant national authority" over any territory "liberated" from Israeli rule. That “national authority” would then be used as a base for continued terror attacks. The final phase of the plan is all-out war against Israel by all her Arab neighbors with the hope of destroying the Jewish State entirely.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=72993

The entire clip, translated by MEMRI, can be viewed by clicking here. http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=390
Fatah Leader Faruq Qaddumi: Two-States A Temporary Solution

The following are excerpts from an interview with Fatah leader Faruq Qaddumi:

Interviewer: Do you still support martyrdom operations inside Israel?

Faruq Qaddumi: When you speak of martyrdom operations, I say that these operations were forced upon the Palestinian people, who face assassinations, killings, destruction of homes, and so on. [The Palestinian people] were forced to commit these operations. We were asked to stop these operations and we said that we were willing to. But stopping these operations is out of our hands. We are not a regular army. We are fighters. In other words, we don't have full control over the fighters...

Interviewer: Aren't you afraid you'll be labeled "a terrorist"?

Faruq Qaddumi: If the resistance in its entirety is labeled "terrorism" by America and Israel, why should we be afraid? A terrorist is someone who fights, not for a cause, but for the sake of fighting. If armed struggle has a political cause, especially if it is a noble one, then it is not terrorism.

Interviewer: Why didn't you change your political discourse although the situation around you has changed and there are circumstances you must deal with?

Faruq Qaddumi: Our enemy always says, "This is Judea and Samaria" and they are "Terrorists." They haven't changed their discourse. If they change theirs, we will change ours, and if not, we will keep saying that armed resistance is the way to Palestine. If there is no political initiative and they keep addressing us with sweet words, and try to seduce us like foxes do, we must continue in our path.

[There are] 300 Million Arabs, while Israel has only the sea behind it.

Interviewer: Minister, how do you see the future of Palestine?

Faruq Qaddumi: At this stage there will be two states. Many years from now there will be only one.

[2nd Timothy]

Faruq Qaddumi: At this stage there will be two states. Many years from now there will be only one.

Wonder if he knows just how true that statement really is?