Interfaith movement brings world closer to global religious system...

Because that instrument only plays one note.

As a normal, sane, orthodox Christian, I look for the resurrection of the dead at the end of history. This is, IMHO, the one and only future event we can look for with certainty.

We are also told of a trend that will characterize the era between our Lord's first and last physical appearances -- the destruction of God's enemies and the increasing blessedness of His people.

Unlike you, I view the Lord Jesus Christ as a true and reliable prophet, who gave His disciples the news they needed, the prophecies of the events that would affect them, and the time frame during which these events would happen. Unlike you, I take Rev. 1:1-3 literally. Unlike you, I think the "last days" Paul warned Timothy about were the "last days" Timothy had to be alert for. When Paul wrote his last recorded letter, to the only protege who was still on board, he gave that guy the news that guy needed. He did not abruptly STOP writing to Timothy, to speak to folks like us living nearly 20 centuries later.

But, then again, I take God's Word more seriously that I do Cyrus Scofield's footnotes. That's the difference between us.

“... I look for the resurrection of the dead at the end of history. This is, IMHO, the one and only future event we can look for with certainty.”

Fair enough. I think you make it very simple to refute you in that case.

Jeremiah 50:39-40
“39Therefore the wild beasts of the desert with the wild beasts of the islands shall dwell there, and the owls shall dwell therein: and it shall be no more inhabited for ever; neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation.
40As God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighbour cities thereof, saith the LORD; so shall no man abide there, neither shall any son of man dwell therein.”

When were these prophecies against Babylon fulfilled? When did they become uninhabited for ever?

Jeremiah 3:17
“17At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the LORD; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of the LORD, to Jerusalem: neither shall they walk any more after the imagination of their evil heart.”

When was this prophecy fulfilled? When did all nations gather at Jerusalem, call it the throne of the Lord, and worship the Lord?

“When Paul wrote his last recorded letter, to the only protege who was still on board, he gave that guy the news that guy needed. He did not abruptly STOP writing to Timothy, to speak to folks like us living nearly 20 centuries later.”

You speak as if the Apostles did not know that their writings would be the living witness to Christ after their deaths, for generations to come. Of course, they did know this, which is why many of their writings have import both for their original correspondent and for later generations.

“But, then again, I take God’s Word more seriously that I do Cyrus Scofield’s footnotes. That’s the difference between us.”

So do I. I’m not sure if you’re aware of the rules of debate on FR, but “mind-reading” is not acceptable. I haven’t cited a word of Scofield, I’ve only appealed to the Scriptures to support my opinion, so I can only assume you are pulling this Scofield accusation out of thin air. If you want to debate Scofield with someone, start a thread for that and find some Scofield supporter to debate.

There is NO other name under heaven by which you can be saved.

That is not true. Isaiah 12:2 Surely God is my salvation; I will trust and not be afraid. The LORD, the LORD, is my strength and my song; he has become my salvation."

And there are hundreds of other passages that say the same thing. The LORD (YHvH), G-d is our salvation. No mediator required or ever mentioned for all that matter.

You still haven't answered my question.

How are your children doing?

The statistics indicate that American evangelicals, a demographic group that mostly agrees with your eschatology, are losing their children in record numbers. The exceptions? Amish families keep more than 90% of their children. Serious Reformed families, which stress the development of the Christian mind, and are often post-mil, also keep more than 90% of their kids. The generic evangelicals, however, see the vast majority of their children abandon ship soon after leaving home.

I suspect there's some cause-and-effect in play here. People who have written off the future also take child-rearing less seriously.

“You still haven’t answered my question.
How are your children doing?”

I didn’t answer because I don’t see how derailing the discussion with personal issues would contribute to anything. Since you’re so interested, I don’t have any children (yet). Want to donate some?

Well, one useful "test" for a doctrine is -- how well does it work at home? Most fundamentalist Christians are pre-mil. Most fundamentalist Christians see their kids jump ship. Cause and effect? I think that can be plausibly asserted. Deny your kids a future, and they'll go looking for someone who isn't sitting passively on folded hands, gloating over the misfortune of others.

I became aware of the classical Reformed post-mil position in 1980. When our kids started coming along in 1983, by God's kind provision, I had more to offer them than "88 reasons why the Rapture will be in 1989." I pray that you will, too.

Well, you make it sound like everyone who reads the apocalyptic prophecies in a future sense is just counting the days until doomsday. I don’t look at it that way at all; I don’t believe in date-setting, or scrutinizing every news item for signs of the apocalypse. Whatever is going to happen, will happen on the Lord’s timetable, not ours.

I also don’t subscribe to the notion that we should evaluate doctrine on whether it is more comforting to our minds, or convenient for us in our lives. Many Christians have and do live lives of great hardship simply for their faith, but this is no reason to believe that the Lord has abandoned them. Likewise, if a proper reading of Scripture tells us there will be hardships in the future, it shouldn’t be any deterrent to our faith either, or be used as an excuse to read Scripture in a way that is more comfortable to us.

“And there are hundreds of other passages that say the same thing. The LORD (YHvH), G-d is our salvation. No mediator required or ever mentioned for all that matter.”

What you say is partially true, and the New Testament attests that the faith of the Patriarchs was accounted to them as grace, whereby they received salvation. However, under the Covenant of Moses, faith was to be demonstrated by obedience to the Law. The Law, exemplified through the High Priest and the Temple rituals, served as a type of mediator between Israel and God. “For faith without works is dead”, one of our Apostles said, so if a Jew had faith, he would follow the Law, and if he did not follow the Law, he had not faith.

Now, in the Old Testament, God did promise a New Covenant to the people of Israel, which we believe has been established. If our belief is correct, the mediation of Christ begins with the inception of this New Covenant, which began at Christ’s death. It is no wonder, to a Christian then, that the Old Testament doesn’t speak of a personified mediator, since his role had not been revealed, and did not play the same role in that Covenant.

the New Testament attests that the faith of the Patriarchs was accounted to them as grace, whereby they received salvation.

The new testament is wrong. Abram heard the LORD and obeyed him:

Gen 12: 4So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.

G-d then first tells Abram of the promise.

7And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him. 8And he removed from thence unto a mountain on the east of Bethel, and pitched his tent, having Bethel on the west, and Hai on the east: and there he builded an altar unto the LORD, and called upon the name of the LORD.

So, Abram heard the LORD then acted upon the words of the LORD by works! He built an altar and offered sacrifices! He traveled to Egypt and back and then:

Gen 13: 18Then Abram removed his tent, and came and dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron, and built there an altar unto the LORD.

A second altar unto the LORD and offered scrifices! It isnt until Genesis 15, when G-d repeats His promise to Abram that he states his belief in the promise and it is accounted to Abram as righteousness. CLEARLY, Abram had already believed in G-d and had performed many works including two sacrficial altars! The NT is just wrong.

the Covenant of Moses, faith was to be demonstrated by obedience to the Law.

But the obdedience is driven by love of G-d and His word. Our model is King David. Psalm 119, 176 verses (longest in the whole bible) of David extoling the virtues and love of the law. To Paul a curse, to David a delight! I'll take David over Paul any day of the week. Notice Davids confession of murder to nathan is forgiven on the spot. No blood sacrifice. In all of scripture, there is not one recorded event of someone sinning intentionally and offering an animal sacrifice for forgiveness! Not one.

through the High Priest and the Temple rituals, served as a type of mediator between Israel and God.

Not really, that is only a process prescribed by G-d only when there is a temple. G-d told the people there would be times when the people would not have a temple or preist or king.

Hosea 3:4For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim:

Therefore the people had always been able to obtain forgiveness DIRECTLY through G-d. Sacrifices are primarily for unintentional sin. Only about 6 intentional sins are covered by animal sacrifice. And blood sacrifice was not required. (Lev 5:11) They were based on a sliding scale of means, the last being flour. No blood, just flour.

The people of Nineveh (among many other examples) recieved atonement without sacrifice.

if a Jew had faith, he would follow the Law, and if he did not follow the Law, he had not faith.

Not exactly. Many people have faith in G-d but not follow the law. The Israelites had problems chasing after other gods (and had little or no faith) and during 2nd temple times, problems getting along with each other, showing love, mercy and justice to each other but they still had some faith in G-d, just not a strong active faith. But in all cases in all times, there has been a holy remnant.

Now, in the Old Testament, God did promise a New Covenant to the people of Israel, which we believe has been established. If our belief is correct, the mediation of Christ begins with the inception of this New Covenant, which began at Christ’s death.

This new covenant A) Has not occurred yet and B) Is to the house of Israel and Judah. Not the Gentiles, although they will be included in the end of days.

Jer 31:31Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

33But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

When the new covenant comes, all will know G-d. That hasnt happened yet. Ezekiel says almost the same thing.

And I shall give them one heart, and shall put a new spirit within them. And I shall take the heart of stone out of their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, that they may walk in My statutes and keep My ordinances, and do them. Then they will be My people, and I shall be their God. Ezekiel 11:19-20

And Isaiah too:And many peoples shall come, and say: "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; that he may teach us his ways and that we may walk in his paths," for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. Isaiah 2:3

Since, Jesus did not A) Become the King of Judah or Israel, B) Did not bring knowlege of G-d from the least to the greatest and C) rebuild the temple and retore sacrifices (Ezk 43/44) There is no New Covenant yet. This will occur in the Messianic era by the Jewish Messiah. Soon!

You're dealing with pagan "Christian" Reconstructionism and Dominion Theology which got started in the 1960's (which should tell you all you need to know).

They can't validate their own beliefs with Scripture so they have to try to tear down legitimate Biblical beliefs in the desperate attempt to make believe that the garbage they spout is remotely legitimate.

They surface on every prophecy thread they can find to try to instill as much doubt and unbelief in the Bible as possible, since they can't point to one shred of Scripture to confirm their own beliefs.

It's a total, complete sham.

“The new testament is wrong. Abram heard the LORD and obeyed him”

Yes, but there can be no obedience without faith, only a shadow of obedience. Obedience without faith is dead, and faith without obedience is not truly faith.

“So, Abram heard the LORD then acted upon the words of the LORD by works!... It isnt until Genesis 15, when G-d repeats His promise to Abram that he states his belief in the promise and it is accounted to Abram as righteousness.”

Yes, but the point Paul was making is that the Lord had already accounted Abram a righteous man, and blessed him, before he did any works of obedience. The only thing which Abram had done at that point was harken to the voice of the Lord, which was an act of faith, not obedience.

Does the Lord bless the wicked?

Proverbs 3:33

“The LORD curses the house of wicked people, but he blesses the home of righteous people.”

If the Lord had not counted Abram as righteous before Genesis 15, there would have been no blessing, and no promise.

“’the Covenant of Moses, faith was to be demonstrated by obedience to the Law.’

But the obdedience is driven by love of G-d and His word.”

Love of God and his Word, comes from faith, so I think we’re just arguing semantics here. Does the faithless man love God?

“To Paul a curse, to David a delight! I’ll take David over Paul any day of the week.”

Paul was not saying the Law was a curse, but that disobedience to the Law carried a curse. When he said “the curse of the Law”, he clearly refers to the associated curses of disobedience, not the Law itself. Paul also extolled the virtues of the Law:

Romans 7:12
“Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.”

“In all of scripture, there is not one recorded event of someone sinning intentionally and offering an animal sacrifice for forgiveness! Not one.”

Not for forgiveness, but for atonement, of course blood sacrifice was required. Christ removes the necessity of atonement through sacrifice, once and for all. Forgiveness is given, not in exchange for a sacrifice (for who can bargain with the Lord?), but freely given by God by his mercy.

“Not really, that is only a process prescribed by G-d only when there is a temple. G-d told the people there would be times when the people would not have a temple or preist or king.”

There were High Priests, even before the temple, for didn’t Aaron serve the same function? Regardless, though, as I said it was a “type” of mediator, which means it was a thing which foreshadowed what was to come. During the Old Covenant, the mediation of Christ could not have been effective, since he had not yet performed the work necessary for his exaltation. Yet, God provided Israel with rituals which symbolically represented the work of the Mediator that was to come. The purpose was not to serve as an actual mediator, but to instruct them, and later, to serve as testament that God’s plan was set from the beginning.

G-d told the people there would be times when the people would not have a temple or preist or king.

Hosea 3:4For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim:

Therefore the people had always been able to obtain forgiveness DIRECTLY through G-d.”

You didn’t post the final verses of that quote (Hos 3:5-6):

“5 Afterward the Israelites will return and seek the LORD their God and David their king. They will come trembling to the LORD and to his blessings in the last days”

The last 2 verses show that while the Israelites are living many days without these things, it is not until the last days that they return to seek the Lord and their king, and recieve his blessings. What Hosea describes is the results of the curse that God placed on Israel for her disobedience, not evidence that the curse was of no effect.

“The people of Nineveh (among many other examples) recieved atonement without sacrifice.”

The people of Ninevah were not a part of the Covenant, so how the Lord dealt with them is not relevant to how the Lord dealt with those under the Covenant.

“Many people have faith in G-d but not follow the law. The Israelites had problems chasing after other gods (and had little or no faith) and during 2nd temple times, problems getting along with each other, showing love, mercy and justice to each other but they still had some faith in G-d, just not a strong active faith. But in all cases in all times, there has been a holy remnant.”

It is true, that the Lord will always provide that there is a holy remnant among his people, but this does not mean that the rest of Israel is faithful, when they are clearly not. Is a wife faithful to her husband if she commits adultery? Clearly not, so when Israel was whoring after other Gods, she was not faithful, despite the fact that the Lord, through his mercy, provided a faithful remnant within her. If they offered worship in the Temple, and at the same time, offered worship to other Gods after the manner of the pagans, then the worship they offered to God was done in disobedience. They were, so to speak, only going through the motions.

“Since, Jesus did not A) Become the King of Judah or Israel, B) Did not bring knowlege of G-d from the least to the greatest and C) rebuild the temple and retore sacrifices (Ezk 43/44) There is no New Covenant yet. This will occur in the Messianic era by the Jewish Messiah. Soon!”

The prophecies you cite do refer to the New Covenant that the Messiah would institute, however, they do not say that all these things will be accomplished instantly. They do not say, the Messiah will come, and as soon as he appears, all these things will happen. There is, however, a more specific timetable for some of the events concerning the Messiah, which you did not refer to.

Daniel 9:24-27
“24Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

Now, this prophecy actually provides a timeline of events, which can be pinpointed in history, and the coming of the Messiah is included in this timeline. We know when the command to rebuild was given, and we know when the city and the sanctuary was destroyed. The Messiah was prophecied to come, and to be “cut off”, in the time between these two events, which is exactly the period in which we see the appearance of Jesus, and his death.

Now, you can argue that this prophecy doesn’t prove Jesus is the Messiah, but how can you argue that this prophecy doesn’t prove the Messiah has already come? If he already has come, and the work that is prophecied to be performed by the Messiah is not all evident, then it only stands to reason that the Messiah would not complete all of his work instantaneously.

Yes, but the point Paul was making is that the Lord had already accounted Abram a righteous man, and blessed him, before he did any works of obedience. The only thing which Abram had done at that point was harken to the voice of the Lord, which was an act of faith, not obedience.

90+% of Christians will site Gen15:6 as the moment of Abrahams "salvation". If you do a word search on Abraham and believed, it occurs three times in the NT and in each case they reference Gen 15:6, which is an error. Paul is saying that Abraham believing the promise constituted saving faith and there was no element of works but he is wrong. You have it right, Abraham believed G-d and obeyed him and then he did do a lot of works prior to Gen 15:6. Furthermore, notice what G-d says about Abraham to Issac:

Gen 26:4"I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven, and will give your descendants all these lands; and by your descendants all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; 5because Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes and My laws."

Even before the law was given to Moses, Abraham was credited with keeping the law. So, clearly G-d is indictating that Abraham obtained the promise through his actions of obeying G-d's laws. G-d did not credit him with great faith but great works. Works born out of love and faith.

If the Lord had not counted Abram as righteous before Genesis 15, there would have been no blessing, and no promise.

That is a given, but again, how did G-d see him as righteous? G-d told Issac that "Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes and My laws". Not that Abraham had great faith. That would go without saying. No where does G-d comment on his faith.

Paul was not saying the Law was a curse, but that disobedience to the Law carried a curse. When he said “the curse of the Law”, he clearly refers to the associated curses of disobedience, not the Law itself. Paul also extolled the virtues of the Law:

No...Paul is very clear. The law is a curse...we are dead to the law... you are not under law, but under grace....Christ is the end of the law.... To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law....justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law....for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing...Clearly no one is justified before God by the law....etc.

Paul does have some positive things to say about the law but makes it abundantly clear that the Mosaic law is to be replaced by Christs law. Even Paul, who supposedly is a Jew and a Pharisee, took himself out from under the law. Which is contrary to the word of G-d that the law is forever.

Deut 4: 1"Now, O Israel, listen to the statutes and the judgments which I am teaching you to perform, so that you may live and go in and take possession of the land which the LORD, the God of your fathers, is giving you. 2"You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

Deut 11:1 Love the LORD your God and keep his requirements, his decrees, his laws and his commands always.

Deut 29:.....but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law.

The works of his hands are verity and judgment; all his commandments are sure. They stand fast forever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness. Psalm 111:7-8

And in the Messianic era, the law will continue....

And I shall give them one heart, and shall put a new spirit within them. And I shall take the heart of stone out of their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, that they may walk in My statutes and keep My ordinances, and do them. Then they will be My people, and I shall be their God. Ezekiel 11:19-20

My servant David will be king over them, and they will all have one shepherd. They will follow my laws and be careful to keep my decrees. Ezekiel 37:24

The preists will teach the law and keep the law.

23 They are to teach my people the difference between the holy and the common and show them how to distinguish between the unclean and the clean. 24 " 'In any dispute, the priests are to serve as judges and decide it according to my ordinances. They are to keep my laws and my decrees for all my appointed feasts, and they are to keep my Sabbaths holy. Ezek44

And even the Gentiles will have to be circumsized to enter the 3rd temple. Paul missed that one when he condemned circumsision

Ezek 44: This is what the Sovereign LORD says: No foreigner uncircumcised in heart and flesh is to enter my sanctuary, not even the foreigners who live among the Israelites.

So, clearly the law is forever, even in the messianic era.

Not for forgiveness, but for atonement, of course blood sacrifice was required.Christ removes the necessity of atonement through sacrifice, once and for all.

No.... again, read Lev 5: 11 " 'If, however, he cannot afford two doves or two young pigeons, he is to bring as an offering for his sin a tenth of an ephah [a] of fine flour for a sin offering. He must not put oil or incense on it, because it is a sin offering. 12 He is to bring it to the priest, who shall take a handful of it as a memorial portion and burn it on the altar on top of the offerings made to the LORD by fire. It is a sin offering. 13 In this way the priest will make atonement for him for any of these sins he has committed, and he will be forgiven.

Flour...not blood.

Christ removes the necessity of atonement through sacrifice, once and for all.

Not possible. A)Deuteronomy 12:30-31 Jeremiah 19:4-6 Deuteronomy 24:16 Ezekiel 18:1-4; 20-24; 26-27 G-d forbids Human sacrifice and Human vicarious atonement And yet we are to then turn around and believe that God changed His mind, and required human sacrifice, and then it was the sacrifice of His own human son that God wanted? After telling the Jews to stay away from pagan practices, and pagan beliefs, God then changes His mind and says, "Okay, now go ahead and believe in a human sacrifice, just as these very pagans believe?" and B) Ezek 44, sacrifices are returning. Sin offerings will resume. Why? If Jesus is an atonement?

Therefore the people had always been able to obtain forgiveness DIRECTLY through G-d.” You didn’t post the final verses of that quote (Hos 3:5-6): “5 Afterward the Israelites will return and seek the LORD their God and David their king. They will come trembling to the LORD and to his blessings in the last days” The last 2 verses show that while the Israelites are living many days without these things, it is not until the last days that they return to seek the Lord and their king

Okay, yes as Ezekiel says: They will return to the LORD and:My servant David will be king over them, and they will all have one shepherd. They will follow my laws and be careful to keep my decrees. Ezekiel 37:24

The Tanakh (OT) never describes and period when the law doesnt exist and is replaced by a human sacrifice of a man-god to "fulfill" the law. This is a Grecco-Roman invention.

The people of Ninevah were not a part of the Covenant, so how the Lord dealt with them is not relevant to how the Lord dealt with those under the Covenant

Okay, these people were....2 Chronicles 6:24 And if thy people Israel be put to the worse before the enemy, because they have sinned against thee; and shall return and confess thy name, and pray and make supplication before thee in this house; Then hear thou from the heavens, and forgive the sin of thy people Israel, and bring them again unto the land which thou gavest to them and to their fathers....yet if they pray toward this place, and confess thy name, and turn from their sin, when thou dost afflict them; [27] Then hear thou from heaven, and forgive the sin of thy servants, and of thy people Israel,

2 Chron 7:14 14] If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

Furthermore, If Jesus blood were to be an acceptable sacrifice (It isnt per scriptures above) then he fails as a sacrifice on the most basic level. Jesus died from suffocation on the cross, not rapid blood loss at the neck (rendering him treif) His blood was not sprinkled on the altar. His fat and innards were not burned on the altar. He met zero of the requirements of a sacrfice. Not one scripture says that death on a cross in acceptable means of death for a sacrifice. You cant make up your own rules. Even Abraham had Issac on the altar ready to slit his throat and burn him. G-d forbade the sacrifice and told him animals only. But Jesus should have been killed on the altar like Issac would have been.

The prophecies you cite do refer to the New Covenant that the Messiah would institute, however, they do not say that all these things will be accomplished instantly.

Not instantly but concurrently in the same time frame. This is the clear meaning of the texts. Jesus would not need a second coming had he done it properly.

Daniel 9 is a thoroughly messed up explanation by the church. I am short on time so will point you here: Daniel

And Here: Daniel 9

And here: Daniels 70 weeks

Shalom