Did God return Israel in 1948 or will it be after the Trib?

[dad2]

Quote

 

Yes....it happened in 70 AD.  Israel had become His enemy and enemy to the brethren who had received Jesus as the Christ.

Isa 66:4-9

I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before mine eyes, and chose that in which I delighted not.

Hear the word of the LORD, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name's sake, said, Let the LORD be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed.

A voice of noise from the city, a voice from the temple, a voice of the LORD that rendereth recompence to his enemies.

Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child.

Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

Shall I bring to the birth, and not cause to bring forth? saith the LORD: shall I cause to bring forth, and shut the womb? saith thy God.

This is how I read the above prophetic passages:  Jesus came to His own...He called them but they received Him not.  Instead they crucified Him and mercilessly persecuted those who did receive Him.

 

Not bad so far, except that the Tribulation was not in 70ad as a previous poster claimed. The nation will not really be 'brought forth' until Jesus returns and destroys their enemies and returns them to the land. The point in the thread is that this was not something that happened in history. That means that a lot of prophesies regarding Israel in the end are yet to be fulfilled.. It does talk about some sincere folks and so called brethren that cast them out. That does apply in many situations, including how He was rejected and His people rejected in Israel. Not sure we can say it must exclusively apply only there though. For example, in the time of Jacob's trouble, the Tribulation period, we will have many sincere Jews being cast out (as well as many new believers who are gentiles)

 

 

 

Quote

Israel had given birth to the manchild, Jesus the Messiah, before her travail came in 70 AD

 

Yes, Israel did. Here also, though, that can apply to how perhaps millions of Jews in the days after the Rapture will be converted to belief in Jesus. If we viewed that, for example as a new nation being born at that time (that would eventually be the only Israel) then we could aslo say that before THEY were born, and in the Tribulation (labor) they (real believers in Jesus who were seed of Abraham) gave birth to Jesus! That actually is how I am leaning towards interpreting this right now.

Quote

The nation that was ‘born’ in that day of judgment was the “Israel of God”

 

Well, that would be the same nation as the millions of Jewish converts of the Trib who suddenly get born also. In both cases the true nation of believers was born very fasy, in a day.

 

Quote

.....when "Israel after the flesh" died in childbirth so to speak (prophetically foreshadowed by Rachel dying in giving birth to Benjamin), fulfilling what was written in Hebrews 9 below....and 'finishing' the work that Jesus began, that of fully instituting the new covenant:

 

 

So then, God will not stop the process, or shut the womb for this new nation. But under this view, the nation was not the modern country of Israel that came to exist (also fairly quickly) in 1948. So I guess I'll put you down also as a no vote.

 

 

[dad2]

28 minutes ago, DeighAnn said:

Was Israel a nation?

Did it cease to be a nation? 

Were the people scattered?

Did the people come back and is it once again a nation?  

Was there a period in between that matched the period God stated would take place?  

Rather than spam a million verses as if they agreed with you let's address your actual points. I assume you are talking about Isa 66?

[dad2]

2 minutes ago, Josheb said:

That is your interpretation of what is stated. I did not ask for a verse that might possibly could maybe sorta be interpreted to say the tribulation was the last part of human history. I asked for scripture plainly stating your claim. Not only has that been provided despite two attempts (so far) to do so but, as I have already pointed out and now do so a third time, there is an internal contradiction: Even if Jesus takes over that means the tribulation is not the last part. You've contradicted yourself, dad2. 

Something has to change! 

Something has to change in order to remove the internal contradiction. 

 

But before attempting to remove the contradiction please first provide me with the scripture supporting the claim the tribulation is the final part of man's history. And if you can do so in a manner the addresses the op-relevant concerns I have broached. 

? You think Jesus came already in 70 AD? No. Every eye will see Him when He comes. Gong!

[dad2]

2 minutes ago, Josheb said:

That is not what the scripture actually states. 

Matthew 24:33

 

So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors

 

Not before. Not in 70AD for sure.

[dad2]

4 hours ago, Alive said:

And another OP on these questions.

:-)

I will say one thing at this time. There is no question that the scriptures mentioned above, make it crystal clear that events occur 'after' the tribulation referenced by our Lord. That should be faced squarely before it is decided what to do with it.

One step at a time, indeed.

"after the tribulation of those days"

 

Can you clarify? Should we put you down also for a no vote on whether the nation that started in 1948 was a result of God bringing them back to that land or not?

[Alive]

For clarity sake, Matt. 24:3 was mis-translated above.

It does not say 'world'--it says 'age'.

Matt. 24:3 (NAS20S)   And as He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”

This is significant to an understanding of these passages.

 

Matthew 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

 

GK G172 | S G165   αἰών   aiōn   122x  

pr. a period of time of significant character; life; an era; an age: hence, a state of things marking an age or era; the present order of nature; the natural condition of man, the world; ὁ αἰών,

 

[Alive]

21 minutes ago, dad2 said:

Can you clarify? Should we put you down also for a no vote on whether the nation that started in 1948 was a result of God bringing them back to that land or not?

Sure---Jesus Himself in that verse said things would happen after the tribulation He mentioned. The language is clear.

As far as your question above. Everything that happens is due to God's will and He most definately allowed Israel to become a nation on that piece of land, but that is not the same as saying that the Israel of today is an Old covenant Israel restored. That is my simple answer, although there is much more that can be discussed around these things, eschatologically, soteriologically and theologically.

[dad2]

10 minutes ago, Alive said:

Sure---Jesus Himself in that verse said things would happen after the tribulation He mentioned. The language is clear.

As far as your question above. Everything that happens is due to God's will and He most definately allowed Israel to become a nation on that piece of land, but that is not the same as saying that the Israel of today is an Old covenant Israel restored. That is my simple answer, although there is much more that can be discussed around these things, eschatologically, soteriologically and theologically.

The question of the similarity of Israel with the ancient Israel aside, it seems to me that when God brings them back, it is after He judges the nations and destroys their enemies and rules here. It is also after Israel repents. Neither of these are true of the past. 

[dad2]

20 minutes ago, Alive said:

For clarity sake, Matt. 24:3 was mis-translated above.

It does not say 'world'--it says 'age'.

Matt. 24:3 (NAS20S)   And as He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”

This is significant to an understanding of these passages.

 

 

Matthew 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

 

GK G172 | S G165   αἰών   aiōn   122x  

pr. a period of time of significant character; life; an era; an age: hence, a state of things marking an age or era; the present order of nature; the natural condition of man, the world; ὁ αἰών,

 

That makes it pretty clear it is talking about the end of the world alright!

[Alive]

17 minutes ago, dad2 said:

That makes it pretty clear it is talking about the end of the world alright!

No it doesn't. That may be clear in your mind, but that isn't either the context of the scripture or the plain language. I do understand whey you wish it to be saying what you do, but it doesn't. Words have meaning and we have the words the Lord chose for us to have. We all are in a sense 'stewards' of these words and ought to be exacting in how we convey them.