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

[dad2]

41 minutes ago, Alive said:

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.

I thought when you posted 'sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age' you were trying to say it was, well, at the end of the world. Guess there is some hidden meaning you actually have for that.

[Alive]

21 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Don't answer that, @Alive. He's just moved the goalposts. The op does not ask if Israel will be brought back to the land; it asks whether or not God returned Israel in 1948 or will it be after the trib. 

 

 

.

Chuckling here….I have already addressed it.

[dad2]

2 hours ago, Josheb said:

I won't be taking the bait. Attempts to try to change the topic will be ignored and treated as avoidant subterfuge. This op does not mention 70 AD. I have not mentioned 70 AD. You disagree with my statement the trib is past-tense but an attempt to belabor the matter in avoidance of your own claim is inappropriate. You held out the standard poster support their claims with the Bible but that has yet to happen. 

The attempt to shift away from the scriptural support for the claim made has created the problem of the "shifting onus." If  the onus for the claim made can be shifted away from your own need to support your own claim and move that shift onto me then you get to avoid proving your own claim(s). 

I am having none of that. 

I have already provide clear, unambiguous support from plainly stated scripture for what I have actually posted. 

I've asked thrice. 

Please do not try to change the topic. Please do not attempt to put words into my posts I did not write. I have not in any way shape or form mentioned Jesus' coming. I am happy to discuss that as the conversation unfolds and reaches a point when that change becomes appropriate. Neither have I mentioned 70 AD. Other posters mentioned 70 AD. Whether or not I believe x, y, or z happened then or at some other time is not currently germane to OUR exchange. 

Right now he onus is on you to provide scripture stating the tribulation is the final part of human history. 

".....when you see all these things you know that it near, even at the doors." That is what Jesus stated. What is the "it" to which Jesus is referring? What does the text state the "it" is? What does the text identify as the "it"? 

Matthew 24:29-35
"But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.  And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory.  And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.  Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near;  so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door.  Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.  Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away."

What precedes verse 33 and what follows verse 33? If I don't use scripture selectively and extricate part of a verse from everything else the text says then what does the text tell me is the "it"? When does the text tell me the "it" occurs? Notice that the NAS uses the word "he" instead of "it". Why does the NAS, ESV, NLT, BLT, CSB, HCS, ASV, CEV, ERV.... why do these translations say, "he," instead of "it," and were you aware of this distinction? The reason the more modern translation - both literal and figurative, both formal and dynamic - translate this as "he" is because the Greek word used is "estin" and that is true and that is true in ALL the Greek manuscripts including the Textus Receptus. The word "estin" literally means "I exist" (G1510). In other words a transliteration of the Geek would read, "...when you see all these things know that near I exist at the doors." 

And then Jesus proceeds to plainly state what he is describing will happen in "this generation." 

So....... 

.....you were asked to provide scriptural support for the claim "it (the tribulation) is the final part of man's history," and have not done so. I have been patient, polite, and respectful with the request multiple times and still don't have a scripture stating what you say scripture says. 

The persistent haggling over the same passage again, again, and again rather than seeking any alternative that might possibly support the claim the tribulation is the final part of human history won't prove the claim made. Matthew 24 does not prove that claim. NOTHING in the entire chapter proves that claim. Nothing in the entire chapter proves that claim unless interpretations are added to what is stated to make what is stated say things other than what is plainly stated. 

And that, dad2, is bad exegesis. 

Read the text as written and believe what is stated as written, plainly read. Form your eschatology to what is stated rather than forming scripture to your eschatology. 

 

Now I have a personal rules that helps me avoid dysfunctional discourse. One of those rules is that I will give a person three opportunities to prove their claim(s); three opportunities to answer the question asked. After three requests I move on, and I move on knowing the person either cannot or will not answer the question asked or cannot or will not evidence or prove the claim. I don't doubt your sincerity. Nor do I question any devotion to God and His word. I do question the validity of the claim because no supporting evidence from the Bible was provided without first manipulating the scripture to make it say things it does not state. I have this rule because it is a rule scripture itself asserts in Titus 3. Titus 3:9-11 tells us not to become involved in foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels over the law because they're unprofitable and/or worthless. That text asserts a "three strikes" rule: ask once, ask twice, and after that move on. 

So out of patience and forbearance I will ask just one more time but if the next post does not provide actual proof for the claim the tribulation is the final part of human history or the original claim is not amended then I will not trade posts with you further. I will continue to expound upon the answer to the question this op asks but I won't do so with you because I have not received any collaboration; you've violated your own standard, have not answered questions asked in a timely and collaborative manner, and most importantly have not proven the claim made. 

One last time.

Just answer the question asked.

Can you please provide for me the scripture stating the tribulation is the final part of human history or amend the claim to more accurately reflect what scripture does state?
 

Unless you think that the return of Christ comes every week, or happened in the past sometime, that'll do er.

[dad2]

1 hour ago, Josheb said:

Don't answer that, @Alive. He's just moved the goalposts. The op does not ask if Israel will be brought back to the land; it asks whether or not God returned Israel in 1948 or will it be after the trib. 

 

 

.

Guess posters need you to tell which way to think and respond. OK. Anyhow, of course God will bring back Israel to the land one day. The only issue is that some folks claim that happened in 1948.