3 1/2 year time frames

Please do not take offence or misunderstand what I am going to say here. Its not directed at you (personally)... I find it very difficult to see where true, bible believing Christians see that there will be peace on earth and things would be normal during the first half of the 7 years. I do think this assumption is not correct and its based solely on 1 verse, Dan 9:27. 

First I would offer that any person who has faith in the Savior, reads and studies the words of the NT can come to a conclusion where a person strengthens a covenant with the people in the land of Israel, which includes sacrifices and offerings could think this would lead to peace and normal life.

Those who are spiritually dead and against Christ may see this in that manner. Our sacrifice, atonement was made perfect 2000 years ago. Those who are of anti-christ will accept this and likely be overjoyed for it, but to say it brings peace is very short sighted in my opinion. We have to look beyond what is in the physical and see what is moving the pieces behind the curtain, the spirit of anti-christ. There is a battle in the heavens that we cannot directly see with our natural eyes, but in the spirit. We can see this battle manifesting in our physical world right now. This spiritual battle doesnt come to a halt for 3.5 years because the anti-christ is in control of most of the planet, it continues to rage with the hearts of men becoming more and more wicked. If we who call on the name of the Lord think that there will be peace during this time, when the wicked rule - we are missing pieces to the puzzle. We cant have peace without the Prince of Peace - I think the article is mistaken

From a pre-trib view I can see how one may say this. But that notion should further support what I am saying. Most pre-trib believe the Holy Spirit is the restrainer and is removed at the rapture. Without restraint the wicked will rule...how does peace come of this? When everyone does what is right in their own eyes what happens? How do we reconcile many verses that contradict this thought?
Prov 29:2, 28:12, 28:28
2Tim 3:1-5
Dan 11:40-45 - doesnt sound very peaceful (maybe this is in the latter half?)

Regarding the two witnesses - If their ministry is in the first half, they are going to cause the anti-christ/beast kingdom many a problem with their "stopping rain, breathing fire, water to blood, killing in the manner they are attempted to be killed..."
However nowhere is scripture clear about when their ministry starts. We often think that because we know about a 1260 day time line, that it has to coincide with the other timelines. But its not stated in that manner.

For example we were discussing the beast from the bottomless pit in Rev 9. who kills the two witnesses. The revealing of the beast is at the 5th Trumpet. His hordes from the pit are told to not harm the earth, tress, green things "but only the men who do not have the seal of God on their foreheads." Hmmm...there are men on earth during this time who are sealed and cannot be harmed by these 'locusts'. So we are back at the same conundrum as before. These people who are sealed for God, will they be silent or resist this beast kingdom? AND if this the beast from the bottomless pit is the anti-christ, this couldnt happen at the mid-point, but only sometime after

The tribes were lost to God. Scattered throughout the nations, but the tribes with Christ blood are found. I think you are confusing me with Jewish tribes instead of from peoples, tongues, tribes of the nations.

Most of the commentaries (if not all) on Biblehub say the scattered are Gentiles, not Jews.

Ellicott:
He now passes to a wider meaning still. He has lived to see a partial fulfilment of the ingathering of the “other sheep” of John 10:16, and he thinks of that death as for God’s children in all nations, who shall be one flock under one shepherd.

Barnes:
Should gather together in one - All his chosen among the Jews and Gentiles. See John 10:16.
The children of God - This is spoken not of those who were then Christians, but of all whom God should bring to him; all who would be, in the mercy of God, called, chosen, sanctified among all nations, John 10:16.

Poole:
Not for that nation only; not for the Jews only. The words used in Caiaphas’s speech were laov and eynov, words not significant of the Jews only, but of other people also: for Christ was to gather into one body all the elect of God, who are here called

the children of God, because they were to be so after their being begotten by the immortal seed of the word, and born again of water and the Spirit), those that at present were

scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth: Christ was to gather together in one all things in heaven and earth, Ephesians 1:10. The evangelist extendeth the sense of Caiaphas’s prophecy to Gentiles as well as Jews, according to the extent of the death of Christ, declared 1Jo 2:2.

Gill:
but rather the elect of God among the Gentiles, called "the children of God", in opposition to a notion of the Jews, who took this character to themselves, on account of their national adoption, and denied it to the Gentiles, reckoning them no other than as dogs; and because they were the children of God by special adoption, in divine, predestination, and in the covenant of grace;

Vincent:
He wishes to set the Gentiles over against the Jews, and this distinction was national. Moreover, John points out in this word the fact that the work of Christ was not to be for any people as specially chosen of God, but for all nations.

venge,  Here is Galatians 6:11-18, for context.  It's "Final warnings and Blessings"

11. See what large letters I am using to write to you with my own hand!

12. Those who want to make a good impression outwardly are trying to compel you to be circumcised. They only do this to avoid persecution for the cross of Christ.
13. For the circumcised do not even keep the law themselves, yet they want you to be circumcised that they may boast in your flesh.

14. But as for me, may I never boast, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.
15. For neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything. What counts is a new creation.



16. Peace and mercy to all who walk by this rule, even to the Israel of God.

17. From now on let no one cause me trouble, for I bear on my body the marks of Jesus.

18. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brothers.  Amen."

Nowhere in the passage or the entire chapter [or anywhere else]  does Paul call the church Israel, nor does he equate them as being one. In fact he's making a distinction.    

Interestingly,  one of the major themes of Galations is Freedom from the Law - and he tells the believers that circumcision is not required for salvation.  
However, circumcision and passover are everlasting commandments of God to Israel, and anyone who doesn't keep these are cut off from their people.   

This command was never revoked or rescinded.   
Paul himself, after Christ's death, burial and resurrection, and ascension still kept the feasts and said "he must keep the feast" - talking about himself. 
 But it's not required for NT believers.    
It is another proof that Israel and the church are distinctly different.   

Do you think Passover and circumcision are optional for Jews.  ? 
Do you think Passover and circumcision are required for Gentile believers?      

www.bibleref.com/Galatians/6/Galatians-6-16.html
"What does Galatians 6:16 mean? 
Coming to the end of his letter to the Galatians, Paul offers a benediction or a blessing to a specific group of people: "all who walk by this rule." The rule he has in mind is what he has just said in the previous verses: It doesn't matter if someone is circumcised; what matters is if someone is a new creation in Christ.



Paul has made the case, from the first words of this letter (Galatians 1:3–5), that being "in Christ" comes only by faith in Christ and His death for our sin on the cross. No component of works, rituals, or sacraments can obtain our salvation (Galatians 3:23–29). In fact, to rely on any aspect of works means not fully trusting in the finished work of Christ (Galatians 5:2–4). The "rule" we are to follow is that of faith in Christ, leading to submissive obedience through His Spirit.



To those in Galatia who follow that rule, Paul prays for peace and mercy. He also prays the same upon "the Israel of God."
In Greek, as well as in English, Paul separates these two groups in praying his blessing. The growing body of Christians—the church—does not replace Israel. Even Paul, as shown here, sees them as separate entities."

Maybe mike or yardstick could move this into another thread so it doesn't sidetrack this one.  


   

Yea, IMHO, all of you guys, and the Bible commentators are wrong on the identity of "the Israel of God" in Galatians 6:16.

"the Israel of God" = Jesus Christ.



This is why the KJV is so important.


In the Egyptian corrupted "bibles", not based on the Texus Receptus, they omit χριστω ιησου (Christ Jesus) from Galatians 6:15, the previous verse.

That is the primary subject for the surrounding verses of Galatians 6:16.

And since it's Christ Jesus, and those whom believe are a new creature in Christ, it's all the same anyway.  We are in him, he is in us.  So it's all of us including him.
----- Edit: there is a verse in the Old Testament that names Israel that Paul quotes somewhere and identifies Israel as Jesus Christ.  It will take me some time to find it.  I'll probably need to re-read all of Paul's letters to find it.  I took notes on it when I saw it.

Hi - There are a few problems with the Holy Spirit being removed from the earth, many of which you a probably familiar with (but in case not). This is one of those things that caused me to question the pre-trib theory. If the Holy Spirit is removed what happens to Trib saints? They cant receive the Holy Spirit can they? If they do receive the Holy Spirit, then He isnt removed. The pre-trib theory says that after the rapture many will come to faith immediately or almost immediately because they will realize they missed the rapture, so what do they do? The Holy Spirit is gone or He isnt, cant be both. That leads to other theories 1. the restrainer isnt the Holy Spirit, 2. He changes how He ministers/He isnt removed, but removes His restraint.

In the quote you state the Great Tribulation is 3 1/2 years where Gods wrath is poured out. Where does the bible say that Gods wrath lasts 3.5 years? I ask that you consider that if God poured His wrath on the earth for that long, what would happen? The Great Tribulation is the anti-christ tormenting Christians worldwide. The Lord cuts short for the sake of the elect (Mark 13:20, 1Thes 1:10). After He saves the saints (I believe the rapture occurs very late into the G.T. - however for the sake of argument lets just say the Trib saints) before His wrath is poured. Gods wrath is at the 6th seal (Rev 6:12-17, Matt 24:29-31).

Not sure I understand "JACOB's trouble dealing with Israel" - You mean the 70th week is Jacobs trouble where He deals with Israel? I will interject my thought here. Jacobs name was changed to Israel, but why? From Gotquestions:
A possible answer to this, possible. It is the time of Jacobs trouble, not Israels trouble. Just something to ponder and see if this plays out, who knows.

You are missing context by looking for the word "church". He is speaking to the church. 

Jamieson says:
Israel of God—not the Israel after the flesh, among whom those teachers wish to enrol you; but the spiritual seed of Abraham by faith (Ga 3:9, 29; Ro 2:28, 29; Php 3:3).

Gill:
the spiritual Israel, as distinct from Israel according to the flesh; see 1 Corinthians 10:18.

The true church is to worship God in spirit and truth. The true church is spiritual Israel. Physical Israel today will NEVER inherit any of the promises that the true Israel WILL inherit if the physical Israel doesnt join the true in spirit and not in flesh. Only those physical Israelites today that worship God in spirit can and they are part of the true Israel. 

Whoever said the church replaces Israel? I keep hearing people say that. We joined in with true Israel. How does one replace Israel when we were foreign to it and brought INTO it by the blood of Christ? True Israel existed before us. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Elijah and others were of spiritual true Israel. The others were not. We are now apart of true Israel with Abraham, our father, by faith having joined into it by the same root which is Holy. 

And you say separate entities? Did you not read Elicott?


Or Meyer:

or Bengel:

Did you see that above? The physical Jews in Israel "do not use the proper name in the construct state" and "they do not put two proper names together in such a construction as "the Israel of God".

But let us confer to others since the testimony of 1 is not enough, yea, the testimony of 5 is not either I suppose. Let me post a 6th commentary.

Cambridge:

Lets go for 7...

Vincent:

Are you telling me I'm wrong in how the spirit testifies to me this truth and not me alone, but every commentary also? If I post 30 commentaries on the subject all saying the same thing, is that enough? What if I post what the early church said? Is that enough? Or is the real problem this:
Pre-TB has a fundamental issue because though the Bible says one thing, it interferes with their eschatology and if it interferes with that, it interferes with their belief in dispensationalism. To wit, both are tied hand in hand which we get the question: What came first, Pre-TB or the egg (dispensationalism)? Because holding on to that logic will cloud any other thing that comes into conflict with it. And doing so, I have to ask myself, are Pre-TB Christians afraid that saying they are spiritual Israel and possibly some not understanding it, do they feel they will alienate themselves from others by assuming they are replacing Israel? The church has been given grace, not made supreme over all. And we too as living stones can be broken off as the apostle warns us. 

Do not think that I, by saying we are the Israel of God, the spiritual Israel and the true Israel - that I am being proud; Or that I am casting others off and exalting myself. We have been brought into the same spiritual Israel by grace through faith. It is said In Isaiah 44:5

That is who we are!

Matthew henry:

Do you remember the man Christ said "behold an Israelite in whom there is no guile"? It was Nathaniel who became Christian. 


I don't need to keep going do I? 
Look, you don't need to reply. None of you do. This is what I believe is truthful in the word. And with that, obviously others agree on the same logic as tested above in various commentaries. I think that making it physical, as opposed to  spiritual, distorts the notion and that issue is what permeates in the minds of many here. The only separation between the church and physical Israel today is the carnal from the spiritual. Those in faith of Christ from those only in works. Those who are proud over those who are humbled. 

How you thought about that? God was theirs first before us. We, as Jameison points out, joined ourselves to the children of Jacob to worship their God. Do you remember what the OT said about the land inheritance? Separate subject, but I want to drive home a point:
Any foreigner who joined the tribes to worship the true God BECAME part of that tribe even though they were not biologically Jewish. 

So if a heathen joined with Israel and dwelt, for example,...the Benjaminite's, they became of the tribe of the Benjaminite's and had an inheritance of the land with them. Something to think about and how it relates to the spiritual side, not of land but of worship.