Defense of the Post Trib Rapture

[Uriah]

1 hour ago, transmogrified said:

 It was never said Daniel 11 was exclusively talking about the man of sin. 

Its not. Neither is there a eschatological tribulation that is thousands of years long.

But in Daniel, people see the words, :time of the end" a few times and think they all apply to eschatology, they don't. Every place other than ch. 12, it is speaking of the time of the end of the matters in the particular vision/revelation in which the angel is speaking of.

[transmogrified]

3 hours ago, Uriah said:

Its not. Neither is there a eschatological tribulation that is thousands of years long.

But in Daniel, people see the words, :time of the end" a few times and think they all apply to eschatology, they don't. Every place other than ch. 12, it is speaking of the time of the end of the matters in the particular vision/revelation in which the angel is speaking of.

Yes the specific events listed in Dan. 12:1-4 are the events that take place when the man of sin comes to his end...Neither Herod or Antiochus is the man who comes to his end in Daniel 11:45...they came to their end some 2000 years ago and the resurrection has not take place yet...at the time the man in Dan. 11:45 comes to his end is when the  the resurrection takes place, meaning it refers to a future man, not one who lived thousands of years ago...

[Uriah]

1 hour ago, transmogrified said:

it refers to a future man, not one who lived thousands of years ago

No, it is referring to to a man from the distant past. Look at the CONTEXT of the entire chapter. It doesn't change until the next verse.

[transmogrified]

19 minutes ago, Uriah said:

No, it is referring to to a man from the distant past.

Who is the man from the distant past?

19 minutes ago, Uriah said:

Look at the CONTEXT of the entire chapter.

What is the context of the entire chapter?

20 minutes ago, Uriah said:

It doesn't change until the next verse.

What doesn't change until what verse?

[Uriah]

34 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

Who is the man from the distant past?

Antiochus attacks the Jews (11:29-45)

https://www.studylight.org/commentary/daniel/11-45.html

34 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

What is the context of the entire chapter?

It is part of a scrolling history of historical events.

35 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

What doesn't change until what verse?

The general context of the chapter.

Dan 12- Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.

Even in the following chapter we see here what scholars believe to be a  reference to Antiochus, where it look time for wrod to filter down to the Israelis that he had met his demise. 

[Retrobyter]

8 hours ago, transmogrified said:

At the time the man in Dan. 11:45 comes to his end is when the resurrection takes place in Dan. 12:3...the divisions of chapters means nothing unless the context changes. The man in Dan. 11:45 comes to his end and then it says 'AT THAT TIME' these things will happen...

Shalom, transmogrified.

Actually, the man of Daniel 11:45 is HEROD THE GREAT! And, "uwVaa`eet" ("at that time") in Daniel 12:1 is a reference to the First Coming of the MESSIAH!

8 hours ago, transmogrified said:

1) Michael stands up..

It was Micha`eel's job to PROTECT the children of Israel while in captivity. They were about to go into captivity again!

8 hours ago, transmogrified said:

2) There will be a time of trouble (such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time and at that time thy people shall be delivered ...

3) Israel will be delivered ([rescued], every one that shall be found written in the book),,,

This is a DIRECT REFERENCE to the Time of Jacob's Trouble (a.k.a. the Tribulation), which was mentioned in Jeremiah 30:

Jeremiah 30:1-11ff (KJV)

1 The word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD, saying, 

2 'Thus speaketh the LORD God of Israel, saying,

'"Write thee all the words that I have spoken unto thee in a book. 3 For, lo, the days come," saith the LORD, "that I will bring again the captivity of my people Israel and Judah," saith the LORD: "and I will cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers, and they shall possess it."'

4 And these are the words that the LORD spake concerning Israel AND concerning Judah.

5 'For thus saith the LORD; "We have heard a voice of trembling, of fear, and not of peace. 6 Ask ye now, and see whether a man doth travail with child? wherefore do I see every man with his hands on his loins, as a woman in travail, and all faces are turned into paleness? 7 Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved (rescued) out of it. 8 For it shall come to pass in that day," saith the LORD of hosts, "that I will break his yoke from off thy neck, and will burst thy bonds, and strangers shall no more serve themselves of him: 9 But they shall serve the LORD their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them.

10 '"Therefore fear thou not, O my servant Jacob," saith the LORD; "neither be dismayed, O Israel: for, lo, I will save (rescue) thee from afar, and thy seed from the land of their captivity; and Jacob shall return, and shall be in rest, and be quiet, and none shall make him afraid. 11 For I am with thee," saith the LORD, "to save (rescue) thee: though I make a full end of all nations whither I have scattered thee, yet will I not make a full end of thee: but I will correct thee in measure, and will not leave thee altogether unpunished. ..."'

8 hours ago, transmogrified said:

4) Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth awake...

Yes, and this part is fulfilled at the Second Coming.

8 hours ago, transmogrified said:

One can not say the first 3 items were a fulfillment of prophecy around 70 AD when such and such king died and then say but the resurrection will happen some 2000 years after such and such king died...NO.

Actually, YES! After Herod the Great died, and after the Messiah was rejected, Yeshua` left the children of Israel, particularly the Jews of Jerusalem, DESOLATE!  (Matthew 23:37-39). This happened 40 years before the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem in 70 A.D., and Micha'eel probably was the angel who warned the Christians of Jerusalem when it was time to escape in 66 A.D!

The Tribulation or the Time of Jacob's Trouble began at this time, particularly in 70 A.D., and has lasted even into the present! It will continue until the Sun, Moon, and Stars Sign is seen! (Matthew 24:29-31). The Tribulation is not some mere 7 years long nor is the Great Tribulation only 3.5 years long! The Tribulation has been going on for nearly 2,000 YEARS! When I learned that, I could no longer be a pretribulational rapturist. How could the rapture be "before the Tribulation" when the Tribulation started in the First Century?!

8 hours ago, transmogrified said:

It does not say the first 3 items will be fulfilled when he comes to his end but the resurrection will happen some 2000 years after he comes to his end.

Fortunately (or rather, Providentially), King Herod died SHORTLY AFTER the Messiah was 1 or 2 years old and He and His family had fled to Egypt after the visit by the Magi until Herod had died. So, Herod dying, the Messiah's Advent, and Michael standing up for the children of Israel (the Jews) being delivered into captivity ALL happened BEFORE 70 A.D.

8 hours ago, transmogrified said:

I was referring to the text of Daniel 12 which does include the resurrection, which, by extension means the Second Coming.

After verse 4 in Daniel 12, the whole revealing prophecy in the text of Daniel 10-12 ends. Daniel is told to close the scroll and seal it, and then to "go his way"; that is, to "go on the road to his home." Thus, He was told, "Go HOME!"

8 hours ago, transmogrified said:

The only king that fits this description when the resurrection takes place is the man of sin who scatters the power of the holy people and reigns for 3. 5 years. The resurrection can not be placed at a different time than when the man in Daniel 11:45 comes to his end. Saying the tribulation lasts 2000 years does not eliminate the fact that the resurrection still happened when he comes to his end, which of course never happened when Herod or Antiochus came to their end.

 It was never said Daniel 11 was exclusively talking about the man of sin. 

Nope. Sorry, but he doesn't even APPEAR in this text! Even the prophecy of Gavri'eel in Daniel 9:26-27 is about the REAL MESSIAH, not the "man of sin!" That's a FICTION that's been attached to this prophecy without any authority to do so!

[transmogrified]

1 hour ago, Uriah said:

2 hours ago, transmogrified said:

Who is the man from the distant past?

Antiochus attacks the Jews (11:29-45)

Antiochus did not come to his end at the time the resurrection took place. The resurrection has not yet taken place. The resurrection of the good and bad takes place at the Second Coming...it did not happen some 2000 years ago when Antiochus came to his end. 

The events that were to take place at the time he comes to his end was:

1) Michael stands up...

2) Israel is delivered...

3) Time of trouble...

4) Multitudes that sleep in the dust of the earth will awake...

The resurrection of the good and the bad did not take place when Antiochus came to his end...

The question was asked 'When shall be the END of all these things? The answer was that 'it shall be for a time, times and a half, (3.5 years) and when HE (the man of sin, not Antiochus) shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, ALL THESE THINGS SHALL BE FINISHED.'

Part of 'all these things' was the resurrection of the good and the bad. Who is the 'HE' in verse 7? 

Blessings to you...

[Retrobyter]

7 hours ago, Uriah said:

Its not. Neither is there a eschatological tribulation that is thousands of years long.

Sorry, Uriah, but that's wrong. As I mentioned, Daniel 12:1 DOES talk about "the time of trouble" that is a DIRECT REFERENCE to Jeremiah's "Time of Jacob's Trouble" in Jeremiah 30:1-11. And, as can be seen from the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24:9, 21, 29 and Mark 13:19, and 24, this "tribulation" will continue to plague the children of Israel from the First Century until "the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken."

7 hours ago, Uriah said:

But in Daniel, people see the words, "time of the end" a few times and think they all apply to eschatology, they don't. Every place other than ch. 12, it is speaking of the time of the end of the matters in the particular vision/revelation in which the angel is speaking of.

Actually, what clinches the connection are the phrases "there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time," "that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble," and "then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be," found in Daniel 12:1, Jeremiah 30:7, and Matthew 24:21, respectively.

[Retrobyter]

37 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

Antiochus did not come to his end at the time the resurrection took place. The resurrection has not yet taken place. The resurrection of the good and bad takes place at the Second Coming...it did not happen some 2000 years ago when Antiochus came to his end. 

The events that were to take place at the time he comes to his end was:

1) Michael stands up...

2) Israel is delivered...

3) Time of trouble...

4) Multitudes that sleep in the dust of the earth will awake...

The resurrection of the good and the bad did not take place when Antiochus came to his end...

The question was asked 'When shall be the END of all these things? The answer was that 'it shall be for a time, times and a half, (3.5 years) and when HE (the man of sin, not Antiochus) shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, ALL THESE THINGS SHALL BE FINISHED.'

Part of 'all these things' was the resurrection of the good and the bad. Who is the 'HE' in verse 7? 

Blessings to you...

Actually, the last verse in Daniel 11 that talks about Antiochus IV directly is verse 32, and he goes off to fight elsewhere while his army continues to do his will against Judea. Antiochus dies between verses 34 and 35, and these verses after 32 are talking about Judas Maccabee, his brother Jonathan, and the Hasmonean dynasty. Then, in verse 36, we begin to read about Herod the Great, the client king of Rome, an Idumean, who is installed as the "King of Judaea." He is the "king" mentioned in the remaining verses of chapter 11, with a short group of verses (40-43) about the war between Rome and the alliance between Mark Antony and Cleapatra II, fought on Israeli soil, stuck in between those verses about Herod the Great.

See Bryan T. Huie's work at HereALittleThereALittle.net.

Edited May 29, 2022 by Retrobyter
to add the reference

[transmogrified]

18 minutes ago, Retrobyter said:

9 hours ago, transmogrified said:

One can not say the first 3 items were a fulfillment of prophecy around 70 AD when such and such king died and then say but the resurrection will happen some 2000 years after such and such king died...NO.

Actually, YES! After Herod the Great died, and after the Messiah was rejected, Yeshua` left the children of Israel, particularly the Jews of Jerusalem, DESOLATE!  (Matthew 23:37-39).

Saying the Messiah was rejected and left their house desolate is not the same event as the resurrection of the good and the bad that happens at the Second Coming..Saying after Herod the Great Died, and after the Messiah was rejected, Jesus left them desolate has nothing to do with the resurrection of the good and the bad taking place at the time the man in Daniel 11:45 comes to his end. 

There was no resurrection of the good and the bad at the first coming. Christ died and rose again after he said what he said in Matthew 23...Christ was the first fruits, after ward those that are Christ's AT HIS COMING...this is the Second Coming he is talking about...not the first coming...the Second Coming is yet future...the man identified in Dan. 11: 45 comes to his end WHEN the resurrection of the good and the bad happen...not at the death of Herod the Great. 

25 minutes ago, Retrobyter said:

10 hours ago, transmogrified said:

It does not say the first 3 items will be fulfilled when he comes to his end but the resurrection will happen some 2000 years after he comes to his end.

Fortunately (or rather, Providentially), King Herod died SHORTLY AFTER the Messiah was 1 or 2 years old and He and His family had fled to Egypt after the visit by the Magi until Herod had died. So, Herod dying, the Messiah's Advent, and Michael standing up for the children of Israel (the Jews) being delivered into captivity ALL happened BEFORE 70 A.D.

None of the above quote has anything to do with the resurrection of the good and the bad that takes place at the Second Coming. 

 

27 minutes ago, Retrobyter said:

10 hours ago, transmogrified said:

I was referring to the text of Daniel 12 which does include the resurrection, which, by extension means the Second Coming.

After verse 4 in Daniel 12, the whole revealing prophecy in the text of Daniel 10-12 ends.

The revealing prophecy does not end after verse 4...the question that was asked about when the things that were stated to occur was answered by the angel in verse 7. The question of WHAT shall be the end of these things was not answered, but the question of 'How long shall it be to the end of these wonders' was answered.'

The first question: 'HOW LONG shall it be to the end of these wonders?'

The answer to the first question: "It shall be for a time, times and a half, and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people ALL THESE THINGS SHALL BE FINISHED.

The Second Question: "WHAT shall be the end of these wonders?'

The answer to the second question: "Go thy way, Daniel; for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end..." 

The first question was answered in verse 7. When he said it was sealed to the time of the end does not mean the answer was not given to the first question. It meant the understanding of what was said would not be understood until the time of the end...not that the answer was not given. We now have the Book of Revelation that shows us the meaning of the 3. 5 year reign of the beast being described and how he will wage war against the saints, and how the resurrection will take place when he is destroyed at the Second Coming.

If in fact no one can understand what was said in verse 7 because the book is still sealed, then it would be folly for it to be asserted that this man was Antiochus as it was stated below:

Quote

 

Daniel 12 does not talk about "the man of sin" or "the 3.5 year reign of the beast!"

The "the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river" is talking about the same man in ...

Daniel 11:30-35 (KJV)

30 For the ships of Chittim shall come against him: therefore he shall be grieved, and return, and have indignation against the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return, and have intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant. 31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate. 32 And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits. 33 And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days. 34 Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help: but many shall cleave to them with flatteries. 35And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.

This is NOT talking about the "beast" of Revelation, nor the "man of sin": the messenger here is talking about ANTIOCHUS IV EPIPHANES!

 

If the revealing of the prophecy ends in verse 4 and everything Daniel was told can not be understood even now, then it could not be known that it was Antiochus or Herod.

And if Antiochus or Herod was being described from 11:30- 35, who is the man from 35-45?

Blessings to you- Gary