Defense of the Post Trib Rapture

[Uriah]

1 hour ago, transmogrified said:

Saying 'at that time' does not make it obvious that two different times are in front of us

The CONTEXT certainly does.

1 hour ago, transmogrified said:

Where did they do it as elsewhere?

Graphic below should have been here.

1 hour ago, transmogrified said:

If what is being proposed then every translation that I have seen are wrong...none of them have it translated 'And at that time that...'

Yup, and look at the sheer havoc that has ensued.

1 hour ago, transmogrified said:

In both constructs the one event was tied directly to the time frame of the proceeding events.

Spoken like the true devotee to infallible translators.

 

1 hour ago, transmogrified said:

that - (this word is not in the Hebrew text in Daniel 12 according to Blue Letter Bible Interlinear

Too bad you didn't address the "implied" manner of the language usage. Thought I made it clear.

1 hour ago, transmogrified said:

This  alleged translation error is being put forth as if it confirms Antiochus is the man in Dan. 12:7. If Antiochus is the man in Dan. 12:7 the same issue remains. It says at the end of his 3.5 year reign all the things specified are to be finished. Antiochus has still been dead for over 2000 years and the resurrection of the just and the unjust have not taken place.

I assumed Dan 12:7 the "he" was Antiochus. But I don't understand how you think he should have been restricted. Baffled. How long do you think his terror against the Jews lasted? My position stated was that the narrative in Dan. 11 changes to the distant future in Dan 12, where it then returns to statements on Antiochus again. Easy.

See that word in parentheses?-"that" Not shown in the BLB text list...because it is implied. this happens all over the scriptures.

Edited May 31, 2022 by Uriah
Note

[Retrobyter]

13 hours ago, transmogrified said:

Here are the events that will be finished at the time the man in Dan. 11:45 comes to his end:

1) Michael stands up...

2) There will be a time of trouble...

3) Israel will be delivered...

4) The just and the unjust are resurrected.

Yes the messiah was rejected...rejecting the Messiah does not mean the resurrection of the just and the unjust took place at that time.

Yes, Jesus said that. But Jesus telling Israel that her house is left unto her desolate does not mean the resurrection of the just and the unjust took place at this time...The resurrection is yet future and it did not happen when Herod The Great came to his end. According to Dan. 11:45 all of the event specified were to be completed at the time the man in Dan. 11:45 comes to his end..These events

Shalom, transmogrified.

Don't you find it ODD that Yeshua` the Messiah wouldn't be mentioned? He IS! That's what "At that time" implies! We've just finished reading about the evil man Herod the Great and then we read about Micha'eel standing up? What happened in between? Do you know WHY Micha'eel had to stand?

Micha'eel is described as ...

Daniel 11:44-12:1 (NIV)

44 But reports from the east and the north will alarm him (Herod), and he (Herod) will set out in a great rage to destroy and annihilate many. (the grandchildren of Rachel) 45 He (Herod) will pitch his royal tents between the seas at the beautiful holy mountain. Yet he (Herod) will come to his end, and no one will help him.
1 “At that time Michael, THE GREAT PRINCE WHO PROTECTS YOUR PEOPLE, will arise. There will be A TIME OF DISTRESS such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time YOUR PEOPLE—EVERYONE WHOSE NAME IS FOUND WRITTEN IN THE BOOK—WILL BE DELIVERED. ..."

Remember: The events described in chapters 10 through 12 affect the PEOPLE of Israel and their LAND! The messenger from God isn't concerned with whatever else may have been happening all around them! He's ONLY telling of events that DIRECTLY affected the children of Israel and the Holy Land!

Yeshua`s appearance and presentation of the Kingdom "NEVER HAPPENED," as far as the Jews were concerned! Therefore, there was no ACTUAL affect on the Land during His First Advent. However, who do you think is writing "in the book?"

This is the LAMB'S Book of Life! (Revelation 21:27).

13 hours ago, transmogrified said:

Yes, they will say that at the Second Coming when he comes and delivers Israel from all the nations that are gathered together against her..There will be a great mourning in that day when they realize they have killed their own Messiah and they will repent and God will accept them.

Herod the great died in 4 BC. Jesus is talking to the disciples some 30 years later on the Mt. of Olives, answering the question of 'what would be the sign of your coming, and of the end of the age.' 

If Jesus meant the abomination of desolation was Herod the Great then all the things that were to occur when he came to his end would have already been fulfilled.

Nope. You're confusing the characters in Daniel 11. Herod the Great was the LAST person mentioned in chapter 11.

Antiochus IV is the one who "shall place the abomination that maketh desolate." The idol of Zeus and the sacrifice of a pig that caused the Temple and particularly the Altar to be desecrated. (Daniel 11:31).

Furthermore, He DID NOT mean the "abomination of desolation" was Herod the Great nor did He mean that Antiochus II was the "abomination of desolation." He was referring back to chapter 9, verse 27. The abominations that led to the desolation of the Temple and Jerusalem were what the scribes and Pharisees - the elders of the people - had done! And, the desecration of the Temple would be the SIGNAL to the believers in 66 A.D. that it was time to flee! Furthermore, they received AUDIBLE warning from an angel (a messenger) of God to flee! The words "abomination" and "desolation" are NOT a label for a single event! They are words that can be used for ANY abomination and for ANY desolation!

13 hours ago, transmogrified said:

The scripture specifically at the time the man in Dan. 11:45 comes to his end is when the following events occur:

1) Michael stands up..

2) There will be a time of trouble...

3) Israel will be delivered...

4) The just and the unjust are resurrected....

Not exactly. See, Herod the Great is the man in Daniel 11:45. And, it is at that time that Micha'eel stands up. Then, FOLLOWING his standing, there will be a time of trouble - the Tribulation. THROUGH the time of Jacob's trouble, Israel will be delivered. Then, FOLLOWING the Tribulation, the Second Coming occurs and the just are resurrected. AFTER the first 1,000 years of the Messiah's reign, THEN the unjust are resurrected.

There are TIMING issues that are glossed over in this brief summary of human history.

13 hours ago, transmogrified said:

All these events would have been fulfilled some 30 years BEFORE Jesus spoke to his disciples on the Mt. of Olives in Matthew 24. He would NOT have been telling there would be a FUTURE gathering of the elect at the sound of the great trumpet, if the resurrection of the just had already taken place at the death of Herod. 

Nope. You're forgetting (if you once knew) that YESHUA` HIMSELF is the one who set these events in motion! And, there are TIMING considerations that must be added to this shortened summary.

13 hours ago, transmogrified said:

Yes, the resurrection of the just happens at the Second Coming...the problem is that the resurrection of the just in Dan. 12:3 is supposed to happen at the time the man mentioned in Dan. 11:45 comes to his end. The resurrection of the righteous did not take place when Herod died in 4 BC.

So if the 3.5 years was the 'time of the offering of the kingdom to Judah,' then at the close of that 3.5 year period all the things listed were to be finished.

Yes, and they ARE BEING FINISHED! Not all events are instances of time. SOME ARE PERIODS of time! Something that begins at one point on the timeline, but it isn't finished until some point in the future from there! The beginning and ending points define a LINE SEGMENT on the timeline - a PERIOD!

13 hours ago, transmogrified said:

All of the things were not finished at the end of the 3.5 year 'time of the offering of the kingdom to Judah.'

Of COURSE, "All of the things were not finished at the end of the 3.5 year 'time of the offering of the kingdom to Judah.'" But, they were STARTED then!

13 hours ago, transmogrified said:

The resurrection of neither the just nor the unjust took place at the end of Christ's ministry. Israel was not delivered at the end of Christ's ministry...that was actually the time they were cut off as you said ...Their house was left unto them desolate..not delivered.

Of course not! Why would you think it would have to be otherwise?!

13 hours ago, transmogrified said:

The question was How long shall it be to the end of these wonders? What wonders was he talking about?

1) Michael stands up..

2) Israel is delivered...

3) Time of trouble...

4) The just and the unjust are resurrected...

When he said ALL these things will be finished at the end of the 3.5 year period he meant ALL the things specified. All the things specified did not occur at the end of Christ's ministry.

Actually, they DO! The time of the Resurrections IS when the Messiah has returned! Christ's "Ministry" hasn't ended, yet! There were to be 7 years when the Messiah of God from the Tribe of Yhudah would offer the Kingdom to the whole of the children of Israel, just as His father, David, did. However, the time was postponed because His own tribe, Yhudah - the Jews - did not accept Him as God's Messiah, their King! So, He turned from them to the Gentiles.

However, don't think for a moment that ANY of this was not already a part of God's Plan, set into motion with the Creation of the World!

13 hours ago, transmogrified said:

God did not change what he told Daniel because Israel rejected him...if all the things specified are to take place within the 3.5 year period, and that 3.5 year period was the ministry of Christ, then it would have been fulfilled, but it wasn't.

OF COURSE it wasn't! But, Yeshua` the Messiah of God SPLIT the 70th Seven in two when they rejected Him to be their King, HALFWAY THROUGH the 70th Seven! The SECOND half of the 70th Seven will occur AFTER the Tribulation, which ends at the SECOND COMING! Thus, the SECOND half of the 70th Seven will occur AFTER the SECOND COMING! And, again, this was all decided before the Foundation of the World!

13 hours ago, transmogrified said:

 Yes. That was in the quote below:

 

The 3.5 year ministry of Christ is not the man in Dan. 12:7. This is totally false. If that 3. 5 year period was the 3.5 year ministry of Christ all those things would have been finished at the death of Christ, but they weren't.

Which half of the "7-year offer of the King of the Jews to be Israel's King" are you talking about? The first half was the offer rejected, because Yeshua` was to be the "Lamb of God," when Yeshua` was offered as the Sacrifice for sin, and was resurrected. The second half will be the offer accepted, because Yeshua` will return as the "Lion of the Tribe of Yhudah!"

13 hours ago, transmogrified said:

Here is part of the answer:

The above was part of the answer as to who the man in Dan. 12 was. It was said he was Antiochus.

Yeah, I think I may have even said that before. That's not what I believe. I believe that it will be the Messiah who FINISHES the offer of the Kingdom to His people. I also believe that there will be competition to His rulership until His Kingdom has been established, but there will be no doubt when all is over who the King is! 

13 hours ago, transmogrified said:

The response to this was that the events described did not take place when Antiochus came to his end.

Here is another part of the answer as to who the man in Dan. 12 was:

The question was asked where the identity of the man who started in Dan. 11:21 changed to someone else. A partial response to this question was given as shown below:

 

It can be said Antiochus ends in verse 32, and it can be said Antiochus dies between 34 and 35, and it can be said the verses after 32 are talking about Judas Maccabee and his brother Jonathan, and it can be said that Herod shows up in 36, and then that Herod lasts until the 45, and that 40-43 is the war between Rome and the alliance between Mark Anotony and Cleapatra II, and they are stuck between the verses about Herod the Great. 

The problem is these that events that show up in history does not mean that is what scripture is describing. For example it was said Antiochus ends in verse 32. Here is the verse 32:

Where does the above verse say Antiochus ends? Here is the next quote: 

Here is 34 and 35:

Where does this quote say Antiochus died? How is it that Antiochus died in verse 32 and yet he comes to his end in 34 and 35 when no death of anyone is mentioned from 32 -35? 

 Blessings to you- Gary

Gary, the WHOLE prophecy of the messenger is about WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL LEFT IN THE LAND and WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO GOD'S LAND?

Antiochus IV died while he was off in Persia on one of his campaigns to get money to pay off Rome. He heard news that Judas Maccabee and his paltry army DEFEATED his powerful and large army back home, took ill, and died there! That was away from the Land; so, who cares? The messenger sure didn't!

Antiochus' army tried and tried again, and sometimes they won; sometimes (and ULTIMATELY) they lost! Then, when the surrounding Gentiles heard about their successful revolt, they were ANGRY with the Jews, and THEY began to attack them! Why? Who knows (but God)? But, then the Hasmoneans were fighting back at them! So, at that point (the end of verse 32), the focus was on the "the people that do know their God." In less than 4 verses, the whole story of the Hasmonean dynasty is told.

Then, in verese 36, the story changes focus to Herod the Great, who appeared on the scene as Rome's client king over the Land. The weird things about this man - the outstanding traits of the man and the awful choices he made as king - were said to identify him.

Then, in verse 40, a bigger picture takes place between Rome and Egypt! And part of their war takes place on the Holy Land! Herod at first had sided with Antony, but seeing that the war was turning against Antony/Cleopatra, he changed sides to Octavius (whom he met with on the Greek isle of Rhodes in the winter of 30 B.C.), and prevented Antony from getting his gladiators going to Egypt to help Antony.

This was the greater influence on the Land at that time.

Then, in verses 43 to 45, we're back to Herod the Great.

The "news from the North" that troubled him was that his oldest son Antipater, who was trying to gain the throne for himself, sent letters telling his father that two of his younger brothers, whom Herod wanted to make his successors, were criticizing him to Caesar. He had both sons killed.

The "news from the East" that troubled him was the visit of the Magi looking for the one who was "born King of the Jews."

[transmogrified]

 

Hello Uriah-

 

 

The text reads:

"And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away...." From what was said above, adding implied words that are not in the text would be wrong and so it shouldn't be done. 

Quote

See that word in parentheses?-"that" Not shown in the BLB text list...because it is implied. this happens all over the scriptures. 

On 5/30/2022 at 6:20 PM, Uriah said:

On 5/30/2022 at 5:10 PM, transmogrified said:

If what is being proposed then every translation that I have seen are wrong...none of them have it translated 'And at that time that...'

Yup, and look at the sheer havoc that has ensued.

Above it is put forth that the word 'that' was deleted from the text in all the translations that were shown and it was deemed to be wrong and it was stated that  doing so  has cause sheer havoc. 

In the first case it is said a word was added and shouldn't have been done. In the second case it is said that a word was deleted and shouldn't have been done. It is then acknowledged that it would be wrong to add or delete a word from the text. 

The problem here is that the word 'that' was never in the text in Daniel 12:1 so it was NOT deleted in any of the translations that were shown. Something can not be deleted that was never there to start with.

Here is how it reads in Blue letter Bible:

1) And at (#6256)

2) That (#1931)

3) time (#6256) 

4) shall (#5975)

5) Michael (#4317) 

6) stand up (#5975) 

It is not 'and at that time that..'

Here is how it reads in Study Light:

1) And time  (#6256) 

2) at that (#1931) 

3) shall stand up (#5975) 

4) Michael (#4317) 

It is not 'and at that time that...'

Here is how it reads in Bible Hub NASB Lexicon:

1) Now at that time (#6256) 

2) Michael (#4317) 

3) the great (#1419)

4) prince (#8269) 

5) who stands (#5275)

5) guard ove (#5921) 

6) the sons (#1121) 

7) of your people (#5971) 

8) will arise (#5975)  

It is not 'and at that time that...'

The word 'that' was not there to delete, so the translations did not omit it. The meaning remains as it is in the text...

"...yet he shall come to his end and none shall help him. And at that time (that he comes to his end) shall Michael stand up...

Not, 'And at that time that Michael stands up.'

If it was wrong to add words to the text in the first example, it would also be wrong to add words to the text in this example. 

Blessings to you-Gary

 

 

  

 

  

 

[Uriah]

2 hours ago, transmogrified said:

"And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away...." From what was said above, adding implied words that are not in the text would be wrong and so it shouldn't be done. 

This is done all the time! Its called the KJV. surely you have seen the many italicized words. 

2 hours ago, transmogrified said:

Above it is put forth that the word 'that' was deleted from the text in all the translations that were shown and it was deemed to be wrong and it was stated that  doing so  has cause sheer havoc. 

Wait a minute, you're saying I claim something was DELETED? I did no such thing! Oh, "put forth" (implied?!) No, I thought I made clear enough that a legitimate practice was ignored and many simply follow suit.

2 hours ago, transmogrified said:

In the first case it is said a word was added and shouldn't have been done.

Actually 2 words...

12:1- "And at" these two words are implied and its fine. I did not say it shouldn't have been done. Please stop this..

4 hours ago, transmogrified said:

1) And at (#6256

#1931- "And at", yet the word for this is ʿēṯ   whose translation is "time"

4 hours ago, transmogrified said:

Not, 'And at that time that Michael stands up.'

Right, I did nothing more than the NASB folks with the most minimalist way I could find. 

The 11th chapter of Daniel starts with what is now history of the rise of the Persians and Grecians. Has anyone ever showed where in the chapter it transitions to Herod or the A-C?

[transmogrified]

On 5/31/2022 at 4:42 AM, Retrobyter said:

On 5/29/2022 at 3:40 PM, transmogrified said:

All of the things were not finished at the end of the 3.5 year 'time of the offering of the kingdom to Judah.'

Of COURSE, "All of the things were not finished at the end of the 3.5 year 'time of the offering of the kingdom to Judah.'" But, they were STARTED then!

The words 'all these things shall be finished,' does not mean 'all these things will have started and will be finished later.'

It is a direct contradiction of what is said to say

Quote

'Of course all the things were not finished at the end of the 3. 5 year time of the offering of the kingdom to Judah,' But they started then.

Starting something and something being completed are not the same. It did not say at the end of the 3.5 year period of persecution that all these will be started...it said they would be finished. Starting something does not mean it is finished. 

On 5/31/2022 at 4:42 AM, Retrobyter said:

On 5/29/2022 at 3:40 PM, transmogrified said:

Here is 34 and 35:

Where does this quote say Antiochus died? How is it that Antiochus died in verse 32 and yet he comes to his end in 34 and 35 when no death of anyone is mentioned from 32 -35? 

 Blessings to you- Gary

Gary, the WHOLE prophecy of the messenger is about WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL LEFT IN THE LAND and WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO GOD'S LAND?

It was alleged that Antiochus died between 32-35. There is no death of anyone mentioned in 32-35. Saying  'the whole prophecy of the messenger is about what will happen to the children of Israel left in the land and what will happen to God's land,' does not make verses 32-35 show the death of Antiochus. 

On 5/31/2022 at 4:42 AM, Retrobyter said:

The SECOND half of the 70th Seven will occur AFTER the Tribulation, which ends at the SECOND COMING! Thus, the SECOND half of the 70th Seven will occur AFTER the SECOND COMING! And, again, this was all decided before the Foundation of the World!

The second half of the tribulation does not occur after the Second Coming...It says 'immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days he will gather his elect...' The time of trouble is FINISHED at the end of the 3.5 year persecution of the saints...this means the time of trouble is not still going on. Finished means it has come to its completion. Saying immediately after the tribulation Jesus will come does not mean in the middle of the tribulation Jesus will come. 

On 5/31/2022 at 4:42 AM, Retrobyter said:

Then, in verses 43 to 45, we're back to Herod the Great.

If Herod the Great was the man who came to his end in 11:45, then Michael was to stand up at that time, Israel was to be delivered, the time of trouble would have ended, and the resurrection of the good and bad would have happened. But they didn't, so Herod is not the man in 11:45. It is the man of sin Paul spoke of who comes to his end in 11:45. He is called the beast in Revelation. He will persecute the saints for 3.5 years and then comes to his end when he is destroyed at the Second Coming and cast alive into the lake of fire. 

Blessings to you- Gary

[Retrobyter]

On 5/29/2022 at 3:33 AM, Uriah said:

Antiochus. Historically. After that time, it was over. Even though there was more time until Antiochus died, He never made it back to fulfill the rest of his hatred against the Jews.

Indeed, and so look at how a bit further in the chapter it shows the blasphemy committed against the Jews by the Greeks. 

Guys,

The problem here, as is when people read Revelation, they then to go into linear mode. Like demanding that because the sentences on the page are in a certain order, therefore the speaker MUST be speaking of things in the exact same order.

In Dan. and Rev. there are cases where an angel speaks of things to come, moves foreword then returns to the previous matters. (like people talking football-super bowl)

Until you recognize this you will go along happily stumbling over and over on the same things that have been debated endlessly while straining to mush things together that aren't made to be so.

It would be nice if at every one of these junctures carried the, "but before these things" label for us but they don't. 

Suffice it to say, studying prophecy requires close attention to what is being said, including how it is said at times. Not just reading words.

Shalom, Uriah.

That seems to be your answer for everything. "The problem is a linear view of the text." Well, guess what: People, like the human authors, NORMALLY think and talk LINEARLY! That is, we recount activities in a chronological order, as much as possible. To do otherwise would be to state a bunch of facts without linking cause and effect!

Now, admittedly, there is a different way of thinking and reporting in Hebrew literature; that is, the author will list the main thoughts first and then go back and fill in the details, but it is fairly clear from the text which things came first, second, third, etc. The main points are listed LINEARLY! The detailed points are also listed LINEARLY! It's just plain WRONG to think you can rearrange the order to your own liking!

An example is Genesis 1!

Genesis 1:1 generally says,

Genesis 1:1 (KJV)

1 In the beginning God created THE HEAVEN and THE EARTH.

Then, it begins with the details:

Genesis 1:2-13ff (KJV)

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said,

"Let there be light":

and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light "Day," and the darkness he called "Night." And the evening and the morning were THE FIRST DAY.

6 And God said,

"Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters."

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament "Heaven." And the evening and the morning were THE SECOND DAY.

9 And God said,

"Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear":

and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land "Earth"; and the gathering together of the waters called he "Seas": and God saw that it was good. 11 And God said,

"Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth":

and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 13 And the evening and the morning were THE THIRD DAY.

...

Here's the Hebrew (transliterated) from the same verses:

Bree'shiyt 1:1-13

1 Bree'shiyt baaraa' 'Elohiym 'eet HASHAAMAYIM v'eet HAA'AARETS:

2 Vhaa'aarets haaytaah tohuw vaaVohuw vchoshekh `al-pneey t-howm v-Ruwach 'Elohiym mrachefet `al-pneey hamaayim:
3 Vayo'mer 'Elohiym, 

"Yhiy 'owr"

Vayhiy-'owr: 4 Vayyar' 'Elohiym 'et-haa'owr kiy-TowV vayyaVdeel 'Elohiym beeyn haa'owr uwVeeyn hachoshekh: 5 Vayyiqraa' 'Elohiym | laa'owr "YOWM" v-lachoshekh qaaraa' "LAAYLAAH" vayhiy-`ereV vayhiy-boqer YOWM 'ECHAAD: F

6 Vayyo'mer 'Elohiym, 

"Yhiy raaqiya` b-towkh hamaayim viyhiy maVdiyl beeyn mayim laamaayim":

7 Vayya`as 'Elohiym 'et-haaraaqiya` vayhiy maVdeel beeyn hamayim 'asher mitachat laaraaqiya` uwVeeyn hammayim asher mee`al laaraaqiya` vayhiy-keen:
8 Vayyiqraa' 'Elohiym laaraaqiya` "SHAAMAAYIM" vayhiy-`ereV vayhiy-boqer YOWM SHEENIY: F

9 Vayyo'mer 'Elohiym, 

"Yiqaavuw hamayim mitachat hashaamayim 'el-maaqowm 'echaad v-teer'eh hayyabaashaah"

vayhiy-keen:
10 Vayyiqraa' 'Elohiym layyabaashaah "'ERETS": uwlmiqveeh hammayim qaaraa' "YAMMIYM" vayyar' 'Elohiym kiy-TowV
11 Vayyo'mer 'Elohiym, 

"Tadshee' haa'aarets deshe' `eeseV zera` l-miyneehuw v`eets `oseh priy lmiynov 'asher zar`ov-bov `al-haa'aarets"

vayhiy-keen:
12 Vatovtsee' haa'aarets deshe' `eeseV mazriya` zera` l-miyneehuw v`eets `oseh-priy 'asher zar`ov-bow l-mineehuw vayyar' 'Elohiym kiy-TowV:
13 Vayhiy-`ereV vayhiy-boqer YOWM SHLIYSHIY: F

Here's a word-for-word translation:

In-the-beginning 1:1-13

1 In-the-beginning created God (D.O.->) THE-SKIES and-(D.O.->) THE-EARTH:

2 And-the-earth was formless and-empty and-darkness (was) upon-[the]-face of-the-deep and a-Wind of-God moved `upon-[the]-face of-the-waters:
3 And-said God

"Let-exist light"

And-there-was-light: 4 And-saw God (D.O.->) the-light that-[it-was]-good and-divided God between the-light and-between the-darkness: 5 And-gave-a-name God | to-the-light "DAY" and-to-the-darkness He-gave-the-name "NIGHT" and-there-was evening and-there-was morning DAY ONE: F

6 And-said God,

"Let-exist an-expanse between the-waters and-let-it separate between waters from-waters":

7 And-made God (D.O.->) the-expanse and-separated between the-waters that-were beneath to-the-expanse and-between the-waters that-were from-above to-the-expanse and-it-was-so:
8 And-gave-a-name God to-the-expanse "SKIES" and-there-was-evening and-there-was-morning DAY TWO: F

9 And-said God, 

"Let-be-gathered-together the-waters beneath the-skies 'into a-place one and-let-appear the-dry-[ground]"

and-it-was-so:
10 And-gave-a-name God to-the-dry-[ground] "EARTH": and-to-the-collection of-the-waters He-gave-a-name "SEAS" and-saw God that-it-was-good.
11 And-said God, 

"Let-bring-forth the-earth grass [the]-herb that-bears seed the-tree of-fruit yielding fruit to-its-kind that-has its-seed-in-it upon-the-earth";

and-it-was-so:
12 And-brought-forth the-earth grass [the]-herb bearing seed to-its-kind and-[the]-tree bearing-fruit whose its-seed-in-it to-its-kind; and-saw God that-it-was-good:
13 And-there-was-evening and-there-was-morning DAY THREE: F

Verse 1 is the SUMMARY of the verses to follow because in verses 8 and 10, God gives NAMES to the expanse and to the dry land, and He gives them the names "skies" and "earth" respectively, the SAME WORDS as in verse 1! Just follow the logic!

And, even when listing the details of the Creation events, He does so in order: the events of Day One, the events of Day Two, the events of Day Three, etc. That's a LINEAR progression! That's why we can look at events on what is called a "timeline!" And, the great thing about time is that it is uni-directional, that is, it only flows one way - from past to present to future - for EVERYONE!

So, please, re-look at the Scriptures that you take so nonchalantly and SEE the order that is there! It's not a hodge-podge of facts; there is time-linear order!

 

[Uriah]

1 hour ago, Retrobyter said:

That seems to be your answer for everything.

Whoa, let's get real here. I have pointed out two instances out of thousands of bible verses. Should we pretend parenthetic passages NEVER happen? But curiously, these are exactly where there are so much controversy are generated. 

The convoluted, Monty Python pipe-works we have all seen surrounding these bottleneck areas are hard enough to avoid without having to strain at the trees and miss the forest.

By strict linear reading, people are sure Genesis holds two creation accounts instead of realizing it is merely written of twice.

Edited June 2, 2022 by Uriah

[Retrobyter]

On 5/30/2022 at 7:10 PM, transmogrified said:

Saying 'at that time' does not make it obvious that two different times are in front of us. 

Below is a list of many translations and none of them has it the way that is being proposed...none of them say "And at the time that Michael stands up shall be a time of trouble...." They almost exclusively say the exact phrase 'at that time.' 

Where did they do it as elsewhere? 

If what is being proposed then every translation that I have seen are wrong...none of them have it translated 'And at that time that...' 

The Hebrew words in Strongs from Blue Letter Bible do not have the additional #1931 'That.' as is shown in the above quote. The Hebrew is shown as follows:

1) And at - #6256  et...

2) that - #1931 hu...

3) time - #6256 et...

4) that - #19331 hu....This word is not in the Strongs Blue Letter Hebrew Interlinear..it ends with 'and at that time shall Michael stand up..' it does not say 'and at that time that Michael shall stand up.' 

Original reading:

And at that time shall Michael stand up...

Revised reading:

And at that time that Michael shall stand up...

It was never translated that way in any of these versions:

NIV - At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. 

NLV - “At that time Michael, the archangel who stands guard over your nation, will arise.

ESV -At that time shall arise Michael, the great prince

Berean - At that time Michael, the great prince who stands watch

NASV-  Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise.

NASB 1995 - Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise. 

NASB 1997-  Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise.

Amplified: Now at that [end] time Michael, the great [angelic] prince who stands guard over the children of your people, will arise.

Christian Standard Bible - At that time Michael, the great prince who stands watch over your people, will rise up.

Holman Christian Standard Bible - At that time Michael the great prince who stands watch over your people will rise up. 

Aramaic Bible in Plain English - At that time Mikaeil, the Great Angel, shall stand, 

Brenton Septuagint - And at that time Michael the great prince shall stand up,

Good News Translation -The angel wearing linen clothes said, "At that time the great angel Michael, who guards your people, will appear. 

International Standard - At that time, Michael will arise, the great prince who will stand up on behalf of your people,

.JPS Tanakh 1917- And at that time shall Michael stand up, 

Literal Standard Version- And at that time Michael stands up, the great head, who is standing up for the sons of your people, 

New American Bible - At that time there shall arise Michael, the great prince, guardian of your people;

NET - At that time Michael, the great prince who watches over your people, will arise.

NRSV - At that time Michael, the great prince, the protector of your people, shall arise. at that time that Michael shall stand up.'

New Heart English Bible - At that time shall Michael arise, the great prince who watches over the children of your people.

World English Bible -"At that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince who stands for the children of your people;

Young's Literal Bible - And at that time stand up doth Michael, the great head, 

There are two times in the KJV that has the phrase 'and at that time that,' and they are shown below:

In both constructs the one event was tied directly to the time frame of the proceeding events. For example:

When it says in Gen. 21:22 'And it came to pass at that time,' it is referring to the time frame just mentioned, meaning when Ishmael dwelt in Paran and his mother took him a wife  out of Egypt... as it states:

Then it says, and it came to pass at that time, (comma) that Abimelech and Phichol spoke to Abraham.

So when it said 'and it came to pass at that time, that Abimelech and Phichol spoke to Abraham we know that the time that Abimelech and Phichol spoke to Abraham was at the same time that Ishmael dwelt in Paran. The phrase  'at that time' links two different events to the same time period, even though the word 'that' was added into the sentence.

Here is a comparison between the text in Gen. 21 and Dan. 12 where the phrase 'at that time' is used.

Gen. 21: 

1) at -#6256

2) that - #1931

3) time -#6256

4) that - #559

Dan. 12:

1) at - #6256

2) that - #1931

3) time -#6256 

4) that - (this word is not in the Hebrew text in Daniel 12 according to Blue Letter Bible Interlinear) 

But let's assume all the English translations I have looked are wrong and it really should be translated 'and at that time that.'

It now reads, And at that time that Michael stands up, there will be  a time of trouble...and at that time that thy people shall be delivered, everyone that shall be written in the book. It doesn't read coherently but the net result is it is saying there are these specific events that will happen but not at any specific time.

When Michael stands up there will be a time of trouble...and whenever Israel is delivered the resurrection of the good and the bad will occur.

This  alleged translation error is being put forth as if it confirms Antiochus is the man in Dan. 12:7. If Antiochus is the man in Dan. 12:7 the same issue remains. It says at the end of his 3.5 year reign all the things specified are to be finished. Antiochus has still been dead for over 2000 years and the resurrection of the just and the unjust have not taken place.

It does not matter if I can find a time somewhere where there was trouble, or if I can find a time when Israel was delivered, or I can assume there was a time when Michael stood up, it still DOES NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

The angel did not say SOME of these things will be finished at the end of the 3.5 year reign of the man in Dan. 12:7, he said ALL these things will be finished.

The resurrection of the just and the unjust is part of the events that were specified so no one in past history can fit the bill...It doesn't matter if one claims Herod or Antiochus, they both have been dead for thousands of years and this  resurrection has not taken place which scripture said would be finished. It is not finished and will not take place until the Second Coming so there is no object in finding someone in the past to fit the bill...it is impossible. 

Blessings to you- Gary

 

Shalom, Gary.

One doesn't need to use comparative studies between translations if one knows the Hebrew (or Greek) behind the original words translated.

Translators are human, and they will often use the translations of others as a guide in their own translation process. Depending on how much of this is done will determine when a work can be called an original "translation" or a "paraphrase" of work done by others.

It's better to go back to the roots. If one learns biblical Hebrew and biblical Greek, then one is not dependent so much on the various versions that are out there. One is still dependent on some human works such as dictionaries and lexicons, but one is much closer to the author who wrote the book. One can even make up his or her own "dictionary" based on how the word is used by comparing all of the instances in Scripture where that word is used and checking the context of each occurrence.

Here's the Hebrew (read from right to left) of Daniel 12:1:

וּבָעֵ֣ת הַהִיא֩ יַעֲמֹ֨ד מִֽיכָאֵ֜ל הַשַּׂ֣ר הַגָּדֹ֗ול הָעֹמֵד֮ עַל־בְּנֵ֣י עַמֶּךָ֒ וְהָיְתָה֙ עֵ֣ת צָרָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֤ר לֹֽא־נִהְיְתָה֙ מִֽהְיֹ֣ות גֹּ֔וי עַ֖ד הָעֵ֣ת הַהִ֑יא וּבָעֵ֤ת הַהִיא֙ יִמָּלֵ֣ט עַמְּךָ֔ כָּל־הַנִּמְצָ֖א כָּת֥וּב בַּסֵּֽפֶר׃

Here's the Hebrew of Daniel 12:1 transliterated:

UwVaa`eet hahiy' ya`amod miykhaa'eel hassar haggaadowl haa`omeed `al-bneey `ammekhaa vhaaytaah `eet tsaaraah 'asher lo'-nihytaah mihyowt gowy `ad haa`eet hahiy' uwVaa`eet hahiy' yimmaaleeT `ammkhaa kaal-hannimtsaa' kaatuwV baceefer:

Here's the Hebrew translated word-for-word:

And-in-the-time the-she shall-stand-up Michael the-prince the-great who-stands-[watch] over - sons of-your-people and-there-shall-be a-time of-trouble that never - came-to-pass from-coming-to-pass a-nation until the-time the-she and-in-the-time the-she shall-be-delivered your-people every-one - who-is-found written in-the-book:

"The-she," referring back to the word "time" before it, is usually translated as the adjective "that," or the phrase "that-one," if there's no associated noun. "Time" (Hebrew: `eet) is a common noun; that is, it can be used with either masculine or feminine. In this case, the feminine is used to distinguish it from the masculine noun "Michael" and the verbs and modifiers used with "Michael."

The Hebrew word "`eet" is listed in Strong's Dictionary as...

6256 עֵת `eet (ayt). From עַד `ad; time, especially (adverb with preposition) now, when, etc.: 
-- + after, (al-)ways, X certain, + continually, + evening, long, (due) season, so (long) as, (even-, evening-, noon-)tide, ((meal-)), what) time, when.

5703 עַד `ad (ad). From עָדָה `adah; properly, a (peremptory) terminus, i.e. (by implication) duration, in the sense of advance or perpetuity (substantially as a noun, either with or without a preposition):
-- eternity, ever(- lasting, -more), old, perpetually, + world without end.

5710 עָדָה `adah (ad'-ah). A primitive root; to advance, i.e. Pass on or continue; causatively, to remove; specifically, to bedeck (i.e. Bring an ornament upon):
-- adorn, deck (self), pass by, take away.

My point is this: This Hebrew word "`eet" is a PERIOD (. - .) more than an EVENT (.). In fact, unless something instantaneously begins (. -) or ends (- .), even an EVENT is truly a PERIOD when one zooms in on the timeline!

So, substitute the word "period" for "time" or perhaps use them together (time-period).

And-in-the-time-period the-she shall-stand-up Michael the-prince the-great who-stands-[watch] over - sons of-your-people and-there-shall-be a-time-period of-trouble that never - came-to-pass from-coming-to-pass a-nation until the-time-period the-she and-in-the-time-period the-she shall-be-delivered your-people every-one - who-is-found written in-the-book:

It's not "in that very moment"; it's more like "in that period of time." Understand?

[transmogrified]

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

It's not "in that very moment"; it's more like "in that period of time."

So 'in the period' that Herod the Great comes to his end Michael shall stand up, there will be a time of trouble, Israel gets delivered and the resurrection is finished. Herod died in 4 BC.

If Herod was the man who came to his end and the one who persecutes the saints for 3.5 years, then all these things should be finished. But they aren't.

Michael has not stood up..

The time of trouble has not come...

Israel is not delivered...

The resurrection of the good and the bad has not taken place.

Finished means they are completed. All of these things must be finished by the end of the 3.5 year persecution of the saints. Herod is not the man in 11:45 nor is he the man in 12:7. These things are not finished. 

Blessings to you - Gary

 

[Retrobyter]

50 minutes ago, Uriah said:

Whoa, let's get real here. I have pointed out two instances out of thousands of bible verses. Should we pretend parenthetic passages NEVER happen?

Shalom, Uriah.

No, but the parenthetical passages are looking at ANOTHER DIMENSION of the events. They are not changing the ORDER of the events, but they are looking at those events from a different perspective to reveal a broader picture! Take, for instance, Revelation 20:1-6:

Revelation 20:1-6 (KJV)

1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. 2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, 3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

Okay, so this defines the "1,000 years." It begins with the chaining of haSatan, binding him, and throwing him into the pit with no sounded bottom. It ends when he is "loosed [for] a little season."

Reading on...

4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 

So, now we have additional information given within that 1,000-year period. During that time, there will be thrones - plural - established and there will be some people other than the Messiah who sit upon them with the authority to make judgments. Among the people who will sit on these thrones will be those who had been beheaded, now breathing again, who had not bent the knee to the Beast nor to his image nor had received his mark upon their foreheads or in their hands. They shall live again and reign with the Messiah for that 1,000-year period.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.

This ONE sentence looks FORWARD in time to the END of the 1,000 years. It is here at this point in the narration to establish the fact that the dead are resurrected en masse at two different times, one group at the beginning of the 1,000 years and the other group at the end of the 1,000 years, and that this resurrection of "those who had been beheaded and are breathing again" is part of the FIRST resurrection. So, now we return to the narration:

This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

This part is still talking about the BEGINNING of the 1,000-year period. It is in the narration to show that there will be MORE than just the beheaded who were resurrected and that all those who participate in the first resurrection will be "priests of God and of His Messiah" and "shall reign with Him [for] a thousand years!"

THEN, we get to verses 7 and 8:

7 And when the thousand years are expired (i.e., the thousand year have come to an end), Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, 8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

Up to this point, the ONLY sentence that is "parenthetical" would be the first sentence in verse 5! And, its only purpose for being there is to show that these are the resurrections of those justified by God, not everybody! Chapter and verse numbers may be distracting and confuse the understanding of the reader, but they are ONLY present as a referencing system; they are HUMAN in origin and are NOT divinely inspired!

50 minutes ago, Uriah said:

But curiously, these are exactly where there are so much controversy are generated. 

The convoluted, Monty Python pipe-works we have all seen surrounding these bottleneck areas are hard enough to avoid without having to strain at the trees and miss the forest.

By strict linear reading, people are sure Genesis holds two creation accounts instead of realizing it is merely written of twice.

When one learns how the Hebrew literature works, one will find that not only is Genesis 1:2-2:3 an expansion of Genesis 1:1, one will also understand that Genesis 2:4-2:45 is an expansion of Day Six, found in Genesis 1:24-31.

Some think that the order of the creation of animals and man changes between the two passages, but Genesis 1:24-31 gives us the order in which they were created, and Genesis 2:18-20 is the parade of those animals before Adam for their names and for Adam to realize that all animals were created male and female, but he was alone!

One simply must learn that Hebrew literature works like the points of an outline. Instead of our way of showing,...

I. ...
I. A. ...
I. A. 1. ...
I. A. 2. ...
I. B. ...
I. B. 1. ...
I. B. 2. ...
II. ...
...

Hebrew literature shows it like this:

I. ...
II. ...
I. A ...
I. B. ...
I. A. 1. ...
I. A. 2. ...
I. B. 1. ...
I. B. 2. ...
...

The order of events is still linear within each segment, but the details are shown together, rather than separated by time.