Defense of the Post Trib Rapture

[transmogrified]

13 minutes ago, Retrobyter said:

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,

The resurrection of the good and the bad did not happen at the time Herod the Great, the client king of Rome, an Idumean, who was installed as the 'King of Judea,' came to his end. 

The resurrection takes place at the Second Coming...none of the kings mentioned died when the resurrection took place for the resurrection has not yet taken place. 

[Retrobyter]

16 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

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. 

Shalom, Gary.

Why be such a nay-sayer? Just look at the events! The Messiah was rejected - SEVERAL times - in Matthew before chapter 23. Then, in chapter 23, we read about all the abominations of the scribes and Pharisees, and He ends with this:

Matthew 23:37-39 (KJV)

37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, ... and ye would not! 38 BEHOLD, your house is left unto you DESOLATE! 39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say,

"Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the LORD!"

And, as I've pointed out elsewhere, that phrase means to WELCOME Him back as the Messiah of YHWH God! Then, He gave the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24, and following that was the scene in the Garden of Gethsemane, the trials of the Master, and the Crucifixion, and the Resurrection following that. THEN we are talking about the Time of Trouble, which our Lord called "the Tribulation," which is a 2,000-YEAR-LONG Tribulation which won't end until the Resurrection of the good accompanies the Second Coming!

16 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

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...

You're right up to HERE! But, the rest of this is WAY off!

16 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

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.

First and foremost, there IS NO resurrection of the bad at the Second Coming! That seems to be a MAJOR hang-up in your mind!

The Resurrection of the Justified - THOSE WHO BELONG TO THE MESSIAH -happens at the Second Coming; the resurrection of the unjust doesn't happen until AFTER the 1,000-years of Revelation 20:1-6, and it happens for the Great White Throne Judgment!

16 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

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. 

Again, there's NO SUCH THING as a "resurrection of ... the bad that takes place at the Second Coming!"

16 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

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.

This first question was answered because the TIME OF THE OFFERING OF THE KINGDOM TO JUDAH was the 3.5 years of the Messiah's "Ministry" during the First Advent! In rejecting God's Messiah to be King, the King postponed their Kingdom for a Time of the Gentiles to be included.

16 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

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.

You're right, but then, Daniel didn't ask THAT question. Daniel's question (the Second Question) was NOT answered!

16 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

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.

Nope. That's the SECOND Half of the 7 years, which is the SECOND time the offer of the Kingdom is given to the children of Israel, and this time, it will be gladly accepted. The Beast attempts to make his move while the Messiah's Kingdom is small ("a grain of mustard seed"), but he'll still fail.

16 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

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:

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

 

I've already answered that question. Go back and re-read my answer.

[Retrobyter]

42 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

The resurrection of the good and the bad did not happen at the time Herod the Great, the client king of Rome, an Idumean, who was installed as the 'King of Judea,' came to his end. 

The resurrection takes place at the Second Coming...none of the kings mentioned died when the resurrection took place for the resurrection has not yet taken place. 

Shalom, Gary.

Again, re-read what I wrote until you understand it. And, also once again, the resurrection of the good happens at the Second Coming, not the resurrection of the bad. Why are you still so baffled?

[Uriah]

3 hours ago, transmogrified said:

Who is the 'HE' in verse 7? 

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.

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Actually, what clinches the connection are the phrases

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.

[transmogrified]

14 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Why be such a nay-sayer? Just look at the events!

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.

14 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

The Messiah was rejected

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

14 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Then, in chapter 23, we read about all the abominations of the scribes and Pharisees, and He ends with this:

Matthew 23:37-39 (KJV)

37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, ... and ye would not! 38 BEHOLD, your house is left unto you DESOLATE! 39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say,

"Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the LORD!"

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

 

14 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

And, as I've pointed out elsewhere, that phrase means to WELCOME Him back as the Messiah of YHWH God!

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.

14 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

THEN we are talking about the Time of Trouble, which our Lord called "the Tribulation," which is a 2,000-YEAR-LONG Tribulation which won't end until the Resurrection of the good accompanies the Second Coming!

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. 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....

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. 

14 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

15 hours ago, transmogrified said:

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.

First and foremost, there IS NO resurrection of the bad at the Second Coming! That seems to be a MAJOR hang-up in your mind!

The Resurrection of the Justified - THOSE WHO BELONG TO THE MESSIAH -happens at the Second Coming;

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.

14 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

15 hours ago, transmogrified said:

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.

This first question was answered because the TIME OF THE OFFERING OF THE KINGDOM TO JUDAH was the 3.5 years of the Messiah's "Ministry" during the First Advent!

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

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.

15 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

In rejecting God's Messiah to be King, the King postponed their Kingdom for a Time of the Gentiles to be included.

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.

15 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

15 hours ago, transmogrified said:

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.

You're right, but then, Daniel didn't ask THAT question. Daniel's question (the Second Question) was NOT answered!

 Yes. That was in the quote below:

15 hours ago, transmogrified said:

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.'

 

15 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

15 hours ago, transmogrified said:

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.

Nope. That's the SECOND Half of the 7 years, which is the SECOND time the offer of the Kingdom is given to the children of Israel,

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.

Quote

 

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.

I've already answered that question. Go back and re-read my answer.

 

Here is part of the answer:

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! 

 

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

Quote

 

One just has to follow the text through the history of the enemies of the children of Israel! First, were the kings of Bavel ("Babylon"), then the kings of Medo-Persia, then the kings of Greece, particularly Alexander the Great, and then the Seleucid Empire that arose from Alexander's empire. And, in the Seleucid Empire, the text goes down through time between the king of the north, the leaders of the Seleucid dynasty, and the king of the south, the Ptolemies of Egypt!

ALL of these people were talked about in Daniel 11! 

 

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:

 

17 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

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.

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:

Quote

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.

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

Quote

'And it can be said that Antiochus dies between 34 and 35."

Here is 34 and 35:

Quote

 

Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help: but many shall cleave to them with flatteries.

And 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.

 

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

[transmogrified]

15 hours ago, Uriah said:

19 hours ago, transmogrified said:

Who is the 'HE' in verse 7? 

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.

The question was asked 'How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?' If the 'he' in verse 7 was Antiochus, then the answer to the question would read:

"It will be for a time, times and a half, and when Antiochus shall have accomplished to shatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.'

It doesn't say when HE and then more people after him have accomplished to shatter the power of the holy people..it says when HE had done this, then all the things that were specified would be finished, or completed. It has been some 2000 years since Antiochus had died and the things specified have not yet come to pass. 

The resurrection of the just and the unjust was supposed to happen when the man in Dan. 11:45 came to his end...Antiochus is not the man or those things would have already been fulfilled, but they have not been. The resurrection of both the just and the unjust is yet future and has never happened at any time in the past.

Blessings to you- Gary

[Uriah]

2 hours ago, transmogrified said:

The question was asked 'How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?' If the 'he' in verse 7 was Antiochus, then the answer to the question would read:

"It will be for a time, times and a half, and when Antiochus shall have accomplished to shatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.'

It doesn't say when HE and then more people after him have accomplished to shatter the power of the holy people..it says when HE had done this, then all the things that were specified would be finished, or completed. It has been some 2000 years since Antiochus had died and the things specified have not yet come to pass. 

The resurrection of the just and the unjust was supposed to happen when the man in Dan. 11:45 came to his end...Antiochus is not the man or those things would have already been fulfilled, but they have not been. The resurrection of both the just and the unjust is yet future and has never happened at any time in the past.

Blessings to you- Gary

Please refer to my last response intended to you and Retro.

After Dan. 11:45 the angel turns to other subject matter for a few verses then returns to the previous topic of Antiochus.

[transmogrified]

1 hour ago, Uriah said:

Please refer to my last response intended to you and Retro.

After Dan. 11:45 the angel turns to other subject matter for a few verses then returns to the previous topic of Antiochus.

I looked back on the last response but not sure it was the one you were referring to. The events are not linked because they are similar events, the events are linked in time. The phrase to look at is when he comes to his end in Dan. 11:45 it says 'AND AT THAT TIME' the following things are to happen:

1) Michael stands up..

2) There is a time of trouble..

3) Israel is delivered

4) The good and bad are resurrected.

So when he says 'AT THAT TIME' it is obvious he is referring to the time when the man in Dan. 11:45 comes to his end. If the following events were to happen at another time, then he would not have said 'AT THAT TIME,' such and such would occur.

When the man in Daniel 11:45 comes to his end and the events designated to take place at that same time do not take place at that time, then it would not say the following events would take place at that time. It would have to say something like 'at another time,' or 'everything except the resurrection of the just and unjust will happen at this time,' or 'the resurrection of the unrighteous will happen 1000 years after the resurrection of the righteous...' But it says none of the above. It states at the time the man in Dan. 11:45 comes to his end is the time when the following events will occur. 

Here is the sequence:

11:45 "But he shall come to his end and none shall help him...'

AND AT THAT TiME:

1) Michael stands up..

2) AND there shall be a time of trouble..

AND AT THAT TIME

3) Thy people shall be delivered..

4) AND multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake...some to life and some to damnation

All the above events takes place AT THE TIME the man comes to his end and none shall help him.

All the events happen at this same time...one can not find some time when there was trouble and say this is the time. One can not find another time when it is thought Michael stood up...One cannot find another time when Israel was delivered...one cannot find another time for the resurrection of the righteous to occur...one cannot find another time in which the resurrection of the unrighteous occur. No. 

ALL THESE EVENTS HAPPEN at the time when the man in Dan. 11:45 comes to his end. ALL of these events did not happen when Antiochus came to his end.

Blessings to you- Gary

 

 

[Uriah]

8 hours ago, transmogrified said:

So when he says 'AT THAT TIME' it is obvious he is referring to the time when the man in Dan. 11:45 comes to his end. If the following events were to happen at another time, then he would not have said 'AT THAT TIME,' such and such would occur.

 

It is obvious that two different times are in front of us in this passage. Context is king, as the saying goes. This also makes it obvious that it narrows down to one phrase, "And at that time" which is not translated well in this instance. Probably because of it emphasis not being captured by translators vs simply counting up the times its was usage was a simpler matter and assigning this one with it.

For simplification, they should have done as elsewhere. A subtle difference makes it easy to see with no violation of translational norms.

I hope you can follow along as I lay it out: original language is "time that time"  in the opening phrase.

And at = et...time  | that = hu...  | time = et...time that |

And at that time that...

As is in countless places in scripture, implied words (which are common in this language and a tremendous number of others) are part of the experience that paves it together.

God bless , brother

 

 

Edited May 30, 2022 by Uriah
added one word

[transmogrified]

7 hours ago, Uriah said:

It is obvious that two different times are in front of us in this passage.

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

9 hours ago, Uriah said:

This also makes it obvious that it narrows down to one phrase, "And at that time" which is not translated well in this instance.

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.' 

9 hours ago, Uriah said:

For simplification, they should have done as elsewhere.

Where did they do it as elsewhere? 

9 hours ago, Uriah said:

I hope you can follow along as I lay it out: original language is "time that time"  in the opening phrase.

And at = et...time  | that = hu...  | time = et...time that |

And at that time that...

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:

Quote

 

Gen. 21:22 And it came to pass at that time, that Abimelech and Phichol the chief captain of his host spake unto Abraham, saying, God is with thee in all that thou doest:

Gen. 38:1 And it came to pass at that time, that Judah went down from his brethren, and turned in to a certain Adullamite, whose name was Hirah.

 

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:

Quote

And he (Ishmael) dwelt in the wilderness of Paran: and his mother took him a wife out of the land of Egypt.

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