The absurdity of Pretrib logic

[WPM]

That does not say "MANY but not ALL". That is only your assumption. The English word "many" is translated from the Hebrew word "rab" there which does not mean "many but not all". It simply refers to a large number which may or may not refer to all of something.

Here's a couple examples where the word was used to refer to all of something rather than many, but not all of something.

Genesis 21:33 And Abraham planted a grove in Beersheba, and called there on the name of the Lord, the everlasting God. 34 And Abraham sojourned in the Philistines' land many (rab) days.

Is this referring to many but not all of the days Abraham sojourned in the Philistines' land or to all of the days he sojourned there of which there were "many"? The latter, right? Clearly.

Genesis 37:31 And they took Joseph's coat, and killed a kid of the goats, and dipped the coat in the blood; 32 And they sent the coat of many colours, and they brought it to their father; and said, This have we found: know now whether it be thy son's coat or no. 33 And he knew it, and said, It is my son's coat; an evil beast hath devoured him; Joseph is without doubt rent in pieces. 34 And Jacob rent his clothes, and put sackcloth upon his loins, and mourned for his son many (rab) days.

This is referring to when Jacob thought his son Joseph had died and he then "mourned for his son many days". Is that referring to many but not all of the days that Jacob mourned or is it referring to all of the days he mourned, of which there were many? The latter, right? Clearly.

There are other examples like these where the Hebrew word "rab" did not mean many but not all as you believe is the case in Daniel 12:2, but instead refer to all of something with the number of all of something being many.

It's clear to me that Daniel 12:2 refers to the same resurrection of all of the dead that Jesus referred to here:

John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

And what about the reference to those who rise "to shame and everlasting contempt" in Daniel 12:2? Did you miss that?

Excellent post bro! And yes, indeed, they ignore the fact that this is a general judgment, which involves the resurrection of the wicked.

 

[IndianaRob]

Excellent post bro! And yes, indeed, they ignore the fact that this is a general judgment, which involves the resurrection of the wicked.

You’re proving my point. You’re coming to both of those verses both Daniel and Matthew with the assumption that you understand the resurrection therefore the cross CAN NOT be the cross instead of letting the words from both verses correct your error.

 

[IndianaRob]

When you guys handle scripture by making it say what you want it to say you have zero chance of ever understanding the scripture.

 

[WPM]

Dude. Please stop with the nonsense. You and your buddy are double teaming me. I have been making post after post trying to keep up. I work contract and am a day trader. I'm not doing much trading, and haven't even looked at the market, let alone get any contract work done.
I'm going to work. If you have a post you want me to address just repost it.

I don't avoid anything. Why would I need to? If I am wrong about something, I change what I believe. That why I changed from pre wrath rapture to two raptures.

The facts have been presented and avoided countless times. Here are the last 2:

The absurdity of Pretrib logic

You might want you read a little closer. They all entered in the selfsame day. That is one day. That day is the day that God told him to enter. Genesis 7 13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with...

www.christianityboard.com

The absurdity of Pretrib logic

You might want you read a little closer. They all entered in the selfsame day. That is one day. That day is the day that God told him to enter. Genesis 7 13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with...

www.christianityboard.com

 

[WPM]

You’re proving my point. You’re coming to both of those verses both Daniel and Matthew with the assumption that you understand the resurrection therefore the cross CAN NOT be the cross instead of letting the words from both verses correct your error.

What are you talking about? This is vague and incoherent.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Great. And Noah was shut in the ark 6 days before the flood, but the very day Lot left Sodom destruction came.

No, he was not, but what do you think that means exactly in relation to the second coming of Christ? That the rapture will occur 6 days before His second coming?

The fact that you are unable to understand does not change the truth.

The fact that you are unable to explain your view clearly and in a logical way suggests that you are not telling the truth.

Armageddon..........sudden destruction...............does not happen on the FIRST 24 hour day. What are you going to do with these 5 months pretend that they mean 24 hours, like you pretend that the 144,000 from the twelve tribes is the Church.

Revelation 9
5 And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.

What does Revelation 9 have to do with the sudden destruction that will occur upon the arrival of the day of the Lord (1 Thess 5:2-3) which Peter indicates will involve fire coming down on the entire earth (2 Peter 3:10-12)? Where does Revelation 9 indicate that it's describing the day of the Lord? Your doctrine is based on many assumptions rather than on clear scripture.

The wrath of God lasts one year.

Not the wrath that occurs when Jesus comes which will be such that "they shall not escape" (1 Thess 5:2-3) because it will involve fire coming down on the entire earth (2 Peter 3:10-12).

Jesus said they were eating and drinking and marrying and giving in marriage UNTIL THE DAY NOAH ENTERED THE ARK.

Knowing the day Noah entered the ark is probably something that we need to know. The fact that you do not understand this doesn't change the truth

You know we will never agree about this. You think he was on the ark 6 days before the flood came and I believe he entered the ark on the same day the flood came. I'm not interested in arguing that back and forth when you know that neither of us will budge on that. What I'm trying to get you to do is explain what Noah supposedly entering the ark 6 days before the flood means exactly in your view in comparison to the second coming of Christ. Are you thinking this means the rapture will occur 6 days before His second coming or what?

And, the fact that you don't compare what happened with Lot going out of Sodom the same day fire came down on Sodom to the rapture is strange, also.

The fact that you are unable to comprehend there is more than one coming of the Lord doesn't change the facts.

You are using a non-existent definition of the word fact. Clearly, the idea of there being more than one future coming of the Lord is only your OPINION.

Just wondering why it is so important that you deny that Noah was shut in the ark 6 days before flood?

Because Jesus indicated that the flood came the same day that Noah entered the ark, so I believe Him. I am sure that He has a much better understanding of Genesis 6 and 7 than you do.

Why not just accept the truth.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

If I were to say “And many of the fish that swim in the sea will be caught , some to the dinner table, and some to the taxidermist”.

Are you telling me that means I caught all the fish in the sea?

So, you think being a scoffing clown like this is a valid way to address my points? You didn't answer my questions about how the word is used in the examples I gave. Why not? Are you afraid to acknowledge how the word is used in those verses?

Do you care that your interpretation of Daniel 12:2 contradicts what Jesus said in John 5:28-29? Does scripture teach two different days when both saved and lost people would be bodily resurrected? I'm sure it does not. So, why would you think Daniel 12:2 is about something different than John 5:28-29?

 

[WPM]

If I were to say “And many of the fish that swim in the sea will be caught , some to the dinner table, and some to the taxidermist”.

Are you telling me that means I caught all the fish in the sea?

Can you address his question, instead of avoiding the obvious?

"And what about the reference to those who rise "to shame and everlasting contempt" in Daniel 12:2? Did you miss that?"

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

When your Sunday school teacher asked you who anointed Solomon as the King of Israel, and you gave a incorrect answer, did she say to you that you are dishonest ?

Are you reading anything I'm saying, Douggg? Do you think it's honest to make up your own definition of the word generation when interpreting Matthew 24:34? Do you think it's honest to claim that Jesus said He would be taking us to heaven when He said no such thing? You can have that opinion if you want, but it's dishonest to make is as if Jesus specifically said that when that is not the case.

 

[IndianaRob]

What are you talking about? This is vague and incoherent.

The resurrection has absolutely nothing to do with raising dead earthly bodies, that’s why they aren’t mentioned in Matthew.

Daniel 12:2 is one of the powerful verses in the Bible to prove the resurrection has nothing to do with raising dead earthly bodies.

Everybody takes part in the resurrection all of just and all of the unjust. Daniel 12:2 God is saying hey look here, there’s a profound truth here if you just believe what I’m telling you.

 

[WPM]

So, you think being a scoffing clown like this is a valid way to address my points? You didn't answer my questions about how the word is used in the examples I gave. Why not? Are you afraid to acknowledge how the word is used in those verses?

Do you care that your interpretation of Daniel 12:2 contradicts what Jesus said in John 5:28-29? Does scripture teach two different days when both saved and lost people would be bodily resurrected? I'm sure it does not. So, why would you think Daniel 12:2 is about something different than John 5:28-29?

Bro, they must do an "ad hominem" and "avoidance" class before they send Pretribbers online! They all act the same way, apart from a few rare exceptions. Dougg is one. Albeit, they must all do a "how to twist Scripture class" to make it say the opposite to what it means.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You’re proving my point. You’re coming to both of those verses both Daniel and Matthew with the assumption that you understand the resurrection therefore the cross CAN NOT be the cross instead of letting the words from both verses correct your error.

Can you clarify this word salad for us?

 

[WPM]

The resurrection has absolutely nothing to do with raising dead earthly bodies, that’s why they aren’t mentioned in Matthew.

Daniel 12:2 is one of the powerful verses in the Bible to prove the resurrection has nothing to do with raising dead earthly bodies.

Everybody takes part in the resurrection all of just and all of the unjust. Daniel 12:2 God is saying hey look here, there’s a profound truth here if you just believe what I’m telling you.

I have never heard such nonsense in my life. What are you on?

Daniel 12:1-3 reveals, “And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall 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, every one that shall be found written in the book. And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.”

The first thing we need to establish here is: this is describing a general resurrection. This resurrection involves two types of people – the righteous and the wicked; one group rises "to everlasting life" the other to "everlasting contempt." Pretrib or Premil does not believe that. They oppose that. They are therefore fighting with the text. The fact that we see a clear description of the general resurrection of the righteous and the wicked tells us that this is a tribulation that occurs prior to the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Not surprisingly, Daniel 12 agrees with the consistent New Testament Scripture. This is one of many passages that prove Amillennialist position. This text totally negates the Premillennial paradigm.

They cannot go anywhere near recognizes the fact there is a general judgment in view here. Your fixation with "many" is a sidetrack from the indisputable reality of a future general resurrection when Jesus comes.

The word here for “many” in the original Hebrew (rab) actually means: the abundance, referring to quantity, size, age, number, rank, quality. It refers to a large number, which may or may not refer to all of something.

In the sense it is used here it includes everyone that is in the grave. Namely: “the abundance of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake.”

The all-inclusive resurrection that the Old Testament prophet foresaw is confirmed in the New Testament writings. "All" indeed the dead come forth when Jesus comes. The abundance of the dead are released on that great climatic day.

 

[IndianaRob]

So, you think being a scoffing clown like this is a valid way to address my points? You didn't answer my questions about how the word is used in the examples I gave. Why not? Are you afraid to acknowledge how the word is used in those verses?

Do you care that your interpretation of Daniel 12:2 contradicts what Jesus said in John 5:28-29? Does scripture teach two different days when both saved and lost people would be bodily resurrected? I'm sure it does not. So, why would you think Daniel 12:2 is about something different than John 5:28-29?

All I did was change the characters so that you could see the grammar can only be many but not all.

Nothing I’m telling you contradicts anything in the Bible.

Jhn 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

Another account of that verse says the hour is coming AND NOW IS. It’s impossible for Jesus to be talking about any other time in history than the resurrection.
Jhn 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

When you guys handle scripture by making it say what you want it to say you have zero chance of ever understanding the scripture.

LOL. That is exactly what you are doing by saying that Daniel 12:2 says many but not all when it says no such thing. When I show that the Hebrew word translated as "many" there does not mean "many but not all" you just respond with nonsense.

 

[WPM]

All I did was change the characters so that you could see the grammar can only be many but not all.

Nothing I’m telling you contradicts anything in the Bible.

Jhn 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

Another account of that verse says the hour is coming AND NOW IS. It’s impossible for Jesus to be talking about any other time in history than the resurrection.
Jhn 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Oh, so you believe in an ongoing resurrection now? Is that spiritual or physical?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

All I did was change the characters so that you could see the grammar can only be many but not all.

With a ridiculous analogy, which proved nothing. Why did you avoid addressing my points about how the Hebrew word "rab", translated as "many" in Daniel 12:2 is used in other verses? Are you afraid to address that?

Genesis 21:33 And Abraham planted a grove in Beersheba, and called there on the name of the Lord, the everlasting God. 34 And Abraham sojourned in the Philistines' land many (rab) days.

Is this referring to many but not all of the days Abraham sojourned in the Philistines' land or to all of the days he sojourned there of which there were "many"? The latter, right? Clearly.

Genesis 37:31 And they took Joseph's coat, and killed a kid of the goats, and dipped the coat in the blood; 32 And they sent the coat of many colours, and they brought it to their father; and said, This have we found: know now whether it be thy son's coat or no. 33 And he knew it, and said, It is my son's coat; an evil beast hath devoured him; Joseph is without doubt rent in pieces. 34 And Jacob rent his clothes, and put sackcloth upon his loins, and mourned for his son many (rab) days.

This is referring to when Jacob thought his son Joseph had died and he then "mourned for his son many days". Is that referring to many but not all of the days that Jacob mourned or is it referring to all of the days he mourned, of which there were many? The latter, right? Clearly.

Nothing I’m telling you contradicts anything in the Bible.

Jhn 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

Another account of that verse says the hour is coming AND NOW IS. It’s impossible for Jesus to be talking about any other time in history than the resurrection.
Jhn 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

What are you talking about here? John 5:28-29 is talking about the bodily resurrection of the dead which has not yet occurred. John 5:24-25, where Jesus said "the hour is coming, and now is" refers to going from being dead in sins to spiritually alive in Christ like what Paul wrote about in passages like Ephesians 2:4-6.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The resurrection has absolutely nothing to do with raising dead earthly bodies, that’s why they aren’t mentioned in Matthew.

Daniel 12:2 is one of the powerful verses in the Bible to prove the resurrection has nothing to do with raising dead earthly bodies.

Everybody takes part in the resurrection all of just and all of the unjust. Daniel 12:2 God is saying hey look here, there’s a profound truth here if you just believe what I’m telling you.

You can't be taken seriously with this nonsense. Daniel 12:2 is clearly referring to the bodily resurrection of the dead. What else sleeps in the dust of the earth except for dead bodies? Good grief. You are just making scripture say whatever you want it to say. That is obvious.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Bro, they must do an "ad hominem" and "avoidance" class before they send Pretribbers online! They all act the same way, apart from a few rare exceptions. Dougg is one. Albeit, they must all do a "how to twist Scripture class" to make it say the opposite to what it means.

That must be the case because they all do that. They will not address our straightforward points and questions with straightforward responses and answers. They never do. That comes across that they have something to hide and they are purposely trying to make scripture say what they want it to say. They never exegete scripture and their doctrine is based on assumptions and wild theories rather than on clear scripture.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Oh, so you believe in an ongoing resurrection now? Is that spiritual or physical?

It looks like he's trying to say that John 5:24-25 and John 5:28-29 are talking about the same thing, but they clearly are not. John 5:24-25 is about an ongoing thing (the hour is coming, and now is) while John 5:28-29 is clearly only a future event (the hour is coming, but does not say "and now is").