Jesus, is he coming again or did he come long ago?

[erodz23]

smile Some people say he came, other say he's coming again for his people, and some others don't believe that he was the Messiah according to the Bible. What have you say about it question  

[Silver Wingling]

I say he came once to die for us, and will come again to take us up to heaven before the tribulation. And if he wasn't Messiah, how did he fufill all those prophosies?  

[RoseRose]

I say he wasn't the Messiah, for I haven't seen anything in the Tanach talking about two comings. I believe the Messiah will come once, but he hasn't come yet.

An old Jewish song:

Ani Ma'amin be-emunah shlema, beviat HaMashiach.

I believe in the coming of the Messiah, though he may tarry. (Not sure if that's the exact translation, but it's the traditional one).

According to tradition, it was sung by Jewish Holocaust victims on their way to the gas chambers.  

[grani4fam1]

RoseRose

I say he wasn't the Messiah, for I haven't seen anything in the Tanach talking about two comings. I believe the Messiah will come once, but he hasn't come yet.

In reference to the comment that the Tanach doesn't mention two comings of Messiah, Daniel 9 refers to "an anointed one" being "cut off" after a certain number of weeks. The Hebrew word for "anointed" is "mashiach," which, in Greek, is "christos" or "Christ." Also, in the Bible, to be "cut off" means to die. If you calculate the number of weeks starting with the rebuilding of Jerusalem as stated in the Scripture verse, "So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and 62 weeks." (Daniel 9:25) The only decree to go out was by Artaxerxes in 444 B.C.E. Biblically speaking, a week equals seven years and a sabbatical year, approximately 360 days. This anointed one was to die in 32 C.E., the year Christ was crucified. (Paraphrased from an article by Barry Rubin, 9/1/1980)  

[grani4fam1]

Talmar_Star_Blood

I say he came once to die for us, and will come again to take us up to heaven before the tribulation. And if he wasn't Messiah, how did he fufill all those prophosies?

I agree about the prophecies, but be careful what you say about Him taking us up to heaven before the Tribulation. Not everyone believes this, including me. This concept can be very offensive, especially to Jewish people. It smacks of replacement theology and dispensationlism.  

[Silver Wingling]

before, or after? Some people think one, some, the other. I was raised thinking before, but I don't know... what do you think? Any verses?  

[Bezant]

He was on earth only once in bodily form so far, and has not come back yet. The first time around, He was an obscure man in an obscure land, from a Roman point of view anyway, and lived humbly and died horribly. The second time around, there will be no confusion about who He is, and He will come back in glory, not humility.  

[RoseRose]

grani4fam1

RoseRose

I say he wasn't the Messiah, for I haven't seen anything in the Tanach talking about two comings. I believe the Messiah will come once, but he hasn't come yet.

In reference to the comment that the Tanach doesn't mention two comings of Messiah, Daniel 9 refers to "an anointed one" being "cut off" after a certain number of weeks. The Hebrew word for "anointed" is "mashiach," which, in Greek, is "christos" or "Christ." Also, in the Bible, to be "cut off" means to die. If you calculate the number of weeks starting with the rebuilding of Jerusalem as stated in the Scripture verse, "So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and 62 weeks." (Daniel 9:25) The only decree to go out was by Artaxerxes in 444 B.C.E. Biblically speaking, a week equals seven years and a sabbatical year, approximately 360 days. This anointed one was to die in 32 C.E., the year Christ was crucified. (Paraphrased from an article by Barry Rubin, 9/1/1980)

Hmmm... I've heard alternate interpretations, with various start-dates for the time. Basically, since Daniel doesn't give a start time for it (and even assuming he's right, the Messiah in that passage should come, and then disappear after 7 weeks, then reappear for 62, according to the JPS translation), there's no way to be certain who it is referring to. Prophecy is notably vague and hard to translate accurately.

Basically, like in the other thread, this is one of those cases where everything's up to interpretation. Oh, by the way, one time I heard was the end of the 6-Day War, in 67. Assuming it's 7 weeks of years until the Messiah comes from that start date, he'll be here in 6 years. (56 years) With no jubilee (as some calculations do), he should have been here last year, or perhaps this year if it started counting from the year after, as sometimes happens.  

[grani4fam1]

Cherry Sodah

He was on earth only once in bodily form so far, and has not come back yet. The first time around, He was an obscure man in an obscure land, from a Roman point of view anyway, and lived humbly and died horribly. The second time around, there will be no confusion about who He is, and He will come back in glory, not humility.

Amen. And, we'll see what the right interpretation of scripture about whether the Messiah already came is then, won't we?  

[grani4fam1]

Talmar_Star_Blood

before, or after? Some people think one, some, the other. I was raised thinking before, but I don't know... what do you think? Any verses?

There are way more verses in the Tanach dealing with an endtimes repeat of the wilderness experience as Israel came out of Egypt until they got to the Promised Land (i.e., we stay here) than there is support for a "rapture" (Greek for being snatched away) as many Christians believe. The support for the rapture is very thin, in fact, it takes a lot of reading between the lines in the Gospels and 1 Thessalonians to come up with it. This concept was only developed in the last 100-200 years by Christians, anyway. Especially as Americans who love to live like kings, we'd like to think we will escape the judgments of God in many of the minor prophets towards the end of the Tanach, which, by the way, are repeated in the book of Revelation. (Verses to come later when I have time)  

[Silver Wingling]

Interesting. I am so sick of all the assumption. I don't really know... but whatever. Verses are good. I like verses. Sermons... not so good.  

[grani4fam1]

RoseRose

Hmmm... I've heard alternate interpretations, with various start-dates for the time. Basically, since Daniel doesn't give a start time for it (and even assuming he's right, the Messiah in that passage should come, and then disappear after 7 weeks, then reappear for 62, according to the JPS translation), there's no way to be certain who it is referring to. Prophecy is notably vague and hard to translate accurately.

Here are some more prophesies in the Tanach that were fulfilled according to the New Testament:

Messiah would be born at Bethlehem: Micah 5:1
Messiah would be from the tribe of Judah: Genesis 49:10
Messiah would present himself by riding on an a**: Zechariah 9:9
Messiah would be tortured to death: Psalm 22
Messiah would suffer, be silent at his arrest and trial, would die and be buried in a rich man's tomb, and be resurrected: Isaiah 52:13-53:12

RoseRose

Basically, like in the other thread, this is one of those cases where everything's up to interpretation. Oh, by the way, one time I heard was the end of the 6-Day War, in 67. Assuming it's 7 weeks of years until the Messiah comes from that start date, he'll be here in 6 years. (56 years) With no jubilee (as some calculations do), he should have been here last year, or perhaps this year if it started counting from the year after, as sometimes happens.

Actually, there are people in the church and among Messianics who have figured out that the Tribulation in the book of Revelation will start by 2014, and the 42 months will end at Rosh Hashanah in 2018 when Messiah returns with a shofar blast so loud all the earth will hear it. Hmmmmmmm.... wink  

[RoseRose]

grani4fam1

RoseRose

Hmmm... I've heard alternate interpretations, with various start-dates for the time. Basically, since Daniel doesn't give a start time for it (and even assuming he's right, the Messiah in that passage should come, and then disappear after 7 weeks, then reappear for 62, according to the JPS translation), there's no way to be certain who it is referring to. Prophecy is notably vague and hard to translate accurately.

Here are some more prophesies in the Tanach that were fulfilled according to the New Testament:

Messiah would be born at Bethlehem: Micah 5:1
Messiah would be from the tribe of Judah: Genesis 49:10
Messiah would present himself by riding on an a**: Zechariah 9:9
Messiah would be tortured to death: Psalm 22
Messiah would suffer, be silent at his arrest and trial, would die and be buried in a rich man's tomb, and be resurrected: Isaiah 52:13-53:12

RoseRose

Basically, like in the other thread, this is one of those cases where everything's up to interpretation. Oh, by the way, one time I heard was the end of the 6-Day War, in 67. Assuming it's 7 weeks of years until the Messiah comes from that start date, he'll be here in 6 years. (56 years) With no jubilee (as some calculations do), he should have been here last year, or perhaps this year if it started counting from the year after, as sometimes happens.

Actually, there are people in the church and among Messianics who have figured out that the Tribulation in the book of Revelation will start by 2014, and the 42 months will end at Rosh Hashanah in 2018 when Messiah returns with a shofar blast so loud all the earth will hear it. Hmmmmmmm.... wink

Hmm... I read Micah 5:1 a bit differently, in that it is saying the subtribe of Judah from which the Messiah will come.

As for the being from the tribe of Judah, that is NOT a unique thing. By the time of Jesus, the vast majority of practicing Jews were from the tribe of Judah, the rest of them having been assimilated in the process of the Assyrian conquest.

Reading the section of Zechariah from which that prophecy comes, to me, Jesus didn't fufill that entire prophecy. Verse 10 seems to be a continuation of the prophecy.

Zechariah 9:9-10

Rejoice greatly, Fair Zion; Raise a shout, Fair Jerusalem! Lo, your king is coming to you. He is victorious, triumphant, Yet humble, riding on an a**, On a donkey foaled by a she-a**. He shall banish chariots from Ephraim And horses from Jerusalem; The warrior's bow shall be banished; He shall call on the nations to surrender, And his rule shall extend from sea to sea And from ocean to land's end.

Here you see that the Messiah will also be a military victor, which Jesus was NOT.

I don't see Psalm 22 as a prophetic psalm predicting the Messiah, but I see how it can be read that way.

I'm not 100% sure if the Isaiah section can be read as a prophecy of the Messiah, but even if it is, I can't find any evidence for resurrection in the section. Everything else, I can find, but not resurrection. Considering the theories on who wrote this section of Isaiah, I'm wondering if this is a historical commentary, starting at the beginning of chapter 53, where the tense changes from future to past, and the comments are a historical commentary, with the person being Israel, and this being a poetic history of the Babylonian invasion, and if there is a resurrection, it is a prophecy of the return of the Jews to Israel. Chapter 52 IS a Messianic prophecy, but I'm not sure if it should be linked to chapter 53.

*phew* I hope that all made sense.  

[Silver Wingling]

Zechariah 9:9-10

Rejoice greatly, Fair Zion; Raise a shout, Fair Jerusalem! Lo, your king is coming to you. He is victorious, triumphant, Yet humble, riding on an a**, On a donkey foaled by a she-a**. He shall banish chariots from Ephraim And horses from Jerusalem; The warrior's bow shall be banished; He shall call on the nations to surrender, And his rule shall extend from sea to sea And from ocean to land's end.

Just a thought here... it never occured to me before, but banishing chariots and warriors bows doesn't nessarilly take a millitary leader. For example, if someone preached peace, and people listened, and did as he said, and abandoned warfare, would that someone have not, in effect, banished the bow, and the chariot, and war? Without being a military leader? Only a shot in the dark, but... Think about it. Respond. Prove me wrong. I love to be proven wrong, it puts me in my place.  

[grani4fam1]

RoseRose

Hmm... I read Micah 5:1 a bit differently, in that it is saying the subtribe of Judah from which the Messiah will come.

Oops...I meant Micah 5:2.

RoseRose

As for the being from the tribe of Judah, that is NOT a unique thing. By the time of Jesus, the vast majority of practicing Jews were from the tribe of Judah, the rest of them having been assimilated in the process of the Assyrian conquest.

It's true that it is not a unique thing to be from the tribe of Judah at the time of Jesus, but along with other prophecies, it is important that it not be a detail that is missing.

RoseRose

Reading the section of Zechariah from which that prophecy comes, to me, Jesus didn't fufill that entire prophecy. Verse 10 seems to be a continuation of the prophecy.

Zechariah 9:9-10

Rejoice greatly, Fair Zion; Raise a shout, Fair Jerusalem! Lo, your king is coming to you. He is victorious, triumphant, Yet humble, riding on an a**, On a donkey foaled by a she-a**. He shall banish chariots from Ephraim And horses from Jerusalem; The warrior's bow shall be banished; He shall call on the nations to surrender, And his rule shall extend from sea to sea And from ocean to land's end.

Here you see that the Messiah will also be a military victor, which Jesus was NOT.

This is where it's important to believe that there are two comings of Messiah, one for being the high priest and Lamb of Israel, and the other to be the King and Judge of Israel and all the nations. This view is held up in the midrashim of the New Testament. The concept of multiple fulfillments at different times of the same prophecy is not new. Fleeing Jerusalem to escape siege happened a couple of times, and Yeshua said those in Jerusalem would have to flee in the future when the antimessiah shuts down the altar in Jerusalem.

RoseRose

I don't see Psalm 22 as a prophetic psalm predicting the Messiah, but I see how it can be read that way.

This psalm has several elements of what happened when Yeshua was on the cross.
v1 - "My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?" - Yeshua said this just before He died. If this were done alone, it could be dismissed, but with the others, that's not possible (Matthew 27:46).
v8 - "All who see me sneer at me; They separate with the lip, they wag the head, {saying,} 'Commit {yourself} to the LORD; let Him deliver him; Let Him rescue him, because He delights in him." - Those who hated Yeshua did this and said these things while He hung up on the cross (Matthew 27:43).
v16 - One of the Roman soldiers pierced His side with a spear to make sure He was dead (John 19:34).
v18 - "They divide my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots." The Roman soldiers did this (John 19:24).

Also, as a related side note to fulfillment of the Torah in John 19, the Roman soldiers didn't break His legs because He had already died when they went to check on Him after breaking the legs of the other two men on crosses beside Him (John 19:36). This is a fulfillment of the requirement that the sacrificial lamb not have a bone broken (Exodus 12:46).

RoseRose

I'm not 100% sure if the Isaiah section can be read as a prophecy of the Messiah, but even if it is, I can't find any evidence for resurrection in the section. Everything else, I can find, but not resurrection. Considering the theories on who wrote this section of Isaiah, I'm wondering if this is a historical commentary, starting at the beginning of chapter 53, where the tense changes from future to past, and the comments are a historical commentary, with the person being Israel, and this being a poetic history of the Babylonian invasion, and if there is a resurrection, it is a prophecy of the return of the Jews to Israel. Chapter 52 IS a Messianic prophecy, but I'm not sure if it should be linked to chapter 53.

I'd like to see evidence that Isaiah isn't considered prophecy. Where do you find that in the Talmud or elsewhere? I don't believe it would be included in the Tanach if it were not considered the inspired Word of the LORD. Besides that, half of Isaiah is written in the future tense. If that's not prophecy, I don't know what is.

I believe the resurrection interpretation can be found by looking at the job Messiah Yeshua (King Salvation) was sent to do. If He was the guilt offering for all people (Is 52:15 - "He will sprinkle many nations"; Is 53:6 - "the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him"), then He had to be resurrected so He could enter the Heavenly Temple to minister before the altar on our behalf. If He interceded for the transgressors (Is 53:12), He couldn't have done so as a dead man in a grave. Dead priests don't intercede; they wait for the future resurrection, and their job in this life as priests is concluded.