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

[Bezant]

Talmar_Star_Blood

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.

That's what I was thinking myself. Jesus changed the culture, in every society where his teachings were preached. War hasn't been abolished by any means, but now they call it "democratic peace" because societies in which Christianity exists, tend to not fight each other. Of course they still go to war and have done so over the last two thousand years, but...not like they used to. No more warring city-states.  

[grani4fam1]

Another thought on that is that if someone is the head of the entire world and holds all the power in His hand, no one dares to fight (it would be illogical and foolish), and everyone does what He says to do.  

[RoseRose]

Hmm... as for most of your comments, I will take them as a difference in interpretation.

I never said Isaiah wasn't prophecy, but it isn't necessarily ALL prophecy, or even all MESSIANIC prophecy.

I believe that the passage indicated was a historical interlude, as indicated by the change in tense, discussing the Babylonian exile. Just because one is a prophet, that doesn't mean everything said is prophecy, or even meant to be prophecy.

The passage PERFECTLY fits the Babylonian exile.  

[grani4fam1]

RoseRose

Hmm... as for most of your comments, I will take them as a difference in interpretation.

I never said Isaiah wasn't prophecy, but it isn't necessarily ALL prophecy, or even all MESSIANIC prophecy.

I believe that the passage indicated was a historical interlude, as indicated by the change in tense, discussing the Babylonian exile. Just because one is a prophet, that doesn't mean everything said is prophecy, or even meant to be prophecy.

The passage PERFECTLY fits the Babylonian exile.

I was just asking for sources because you seemed to infer it. I wasn't sure whether there was a difference in opinion among Jewish people about this. I didn't mean to upset you, if you are upset.  

[RoseRose]

grani4fam1

RoseRose

Hmm... as for most of your comments, I will take them as a difference in interpretation.

I never said Isaiah wasn't prophecy, but it isn't necessarily ALL prophecy, or even all MESSIANIC prophecy.

I believe that the passage indicated was a historical interlude, as indicated by the change in tense, discussing the Babylonian exile. Just because one is a prophet, that doesn't mean everything said is prophecy, or even meant to be prophecy.

The passage PERFECTLY fits the Babylonian exile.

I was just asking for sources because you seemed to infer it. I wasn't sure whether there was a difference in opinion among Jewish people about this. I didn't mean to upset you, if you are upset.

Oh, I didn't mean to infer it.

Just, there's a theory (more among researchers than anyone else) that the book of Isaiah was written by 2 or 3 different authors. All prophets, but not all the same one.  

[grani4fam1]

RoseRose

grani4fam1

RoseRose

Hmm... as for most of your comments, I will take them as a difference in interpretation.

I never said Isaiah wasn't prophecy, but it isn't necessarily ALL prophecy, or even all MESSIANIC prophecy.

I believe that the passage indicated was a historical interlude, as indicated by the change in tense, discussing the Babylonian exile. Just because one is a prophet, that doesn't mean everything said is prophecy, or even meant to be prophecy.

The passage PERFECTLY fits the Babylonian exile.

I was just asking for sources because you seemed to infer it. I wasn't sure whether there was a difference in opinion among Jewish people about this. I didn't mean to upset you, if you are upset.

Oh, I didn't mean to infer it.

Just, there's a theory (more among researchers than anyone else) that the book of Isaiah was written by 2 or 3 different authors. All prophets, but not all the same one.

Actually, this made me curious. I was just looking it up in Unger's Bible Dictionary and saw that theory. It was interesting to see how they refuted it. Besides the witness of New Testament writings, they mentioned that Nahum, Jeremiah and Zephaniah point to the authorship of one person. They also mentioned the traditions surrounding the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Septuagint evidence, Jewish tradition, Josephus and the Apocrypha as well as church fathers and Christians down to the 18th century are against the idea. Personally, I have never looked into this or even questioned it, so thanks for mentioning what you thought.  

[RoseRose]

grani4fam1

RoseRose

grani4fam1

RoseRose

Hmm... as for most of your comments, I will take them as a difference in interpretation.

I never said Isaiah wasn't prophecy, but it isn't necessarily ALL prophecy, or even all MESSIANIC prophecy.

I believe that the passage indicated was a historical interlude, as indicated by the change in tense, discussing the Babylonian exile. Just because one is a prophet, that doesn't mean everything said is prophecy, or even meant to be prophecy.

The passage PERFECTLY fits the Babylonian exile.

I was just asking for sources because you seemed to infer it. I wasn't sure whether there was a difference in opinion among Jewish people about this. I didn't mean to upset you, if you are upset.

Oh, I didn't mean to infer it.

Just, there's a theory (more among researchers than anyone else) that the book of Isaiah was written by 2 or 3 different authors. All prophets, but not all the same one.

Actually, this made me curious. I was just looking it up in Unger's Bible Dictionary and saw that theory. It was interesting to see how they refuted it. Besides the witness of New Testament writings, they mentioned that Nahum, Jeremiah and Zephaniah point to the authorship of one person. They also mentioned the traditions surrounding the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Septuagint evidence, Jewish tradition, Josephus and the Apocrypha as well as church fathers and Christians down to the 18th century are against the idea. Personally, I have never looked into this or even questioned it, so thanks for mentioning what you thought.

That makes me curious as well... I may have to look up more. I only saw the theory once or twice.

But, even if it is the same author, it could be a prophecy of the Babylonian exile as easily as a Messianic prophecy.  

[Takako_Uchiha]

Jesus came to fullfil the prophosies(sp) when he came last time. Then there will be the rapture, when the church is evacuated before the tribulation begins. Then when the whole world is about to attack Israle then here come Jesus on the white horse with us and the armys of heaven following him. So that would be the second time. Then well the Bible talks about the ending. If you follow Jesus then its a very good ending. mrgreen biggrin