Question about the Messiah.

jmdewey60
What if you are wrong, and the New Testament doesn't say that Jesus is ever coming before the world gets "wound up"?

1 Corinthians ch1 vv7-8
2 Thessalonians ch1 vv9-10
2 Peter ch3 v10
Revelation ch22 v20
And many other places.

You are entitled to believe that the New Testament got it wrong, but there is no disputing that the New Testament has that expectation.

reply to post by DISRAELI

You are entitled to believe that the New Testament got it wrong, but there is no disputing that the New Testament has that expectation.

I'm not claiming that the New Testament "got it wrong".
I'm claiming that a lot of modern Christians believe that they can foretell the future and can determine a time of Jesus' "return".
I think that those who make those claims have got the New Testament wrong.

jmdewey60
I'm claiming that a lot of modern Christians believe that they can foretell the future and can determine a time of Jesus' "return".
I think that those who make those claims have got the New Testament wrong.

I agree with you entirely on this.
However, your previous suggestion was that he was not returning at all.
Since the New Testament does expect him to return, that previous suggestion amounted to saying that the New Testament had got it wrong.
That was what I meant.

Jehovah's Witnesses ........ believe in a "works based" salvation

reply to post by OptimusSubprime


I do not think this is correct so I will ask you to provide documentation.

“You have been saved through faith . . . It is not owing to works . . .”—EPHESIANS 2:8, 9

Of course I may be wrong but my understanding is that the Jehovah s Witnesses say that the message of the Bible is that good works are not sufficient for salvation.

Sahabi
reply to post by filledcup

 

thou doth smoketh some very potent crack.

Jesus = Isa
false prophet = dajjal
antichrist = mahdi/second Jesus

fix0red

Superficially and without deeper knowledge of the eschatological details,... the comparison you offer 'appears' to be the correct assumption. Your comparison works when examining their titles alone.

However, when one looks into the Christian and Islamic descriptions of the End Times figures, and the details of the events and actions,... it becomes clear that Christian's End Times figures are antipodal and juxtaposed mirrors of Islam's End Times figures.

edit on 10/3/13 by Sahabi because: (no reason given)

look a bit further and u might untangle ur perception.

they describe the same persons, just calling them different names.

most likely ur confusion is just as the majority of christians and perhaps others who arent sure whether the anti-christ is evil or good.

i believe the antichrist is good, however.. demonized so that we would be tricked into fighting against him when he emerges. those who fight against him.. the martyrs "they will not be forgiven". he is the mahdi figure. he is the christ in the flesh, or rather.. the embodiment of Christ.. the spirit of Christ possessing the flesh of a human man. the Holy Spirit.

dajjal.. would be a figure in collusion with "the beast and consorts" i consider who are powered by the whore(the church), and the beast(capitalism/money changing(not of God).

it's tough. you have to read the bible from cover to cover to see the problems, omissions and what appears to be proper misdirection of the masses.

the truth is in there. but u are tricked into fighting yourselves and your saviour.

reply to post by DISRAELI

Since the New Testament does expect him to return . . .

OK, all you did was list a few biblical citations, with no explanation as to how they support your claim.

Number one, 1 Corinthians 1:7&8,
Therefore you do not lack any spiritual gift as you eagerly wait for our Lord Jesus Christ to be revealed.
He will also keep you firm to the end, so that you will be blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.
(2011 NIV)
Suppose that the "revelation" is that Jesus is Lord, which would have been made manifest on the day that the Jerusalem temple was destroyed, where the former entity who held that title was shown to be powerless to save His own 'holy house'.
That would have been the "Day of our Lord Jesus Christ", or at least 'a day' of that type, meaning a day of judgement, the anti-type being the hypothetical "last day" when the world is 'no more'.

Number two, 2Thess. 1:9&10,
They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might
on the day he comes to be glorified in his holy people and to be marveled at among all those who have believed. This includes you, because you believed our testimony to you.
(2011 NIV)
That could mean the establishment of the church in the eyes of the world when the old system was 'punished' at the destruction of Jerusalem, who did not accept Jesus' gospel.

Number three, 2Peter 3:10,
But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything done in it will be laid bare.
(2011 NIV)
An allusion to the hypothetical 'end of the universe', in a metaphorical sort of way.
Probably being used to illustrate the cosmic import of the fall of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 AD as a kind to preview of the mythological judgment day.

Number four, Rev. 22:20,
He who testifies to these things says, “Yes, I am coming soon.”

Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.
(2011 NIV)
The church is the metaphorical 'tree of life' that is ushered in officially with the collapse of the former system based on a single geographical location.
This would be understood if you accept this as being a legitimate Apostolic writing, meaning the John in the book being the Apostle John, of the original 12 disciples of Jesus.
So he would have written this before the fall of Jerusalem, which is what I believe, that Revelation was the earliest written of all the New Testament books.

reply to post by gladtobehere


Also there is the Shambhala king prophecy
Shambhala

The prophecy of Shambhala states that each of its kings will rule for 100 years. There will be 32 in all, and as their reigns pass, conditions in the outside world will deteriorate. Men will become more warlike and pursue power for its own sake, and an ideology of materialism will spread over the earth. When the "barbarians" who follow this ideology are united under an evil king and think there is nothing left to conquer, the mists will lift to reveal the icy mountains of Shambhala. The barbarians will attack Shambhala with a huge army equipped with terrible weapons. Then the 32nd king of Shambhala, Rudra Cakrin, will lead a mighty host against the invaders. In a last great battle, the evil king and his followers will be destroyed.

Rudra Cakrin is a messiah type figure.


Here you go, a rundown of messiahs from around the world.

Name That Messiah

the shambala propechy is fascinating...the bit about the 'barbarians' resembles the gog magog scenario... Who are said to be extremely powerful. Both christian and islamic eschatology speak of the return of evil during the last days of mankind... That is, even after Jesus' victorious reign.

sk0rpi0n
the shambala propechy is fascinating...the bit about the 'barbarians' resembles the gog magog scenario... Who are said to be extremely powerful. Both christian and islamic eschatology speak of the return of evil during the last days of mankind... That is, even after Jesus' victorious reign.

Skorpion, I have read much Comparative Religions, even as a Christian I am able to look objectively at things, after all I do review film for writing about films, and what I have discovered in the narrative of all of these early religions is that there is a theme in all of them that point to the same things.

One might say to me that even by mentioning Shambhala that I am denying Christianity, to which I say "bah humbug"

But here is what I discovered...they all had creation stories that had similar elements. And they all had eschatologies that were similar. In Comparative Relgions, I tend to disregard Islam as it was so late into the picture and their teachings were based on all the previous parts of others. If we put it into a timeline, then perhaps we get a better view.

Here is what we know of the history of religion in the Asiatic world. This would not include the Americas because that's a different sphere.

The oldest know place of worship was Gobekli Tepe in what is today Turkey. But the oldest known writing on religion was the Rig Vedas, before Hinduism. Even Hindus say that is the "Vedic Age". Sometime along here came Akkadian, then the Ugaritic of the Canaanites, then came Zoroastrianism, then Judaism with the offshoot Christianity. While Christianity might seem new, it's because it is the baby to the mother Judaism. While Judaism is forming, it was concurrent with Egyptian and Greek, soon followed by Roman. It is here that Christianity was born, (mother had to grow up first, we like our mothers to be adults) I don't want to get into the discussion of who the father of Christianity was, let's leave the domestic squabble for now. But objectively, Christianity isn't new as in a different religion, mother was expecting us. She knew we were coming, but I think she is a little disappointed...

Anyway, if I have missed one in the timeline, please forgive me. But in each of these there is a similar teaching. For instance, Gobekli Tepe of Tengrism believed Tengri was the invisible sky father. While Tengrism is shamanistic, they also believe in the invisible sky father. Which is what Judaism believes. The Ugaritic believed in Ba'al, El, Yaweh, the same as Judaism, but the Canaanites made idols, which the Jews did not. But they both believe that Tiamat was chaotic in creation. She was a bad mofo. (Can I say that here?)

Even the ancient Celts had similar stories and gods, even though they don't realize it. Here is an example of a Gaulish Belgaic goddess...Nehalennia..



While she was the goddess of ships, travel, selling things at market and various other functions, consider her name, it is Romanized. Nehalennia is from the Latin "nihil". So we can see there is Roman influence where the Romans went to.

Now here is a song of the oldest known musical score to the Ugarit goddess Nikkal



What is important about these two goddesses is that there once was an understanding about who they were, but were lost when other goddesses were supplanted over them and these ladies lost their deification, but somehow became cognate with goddesses elsewhere. Nikkal became Ishtar and Astarte, but surprising enough, she also became Asherah.

But can we find her influence in Judaism? Yes, the Song of Solomon, the word blossom is from the root of Nikkal's full name. Objectively I have to conclude that while the Song of Solomon is absolutely beautiful, it is also the story of Nikkal and Yahrick. But we also find that Shamash of the Akkadians also finds his way across time and into Judaism, Shamash is known today as the center candle in a menorah.

But here is the one thing that has convinced me the most that all the people then had understanding of one God and told the story of Him in a slightly different way...Malachi says "the SUN of Righteousness will arise with healing in His wings".

The Winged Sun of Thebes


Ahura Mazda


I can't make this up and neither could I dismiss it. So it's important to look at all the ancient religions to get an understanding that they were all telling us the same thing about the world in creation and the world at apocalypse.

BTW, jmdewey, was Yaweh housed only in the temple built by Herod? Wasn't he not also in the tabernacle in the wilderness? You did know that Yaweh and His Asherah was not just about a God and a pole, right? Asherah became a pole after they diminshed her rank, but she is in the Bible if people only knew to look for her. She is Hochma, Mother Wisdom that will be justified of her children. I can't even make that up and neither can I dismiss her.

And one other thing to mention, I asked my friend why Jews welcome Lady Sabbath to come. She embarrassingly confessed that even though the Jews do not want to say it, Lady Sabbath was a goddess.

Who is in the council of the gods? I can only conclude that all of them were. And that's being objective because I am a Christian and have not inserted any Christian subjectivity in my thesis.

reply to post by WarminIndy

BTW, jmdewey, was Yaweh housed only in the temple built by Herod? Wasn't he not also in the tabernacle in the wilderness? You did know that Yaweh and His Asherah was not just about a God and a pole, right? Asherah became a pole after they diminshed her rank, but she is in the Bible if people only knew to look for her.

A Solomon temple or a tabernacle temple are creative mythologizing of a fabricated past for a merchant class who saw the rest of the world as sheep to be fleeced.

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
(2011 NIV)
There is no male and female God.
That is only human thinking.
Matthew 22:30
At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.
(2011 NIV)
Jesus was saying how we will be in conformity with Heaven, not us making Heaven like Earth.

jmdewey60
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

BTW, jmdewey, was Yaweh housed only in the temple built by Herod? Wasn't he not also in the tabernacle in the wilderness? You did know that Yaweh and His Asherah was not just about a God and a pole, right? Asherah became a pole after they diminshed her rank, but she is in the Bible if people only knew to look for her.

A Solomon temple or a tabernacle temple are creative mythologizing of a fabricated past for a merchant class who saw the rest of the world as sheep to be fleeced.

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
(2011 NIV)
There is no male and female God.
That is only human thinking.
Matthew 22:30
At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.
(2011 NIV)
Jesus was saying how we will be in conformity with Heaven, not us making Heaven like Earth.

edit on 5-10-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

Are you sure it's mythology of a merchant class trying to hide their past?

Well can you explain then why in Japan, the Japanese have over 500 words that are Hebrew in origin and in Japan there are temples of Judaic origin that even the ancient Japanese give credence to the fact that members of a tribe of Israel influenced Japanese society? And this was before Christianity ever found its way to Japan?

Why then are there members of tribes found in Burma? These people have been holding on to these traditions long before Christianity ever came to Burma. And why are there Mizrahi Jews in Afghanistan that hold on to the traditions since the time of Esther, if they have only a mythological history?

Did Menelik of Ethiopia exist? As the Ethiopians at Axum whether or not their Ethiopian Royal Lineages are true. What about the Bembe tribe? Why are they holding to Jewish traditions of a mythological past? And then tell us why then the Cohanim gene is found in only the DNA of some men if it is mythological?

Can you then tell us why Mohammed specifically mentions the Jews of the Quraysh if the Jews supposedly were "invented" later during the Khazar time? Wait, aren't there Yemeni Jews?

Let me get this right, the Khazars converted to a mythological past before converting to Christianity or Islam? And yet the Khazars brought in rabbis of a mythological past to teach them of a mythological past, but if rabbis only appeared after the Khazars, then how did they bring them?

Strabo says the Jews were in Jerusalem. I am sorry, but that's not mythology or a mythological past.
Strabo and the Jews Strabo seemed to believe they were real enough in his day.

Before Moses they were not Jewish, they were Hebrews. While Strabo believes the Jews in his day were indeed the descendents of the Hebrews, he is making it clear that the Jews were in Jerusalem after Moses. What you are basing your deductions on is from the Khazar conspiracy theories.

And your verse, you have taken so completely way out of context. In that verse, if there are no Jews, then there are no Greeks, no slaves nor free people. There is nobody.

But what that verse really means, jmdewey, is that in God's eyes, we are all equal.

Were there Greeks, jmdewey?

WarminIndy

jmdewey60
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

BTW, jmdewey, was Yaweh housed only in the temple built by Herod? Wasn't he not also in the tabernacle in the wilderness? You did know that Yaweh and His Asherah was not just about a God and a pole, right? Asherah became a pole after they diminshed her rank, but she is in the Bible if people only knew to look for her.

A Solomon temple or a tabernacle temple are creative mythologizing of a fabricated past for a merchant class who saw the rest of the world as sheep to be fleeced.

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
(2011 NIV)
There is no male and female God.
That is only human thinking.
Matthew 22:30
At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.
(2011 NIV)
Jesus was saying how we will be in conformity with Heaven, not us making Heaven like Earth.

edit on 5-10-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

Are you sure it's mythology of a merchant class trying to create their past?

Well can you explain then why in Japan, the Japanese have over 500 words that are Hebrew in origin and in Japan there are temples of Judaic origin that even the ancient Japanese give credence to the fact that members of a tribe of Israel influenced Japanese society? And this was before Christianity ever found its way to Japan?

Why then are there members of tribes found in Burma? These people have been holding on to these traditions long before Christianity ever came to Burma. And why are there Mizrahi Jews in Afghanistan that hold on to the traditions since the time of Esther, if they have only a mythological history?

Did Menelik of Ethiopia exist? As the Ethiopians at Axum whether or not their Ethiopian Royal Lineages are true. What about the Bembe tribe? Why are they holding to Jewish traditions of a mythological past? And then tell us why then the Cohanim gene is found in only the DNA of some men if it is mythological?

Can you then tell us why Mohammed specifically mentions the Jews of the Quraysh if the Jews supposedly were "invented" later during the Khazar time? Wait, aren't there Yemeni Jews?

Let me get this right, the Khazars converted to a mythological past before converting to Christianity or Islam? And yet the Khazars brought in rabbis of a mythological past to teach them of a mythological past, but if rabbis only appeared after the Khazars, then how did they bring them?

Strabo says the Jews were in Jerusalem. I am sorry, but that's not mythology or a mythological past.
Strabo and the Jews Strabo seemed to believe they were real enough in his day.

Before Moses they were not Jewish, they were Hebrews. While Strabo believes the Jews in his day were indeed the descendents of the Hebrews, he is making it clear that the Jews were in Jerusalem after Moses. What you are basing your deductions on is from the Khazar conspiracy theories.

And your verse, you have taken so completely way out of context. In that verse, if there are no Jews, then there are no gentiles, no slaves nor free people. There is nobody.

But what that verse really means, jmdewey, is that in God's eyes, we are all equal.

Were there gentiles, jmdewey?

reply to post by WarminIndy

And why are there Mizrahi Jews in Afghanistan that hold on to the traditions since the time of Esther, if they have only a mythological history?

Just because someone traditionally holds to a particular myth, it does not make that myth true.
All you are doing is listing things after the myth was established in Persian Empire and Hellenistic times.

And your verse, you have taken so completely way out of context.

In Heaven there is no distinction.
You are claiming that there is, because there seems to be one on Earth.

reply to post by jmdewey60


GO YOU, dewey!

You've been doing some more reading and research, haven'tcha!?

This rather surprises me to read. I am fully in agreement with the notion that NO ONE IS COMING. We have to sort this mess out by ourselves. We have the tools, the know-how, and a global communication system....it is those who lack THE WILL to step up and participate who are keeping us down.

Cheers!

reply to post by wildtimes

You've been doing some more reading and research . . .

Have you read Joseph Atwill's book yet, Caesar's Messiah?
I have the Kindle version which I bought in April, 2012, after I read a post on it in a thread in the "Conspiracies in Religion" ATS sub-forum.
Not that I necessarily support his main premise that the Caesars wrote the New Testament, but he does a really good job of showing how the New Testament matches up with the events described in Josephus' "War of the Jews", the events leading up to and including the destruction of the Jerusalem temple, which marked the end of the age, as far as that former religion was concerned, and the birth of the new age that we are in now.
People have lost sight, it seems, at least in some sects, of that significance, and believe somehow that it must be talking about an even newer age, being dissatisfied with the one Christ gave us.
Anyway, I've heard Joe doing interviews, most lately this week on the Deana Spingola show, which the more I hear him talk, the more it sort of reinforces my opinion, which I was in the process of forming back around that time amidst all the end of the world hype going on then, when I first heard of Atwill's book.

reply to post by jmdewey60

Have you read Joseph Atwill's book yet, Caesar's Messiah?

I have not. Was this one of the $300 tomes you are prone to buying?

But, it sounds fascinating. I remember when Autowrench brought it up (the Caesar's invention of whatever)....long time ago.

(I also remember discussing whether or not a Kindle would be enjoyable for me.)

This one sounds like a physical-purchase-worthy one, though.....
Thanks for the tip. I tend to run out of reading material rapidly.

reply to post by jmdewey60

Your metaphorical interpretation of judgement does not fully match what the texts say about the judgement.

For example, Paul promises the Corinthians that they will be sustained and found "guiltless" on the day of the Lord Jesus Christ. But what on earth is the relevance, to the Corinthian Christian, of being guiltless on the day when Jerusalam is destroyed. And why should this moment be described as "rhe end"?

Similarly in 2 Peter, the readers of the letter are advised to be keep themselves in holiness and godliness "waiting for the coming of the day of God". But why should it matter to Christians in general that they should be in holiness and godliness on the day when Jerusalem is destroyed? And is not "the heavens will be disssolved and the elements will melt with fire" a rather exaggerated metaphor, if taken as referring to the capture of a city?

In 2 Thessalonians, we read that ALL not knowing God and not obeying the gospel of Christ will suffer exclusion from the presence of God when the Lord Jesus is revealed. But that statement is simply untrue, if the last part of it merely means the destruction of Jerusalem. On the day when Jerusalem was destroyed, there were many people in the world who did not know God and were not yet obeying the gospel of Christ, and yet the gospel continued to be preached and accepted, which implies that the destruction of Jerusalem was not an "eternal destruction" and permanent exclusion for these people after all.

If the gist of the New Testament passages is "When Jesus comes, there will be a judgement of the whole world, and so you need to be without sin when that happens", the most natural interpretation is that "the coming of Jesus" relates to the judgement of the whole world, rather than a partial event. You find this idea uncongenial, so you are forced to resort to unnatural interpretations.

I sympathise with your unwillingness to concede anything to the "rapture" theorists, but I think you may be in danger of going to the opposite extreme and throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

reply to post by DISRAELI

Your metaphorical interpretation of judgement . . .

There is no other way of "interpreting" it since it is always only spoken of in a metaphorical way.
It's just ridiculous to think that any mention of judgment in the Bible is meant to be taken literally.

Can you give an example of a "non-metaphorical" description of judgment?

For example, Paul promises the Corinthians that they will be sustained and found "guiltless" on the day of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Not to fall into disbelief, as what the Jews were guilty of. God will help believers to keep their belief.

And why should this moment be described as "the end"?

It doesn't. What it says is,

. . . He will also keep you firm to the end.
(2011 NIV)
where "the end" comes from the word, telous, which could be a reference to their own goal in regards to their spiritual development.

Similarly in 2 Peter, the readers of the letter are advised to be keep themselves in holiness and godliness "waiting for the coming of the day of God".

You are either forgetting or ignoring or not "getting" that I distinguish between two events, one being now in the past, and the other being a fuzzy hypothetical event in the future, based on Jewish beliefs current at that time.

And is not "the heavens will be disssolved and the elements will melt with fire" a rather exaggerated metaphor, if taken as referring to the capture of a city?

I don't think so, if you understand the "elements" being the principles that hold together the cosmic structure of things, such as a law and a religious institution that supposedly kept earth from being destroyed.

. . . the destruction of Jerusalem was not an "eternal destruction" and permanent exclusion for these people after all.

You are talking about hypothetical people who do not figure into the discussion amongst people in Paul's time who were being physically attacked by the supporters of the temple cult.

If the gist of the New Testament passages is "When Jesus comes, there will be a judgement of the whole world, and so you need to be without sin when that happens"

What passages?
The "sin" is disobedience to God, who's will was that we believe in His son. They killed Jesus and persecuted his followers, and thought that they were serving God, so that institution was judged and destroyed.
The "gist" is we have a new institution, the new covenant of the ingathering of the church.

the most natural interpretation is that "the coming of Jesus" relates to the judgement of the whole world, rather than a partial event.

According to what. You are good at stating opinions but you have nothing that actually says any of that.

You find this idea uncongenial, so you are forced to resort to unnatural interpretations.

"Uncongenial"? You are wrong. I very much believe in every person being judged on what they did in this life. There are tons of people already dead who can be judged in that way right now, with tens of thousands more every day. We don't need the world to have Jesus being seen in the sky or something, to be judged, since we will all be seeing him soon enough since none of us lives forever.

I think you may be in danger of going to the opposite extreme and throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

I could ask you the same think that I ask the rapture cult people, what would be the advantage of Jesus coming? Just killing a lot of people? I think that people need to be active in taking the control of government from criminals so that proper justice can be done in the court system.

reply to post by jmdewey60

I was referring to the fact that you were identifying "the day of judgement when Jesus comes" with the capture of Jerusalem. That was the "metaphorical intrepretation" under consideration.

A non-metaphorical interpretation of that idea would be Jesus appearing to the world at a later date and placing the world at large under judgement.

reply to post by DISRAELI

A non-metaphorical interpretation of that idea would be Jesus appearing to the world at a later date and placing the world at large under judgement.

What I was asking for is a non-metaphorical description of the judgment in the Bible.
I understand there are interpretations out there that some people think are straightforward literal.

Anyway, what is the actual text that you are making that interpretation of?