Prophecies Jesus failed to fulfill?

Spiderman said:

This might be for @Rival , because she produced a list long ago, that was closest to what I am looking for, basically a list of prophecies of the Messiah that Jesus did not fulfill.

World peace and the political office was definitely two, but I'm looking for quotes and verse numbers please.

Also, there is more than one Messiah, because Scripture calls Cyrus the great the "anointed one, the Messiah", he ended Babylonian captivity, and built the temple.

Also, prophecies about the Messiah not damaging a bruised reed, turning the other cheek, being a pacifist, quiet lamb lead to slaughter, contradict other prophecies about the Messiah, that it actually isn't even possible for the prophecies to all be talking about the same person.

Last I read, a contemporary rabbi said there would be a warrior Messiah like Samson, from Dan, and another, the son of David, from Judah, which is why Dan and Judah were called Lions, the two built the temple and tabernacle.

Any feedback you have is appreciated. Thank you.

Click to expand...

The way I resolve the Jesus and the Messiah prophesy is connected to when Jesus was about to begin his ministry and was in the desert fasting and praying. He is visited by Satan, who, among other things, promises Jesus all the wealth and power of the kingdoms of the earth if Jesus would bow down and serve him/Satan. Had Jesus taken the offer, he would have become the Messiah that was expected; have all the logistics. However, the price to become the expected Messiah was to become subservient to Satan.

Satan was the Lord of the Earth at the time of Jesus and he had the authority to make Jesus the expected Messiah. Jesus never denies Satan's authority on earth. However, by refusing the offer and not serve Satan, the prophesy was fulfilled. This challenge to Satan's authority and his prophesy, would lead to a political battle in heaven between Satan/his angelic supporters and Jesus/his angelic supporters, that finally leads to war, where Satan and 1//3 of the Angels, are thrown from heaven; Revelations.

The Son of God took on Satan, not with wealth, power and strength but with weakness. Satan had been like the CEO of the earth, after the fall from paradise, with God the Chairman of the Board. But after being thrown from heaven, Satan was fired from that role. Satan was no longer allowed in heaven and Satan symbolically becomes the Devil. Without heavenly support as the CEO, the Messiah of Satan, no longer had funding. The new CEO; Jesus had another business plan; fulfilled.

The implication is the Lord of the Old and New Testaments was Satan, not God. This explains the binary nature of the God of the Old Testament who did both good and evil; warm and cold. Satan was connected to the tree of knowledge of good and evil which had been the nature of the Old Testament. Jesus said, nobody has seen the Father but the Son, which meant he who had been thought to be the Father; Chairman, was actually Satan, his CEO, who God had placed in charge of the earth, until the Son could overcome him via faith.

wizanda said:

If we read the whole of the contexts pertaining to the scriptures referenced, then it doesn't say in their timeline, it says when the specific contexts are happening.

The people who commonly make these arguments haven't read all the prior prophecy, and so are just looking for a verse to throw the whole thing out.

Click to expand...

I commonly make these arguments by reading what the text says. In my view each of the passages I quoted is a failed prophecy period. The references to the lifetime of some of Jesus' hearers are clear and unambiguous.

I also hold the view that it's extremely disrespectful to history and to truth to try to impose a view on a text which the text doesn't sustain.

wizanda said:

There are prophecies that due to the testimony of Immanuel (Isaiah 8, Zechariah 5, Habakkuk 2); an idolatrous city would be built upon bloodshed, where they wouldn't see their own wickedness.

Click to expand...

Idolatry is in the eye of the beholder. For example it's clear in the Tanakh that at the start Yahweh was simply a member of the Canaanite pantheon and did not become the sole God in [his] followers' eyes until after the Babylonian captivity.

Jesus is mentioned nowhere in the Tanakh. No ordinary Jew in Jesus' time would have recognized him as a messiah, since he was neither a civil, military or religious leader of the Jewish people nor anointed by the priesthood. The idea that Jesus was a messiah begins as unique to his small early cult. And what kind of Jewish messiah founds a church distinguished by two thousand years of rapacious and often murderous antisemitism?

blü 2 said:

The references to the lifetime of some of Jesus' hearers are clear and unambiguous.

I also hold the view that it's extremely disrespectful to history and to truth to try to impose a view on a text which the text doesn't sustain.

Click to expand...

I'd say having studied Biblical prophecy for the last 20 years, people who put forward this same argument are not being rational; as I believe they have to dismiss or haven't even looked at a majority of the Bible prophecy, to put forward claims like it.

It is based on an incomplete comprehension of what the previous prophecies are, that Yeshua was expounding on.

blü 2 said:

it's clear in the Tanakh that at the start Yahweh was simply a member of the Canaanite pantheon and did not become the sole God in [his] followers' eyes until after the Babylonian captivity.

Click to expand...

I agree that after Babylon the Rabbinic Rebels became Henotheists, worshipping Hashem as being the godhead; yet the Bible wasn't always Canaanite, they originally had a similar theology to the Dharma.

Where El Elyon is the God Most High (Brahman) above the Divine Council (Elohim/Avatars); where YHVH was given Israel as his people (Deuteronomy 32:7-9).

YHVH is a direct translation of Bhagavan Brahma in Sanskrit (Lord makes Manifest/Lord of Creation).

We should also take into account that Moses prophesied that they would forget their theology in Deuteronomy 32:15-18.

blü 2 said:

Jesus is mentioned nowhere in the Tanakh.

Click to expand...

Yehoshua is his name in Hebrew, and that is an ongoing prophecy back to Moses's friend Hosea son of Nun; where his name was change to Yehoshua, as he would lead the people into the Promised Land.

Yeshua (H3444) is even more symbolic, as it means Salvation, where it separated the Red Sea, it fought against the Children of Ammon, and did mighty things interacting with the Children of Israel.

The terminology j+sus (יסוס), and j+ses (יסס) is in the Tanakh (Isaiah 51:8); it means 'a beast that will trample down', and 'a beast that will tear away' (Matthew 7:6).

blü 2 said:

No ordinary Jew in Jesus' time would have recognized him as a messiah

Click to expand...

According to scripture lots of people came with palm branches, singing Hosanna as he entered Jerusalem (Matthew 21:9); it was the corrupt religious leaders who rejected him, and then made up lots of religious texts after, to try to cover up their actions against the Messiah.

blü 2 said:

And what kind of Jewish messiah founds a church distinguished by two thousand years of rapacious and often murderous antisemitism?

Click to expand...

According to prophecy God made the Messiah to come against them, as a test to see if they actually accepted the Tanakh, and literally placed the Curse of Moses (Deuteronomy 28) upon them, for their rejection of him for 30 pieces of silver in Zechariah 11:1-14.

Next is the destruction of billions in the Judgement Day Fire, and then God will resurrect those who've respected the Messiah, even with the adversities.

What we need to understand is Yehoshua/Yeshua was a manifestation of YHVH, and the Rabbinic Rebels have chosen to reject their Lord.

Yehudah/Judah means to Praise the Lord, and as posting Moses stated they would reject Yeshua (Salvation); where then the Source of reality will incinerate everyone, and keep those who've respected the Messiah (Deuteronomy 32:15-22).

In my opinion.

blü 2 said:

....

Mark 13:28 “From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near. 29 So also, when you see these things taking place, you know that he is near, at the very gates. 30 Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away before all these things take place.

Matthew 10:23When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes. …

Click to expand...

How do you know those things didn’t happen before Jesus came back from the grave?

blü 2 said:

Matthew 16:28 Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.”
…

Click to expand...

That came true few days later as told in Matt. 17:1-3.

Rival said:

2 Shmuel 7:10-13 (Samuel)
And I will appoint a place for My people, for Israel, and I will plant them, and they will dwell in their own place, and be disturbed no more; and the wicked people shall not continue to afflict them as formerly.
And even from the day that I commanded judges to be over my people Israel; and I will give you rest from all your enemies. And the Lord has told you that the Lord will make for you a house.
When your days are finished and you shall lie with your forefathers, then I will raise up your seed that shall proceed from your body after you, and I will establish his kingdom.
He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.

This has not happened. Wicked people have been murdering Jewish people all throughout history. The Temple is not built. There is no King.

Yeshayahu 2-4 (Isaiah)

And it shall be at the end of the days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be firmly established at the top of the mountains, and it shall be raised above the hills, and all the nations shall stream to it.
And many peoples shall go, and they shall say, "Come, let us go up to the Lord's mount, to the house of the God of Jacob, and let Him teach us of His ways, and we will go in His paths," for out of Zion shall the Torah come forth, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
And he shall judge between the nations and reprove many peoples, and they shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift the sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.

People still go to war and the Temple has not been re-established.

Yeshayahu 11-12-13

And He shall raise a banner to the nations, and He shall gather the lost of Israel, and the scattered ones of Judah He shall gather from the four corners of the earth.
And the envy of Ephraim shall cease, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off; Ephraim shall not envy Judah, nor shall Judah vex Ephraim.

The lost tribes have not been gathered back to Israel.

Yeshahyahu 27-12-13

And it shall come to pass on that day, that the Lord shall gather from the flood of the river to the stream of Egypt, and you shall be gathered one by one, O children of Israel.
And it shall come to pass on that day, that a great shofar shall be sounded, and those lost in the land of Assyria and those exiled in the land of Egypt shall come and they shall prostrate themselves before the Lord on the holy mount in Jerusalem.

Not happened yet.

Yirmiyahu 31:33 (Jeremiah)

And no longer shall one teach his neighbour or [shall] one [teach] his brother, saying, "Know the Lord," for they shall all know Me from their smallest to their greatest, says the Lord, for I will forgive their iniquity and their sin I will no longer remember.

Nothing about needing a middle-man and we don't live in an age where everyone knows G-d is G-d.

Yechezkel 37:26-28 (Ezekiel)

And I will form a covenant of peace for them, an everlasting covenant shall be with them; and I will establish them and I will multiply them, and I will place My Sanctuary in their midst forever.
And My dwelling place shall be over them, and I will be to them for a God, and they shall be to Me as a people.
And the nations shall know that I am the Lord, Who sanctifies Israel, when My Sanctuary is in their midst forever.

Temple still not built and the Nations don't all recognise G-d as G-d.

Micah 4:1-3

And it shall be at the end of the days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be firmly established at the top of the mountains, and it shall be raised above the hills, and peoples shall stream upon it.
And many nations shall go, and they shall say, "Come, let us go up to the Lord's mount and to the house of the God of Jacob, and let Him teach us of His ways, and we will go in His paths," for out of Zion shall the Torah come forth, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
And he shall judge between many peoples and reprove mighty nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nations shall not lift the sword against nation; neither shall they learn war anymore.

People still go to war. L-rd's House not established.

Tzefanaiah 3:9-13 (Zefanaiah)

For then I will convert the peoples to a pure language that all of them call in the name of the Lord, to worship Him of one accord.
From the other side of the rivers of Cush, My supplicants, the community of My scattered ones-they shall bring Me an offering.
On that day you shall not be ashamed of all your deeds [with] which you rebelled against Me, for then I will remove from your midst those who rejoice in your pride, and you shall no longer continue to be haughty on My holy mount.
And I will leave over in your midst a humble and poor people, and they shall take shelter in the name of the Lord.
The remnant of Israel shall neither commit injustice nor speak lies; neither shall deceitful speech be found in their mouth, for they shall graze and lie down, with no one to cause them to shudder.

This hasn't happened either. None of it.

Zach 14:9-11

And the Lord shall become King over all the earth; on that day shall the Lord be one, and His name one.
The whole earth shall be changed to be like a plain, from the hill of Rimmon in the south of Jerusalem; but it [Jerusalem] will be elevated high and remain in its old place; from the gate of Benjamin to the place of the first gate, until the corner gate, and from the tower of Hananel until the king's wine-cellars.
And they shall dwell therein, and there shall be no more destruction; but Jerusalem shall dwell in safety.

Jerusalem is hardly dwelling in safety and polytheism is still a thing.

Click to expand...

Why do you think those should have happened already?

1213 said:

Why do you think those should have happened already?

Click to expand...

Because they're the only way to know the Messiah has come at all. They're the messianic prophecies that tell you what the Messiah will do. What other criteria are you going to use and why would you?

Subduction Zone said:

From context he is speaking to the disciples and the prophesy is about them.

Click to expand...

Personally, I think that whole passage is about what happened to Jerusalem in 70 AD... But it could be also at the same time, be a future reference to the end times. Some of them would have still been alive when The siege of Jerusalem happened.
There are two main school of thought on this passage.
The preterist view: This view sees the great tribulation and coming of Christ spoken of in this passage as past and fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in A. D. 70.
Then there's a futuristic view that sees all this as something that's still yet to happen.
But yet another view combines the two, seeing the siege of Jerusalem and the future second coming as two different prophecies in the same discourse.

Redemptionsong said:

You mean 'real scholars' like Bart Ehrman?

It is indicative of the times that a scholar who gets a lot of 'air time' on the internet is considered to be a spokesman for truth.

Of course, you would use a term like 'apologist' in a derogatory manner, no matter what the credentials of the scholar. The truth is that hundreds of knowledgeable experts on the NT have expressed different views to those of Bart Ehrman.

Here is an article, giving the arguments for an early dating of the Gospels. The quality of the arguments should lead us to the truth of the matter!
The Dating of the New Testament | Union Resources

Click to expand...

I seriously doubt if you can find a scholar superior to him. The problem almost certainly appears to lie upon you. You mentioned the author of Luke earlier, by the way if you think that the Gospels bear their authors names then you have been following extremely low level "scholars". You can't really call them that. You appear to have been listening to apologists. Or Liars For Jesus.

Here is an easy test. Are you aware of why almost all NT scholars know that the nativity story in Luke is a myth?

Rival said:

Because they're the only way to know the Messiah has come at all. They're the messianic prophecies that tell you what the Messiah will do. What other criteria are you going to use and why would you?

Click to expand...

Talk to a Jew. Jesus did not meet the messianic prophecies. That is why some Christians began to quote mine the Bible. They chose verses out of context that were not about Jesus when you read them in context. They were not even prophecies usually.

Wildswanderer said:

Personally, I think that whole passage is about what happened to Jerusalem in 70 AD... But it could be also at the same time, be a future reference to the end times. Some of them would have still been alive when The siege of Jerusalem happened.
There are two main school of thought on this passage.
The preterist view: This view sees the great tribulation and coming of Christ spoken of in this passage as past and fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in A. D. 70.
Then there's a futuristic view that sees all this as something that's still yet to happen.
But yet another view combines the two, seeing the siege of Jerusalem and the future second coming as two different prophecies in the same discourse.

Click to expand...

That does not fit either. Jesus coming back was part of it.

wizanda said:

Actually I was trying to understand the Bible based on what it put forward, and in doing so, know that it can be proven to someone who reads it unbiasedly; if someone is determined to debunk everything, that is all they will find.

In my understanding we can read the prophecies in the Tanakh, understand the chain of events, see that they were prophesied before, and that Yeshua fulfilled the expectations; it is just the Rabbinic Rebels are lying to everyone (including themselves) by waiting for the rewards at the end, and doing away with vast amounts of contexts that have happened.

If someone is willing to understand the prophecies that have happened, and I believe can be proven; then we can discuss it - as long as someone plans on rationally studying all the texts put forward.

In my opinion.

Click to expand...

Now you are simply treating the Bible as a piece of fan fiction. Yes, almost any holy book can be used this way. Religious writings are often of a poetic nature. And if one allows quote mining then almost any poetic work can say exactly what one wants it to say.

It is much more honest and accurate to read a work in context and see what it actually says. You never get to pick one choice poetic sentence out of context because it can be used to justify one's agenda. That guarantees misunderstanding the work.

Rival said:

What other criteria are you going to use and why would you?

Click to expand...

If we're going to use a logical criteria, we'd not use only the best bits of the Bible (Isaiah 30:8-13); ignoring all the other Pre-Messianic prophecies of setting a Snare to catch out all the hypocrites, who don't listen properly to the Law & Testimony of the Messiah, whilst looking for their own reward (Maher Shalal Hash Baz - Isaiah 8).

In my opinion.

Subduction Zone said:

Now you are simply treating the Bible as a piece of fan fiction.

Click to expand...

I'm not a fan; I've fulfilled multiple aspects of the Bible prior to reading it, and so have studied it intently, as we're soon coming to the end of humanity, and so have looked for get out clauses to try to prevent Judgement Day.

Subduction Zone said:

It is much more honest and accurate to read a work in context and see what it actually says.

Click to expand...

I'm generally quoting whole chapters in contexts, and then showing how they interlink with other whole chapters.

If someone questions that I've missed a context, I will generally go back, and reread the whole thing... Comparatively I don't find the same standards from others.

In my opinion.

Subduction Zone said:

That does not fit either. Jesus coming back was part of it.

Click to expand...

He did come back according to the preterist veiw....
the prophecy of the coming of Christ in judgment was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. In fact they believe that all biblical prophecies are already fulfilled.
Which would make me a partial preterist because I do believe in the future second coming....if I cared for labels, but I don't get deeply into prophecy, so I'm willing to say I could be mistaken.

Wildswanderer said:

He did come back according to the preterist veiw....
the prophecy of the coming of Christ in judgment was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. In fact they believe that all biblical prophecies are already fulfilled.
Which would make me a partial preterist because I do believe in the future second coming....if I cared for labels, but I don't get deeply into prophecy, so I'm willing to say I could be mistaken.

Click to expand...

The "peterist" view? That is the first that I have heard of that claim. But he did not come bask in AD 70. I checked. I looked under the pillow and even behind the door.;

wizanda said:

I'm not a fan; I've fulfilled multiple aspects of the Bible prior to reading it, and so have studied it intently, as we're soon coming to the end of humanity, and so have looked for get out clauses to try to prevent Judgement Day.

Click to expand...

<sigh> The "end of the world" has been predicted since at least Jesus's time. HIs worse failed prophecy was that at least some of his disciples would live to see it. It is now almost 2,000 years later. That is one badly failed prophecy. And different sects of Christianity seem to know it. Apologetics is the dishonest tactic of trying to interpret the Bible so that it is true no matter what. There are multiple reinterpretations of that prophecy since the original intent clearly failed.

I'm generally quoting whole chapters in contexts, and then showing how they interlink with other whole chapters.

If someone questions that I've missed a context, I will generally go back, and reread the whole thing... Comparatively I don't find the same standards from others.

In my opinion.

Click to expand...

I have not seen you do that. You would have to look at entire passages to make that claim. I only see verses out of context by you.

Subduction Zone said:

The "peterist" view? That is the first that I have heard of that claim. But he did not come bask in AD 70. I checked. I looked under the pillow and even behind the door.;

Click to expand...

That's because you are expecting a physical return.
If you read the Old testament prophecies they often use language consistent with the way Jesus described his return, to described events that were not worldwide.

Wildswanderer said:

That's because you are expecting a physical return.
If you read the Old testament prophecies they often use language consistent with the way Jesus described his return, to described events that were not worldwide.

Click to expand...

I am unaware of any such Old Testament prophecies. You might be mistaken again about what a prophecy is.

Subduction Zone said:

I seriously doubt if you can find a scholar superior to him. The problem almost certainly appears to lie upon you. You mentioned the author of Luke earlier, by the way if you think that the Gospels bear their authors names then you have been following extremely low level "scholars". You can't really call them that. You appear to have been listening to apologists. Or Liars For Jesus.

Here is an easy test. Are you aware of why almost all NT scholars know that the nativity story in Luke is a myth?

Click to expand...

Let's put your understanding to the test, then. Can you explain why the nativity must be a myth?

Redemptionsong said:

Let's put your understanding to the test, then. Can you explain why the nativity must be a myth?

Click to expand...

Yes, but even more important can you provide any evidence at all that it is real? What theist never seem to understand is that their supernatural beliefs need strong evidence. A weak attempt at a rebuttal of the evidence that shows them to be wrong is a failure on their part.

What year roughly was Jesus born?