*the concept of a coming messiah*

[Ben Masada]

The concept of first or second coming, or third for that matter is related to the People of Israel as they return to the Land of Israel. The first coming was when
the People left the life of captivity in Egypt and returned to Canaan with Moses
to build the First Commonwealth.

When Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, destroyed the first Temple built by Solomon, the Jews were taken into exile for 70 years. Jews then, would speak of the second coming until it happened under Ezra and Nehemiah, when they succeeded to rebuild the Second Temple and therefore, the Second Commonwealth.

Now, when the Romans destroyed the Second Temple, the Jews were expelled into an almost two thousand years exile. As that was over, and having raised our Third Commonwhealth, this has been our third coming back. The Temple will soon be rebuilt. God willing!

This concept of "coming" is of the Paople, or of a remnant of the People, but as a People, not the individual. The individual once dead, he will never return. (Job 7:9,10; 10:21; 14:12; Psalm 88:6; Prov. 2:19)

Jesus' second coming has no grounds to stand but on faith only. If you are ready to believe blindly, go ahead, but anxiety as a result of empty hopes will strike with time. When I finally understood this concept in terms of the collective rather then the individual, the pain of unfulfilled expectations was gone.

Ben :clap

 

[Charity]

Ben sweetie, you naturally won't believe in the 2nd coming. You didn't believe that Jesus was the Messiah the first time he came. But I graciously choose to disagree with you. I do enjoy the context of your post. Keep going we may find a mutual ground yet. I willing to concede some ground if I am proven wrong.....

 

[Ben Masada]

Ben sweetie, you naturally won't believe in the 2nd coming. You didn't believe that Jesus was the Messiah the first time he came. But I graciously choose to disagree with you. I do enjoy the context of your post. Keep going we may find a mutual ground yet. I willing to concede some ground if I am proven wrong.....

Way to go Charity! Your above comment means only one thing: You have a mind of your own.


Ben :rainbow1:

 

[Nade]

Well, from a roman catholic standpoint(I was once roman catholic), I was sick of waiting for Jesus to come his second time and redeem everything. I agree that there was a lot of anxiety there.

But from my own personal standpoint, the idea of messianic salvation seems, to me, like a projection of the childlike impulse to be taken care of. You see, the whole thing hinges on two concepts, one, that we are somehow corrupt and or damaged. And two, that we have no power to change out corruptedness or fix ourselves.

I don't know about anyone else, but the idea that the human race is somehow "damaged" seems a little fishy to me. We call something "damaged" when it no longer fulfills its purpose. But things with purpose are usually created at once, in accordance with a designers needs. The very fact that we as human beings are not distinct from animals, but instead are simply evolved from them makes me question the idea that we can be "broken". It just doesn't seem right to me, when we've evolved over millions of years. There doesn't seem to be a distinction between us and animalas, except by degree. But not by quality.

Anyway, I also have my doubts about the idea that we as humans have no power to "fix" ourselves. Assuming we are "broken" of course. Even if we're not broken, everybody has problems, and lots of them. I don't buy the idea that we have to rely on someone else to fix our problems. That seems like a childlike behavior. If you are a grown man or woman, you need to take responsibility for your life. To put it all into the hands of god strikes me as exactly the same as putting it all into the hands of your best friend.

thing is, its childlike no matter how responsible or able god is. The point of life, to me, at least, involves growing up. So putting all your faith in a messianic savior to redeem you just strikes me as childlike and not mature, not to mention assumed.

And then there's the fact that Jesus hasn't come in 2000 years. If it's been that long, I don't think he's coming back in the next 100.

 

[Ben Masada]

Well, from a roman catholic standpoint(I was once roman catholic), I was sick of waiting for Jesus to come his second time and redeem everything. I agree that there was a lot of anxiety there.

But from my own personal standpoint, the idea of messianic salvation seems, to me, like a projection of the childlike impulse to be taken care of. You see, the whole thing hinges on two concepts, one, that we are somehow corrupt and or damaged. And two, that we have no power to change out corruptedness or fix ourselves.

I don't know about anyone else, but the idea that the human race is somehow "damaged" seems a little fishy to me. We call something "damaged" when it no longer fulfills its purpose. But things with purpose are usually created at once, in accordance with a designers needs. The very fact that we as human beings are not distinct from animals, but instead are simply evolved from them makes me question the idea that we can be "broken". It just doesn't seem right to me, when we've evolved over millions of years. There doesn't seem to be a distinction between us and animalas, except by degree. But not by quality.

Anyway, I also have my doubts about the idea that we as humans have no power to "fix" ourselves. Assuming we are "broken" of course. Even if we're not broken, everybody has problems, and lots of them. I don't buy the idea that we have to rely on someone else to fix our problems. That seems like a childlike behavior. If you are a grown man or woman, you need to take responsibility for your life. To put it all into the hands of god strikes me as exactly the same as putting it all into the hands of your best friend.

thing is, its childlike no matter how responsible or able god is. The point of life, to me, at least, involves growing up. So putting all your faith in a messianic savior to redeem you just strikes me as childlike and not mature, not to mention assumed.

And then there's the fact that Jesus hasn't come in 2000 years. If it's been that long, I don't think he's coming back in the next 100.

I agree with you just 101 percent. But the masses need to exercise their faith,
no matter how hopeless.

Ben

 

[Halcyon]

Isn't it a slight possibility that the idea of a future saviour was incorporated into Judaism, and thus Christianity, from the Saoshyant of Zoroastrianism when the Hebrews were in exile in Babylonia? So, you're premise of a collective messiah would be equally unfounded.

 

[Ben Masada]

Isn't it a slight possibility that the idea of a future saviour was incorporated into Judaism, and thus Christianity, from the Saoshyant of Zoroastrianism when the Hebrews were in exile in Babylonia? So, you're premise of a collective messiah would be equally unfounded.

It would be if it were not founded in the Scriptures. I do not claim that the idea came out of the top of my head. Besides, Isaiah himself wrote the chapters that refer to the Messiah as collective long before the Babylonian exile. Therefore, there is no possibility that he had been influenced by the idea of a future individual Saviour. Furthermore,
the Babylonians did not have such a concept, which was born in the Hellenistic mind of Paul about 25 years after Jesus' death. Now, if you checked the rest of the Tanach,
you would understand that such a concept is anti-Biblical, as we have from Deuteronomy 24:16; II Kings 14:6; Jeremiah 31:30; and Ezekiel 18:4.

Ben

 

[Arch-Angel]

Now, if you checked the rest of the Tanach,
you would understand that such a concept is anti-Biblical, as we have from Deuteronomy 24:16; II Kings 14:6; Jeremiah 31:30; and Ezekiel 18:4.

i disagree with you. Deuteronomy 24:16 is an old covenant,II Kings 14:6 a repeat of Deuteronomy 24:16 just played out by the king at the time, Jeremaih 31:30 if you read the rest of the passage through verse 35 you'll see the messianic covenant proclaimed and later fulfilled by the cross, and Ezekiel 18:4...i dont see where you were going with this one. you are saying that Paul was anti-biblical when in fact he understood completely the Messiah was Jesus and without him there is no hope for humanity. if you read the whole chapters Isaiah 53, psalms 22 and Jeremiah 31:30-35 you will see that these all point directly to Jesus Christ and the covenant sealed in His blood.

 

[Nade]

i disagree with you. Deuteronomy 24:16 is an old covenant,II Kings 14:6 a repeat of Deuteronomy 24:16 just played out by the king at the time, Jeremaih 31:30 if you read the rest of the passage through verse 35 you'll see the messianic covenant proclaimed and later fulfilled by the cross, and Ezekiel 18:4...i dont see where you were going with this one. you are saying that Paul was anti-biblical when in fact he understood completely the Messiah was Jesus and without him there is no hope for humanity. if you read the whole chapters Isaiah 53, psalms 22 and Jeremiah 31:30-35 you will see that these all point directly to Jesus Christ and the covenant sealed in His blood.

Excluding all the scriptural evidence, maybe Jesus will return once we've decided to grow up and solve our own problems?

 

[Charity]

Way to go Charity! Your above comment means only one thing: You have a mind of your own.


Ben :rainbow1:

I find that a lot of your theories are peaking my interest. I shall follow your posts.

 

[Ben Masada]

i disagree with you. Deuteronomy 24:16 is an old covenant,II Kings 14:6 a repeat of Deuteronomy 24:16 just played out by the king at the time, Jeremaih 31:30 if you read the rest of the passage through verse 35 you'll see the messianic covenant proclaimed and later fulfilled by the cross, and Ezekiel 18:4...i dont see where you were going with this one. you are saying that Paul was anti-biblical when in fact he understood completely the Messiah was Jesus and without him there is no hope for humanity. if you read the whole chapters Isaiah 53, psalms 22 and Jeremiah 31:30-35 you will see that these all point directly to Jesus Christ and the covenant sealed in His blood.

Sorry Arch-Angel, but this post of yours was a shoot out of fallacies.
1. To call the Torah or Tanach an old covenant is Replacement Theology, which has been considered Antisemitism. And it originated with Paul. (Gal. 4:21-31)

2. The Messianic Covenant in Jeremiah 31:31 was made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah as one, and it has nothing to do with Christianity.

3. What Paul understood is that he needed to fabricate a Christology about Jesus who was dead about 25 years before, in order to proclaim a dead man the Messiah, but only to hide the real Messiah of Christianity which was Paul himself.

4. Prove to me that anything in the Tanach, not only Jeremiah or Isaiah; anything that points directly to Jesus as the one, and I'll give you my word that I'll become a Christian. Could you do the same if I proved that Israel, the Jewish People is the Messiah by name? You would not have the guts to dare to compromise yourself because you yourself know that all your claims are assumptions; and believe me, assumptions butter no bread.

Ben

 

[opuntia]

What great crime did the Jews commit that the Romans sacked Jerusalem and exiled the Jews for two millennia? Whenever God exiled the Israelites it was always for some great sin or sins. See Deuteronomy 4:23-28; 28:63-65. If Jesus was not the Messiah, then what did the Jews do in Jerusalem?

 

[Ben Masada]

What great crime did the Jews commit that the Romans sacked Jerusalem and exiled the Jews for two millennia? Whenever God exiled the Israelites it was always for some great sin or sins. See Deuteronomy 4:23-28; 28:63-65. If Jesus was not the Messiah, then what did the Jews do in Jerusalem?

Sorry, Opuntia, but your question makes no sense to me. Especially the second one.
The crime committed by the Jews against Rome was never to accept and recognize
the Roman authority over Israel. They wanted freedom and fought for it until the
Romans sacked Jerusalem and exiled most the Jews for almost two millennia.

The second question you need to elaborate further. I didn't get it.

Ben

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings!

In fact, in the Baha'i view the Second Coming of the Christ Spirit already took place about a century and a half ago, and the Faith has been progressing from this starting point ever since!

Best,

Bruce

 

[Ben Masada]

Greetings!

In fact, in the Baha'i view the Second Coming of the Christ Spirit already took place about a century and a half ago, and the Faith has been progressing from this starting point ever since!

Best,

Bruce

Tell this to Christians, and you will be in big trouble to explain a lot of things.

Ben

 

[opuntia]

Sorry,

Opuntia​

, but your question makes no sense to me. Especially the second one.
The crime committed by the Jews against Rome was never to accept and recognize
the Roman authority over Israel. They wanted freedom and fought for it until the
Romans sacked Jerusalem and exiled most the Jews for almost two millennia.

The second question you need to elaborate further. I didn't get it.

Ben

No exile ever occurred to the Israelites unless they had offended their God. If God had been with them, no one could have cast them out of their land--even the Romans. Ever hear of miracles?

 

[Ben Masada]

No exile ever occurred to the Israelites unless they had offended their God. If God had been with them, no one could have cast them out of their land--even the Romans. Ever hear of miracles?

Do you know something? Congratulations! You have scored high with me here because I agree with you. Ezekiel and Daniel do say that Jewish exiles are indeed caused by our offenses. God turns His "face" from us and we end up in exile, but with the purpose to purge our uncleanness. At the end of the exile, the transgression is finished, our sins are ended, reconciliation for our iniquities is made, and Evelasting Righteousness returns to us. That's in Daniel 9:24. That's about our miraculous relationship with God: That to other nations, God will make an end of, but of Israel He will only chastize as we deserve.

Ben

 

[Ben Masada]

I find that a lot of your theories are peaking my interest. I shall follow your posts.

The interest is mutual, Charity. Your posts never escape my eyes.

Ben :run:

 

[Charity]

The interest is mutual, Charity. Your posts never escape my eyes.

Ben :run:

Ben in the book of Luke do you believe the person named Simeon was real? I can almost feel the joy and excitement tht Simeon must have felt when his eyes saw the salvation and his arms were holding the infant that would be amazing grace. Only the Holy Spirit could have revealed this to Simeon.
Ben if only you can teach me the things that you know to be true from your background and I can could teach you what I believe in my heart to be true, along with some personal experiences I have witnessed we would be quite the Jewish/Christian team.....

 

[BruceDLimber]

In fact, in the Baha'i view the Second Coming of the Christ Spirit already took place about a century and a half ago, and the Faith has been progressing from this starting point ever since!

Tell this to Christians, and you will be in big trouble to explain a lot of things.

No sweat whatever! We do so all the time.

(Which is why millions of Christians have become Baha'is as well as a fair number of Jews.)

Best,

Bruce