Author Topic: The coming of the Messiah twice.  (Read 1226 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Mor Ephrem

  • The Fourteenth Apostle and Judge of the Interwebs
  • Section Moderator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,886
  • "I pledge allegiance to the flag..."
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to Czech Lands
Re: The coming of the Messiah twice.
« Reply #90 on: June 21, 2015, 06:39:15 PM »
^Second Coming is one way.

And since we are talking about prophecies, they can be considered in a poetical rather than literal way. (eg. the throne)

That's why I asked you :

"What proof do you have that the Throne of David was something else than a political ruling? "

"So how did Jesus actually sit on the throne of David ? And what about the prophecy from Jeremiah 33?"

 
Also Jesus has Zeconiah in his Matthew lineage of whom the Lord said : ""Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, SITTING UPON THE THRONE OF DAVID, and ruling any more in Judah" (Jeremiah 22:30)."

Is Jeconiah listed in the Lucan genealogy? 
"Do not tempt the Mor thy Mod."

Quote
Bartholomew, 270th Archbishop of Constantinople-New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch, is spiritual leader to 300 million Orthodox Christians throughout the world.

Offline Raylight

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,103
  • Queen Elizabeth I
  • Faith: Christian.
  • Jurisdiction: Anglican Church of Canada.
Re: The coming of the Messiah twice.
« Reply #91 on: June 21, 2015, 08:38:58 PM »
^Second Coming is one way.

And since we are talking about prophecies, they can be considered in a poetical rather than literal way. (eg. the throne)


In my opinion, this is not an answer.

The idea of finishing the rest of the prophecies in a second coming seems fishy to me.
OK. All you have to do is see that the Messiah gets killed the first time around (eg. Zechariah 11-13 or Dan. 9). Then you see that he has unfinished business, because his dominion is supposed to last forever (eg. In the prophecy to David about the Messiah in Chronicles). So that means other prophecies need to get finished later.


Quote
Regarding taking the prophecies poetical rather than literal is  a way of twisting things in order to fit someone's purpose. As I said before, Mohammed himself can become a prophet if we are going to take things poetically. Actually some Muslim writers tried to find some verses in the Bible to prove Mohammed's mission.

The Jewish Tradition's idea of the Messiah is based on what is mentioned in the Bible. In many places, the Bible mentions the Messiah as an earthly king, political figure who will restore Israel, build the temple, fight the nations, and observe the Law...etc. It seems to me that the Jewish Tradition is not the one that is confused about the idea of the Messiah.
Nope. You have to interpret prophecies poetically because they are in the form of poetry. Are you familiar with dream interpretation? The visions in the dreams often mean other things than their literal meaning. Daniel himself had to interpret dreams and gave the hidden meanings of what they predicted. Of course, the Jewish tradition is conflicted on the meaning of the Messianic prophecies and in the Talmud you can find rabbinic debates about their meanings. The Talmud in several places considered Isaiah 53 to be Messianic.

Zechariah 11 can not possibly be about Christ. There is nothing about it can be said about Christ.

Here is a Jewish commentary on Zechariah 11 and you can see it has nothing to do with Christ.

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16215/jewish/Chapter-11.htm#showrashi=true

I will continue to label myself Christian, and Anglican, in respect for my baptism. Even though I still struggle with doubts. I don't believe it is fair to dismiss it that easily because of some doubt.

Offline rakovsky

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,831
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: The coming of the Messiah twice.
« Reply #92 on: June 21, 2015, 10:34:49 PM »
Zechariah 11 can not possibly be about Christ. There is nothing about it can be said about Christ.
Yes there is. It's about a good shepherd over the people, and the rabbinic commentary says that shepherds means kings. Furthermore, the rabbinic commentary says that the flock of slaughter is Israel:
Quote
the flock of slaughter: Israel, whose shepherds slew them and devoured them.
Next, the rabbinic commentary says that the good shepherd breaks the staff that thus breaks the power of the Israelite kings.

Quote
And I took My [first] staff, [called] Pleasantness and I cut it off to nullify My convenant that I [had] formed with all the peoples.         יוָאֶקַּח אֶת מַקְלִי אֶת נֹעַם וָאֶגְדַּע אֹתוֹ לְהָפֵיר אֶת בְּרִיתִי אֲשֶׁר כָּרַתִּי אֶת כָּל הָעַמִּים:
And I took My [first] staff, [called] Pleasantness: I broke the power of the kings of Israel in the days of Jehoahaz the son of Jehu - to the extent that the king of Aram destroyed them and made them like dust to trample (II Kings 13:7) - and in the days of Hoshea the son of Elah, when I delivered them into the hands of Sennacherib and he exiled them (ibid. 17:6).         

The Messiah of course would be a prophetic good shepherd or king over Israel. And not only that, but the rabbinic commentary says that it is He who formed the covenant with the nations. And who else but the Messiah is one who is an Israelite king and who also forms a covenant with the nations and who also would have the ability and willpower to break the power of Israel's kings if they resist Him, like it says?

Quote
Here is a Jewish commentary on Zechariah 11 and you can see it has nothing to do with Christ.

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16215/jewish/Chapter-11.htm#showrashi=true
OK. You are linking to Rashi's medieval commentary, and while it can be helpful, the fact is that it is written about 1500 years after Zechariah. Meanwhile, the Jewish Christians from the 1st century AD related Zechariah's prophecies to Christ (notice the reference to 30 pieces of silver in Zechariah and in the gospels). So one cannot simply prove that the Jewish Christians were wrong by pointing to rabbinic commentaries written by their religious opponents. You would really have to cite actual commentaries from 500-300 BC or so in order to show the meaning of the passage.

But in so far as the Christian and rabbinic interpretations agree, like I outlined initially above in this message, they are reliable.

Offline Raylight

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,103
  • Queen Elizabeth I
  • Faith: Christian.
  • Jurisdiction: Anglican Church of Canada.
Re: The coming of the Messiah twice.
« Reply #93 on: June 22, 2015, 12:30:22 AM »
Zechariah 11 can not possibly be about Christ. There is nothing about it can be said about Christ.
Yes there is. It's about a good shepherd over the people, and the rabbinic commentary says that shepherds means kings. Furthermore, the rabbinic commentary says that the flock of slaughter is Israel:
Quote
the flock of slaughter: Israel, whose shepherds slew them and devoured them.
Next, the rabbinic commentary says that the good shepherd breaks the staff that thus breaks the power of the Israelite kings.

Quote
And I took My [first] staff, [called] Pleasantness and I cut it off to nullify My convenant that I [had] formed with all the peoples.         יוָאֶקַּח אֶת מַקְלִי אֶת נֹעַם וָאֶגְדַּע אֹתוֹ לְהָפֵיר אֶת בְּרִיתִי אֲשֶׁר כָּרַתִּי אֶת כָּל הָעַמִּים:
And I took My [first] staff, [called] Pleasantness: I broke the power of the kings of Israel in the days of Jehoahaz the son of Jehu - to the extent that the king of Aram destroyed them and made them like dust to trample (II Kings 13:7) - and in the days of Hoshea the son of Elah, when I delivered them into the hands of Sennacherib and he exiled them (ibid. 17:6).         

The Messiah of course would be a prophetic good shepherd or king over Israel. And not only that, but the rabbinic commentary says that it is He who formed the covenant with the nations. And who else but the Messiah is one who is an Israelite king and who also forms a covenant with the nations and who also would have the ability and willpower to break the power of Israel's kings if they resist Him, like it says?

Quote
Here is a Jewish commentary on Zechariah 11 and you can see it has nothing to do with Christ.

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16215/jewish/Chapter-11.htm#showrashi=true
OK. You are linking to Rashi's medieval commentary, and while it can be helpful, the fact is that it is written about 1500 years after Zechariah. Meanwhile, the Jewish Christians from the 1st century AD related Zechariah's prophecies to Christ (notice the reference to 30 pieces of silver in Zechariah and in the gospels). So one cannot simply prove that the Jewish Christians were wrong by pointing to rabbinic commentaries written by their religious opponents. You would really have to cite actual commentaries from 500-300 BC or so in order to show the meaning of the passage.

But in so far as the Christian and rabbinic interpretations agree, like I outlined initially above in this message, they are reliable.

Do you have any evidence that all what is said is written in any of the Jewish Tradition before the coming of Jesus ? All what you said so far is your own interpretation.

You say that these verses are about Christ. So, based on that, Christ didn't care about the lost from Israel ? Christ didn't care about the people and instead of healing them, he ignored them ? That doesn't go well with the image the Gospel give about Jesus.

Read this please and tell me how could these verses apply to Jesus ?

" For, behold! I am setting up a shepherd in the land. Those that are cut off he shall not remember; the foolish ones he shall not seek. The lame he shall not heal; the one that can stand he shall not bear. And the flesh of the fat one he shall eat, and their hoofs he shall break. "
I will continue to label myself Christian, and Anglican, in respect for my baptism. Even though I still struggle with doubts. I don't believe it is fair to dismiss it that easily because of some doubt.

Offline rakovsky

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,831
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: The coming of the Messiah twice.
« Reply #94 on: June 22, 2015, 12:57:18 AM »
Zechariah 11 can not possibly be about Christ. There is nothing about it can be said about Christ.
Yes there is. It's about a good shepherd over the people, and the rabbinic commentary says that shepherds means kings. Furthermore, the rabbinic commentary says that the flock of slaughter is Israel:
Quote
the flock of slaughter: Israel, whose shepherds slew them and devoured them.
Next, the rabbinic commentary says that the good shepherd breaks the staff that thus breaks the power of the Israelite kings.

Quote
And I took My [first] staff, [called] Pleasantness and I cut it off to nullify My convenant that I [had] formed with all the peoples.         יוָאֶקַּח אֶת מַקְלִי אֶת נֹעַם וָאֶגְדַּע אֹתוֹ לְהָפֵיר אֶת בְּרִיתִי אֲשֶׁר כָּרַתִּי אֶת כָּל הָעַמִּים:
And I took My [first] staff, [called] Pleasantness: I broke the power of the kings of Israel in the days of Jehoahaz the son of Jehu - to the extent that the king of Aram destroyed them and made them like dust to trample (II Kings 13:7) - and in the days of Hoshea the son of Elah, when I delivered them into the hands of Sennacherib and he exiled them (ibid. 17:6).         

The Messiah of course would be a prophetic good shepherd or king over Israel. And not only that, but the rabbinic commentary says that it is He who formed the covenant with the nations. And who else but the Messiah is one who is an Israelite king and who also forms a covenant with the nations and who also would have the ability and willpower to break the power of Israel's kings if they resist Him, like it says?

Quote
Here is a Jewish commentary on Zechariah 11 and you can see it has nothing to do with Christ.

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16215/jewish/Chapter-11.htm#showrashi=true
OK. You are linking to Rashi's medieval commentary, and while it can be helpful, the fact is that it is written about 1500 years after Zechariah. Meanwhile, the Jewish Christians from the 1st century AD related Zechariah's prophecies to Christ (notice the reference to 30 pieces of silver in Zechariah and in the gospels). So one cannot simply prove that the Jewish Christians were wrong by pointing to rabbinic commentaries written by their religious opponents. You would really have to cite actual commentaries from 500-300 BC or so in order to show the meaning of the passage.

But in so far as the Christian and rabbinic interpretations agree, like I outlined initially above in this message, they are reliable.

Do you have any evidence that all what is said is written in any of the Jewish Tradition before the coming of Jesus ? All what you said so far is your own interpretation.
We don't have interviews with people from 300 BC, so we are stuck using text criticisms to show that the passage is Messianic like I did above.

Quote

You say that these verses are about Christ. So, based on that, Christ didn't care about the lost from Israel ? Christ didn't care about the people and instead of healing them, he ignored them ? That doesn't go well with the image the Gospel give about Jesus.

Read this please and tell me how could these verses apply to Jesus ?

" For, behold! I am setting up a shepherd in the land. Those that are cut off he shall not remember; the foolish ones he shall not seek. The lame he shall not heal; the one that can stand he shall not bear. And the flesh of the fat one he shall eat, and their hoofs he shall break. "
No, this part of the chapter is about the foolish shepherd or antiChrist.

Offline Raylight

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,103
  • Queen Elizabeth I
  • Faith: Christian.
  • Jurisdiction: Anglican Church of Canada.
Re: The coming of the Messiah twice.
« Reply #95 on: June 22, 2015, 01:05:34 AM »
Zechariah 11 can not possibly be about Christ. There is nothing about it can be said about Christ.
Yes there is. It's about a good shepherd over the people, and the rabbinic commentary says that shepherds means kings. Furthermore, the rabbinic commentary says that the flock of slaughter is Israel:
Quote
the flock of slaughter: Israel, whose shepherds slew them and devoured them.
Next, the rabbinic commentary says that the good shepherd breaks the staff that thus breaks the power of the Israelite kings.

Quote
And I took My [first] staff, [called] Pleasantness and I cut it off to nullify My convenant that I [had] formed with all the peoples.         יוָאֶקַּח אֶת מַקְלִי אֶת נֹעַם וָאֶגְדַּע אֹתוֹ לְהָפֵיר אֶת בְּרִיתִי אֲשֶׁר כָּרַתִּי אֶת כָּל הָעַמִּים:
And I took My [first] staff, [called] Pleasantness: I broke the power of the kings of Israel in the days of Jehoahaz the son of Jehu - to the extent that the king of Aram destroyed them and made them like dust to trample (II Kings 13:7) - and in the days of Hoshea the son of Elah, when I delivered them into the hands of Sennacherib and he exiled them (ibid. 17:6).         

The Messiah of course would be a prophetic good shepherd or king over Israel. And not only that, but the rabbinic commentary says that it is He who formed the covenant with the nations. And who else but the Messiah is one who is an Israelite king and who also forms a covenant with the nations and who also would have the ability and willpower to break the power of Israel's kings if they resist Him, like it says?

Quote
Here is a Jewish commentary on Zechariah 11 and you can see it has nothing to do with Christ.

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16215/jewish/Chapter-11.htm#showrashi=true
OK. You are linking to Rashi's medieval commentary, and while it can be helpful, the fact is that it is written about 1500 years after Zechariah. Meanwhile, the Jewish Christians from the 1st century AD related Zechariah's prophecies to Christ (notice the reference to 30 pieces of silver in Zechariah and in the gospels). So one cannot simply prove that the Jewish Christians were wrong by pointing to rabbinic commentaries written by their religious opponents. You would really have to cite actual commentaries from 500-300 BC or so in order to show the meaning of the passage.

But in so far as the Christian and rabbinic interpretations agree, like I outlined initially above in this message, they are reliable.

Do you have any evidence that all what is said is written in any of the Jewish Tradition before the coming of Jesus ? All what you said so far is your own interpretation.
We don't have interviews with people from 300 BC, so we are stuck using text criticisms to show that the passage is Messianic like I did above.

Quote

You say that these verses are about Christ. So, based on that, Christ didn't care about the lost from Israel ? Christ didn't care about the people and instead of healing them, he ignored them ? That doesn't go well with the image the Gospel give about Jesus.

Read this please and tell me how could these verses apply to Jesus ?

" For, behold! I am setting up a shepherd in the land. Those that are cut off he shall not remember; the foolish ones he shall not seek. The lame he shall not heal; the one that can stand he shall not bear. And the flesh of the fat one he shall eat, and their hoofs he shall break. "
No, this part of the chapter is about the foolish shepherd or antiChrist.

Okay, so I agree with you on the last part.

I still need an evidence that these verses are actually about Jesus ? I can't reply on your interpretation or the interpretation of the Church, because the latter surely has its reasons for believing these verses are about Christ.
I will continue to label myself Christian, and Anglican, in respect for my baptism. Even though I still struggle with doubts. I don't believe it is fair to dismiss it that easily because of some doubt.

Offline rakovsky

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,831
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: The coming of the Messiah twice.
« Reply #96 on: June 22, 2015, 01:23:30 AM »
Zechariah 11 can not possibly be about Christ. There is nothing about it can be said about Christ.
Yes there is. It's about a good shepherd over the people, and the rabbinic commentary says that shepherds means kings. Furthermore, the rabbinic commentary says that the flock of slaughter is Israel:
Quote
the flock of slaughter: Israel, whose shepherds slew them and devoured them.
Next, the rabbinic commentary says that the good shepherd breaks the staff that thus breaks the power of the Israelite kings.

Quote
And I took My [first] staff, [called] Pleasantness and I cut it off to nullify My convenant that I [had] formed with all the peoples.         יוָאֶקַּח אֶת מַקְלִי אֶת נֹעַם וָאֶגְדַּע אֹתוֹ לְהָפֵיר אֶת בְּרִיתִי אֲשֶׁר כָּרַתִּי אֶת כָּל הָעַמִּים:
And I took My [first] staff, [called] Pleasantness: I broke the power of the kings of Israel in the days of Jehoahaz the son of Jehu - to the extent that the king of Aram destroyed them and made them like dust to trample (II Kings 13:7) - and in the days of Hoshea the son of Elah, when I delivered them into the hands of Sennacherib and he exiled them (ibid. 17:6).         

The Messiah of course would be a prophetic good shepherd or king over Israel. And not only that, but the rabbinic commentary says that it is He who formed the covenant with the nations. And who else but the Messiah is one who is an Israelite king and who also forms a covenant with the nations and who also would have the ability and willpower to break the power of Israel's kings if they resist Him, like it says?

Quote
Here is a Jewish commentary on Zechariah 11 and you can see it has nothing to do with Christ.

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16215/jewish/Chapter-11.htm#showrashi=true
OK. You are linking to Rashi's medieval commentary, and while it can be helpful, the fact is that it is written about 1500 years after Zechariah. Meanwhile, the Jewish Christians from the 1st century AD related Zechariah's prophecies to Christ (notice the reference to 30 pieces of silver in Zechariah and in the gospels). So one cannot simply prove that the Jewish Christians were wrong by pointing to rabbinic commentaries written by their religious opponents. You would really have to cite actual commentaries from 500-300 BC or so in order to show the meaning of the passage.

But in so far as the Christian and rabbinic interpretations agree, like I outlined initially above in this message, they are reliable.

Do you have any evidence that all what is said is written in any of the Jewish Tradition before the coming of Jesus ? All what you said so far is your own interpretation.
We don't have interviews with people from 300 BC, so we are stuck using text criticisms to show that the passage is Messianic like I did above.

Quote

You say that these verses are about Christ. So, based on that, Christ didn't care about the lost from Israel ? Christ didn't care about the people and instead of healing them, he ignored them ? That doesn't go well with the image the Gospel give about Jesus.

Read this please and tell me how could these verses apply to Jesus ?

" For, behold! I am setting up a shepherd in the land. Those that are cut off he shall not remember; the foolish ones he shall not seek. The lame he shall not heal; the one that can stand he shall not bear. And the flesh of the fat one he shall eat, and their hoofs he shall break. "
No, this part of the chapter is about the foolish shepherd or antiChrist.

Okay, so I agree with you on the last part.

I still need an evidence that these verses are actually about Jesus ? I can't reply on your interpretation or the interpretation of the Church, because the latter surely has its reasons for believing these verses are about Christ.
OK, have a look at the chapter on Zechariah 11-13 on my website on Messianic prophecy: rakovskii.livejournal.com and let me know what you think.

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,232
  • God is One & Jesus is the Messiah.
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: The coming of the Messiah twice.
« Reply #97 on: June 26, 2015, 07:32:38 PM »
^Second Coming is one way.

And since we are talking about prophecies, they can be considered in a poetical rather than literal way. (eg. the throne)

That's why I asked you :

"What proof do you have that the Throne of David was something else than a political ruling? "

"So how did Jesus actually sit on the throne of David ? And what about the prophecy from Jeremiah 33?"

 
Also Jesus has Zeconiah in his Matthew lineage of whom the Lord said : ""Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, SITTING UPON THE THRONE OF DAVID, and ruling any more in Judah" (Jeremiah 22:30)."
There is some light on this by the Jews themselves.
http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/prophecy/jeconiah
I believe in one God the Father and His Son the Messiah, the Savior of all people.

Offline biro

  • Excelsior
  • Site Supporter
  • Hoplitarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,073
  • Chapter one again, here I go again
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: The coming of the Messiah twice.
« Reply #98 on: June 26, 2015, 08:49:07 PM »
^Second Coming is one way.

And since we are talking about prophecies, they can be considered in a poetical rather than literal way. (eg. the throne)

That's why I asked you :

"What proof do you have that the Throne of David was something else than a political ruling? "

"So how did Jesus actually sit on the throne of David ? And what about the prophecy from Jeremiah 33?"

 
Also Jesus has Zeconiah in his Matthew lineage of whom the Lord said : ""Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, SITTING UPON THE THRONE OF DAVID, and ruling any more in Judah" (Jeremiah 22:30)."
There is some light on this by the Jews themselves.
http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/prophecy/jeconiah

Those are Messianic Jews, essentially Protestants, and disavowed by rabbinical Jews.

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,232
  • God is One & Jesus is the Messiah.
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: The coming of the Messiah twice.
« Reply #99 on: June 27, 2015, 05:07:09 AM »
^Second Coming is one way.

And since we are talking about prophecies, they can be considered in a poetical rather than literal way. (eg. the throne)

That's why I asked you :

"What proof do you have that the Throne of David was something else than a political ruling? "

"So how did Jesus actually sit on the throne of David ? And what about the prophecy from Jeremiah 33?"

 
Also Jesus has Zeconiah in his Matthew lineage of whom the Lord said : ""Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, SITTING UPON THE THRONE OF DAVID, and ruling any more in Judah" (Jeremiah 22:30)."
There is some light on this by the Jews themselves.
http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/prophecy/jeconiah

Those are Messianic Jews, essentially Protestants, and disavowed by rabbinical Jews.
Yes but they are still ethnic Jews and have answers to questions that Rabbinical Jews pose
I believe in one God the Father and His Son the Messiah, the Savior of all people.

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,232
  • God is One & Jesus is the Messiah.
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: The coming of the Messiah twice.
« Reply #100 on: June 27, 2015, 05:31:10 AM »
^Second Coming is one way.

And since we are talking about prophecies, they can be considered in a poetical rather than literal way. (eg. the throne)

That's why I asked you :

"What proof do you have that the Throne of David was something else than a political ruling? "

"So how did Jesus actually sit on the throne of David ? And what about the prophecy from Jeremiah 33?"

 
Also Jesus has Zeconiah in his Matthew lineage of whom the Lord said : ""Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, SITTING UPON THE THRONE OF DAVID, and ruling any more in Judah" (Jeremiah 22:30)."
This is a good answer from Jews for Jesus from someone called Timothy:" The genealogy in Matthew is that of Joseph, Christ's adopted father - as an adopted child of Joseph, Christ is LEGALLY Joseph's son - Joseph is His guardian. So the relationship through his earthly "parent" afford Him legal claim to the throne, but He is NOT biologically a descendant of David through Joseph, so this is accomplished by His genealogy through Mary which makes Him a physical descendant of David; thus bypassing the Coniac curse. So He is legally heir to the throne through Joseph, but biologically the son of David through Mary. O, the depth and mystery of the workings of God - how are His wisdom and ways past finding out."http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/prophecy/jeconiah
I believe in one God the Father and His Son the Messiah, the Savior of all people.

Offline Dracula

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 108
  • Faith: Order of the Dragon
  • Jurisdiction: Global
Re: The coming of the Messiah twice.
« Reply #101 on: June 27, 2015, 05:38:43 AM »
^Second Coming is one way.

And since we are talking about prophecies, they can be considered in a poetical rather than literal way. (eg. the throne)

That's why I asked you :

"What proof do you have that the Throne of David was something else than a political ruling? "

"So how did Jesus actually sit on the throne of David ? And what about the prophecy from Jeremiah 33?"

 
Also Jesus has Zeconiah in his Matthew lineage of whom the Lord said : ""Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, SITTING UPON THE THRONE OF DAVID, and ruling any more in Judah" (Jeremiah 22:30)."
This is a good answer from Jews for Jesus from someone called Timothy:" The genealogy in Matthew is that of Joseph, Christ's adopted father - as an adopted child of Joseph, Christ is LEGALLY Joseph's son - Joseph is His guardian. So the relationship through his earthly "parent" afford Him legal claim to the throne, but He is NOT biologically a descendant of David through Joseph, so this is accomplished by His genealogy through Mary which makes Him a physical descendant of David; thus bypassing the Coniac curse. So He is legally heir to the throne through Joseph, but biologically the son of David through Mary. O, the depth and mystery of the workings of God - how are His wisdom and ways past finding out."http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/prophecy/jeconiah

The throne of David was a political throne, how exactly did Jesus sit on it? And political rulers were Messiah, ritually appointed through unction. How did Jesus fit that?

Offline andrewlya

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,232
  • God is One & Jesus is the Messiah.
  • Jurisdiction: Pro-Conservatism. Anti-liberalism.
Re: The coming of the Messiah twice.
« Reply #102 on: June 27, 2015, 06:35:19 AM »
^Second Coming is one way.

And since we are talking about prophecies, they can be considered in a poetical rather than literal way. (eg. the throne)

That's why I asked you :

"What proof do you have that the Throne of David was something else than a political ruling? "

"So how did Jesus actually sit on the throne of David ? And what about the prophecy from Jeremiah 33?"

 
Also Jesus has Zeconiah in his Matthew lineage of whom the Lord said : ""Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, SITTING UPON THE THRONE OF DAVID, and ruling any more in Judah" (Jeremiah 22:30)."
This is a good answer from Jews for Jesus from someone called Timothy:" The genealogy in Matthew is that of Joseph, Christ's adopted father - as an adopted child of Joseph, Christ is LEGALLY Joseph's son - Joseph is His guardian. So the relationship through his earthly "parent" afford Him legal claim to the throne, but He is NOT biologically a descendant of David through Joseph, so this is accomplished by His genealogy through Mary which makes Him a physical descendant of David; thus bypassing the Coniac curse. So He is legally heir to the throne through Joseph, but biologically the son of David through Mary. O, the depth and mystery of the workings of God - how are His wisdom and ways past finding out."http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/prophecy/jeconiah

The throne of David was a political throne, how exactly did Jesus sit on it? And political rulers were Messiah, ritually appointed through unction. How did Jesus fit that?
This is to be fulfilled on the 2nd coming of the Messiah.
Please, read a good answer by Rev. Willem Glashouwer,President Christians for Israel International.

Article removed, as link is already provided so it can be read.

--Mina


http://www.whyisrael.org/2011/12/15/jesus-will-sit-on-the-throne-of-his-father-david/


Please, for the love of God, do not quote the whole article due to copyright laws pertaining to "Fair Use".  If you want to emphasize a part of the article above that you linked, quote the relevant paragraph or sentence.  Or quote the first one or two paragraphs and offer to read the rest in the link.  But do not quote a whole article in your post that does not even belong to you.

--Mina
« Last Edit: June 27, 2015, 12:13:54 PM by minasoliman »
I believe in one God the Father and His Son the Messiah, the Savior of all people.