Why did the Christian messiah fail to fulfill the messianic prophecies?

quote:

---

But you only have "the works of later men" to tell you what the words of Jesus were.
And you still haven't said whether you believe Jesus fulfilled the messianic prophecies or not.

---

We have to take everything in an aparatus that is critical.Here is the only non-Christian writing that actually mentions Jesus during the first century (aside from the same author offering one other highly tampered-with passage that should perhaps be be ignored, this is all we have).It is Jospehus (a Jew).

quote:

---

Now it is said that the elder Ananus was extremely fortunate...but the younger Ananus, who had been appointed to the high priesthood, was rash in his temper and unusually daring. He followed the school of the Sadducees, who are indeed more heartless than any of the other Jews, as I have already explained, when they sit in judgment. Possessed of such a character, Ananus thought that he had a favourable opportunity because Festus was dead and Albinas was still on the way. And so he convened the judges of the Sanhedrin, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, the one called Christ, whose name was James, and certain others, and accusing them of having transgressed the law delivered them up to be stoned.

---

Hegesippus (born around 110 and died around 180) said James was thrown from the Temple Mount.Let's start with James as a foundational figure and of fundamental importance if we consider the early Christians who were worthy of mention. He seems to be somebody who the Temple authorities don't like and they consider him to not be following the Law properly.But, the larger issue on the "past".Did it happen one way or another way?This way or that way?What do I "believe" happened?The answer is that the past happened.Nothing we say or do can change the past.Nothing we believe can change the past.It already happened.In what way?(It happened) The way it did.Now.We can and should try to learn as best we can what happened 2000 and 2500 years ago.And for that matter 10,000 years ago. And, for another matter (and that matter) what happened other years and times in the past.But what we reconstruct doesn't change what already happened.What we can reconstruct will say more about our best working conclusions of the past that what exactly happened.

quote:

---

The scriptures do in fact indicate two comings of Christ if you know how to read them properly. Even some Jewish commentators find two different Messiahs in the Hebrew scriptures, the Suffering Servant and the Warrior King, ben Joseph and ben David being the names they assigned these two anointed ones I think though I may not remember the names rightly. And some even considered that there might be three Messiahs. This is because the scriptures present different portraits of Him. (A book on Jewish Messianic teachings by Raphael Patai, a nonChristian Jew, is my main source for this information).

---

I went to Google then typed 'dead sea scroll text risig 3 days' .The first hit was a 2008 New York Times' article.

quote:

---

Ancient Tablet Ignites Debate on Messiah and Resurrection
By ETHAN BRONNERJULY 6, 2008
JERUSALEM A three-foot-tall tablet with 87 lines of Hebrew that scholars believe dates from the decades just before the birth of Jesus is causing a quiet stir in biblical and archaeological circles, especially because it may speak of a messiah who will rise from the dead after three days.

​

If such a messianic description really is there, it will contribute to a developing re-evaluation of both popular and scholarly views of Jesus, since it suggests that the story of his death and resurrection was not unique but part of a recognized Jewish tradition at the time.
....
Much of the text, a vision of the apocalypse transmitted by the angel Gabriel, draws on the Old Testament, especially the prophets Daniel, Zechariah and Haggai.
....
Ms. Yardeni, who analyzed the stone along with Binyamin Elitzur, is an expert on Hebrew script, especially of the era of King Herod, who died in 4 B.C. The two of them published a long analysis of the stone more than a year ago in Cathedra, a Hebrew-language quarterly devoted to the history and archaeology of Israel, and said that, based on the shape of the script and the language, the text dated from the late first century B.C.

​

A chemical examination by Yuval Goren, a professor of archaeology at Tel Aviv University who specializes in the verification of ancient artifacts, has been submitted to a peer-review journal. He declined to give details of his analysis until publication, but he said that he knew of no reason to doubt the stone’s authenticity.

​

It was in Cathedra that Israel Knohl, an iconoclastic professor of Bible studies at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, first heard of the stone, which Ms. Yardeni and Mr. Elitzur dubbed Gabriel’s Revelation, also the title of their article. Mr. Knohl posited in a book published in 2000 the idea of a suffering messiah before Jesus, using a variety of rabbinic and early apocalyptic literature as well as the Dead Sea Scrolls. But his theory did not shake the world of Christology as he had hoped, partly because he had no textual evidence from before Jesus.

​

When he read Gabriel’s Revelation, he said, he believed he saw what he needed to solidify his thesis, and he has published his argument in the latest issue of The Journal of Religion.

​

Mr. Knohl is part of a larger scholarly movement that focuses on the political atmosphere in Jesus’ day as an important explanation of that era’s messianic spirit. As he notes, after the death of Herod, Jewish rebels sought to throw off the yoke of the Rome-supported monarchy, so the rise of a major Jewish independence fighter could take on messianic overtones.

​

[more in story at link]
Ancient Tablet Ignites Debate on Messiah and Resurrection - The New York Times

---

Care to comment on the significance of finds like this? Do you interpret this as a natural thing that would happen if the scriptures give clear prophecies on a suffering Messiah rising after 3 days? So does this add strength to your argument or is it not significant?Do you feel that the literature between the Testaments should be considered inspired in any way or do you think it just reflects interpretations of revelation?If it is just late B.C. interpretations of Jews, and not any sort of sacred-text type of prophecy, then what is your theory on what, where, and when the actual revelation came from? Just the Old Testament (and nothing else)?If so then how do you explain the fact that Jesus told John's Disciples (in the Q source which made its way into the Synoptic Gospels) that he did several things which match with a Dead Sea Scrolls Messianic text and nothing mentioned in the Old Testament? See post #271 (above)and go to TaborBlog – Page 7 – Religion Matters from the Bible to the Modern World and see article Making Live the Dead Ones which is second article from top. Scroll down past the article What Really Happened Easter Morning—the Mystery Solved? to get to the article of interest (to me anyway, I'm interested).

quote:

---

And you still haven't said whether you believe Jesus fulfilled the messianic prophecies or not.

---

The Gospel author's saw events (whether they actually happened or not) in the records of the life of Jesus and attempted to find any little thing they could in the Old Testament, then called it "prophecy".Historians aren't even sure what actually happened.They do know that even the more reliable Gospels (like Matthew) were written fairly late and much of the prophecy part wasn't from Jesus' lips, but from later ideas.Like Jesus coming out of Egypt "fulfilling prophecy" in Hosea where the prophet was actually talking about Israel and the Exodus. That was read back into the life of Jesus by the unknown author of the Gospel of Matthew. However, Hosea did, in fact, talk about the ending of sacrifices in a way that can (seem to) be described as matching the events and founding of a new religion during time of Jesus, John the Baptist/Elijah, and the Temple destruction. One has to entertain various possibilities of course, but we badly need to figure out what the founders of Christianity thought and said.The Josephus documents talk about John the Baptist, but don't seem to see him as any type of Jesus follower.The Josephus documents do mention "James" the Just (James the Lesser). We know from Acts that James considered Amos to have been a representative of God that delivered an anti-nationalist message for the future (religion and world), and he interpreted his brother as bringing in a new era in which that was being fulfilled.Jesus seemed to want the Temple sacrifices to end.Paul too.The Ebionite/Nararene followers of James saw the sacrifices ending, during the Temple destruction, as being the work of Jesus. Their Gospel of Matthew says as much. They might have had the original "Q" document which Matthew collected (Papias said that logoi were collected by Matthew, and historians critically studying the existing Gospels have concluded that there was a Logoi Gospel. A Gospel of Thomas was found which fit the description - a sayings/Logoi Gospel free of narration - , in amazing ways, the historians predicted AND AND AND it has proven to have the oldest strain of quotes that the logoi/Sayings of Jesus that are in the current Gospels we have in the Bible!) along with additional traditions and narrative episodes not in the Synoptic Gospels existing today.We need to know what Jesus (and his followers) actually said (first).Lets figure it out.Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

quote:

---

And you still haven't said whether you believe Jesus fulfilled the messianic prophecies or not.

---

then

quote:

---

Is that a yes or a no?

---

Are you asking about the Gospel of Matthew saying this?

quote:

---

Matthew 2
15 And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.

---

Is that verse something that Jesus even thought?It refers to Hosea 11.

quote:

---

Hosea 11
King James Version (KJV)

​

1 When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.

​

2 As they called them, so they went from them: they sacrificed unto Baalim, and burned incense to graven images.

​

3 I taught Ephraim also to go, taking them by their arms; but they knew not that I healed them.

​

4 I drew them with cords of a man, with bands of love: and I was to them as they that take off the yoke on their jaws, and I laid meat unto them.

​

5 He shall not return into the land of Egypt, and the Assyrian shall be his king, because they refused to return.

​

6 And the sword shall abide on his cities, and shall consume his branches, and devour them, because of their own counsels.

---

I think the evangelist said this but why I have no idea. I doubt the real Matthew said this.I doubt Jesus ever thought of Hosea in this way.Paul might not have thought this either.Everybody has their own opinion I suppose.What do you think?

quote:

---

I can't make head or tail from your posts whether you're trying to confirm the Christian belief or refute it. There's no need to quote volumes of Josephus. Just tell us which side you're on and we can try to go on from there.

---

We have to figure out which "Christian" period we are discussing to get the what constitutes a "Christian belief".No religion on earth has seen more changed among what constitutes "Christian belief(s)" to its followers than the Christian religion (called variously "Nararene", "Ebionite" or The Way/ha derek during the time of the 1st Christian century A.D.) in the first century and then what it has been the last 1500-1700/1800 years. If one just looks at the "Church Fathers" (and ignores the Jewish Christians as represented by Narzarenes, Ebionites, Elkesaites, and even Manicheans who were still numerous from beginnings of the time of (peversion & corruption started by) Clement of Rome to Constantine 325/Theodosius I 380/Augustine 386) then the changes from the last 1900 years are monumental.If we look at the end of 1st Christian century (about 90 A.D./C.E.), when the Gospel of Matthew was penned, then we can look at prophecies that were described as fulfilled by the unknown author of Matthew; we can look at the quotes of the words of Jesus too. If we want to go earlier than that, then we need to see what Paul taught. If we want to go even earlier then we can see what the Ebionites and Nazarenes taught, and the 100 A.D.Elkesaites can be helpful to critically look at too.Looking at the 90 A.D. writings of the Gospel of Matthew, it might be useful to use google to learn about concepts and teaching techniques.I put JESUS MIDRASH PROPHECY into google, so I could get searches relevant to prophecy issues, and to them a discussion of techniques of the people from that age. A search with just JESUS MIDRASH would be the better place to start however.Here is the first hit for the former google search. It is the fundamentalist Chuck Missler.Midrash Hermeneutics: Pattern, not Just Prediction: – Chuck Missler – Koinonia HouseThere will be alot of issues to consider, so perhaps we should start here?
Google"apostle paul teach techniques logic"
"Jesus Midrash"Then attack "prophecy" to each search.Perhaps then we can learn more.Any ideas?We have seen in this thread that the prophecies quoted by the OP clearly seem all boogered up by today's standards of what constitutes an actual connection. The original Old Testament authors clearly did not have Jesus in mind when the text was written down. That much is certain. That much is settled.The idea of "Midrash" is my "solution"(?).Any better ideas.

Perhaps this should be in its own thread, but here was a recent discovery. This site had a positive spin on this discovery. A suffering and dying messiah? The Blaze site will cause computers to crash, so that is too bad. I still havnt been able to read the entire article text on the site due to the crashing it causes.

quote:

---

Author Explains Why Mysterious Archeological Find Blew Him Away and Sent an ‘Earthquake’ Through the Biblical Studies World
Oct. 26, 2015 12:16pm Billy Hallowell

​

An author and Bible expert who has spent a great deal of time analyzing recent archaeological discoveries said that he has been blown away by an ancient tablet that was discovered back in 2000 one that has caused an earthquake in the biblical studies field.

​

The one [find] that really blew me away was the Gabriel Revelation a first century stone tablet that was discovered around the year 2000 on the other side of the Jordan River, author Robert J. Hutchinson told The Church Boys podcast.

​

Hutchinson, who describes this find among many others in his new book, Searching for Jesus: New Discoveries in the Quest for Jesus of Nazareth and How They Confirm the Gospel Accounts, said that the tablet, which is dated to the first century B.C., is written in Hebrew and mentions the angel Gabriel.

​

[It] speaks about a messiah who would suffer, die and perhaps even rise again. This has just been kind of an earthquake, Hutchinson said. The implications of it haven’t really filtered down to ordinary scholars, and seminaries and so on and even, of course, into the media.

​

....
The author said that the discovery, which has attracted attention inside biblical and archaeological circles, is notable due to the fact that it basically shows that there were Jews in Jesus’ time who were expecting a suffering messiah.

​

Critics have spent a century questioning the New Testament narrative, Hutchinson said, based on the claim that the story surrounding Jesus’ divinity and the reason for his crucifixion were conjured up after the fact something that he believes the tablet dismisses.

​

Those opposed to the narrative in the gospels said that the Jews were expecting a conquering hero who would reestablish the Davidic kingdom and not a savior who would suffer, die and rise again, the author maintains.

​

This theme of a suffering messiah wasn’t just made up by the Christian community as an apologetic device after the fact to explain the scandal that Jesus was crucified, he said. For literally a century scholars have said that. It was one of the pillars for questioning the reliability of the New Testament.

​

Much of the Gabriel Revelation is indiscernible, though a portion of it was translated into English by the Shalom Hartman Institute, among others. And as the Associated Press reported in 2013, scholars continue to debate its meaning.

​

TheBlaze - 404 Not Found

---

Here is a direct link to a translation of text.Attention Required! | CloudflareAP story link.The Associated Press - Video, photo, text, audio, data news agencyI have been attempting a post for the last few days on this discovery, but the crashing computer keeps preventing me.One interesting issue to consider is that Jesus was in the tomb from Friday to Sunday, so that isn't 3 days and three nights. It was 3 different days (part of Friday, all of Saturday, and part of Sunday) but not 3 days and 3 nights. So the
interesting thing is that the crucifix event and its description did seem like it was possibly an attempted match-up with an precise prophecy floating around late 2nd Temple Jewish circles. Every now and then we learn, through discoveries, that there are prophecies that the New Testament authors reference, but which we simply don't have (or didn't have before)Look at Paul in 1 Corinthians 15. Nevermind. Computer won't let me quote it (sigh) as it is freezing and crashing.I give up.About the only thing i can do is type here, lets see if my message sends.

Matthew 12:40 has Jesus say that there will be 3 days and nights in the grave for the rising Messiah.1 Corinthians 15 (around verses 3-4) has a 3 day prophecy (without the 3 nights) referenced. It says "according to the scripture" (or close to that) and "scripture" always means the pre-New Testament (usually Old Testament though not always confined to what makes up the "Old Testament" today).One has to wonder if there are multiple Dead Dead Scroll type texts (if any) with different details.To make matters more confusing, the Gospels present the Apostles as ignorant of a dying & rising Messiah, while it has the Jewish leaders as aware.Apologist William Lane Craig says that the guard of the tomb in Matthew (absent the other 3 gospels) is irrelevant as an apologetic argument because modern scholars no longer propose that the Apostles stole the body. He says that modern scholarship rejects the guard as historical, so he doesn't use it while making his arguments. He feels that the guard is historical and that it was a Jewish, not a Roman, guard. That would raise even more questions about how many people were expecting a rising Messiah.The whole issue of scripture predicting a dying and rising Messiah has always been confusing, because Hosea 5 would have been a closer parallel than the Jonah story.Many confusing issues, but there have been discoveries this decade that cause one to hold the possibility that there were intertestamental texts that had the details. How widely held they were is another issue.

Phat said this:

quote:

---

the truth is not going to be found by studying the scriptures themselves...no matter how many old books and scrolls you happen to examine.

---

But Paul seemed to be using this 3 day resurrection as an issue relevant to the resurrected spiritual body. He said that there was "scripture" (ie. pre-Jesus) that described this. The Gospel of Matthew has Jewish leaders instigating a need for guards to be placed over the tomb of Jesus in order to make sure that he didn't get his body snatched; which means that they had scripture telling of a rising messiah.

quote:

---

1 Corinthians 15
3For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

---

Apologists say that Paul is using living witnesses to back up an event they witnessed. But it is part of an overall "gospel" story that indicates an expectation of a dying and rising after 3 days (and nights in Matthew) as something prophetic.Hosea 6:1-4 has a national restoration.

quote:

---

Come, let us return to the Lord.
He has torn us to pieces
but he will heal us;
he has injured us
but he will bind up our wounds.

​

2
After two days he will revive us;
on the third day he will restore us,
that we may live in his presence.

​

3
Let us acknowledge the Lord;
let us press on to acknowledge him.
As surely as the sun rises,
he will appear;
he will come to us like the winter rains,
like the spring rains that water the earth.

​

4
What can I do with you, Ephraim?
What can I do with you, Judah?

---

Ezekiel 35-37 and the valley of dry bones is an interesting parallel.Here is a link that found a specific text (albeit not put into writing till about 900 A.D., though based on older material) that has a specific 3 day and 3 night body resurrection theme associated with the eschatology and the afterlife. It happens to be Zoroastrian. How far back it goes is a matter of debate.Academia.eduI put "3 days 3 nights resurrection afterlife Zoroastrian" into GoogleI look for whatever light I can find to help us learn what was going on.We have a different approach.

Jaywill asked "Where [is the renewal of this world is our responsibility according to Jesus]?Luke 17:20-21 is highly relevant.

quote:

---

20 Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, He answered them and said, The kingdom of God does not come with observation; 21 nor will they say, ‘See here!’ or ‘See there!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you.
NRSV

---

Steve Mason in his Early Christian Reader had these annotations (actually far more, but here are the most relevant).

quote:

---

Steve Mason
p.449
....

​

Luke 17:20-21 See Gospel of Thomas 3, 113

---

Then a note for "among you" in verse 21 of chapter 17 in Luke.

quote:

---

17:21 .... The preposition translated among here normally means "inside" or "within" a particular space or time :the potential for the kingdom lies within the Pharisees. This is a critical passage for the argument that the historical Jesus announced the present realization of the kingdom (as distinct from an exclusively or largely future kingdom). It is also a remarkable statement about Luke's Pharisees. They could have brought forth the kingdom in some way (but they did not).

---

Jesus told his apostles (just before the transfiguration or metamorphosis) that they would see the kingdom come with power in their lives around Mark 9:1 (or the last verse in chapter 8) as well as in Luke and Matthew. Matthew 24 and Mark 13 and Luke 21 seemed to put that at the destruction of the Temple.This synoptic material was also contained in the (extremely important)Gospel of Thomas (but different in part). About half of the 114 sayings (logoi) in Thomas are also in the Synoptic Gospels, and (nearly all)scholars now say that Thomas has the earlier form of the sayings (textual experts say it is very much the case). Scholars hypothesized that there was a Q document containing just "sayings" (logoi) of Jesus (of a certain type), and then the discovery of the Gospel of Thomas backed that theory up. Saying 12 of Thomas showed scholars that Jesus appointed James as the leader of the Apostles (the fact of his leadership was always clear because of Acts chapters 12, 15, 21), which was not covered in the Bible we have today. Thomas does seem to contain material from an earlier version of Q than the one Matthew and Luke used. Thomas doesn't seem to have Q material that could post-date the Temple destruction.Thomas clearly has "logoi" material that is earlier than the material that Luke and Matthew used, so it is important.Here is saying 113 of Thomas (and it is part of the post 50 AD branches of a conversation that Jesus could very well have had) in 3 different translations

quote:

---

BLATZ translation
His disciples said to him: On what day will the kingdom come? It will not come while people watch for it; they will not say: Look, here it is, or: Look, there it is; but the kingdom of the father is spread out over the earth, and men do not see it.

​

LAYTON translation
His disciples said to him, "When is the kingdom going to come?" , "It is not by being waited for that it is going to come. They are not going to say, 'Here it is' or 'There it is.' Rather, the kingdom of the father is spread out over the earth, and people do not see it."

​

DORESSE TRANSLATION
His disciples said to him: "On what day will the kingdom come?" "It will not come when it is expected. No one will say: 'See, it is here!' or: 'Look, it is there!' but the Kingdom of the Father is spread over the earth and men do not see it."

​

Gospel of Thomas Saying 113 - GospelThomas.com

---

Mason also refers us to saying 3.Here is the Layton translation of a Greek text found in Egypt.

quote:

---

Jesus said, "If those who lead you (plur.) say to you, 'See, the kingdom is in heaven,' then the birds of heaven will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. But the kingdom is inside of you. And it is outside of you. "When you become acquainted with yourselves, then you will be recognized. And you will understand that it is you who are children of the living father. But if you do not become acquainted with yourselves, then you are in poverty, and it is you who are the poverty."
Gospel of Thomas Saying 3 - GospelThomas.com

---

Mason offered these relevant references when he was at chapter 3, but the chapter 3 itself isn't nearly as important as the text insaying/chapter 113.

quote:

---

Steve Mason
p.519

​

3:1-3 Mark 13:21-23 :Matt 24:23-28; Luke 17:20-25; for insight in the farthest reaches of the cosmos derives from Jewish wisdom tradition. (LXX Job 28:12-14, 20-22 ; Bar 3:29-32, 35-37, LXX Deut. 30:11-14; and Sir. 1:1-3). Here it is probably intended as a mild parody of this tradition. 3:3 Luke 17:21

---

(LXX is the Septuagint text, but that isn't so important as to our topic)What is important is that this Gospel, which uses earlier sources than Matthew and Luke (and mark and John too but they don't have Q material), seems to see the kingdom as something that can happen presently. Those who followed James did see the Temple destruction as something of a new age. They didn't see some mythical "church age" inserted between the time of Jesus and John the Baptist and some future "Kingdom of God" (1988 AD? 2000 AD? 2007 AD? ) as the actual beginning. Not that they didn't see a large scale metamorphosis happening suddenly at some point. The metanoia (sp?) or "change of mind" was called for by John the Baptist according to the Gospels. It was translated as "repentance". The dead John the Baptist witnessed the change of body (according to Jesus) for Jesus which was metamorphosis (translated "transfiguration"). But the early sources seem to attest to a present realization of the Kingdom, and the Gospels in the Bible we have today don't contradict the earlier sources (I don't think).It seems that the death of Jesus around 30 A.D. and then the Temple destruction were supposed to be major turning points. The metamorphosis and resurrection were happening for all (albeit slowly as it turned out). That was the view of the followers of James the Just anyway. I'm not so sure that Paul had a much different view.Modern day fundamentalists seem to have issues with the view of the early Jewish Christians though. Perhaps it is because the Roman Empire slaughtered people like crazy after 380 A.D. , and Jewish Christians (who followed James ) were prime targets. Many local church councils targets their worship/lifestyle practices. The Jewish Christians, stood in a line (tradition) that wasn't highly esteemed then and, as a result, isn't now.The Gospel of Thomas (which has many variants and the most complete one might not be standard, but it could be unique in many parts so it is a little risky to assume we have the actual "original" one - and it was based on various sources, early and late) gives us a window into the verses that one Jewish-Christian tradition saw as important.And it (saying 113 of Thomas) doesn't contradict Luke (chapter 17 and then the entire gospel itself), does it?They are saying the same thing, right?(NOTE Please ignore the veritable ignoramus choir (of 4-6 posters) that will rear its head and disrupt by calling my posts "off-topic")

I already brought the issue up about the historical Jesus and what he actually might have said. But I'll throw it out again to see if it might possibly lead to a solution to this discussion.

quote:

---

[Tangle]
Which is exactly why the myth of the resurrection had to be created. Note that it's easy to create the myth of a resurrection and susequent permanent disappearance, but impossible to create the reality of a real return - the 'second coming'. Just like fake healers can 'heal' those with invisible ailments but not those requiring new limbs.

---

Then

quote:

---

[GDR]

​

So what. That is my point. Jesus essentially said that they had misinterpreted the prophesies.

​

[Taq]
That's what a false Messiah would say when he failed to fulfill the prophecies.

---

But what did Jesus actually teach? Volume 9 (covering Luke-John) of the New Interpreters Bible had this to say in a commentary on Luke 17:22-37.

quote:

---

p.330
The coming of the Son of Man, however, is not to be equated with the coming of he kingdom of God. The kingdom is already present.

---

Here was the conclusion to the commentary on verses 20 to 21 of chapter 17. (which I already quoted)

quote:

---

p.330

​

Other nuances have proposed: either that the future kingdom has already arrived unobserved of that it is within their grasp if they will only act to seize it.

---

My reading of the (evangelical)commentary on verses 22-37 lead me to believe that the commentary is saying that Jesus taught a present kingdom but a future "coming", though that wasn't at all clear in reading the comments to verses 20-21. (20-21 comments had the idea treated as one of many opinions, while 22-37 comments treated the distinction as a self-evident reading).Mainstream scholars do seem to see that interpretation as very possibly being the (something like) teaching of the actual historical Jesus.The question is whether or not this solves the problem of Jesus not "coming" back in person (in plain view for everybody to see) in his lifetime.It might be helpful to quote the actual text while making arguments for or against this "solution".

quote:

---

[Hawkins]
The problem is that we don't know what is the Messianic prophecies in the minds of Jews back in Jesus' time.

---

Do we even know what prophecies Jesus himself made? And then we have to wonder, "when did he make them?".Here is a quote (courtesy of me) that shows us that liberal scholars accept the Judas story.There was a show called,Peter Jennings Reporting, The Search for Jesus, ABC, and it aired June 26, 2000. Liberal scholar, and co founder of the Jesus Seminar, John Dominique Crossan said this (the was a response to charges that Judas was an anti-Semitic slur name that was made up late, but that isn't the point of my quote)

quote:

---

[Crossan]
The trouble is, of course, that that was not the way people in the first century would have heard it, because [Judas] was an ordinary name. There’s a lot of evidence that somebody-I’m deliberately putting this very vaguely-somebody close to Jesus betrayed Him.

---

Jesus knew at some point that he would die. So he could very well have made predictions of a return or "second coming". We know of at least one "I shall return to establish righteousness" God-man individuals from before the time of Jesus (Krishna of India). It would have been known in the Greek-ruled kingdoms in India during the life of Jesus. How influential India was on Greek culture (in the empire of Rome, which was isolated from the Greek Kingdoms in India by the Persian Parthian Empire)is something very much debated. And that doesn't even get to the Krishna issue, which is ignored.We have to ask if Jesus could have known of his death before the Judas betrayal. Like, would the Lord's Supper have actually been said by Jesus?Look at the context of the Lord's Supper (the Jerusalem entry which lead to the upper room Passover) as described by a conservative scholar.

quote:

---

N. T. Wright
Jesus and the Victory of God
p.342
[the disciples] had come to Jerusalem expecting Jesus to be enthroned as the rightful king. This would necessarily involve Jesus taking over the authority which the Temple symbolized. They were now confronted with the startling news that this taking over of authority would mean the demolition, literal and metaphorical, of the Temple, whose demise Jesus had in fact constantly predicted, and which he had already symbolically overthrown in his dramatic (but apparently inconsequential) action in the Temple itself. The disciples now heard his prophetic announcement of the destruction of the Temple as the announcement, also, of his own vindication; in other words, of his own coming-not floating around on a cloud, of course, but of his coming to Jerusalem as the vindicated, rightful king.

---

Did Jesus really make this prophetic announcement though? (if so then was it edited so much so as to permanently mangle all the quotes we have today about his Temple prediction?)And did he say he would be a sacrifice in place of animals being killed? Or was that added after his death?Did he teach 2 comings? That is his death would come then a return later in time?Would it be the same thing as the "kingdom" talked about by John the Baptist (in the Gospels)?

quote:

---

Oh, a question of 2013. Why there are so many revived threads around in EvC.
The problem is that we don't know what is the Messianic prophecies in the minds of Jews back in Jesus' time.

​

Today Messianic prophecies is from today's Judaism, but not the Jewish concepts back in Jesus time. Today's Judaism was built after AD 200.

---

I just put "eschatology" into the Encyclopedia Iranica search engine. It got 95 results.http://www.iranicaonline.org/.../search/keywords:eschatologyIt has a lot of religions covered and how their development relates to other religions like Judaism.It pays attention to the issues of what was believed and when. WHEN WHEN WHEN?Also, Bart Ehrman is one that attempts to look at what was believed, during "the time" of his life, by Jews, and specifically as is relates to messianic terms and issues. His interviewer, Terry Gross, is aware of the issue, as one can see in this transcribed interview.If Jesus Never Called Himself God, How Did He Become One? : NPR