The Jesus Prophecy - Tumblr Posts
This book uncovers new information that changes everything we thought we knew about Jesus!
If you have been inspired by author Kittim's fascinating book on Jesus and the end times, then we encourage you to like our fan page on Facebook!
[Nonfiction] The Little Book of Revelation (End times Prophecy)
By Author Eli of Kittim
What is the difference between my view and the classical Christian perspective? I am convinced that there are not multiple comings and multiple returns of Christ, but only one decisive coming at the end of the world, which includes the resurrection, the rapture, and his appearance from above!
Editorial Reviews
BlueInk Review Beautifully written. Highly creative literary analysis. An intriguing study. Bible scholars and eschatologists may want to consider its thought-provoking ideas.
Dr. Robert Eisenman Your illustrations are really good. You've mastered another world than I.
https://www.amazon.com/Eli-of-Kittim/e/B00FWAVSMC%3Fref=dbs_a_mng_rwt_scns_share
Jesus: the Greek God My book is not about the pseudo-historical Jewish Jesus of Christian folklore, but about the Gentile Jesus of Biblical prophecy!
Jesus Revealed: In the Fulness of Time, In the End Times, or in Due Time
By Goodreads Author Eli of Kittim
Sadly, we have confused biblical literature with history, and turned prophecy into biography. In the end, the New Testament (NT) gospels appear to be non-historical stories—borrowed to a large extent from the Old Testament (OT)—giving us the Messianic prophecy through an apocalyptic narrative, whereas the NT epistles (or letters) and the book of Revelation, which are NOT stories, reveal the real Jesus and tell a different story. And although I'm not Jewish, I do agree with the Jews on one point. In fact, I'm the first author, as far as I know, who legitimately fuses the messianic expectations of the Jews with Christian scripture! In my view, both the OT and NT say the SAME THING: the Messiah comes "once in the end of the world" (NT, Hebrews 9:26)!
Messiah Revealed: In the End Times
According to the NT itself, Jesus will come once, for the first time, in the "last days" (Hebrews 1:1-2), or "at the consummation of the ages" (Hebrews 9:26). The King James Version says that Christ will die as the atonement for sin "ONCE IN THE END OF THE WORLD" (Hebrews 9:26)! Without putting a spin on it, we must conclude that the church has CHANGED what the Bible ACTUALLY says, and has therefore handed us the wrong information about the precise timing of the messiah's momentous coming to earth. I present multiple lines of evidence to buttress my argument. As for my conviction that Jesus did not come the first time, this comes primarily from the New Testament epistles (Hebrews 1:1-2, 9:26; Galatians 4:4; Ephesians 1:10; 2 Thess. 2:7; 1 Corinthians 15:8, 19, 22-26, 54-55) and the book of Revelation (Rev. 6:2; 12:1-5, 19:10-11, 22:7), as well as from the Old Testament where the Messiah is depicted as dying (Zephaniah 1:7; Zechariah 12:8-10) and being resurrected (Isaiah 2:19; Daniel 12:1-2) on the Day of the Lord, or in the last days:
"Once IN THE END OF THE WORLD hath he [Jesus] appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice [death] of himself" (King James, Hebrews 9:26, emphasis added).
The original Greek New Testament says:
“νυνϊ δε απαξ επι ϲυντελεια των αιωνων ειϲ αθετηϲιν τηϲ αμαρτιαϲ δια τηϲ θυϲιαϲ αυτου πεφανερωται.” (Hebrews 9:26, Codex Sinaiticus, Greek NT).
Translation: “Once in the conclusion of the ages [in Greek the word αιωνων/’ages’ also means ‘centuries’] has he [Christ] been made manifest, to put away sin through the sacrifice of himself.” (Hebrews 9:26, Codex Sinaiticus).
Here, the phrase sinteleia ton aionon does NOT imply dispensations, speculative covenants or anything else. The word "aionon" refers specifically to chronological time, and it means "ages" or centuries, whereas the term synteleia means "conclusion," "consummation," or "end." Put together, it simply means at the "end" or at the conclusion of all the ages. That’s why the King James Version translates it as, “In the end of the world.” In other words Christ appears ONCE AND FOR ALL (hapax), not twice, to atone for sin by sacrificing himself “in the end of the world.” If you try to manipulate the verse by claiming that the end of the world was 2000 years ago, that would be nothing short of insanity! A similar phrase, ϲυντελειαϲ του αιωvos, can be found in the Gospel of Matthew chapter 28 and verse 20:
"διδαϲκοντεϲ αυτουϲ τηριν παντα οϲα ενετιλαμην ϋμιν και ϊδου εγω ειμι μεθ υμων παϲαϲ ταϲ ημεραϲ εωϲ τηϲ ϲυντελειαϲ του αιωvos.”
Translation: American Standard Version “Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.”
Therefore, it is unquestionable that the Greek phrase ϲυντελειαϲ του αιωvos (Matthew 28:20) means “in the end of the world.” And if that’s the case, and it is, then the reference to Jesus being manifested once επι ϲυντελεια των αιωνων to die for the sins of the world (Hebrews 9:26) would certainly mean that his death occurs “Once in the end of the world” and not 2,000 years ago as is currently assumed! The overall meaning of Hebrews 9:26 is that Christ will die for the sins of the world at the final point of time! Read what the text ACTUALLY says: The New American Standard says "at the consummation of the ages." The Jerusalem Bible renders it "at the end of the last age," whereas the King James version translates it "in the end of the world." It's abundantly clear what it means. I've already presented numerous verses that support this view. Here's another:
"God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these LAST DAYS has spoken to us in his Son" (Hebrews 1:1-2, emphasis added).
Once again, in Greek, the "last days" are written as ep escaton ton imeron, where ep escaton means in the last, or in the final, or in the end, and where the term "imeron" refers to chronological days... The meaning is quite clear and resonates among all these verses: Jesus is manifested once and for all (απαξ) in the end of the world to die and save mankind! This is reiterated in 1 Peter 1:5, Apokalufthinai en kairo escato, which means “is revealed in the last days.” The Greek word escato means “last” and it is the same term from where we get the word eschatology. You can speculate all you want on what it means and come up with your own erroneous version of the Bible. I choose to believe EXACTLY what the Bible says WITHOUT INTERPRETING IT, changing it, or manipulating it, which would be equivalent to falsifying it!
Christ Revealed: In the Fulness of Time
Do you know what the fulness of the time means? Read Ephesians 1:10 where "the fullness of the time" means the END OF THE WORLD, confirming Hebrews 9:26 and Hebrews 1:1-2. Ephesians 1:10 reads:
"With a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth."
WITH A VIEW TO AN ADMINISTRATION SUITABLE TO THE FULLNESS OF THE TIMES: eis oikonomian tou pleromatos ton kairon where the term kairoi refer to the passing of chronological “times” or “seasons,” and where the word fullness means "completion." So the Bible ITSELF defines the idiomatic phrase, the fullness of the time as “the summing up [or “conclusion”] of all things… things in the heavens and …on the earth.” In other words, we need not speculate because Ephesians 1:10 clearly defines “the fullness of the times” as an idiom that refers to the END OF THE WORLD.
Now read Galatians 4:4--which uses the same CONSISTENT idiom--to find out exactly when Christ is incarnated:
“But when THE FULNESS OF THE TIME came, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman…” (Galatians 4:4, emphasis added).
Thus, Christ is incarnated during the fulness of the time, or, as Ephesians 1:10 illustrates, at the end of time—“To be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ" (Ephesians 1:10, NIV)! The Greek text does not allow any room for confusion since to pliroma tou chronou (the fulness of the time) clearly indicates a distinctive chronological time period. In Greek, the term "Chronos" means chronological time. And pliroma means "completion." Thus, it means that at the completion of time, or when time has reached its “fulness,” Christ will be incarnated! No wonder there is a prophecy of Christ’s birth in the prophetic book of Revelation chapter 12:1-5!
Knowing this, we cannot manipulate or violate scripture in any way. We must allow scripture to define its own terms because these same terms are repeated consistently throughout the Bible! Therefore, Scripture's own definition of the fullness of the time is actually the end of the world, when all things will be summed up in Christ!!! Similarly, Acts 3:19-21 says,
“Repent ye therefore … and he [God] shall send Jesus Christ, which BEFORE was preached unto you: whom the heaven must receive [or cannot receive] until the times of restitution of all things [meaning, until the end of the world], which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.” — Acts 3:19-21, King James, emphasis added
Here's what it means: The preaching of Jesus precedes his arrival! Moreover, Peter says that Christ “Was foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world, but was manifested at the end of times for your sake.” (1 Peter 1:20). In Greek, it reads: “Fanerothentos de ep escaton ton chronon,” Ep Escaton means "during the last" and "chronon" implies chronological years, which literally means that Jesus is manifested during the last years, or at the final point of time. It fits perfectly with what Peter has been saying all along, such as “apokalufthinai en kairo escato" (1 Peter 1:5), which means “revealed in the end times.”
Jesus Revealed: In Due Time
Now, concerning the under mentioned verse, don’t let the past tenses fool you. Remember that past tenses—such as “Christ died for our sins”—do not necessarily refer to past history. Just read Isaiah 53 and you’ll see why. It is filled with past tenses—“He was despised and rejected by mankind,” “But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities,” (53:3-5) etc.—and yet Isaiah is not recounting a past event but writing about a future PROPHECY! Similarly, Paul states: “For when we were yet without strength, IN DUE TIME Christ died for the ungodly.” (Romans 5:6, emphasis added) In Greek, it reads:
Eti gar christos onton imon asthenon kata kairon iper asevon apethanen. Textus Receptus
KATA KAIRON means "at the right time" or “in due time” or season. (Strong, G2540). Now, why would Paul use this phrase KATA KAIRON (meaning, that Christ died at the right time or when the time is ripe) to refer to a past event? It doesn't make any sense at all unless he is in line with what Peter (1 Peter 1:5, 20) and Hebrews (1:1-2, 9:26) say about Christ being revealed and DYING during the end times.
Here's a scholarly rendering of the phrase "IN DUE TIME" (KATA KAIRON):
“In 1 Clement 24:2 [Apocrypha] we read: IDOMEN AGAPHTOI THN KATA KAIRON GINOMENHN ANASTASIN, "We should consider, beloved, the resurrection that happens KATA KAIRON." "...the resurrection that Happens … "at the right time" or "at the right season" --Bart D. Ehrman (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill).
That is, "The resurrection that comes when time is ripe for it" --Carl W. Conrad (Department of Classics/Washington University).
In other words, this phrase--"IN DUE TIME Christ died for the ungodly” (Romans 5:6)--implies that Christ dies for the ungodly "when the time is ripe for it," or as other passages suggest, during the fulness of the time (Gal. 4:4; cf. Eph. 1:10), at the end of times (1 Peter 1:20); “revealed in the end times" (1 Peter 1:5), in the last days (Heb. 1:2), or "IN THE END OF THE WORLD." (Hebrews 9:26). It's as if God is screaming at deaf ears...
In the New Testament epistles, we find yet another epiphany:
“You greatly rejoice … that the proof of your faith … may be found … at the revelation of Jesus Christ; and though you have not seen Him, you love Him, and though you do not see Him now, but believe in Him, you greatly rejoice. … As to this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace that would come to you made careful search and inquiry, seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He [the Holy Spirit] PREDICTED the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow” (1 Peter 1:6-11, emphasis added).
1 Peter 1:7 exhorts us to have faith so that we are ready “at the revelation of Jesus Christ,” which apokalifthinai en kairo eshato or is “revealed in the last days” (1 Peter 1:5). Moreover, observe that “the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow” are PROPHECIES or PREDICTIONS (1 Peter 1:10-11), NOT historical events!!! Notice also that the disciples “preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven” (1 Peter 1:12)—not by historical reports! This passage tells you unequivocally that the revelation of Jesus—including his sufferings and glory—are for an appointed time in the future: "For it is the Spirit of prophecy who bears testimony to Jesus" (Rev. 19:10), NOT history! Here's an excerpt from my book (The Little Book of Revelation) that offers further clues:
"Paul, the author of numerous NT letters, explains how Jesus “appeared to Cephas [Peter], then to the twelve,” and finally “to more than five hundred brethren [believers] at one time” (1 Cor. 15:5-6). But then he says: “and last of all, as it were to one untimely born, He appeared to me also” (1 Cor. 15:8). In other words, Paul is stating that Christ “was seen by me also, as by one born out of DUE TIME” (1 Cor. 15:8, NKJ, emphasis added). Similar to other eyewitnesses whom he cites earlier, Paul did not behold Christ in the flesh (Gal. 1:15-16), but in a vision (Acts 9:3-7) that delivered him prematurely, so to speak, before the appointed time of salvation."
As for the so-called witnesses, may I remind you that the Holy Spirit who teaches men is also called a Witness or "The Witness” (1 John 5:8-12)! Moreover, we are told:
"But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come [future events]." (John 16:13)
Conclusion: the Jesus account is not historical, but prophetic! But this does not mean that the gospels are manufactured. It simply means that they are rehashed OT stories that foreshadow the Messianic prophecy. And they are inspired by God! It’s as if history is written in advance before it happens:
“Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done” (Isaiah 46:10).
Goodreads Contest Winner!!
I'm pleased to announce that my book, "The Little Book of Revelation: The First Coming of Jesus at the End of Days," was a winner in a recent Double Decker Books contest on Goodreads. As a result, Double Decker Books and five other blogs will be promoting my end-times prophecy book. They include a book description, an author bio, editorial reviews, and buying links. Check it out! Here are the links: City Life Reader - http://citylifereader.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-little-book-of-revelation-first.html InkSpell Reviews - https://inkspellreviews.wordpress.com/2015/02/04/the-little-book-of-revelation-the-first-coming-of-jesus-at-the-end-of-days/ SunShy - http://sunshybooks.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-little-book-of-revelation-first.html Spilling Words - https://spillingwordskck.wordpress.com/2015/02/04/the-little-book-of-revelation-the-first-coming-of-jesus-at-the-end-of-days/ Jai & K's Reviews- http://jaikreviews.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-little-book-of-revelation-first.html Double Decker Books - http://doubledeckerbooks.blogspot.com/2015/02/large-french-roast-coffee-little-book.html
An Essay By Eli of Kittim
Eli of Kittim's unique interpretation of the New Testament account of Jesus as prophetic rather than historical!
#The_Jesus_Prophecy
By Author Eli of Kittim
There are some who clearly misinterpret and misrepresent my view. I never said, as some have claimed, that “the Gospels are just figments of the writers’ imagination,” or that they “are just made up stories.” On the contrary, they have their rightful place in the Bible, provided we understand what that role and function is. Actually, the gospels present an overview of Jesus’ life, not through biographical data, but rather through stories that are filtered down from the Old Testament. And they are inspired by God! They tell of the Messianic story in advance, so that it can be passed down from generation to generation until the time of its fulfillment. In my view, the gospels are true, not historically, but theologically, or, as I would argue, prophetically! What we have is, the Messiah’s history written in advance in story form.
What is the difference between my view and the classical Christian perspective? I am convinced that there are not multiple comings and multiple returns of Christ, but only one decisive coming at the end of the world, which includes the resurrection, the rapture, and his appearance in the sky! If there truly was an incarnation, a cross, a death, a burial, a resurrection, and ascension of Jesus two thousand years ago—then we’d have to tear many pages out of the Bible that directly contradict the Jesus of Antiquity. For example, we’d have to throw out Luke 17:30; 1 Pet. 1:5, 20; 1 Cor. 15:22-26, 54-55; Heb. 1:1-2; Heb. 9:26; 2 Tim. 2:18; Rev. 6:2; Rev. 12:1-5; Rev. 19:10-13; Rev. 22:7, 10, 18, 19, not to mention many Old Testament (OT) passages, such as Zeph. 1:7, 15-18; Isa. 2:2, 19; Isa. 9:6; Isa. 34:8; Isa. 63:4; Zech. 12:9-10; Dan. 12:1-4, and so on. Even the gospels themselves imply that the New Testament (NT) account of Jesus is prophetic. In Jesus’ own words, his presence on earth (which includes his passion and death) signifies the end of the world, and the commencement of the Day of Judgment:
“Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out.” —John 12:31.
In Acts 1:6, a book often referred to as the fifth gospel, there is a terse passage in which Jesus’ coming is associated with the restoration of Israel (1948). Compare that to Daniel chapter 9 and verses 24-27 (the so-called 70-week prophecy) where Daniel also prophesies the death of the Messiah after the restoration of Israel. Israel’s restoration is in fact prophesied in many places of the Old Testament, most notably in Ezekiel 38:8!
In Luke 17:20-27 Jesus offers a discourse on the end of days in which he implies that his own passion and death are set for an appointed time in the future:
“Now having been questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming, He answered them and said, ‘The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it is!’ For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst. And He said to the disciples, ‘The days will come when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it. They will say to you, ‘Look there! Look here!’ Do not go away, and do not run after them. For just like the lightning, when it flashes out of one part of the sky, shines to the other part of the sky, so will the Son of Man be in His day. BUT FIRST HE MUST SUFFER MANY THINGS AND BE REJECTED BY THIS [implied, future] GENERATION. And just as it happened in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: they were eating, they were drinking, they were marrying, they were being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.” (Emphasis added).
Notice that during his discourse on the end of days, the Jesus character of the gospels promulgates a prophecy which most scholars attribute to his second coming: “For just as the lightning, when it flashes out of one part of the sky, shines to the other part of the sky, so will the Son of Man be in His day” (Luke 17:24). What is surprising, however, is that this omen is then expanded by a most intriguing appendage to the previous verse: “But first He must suffer many things” (17:25). In other words, while “the literary Jesus” is predicting his supposed second coming, according to the common view, this terse statement shockingly reveals that his incarnation must necessarily precede his coming from the sky! And since the entire prophecy is set in the future, the sentence pertaining to Christ’s suffering and rejection “by this [chronologically implied] generation” cannot possibly be understood in any other context except as a reference to a future event. Otherwise we would be dislocating this sentence from the end times setting of the prophecy, thus creating a bizarre anachronism. After all, Jesus prophesies that a long time will pass before we behold “the Son of Man” (Luke 17:22), an idiomatic phrase that is deeply tied to his incarnation (cf. Ps. 8:4; Ezek. 2:1; 12:27; Matt. 9:6; 17:9; 24:44; Gal. 4:4). As a matter of fact, Luke continues by saying that “the Son of Man is revealed” for the first time in the last days (Luke 17:26-30). Thus, the latter portion of the oracle paints Christ’s coming in a very different light and calls for a reexamination of scripture. It sets the prophetic timeline in its proper chronological perspective as it supplies fresh new insights into the future incarnation of Christ: what ought to be called, “the first coming of Jesus!”
The under mentioned verses cannot be understood apart from this future context:
“Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all things be accomplished.” — Luke 21:32.
But which generation is Jesus referring to? Answer: the last one! These verses only make sense within a future context, the implication being that Jesus’ contemporaries are part of the last generation on earth:
“Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.” —Mark 9:1.
If the gospels were historical, then we would have expected Paul to reference at least some of the purported events. Yet there is complete silence from Paul with regard to the gospel narratives. Paul never once mentions Jesus’ birth, the virgin birth, or Bethlehem as his birthplace, the flight into Egypt, the slaughter of the innocents, the Magi, the star of Bethlehem, etc. Paul does not mention this gospel material at all! Why? Paul had many revelations from God and knew about the true mystery of Christ. He knew that we are saved by faith in Jesus’ death and resurrection, which would take place “Once in the end of the world” (Heb. 9:26-27).
Read 2 Thessalonians chapter 2 again. Paul implores us not to be deceived by any rumors claiming that Jesus has already appeared, as though the day of Christ had come! Contrary to popular belief, Paul’s disclaimer insists that these conventions are divisive because they profess to be biblically-based, as if from us, even though this is not the official message of scripture. That is why there is a prophecy of Jesus’ incarnation in Revelation 12:1-5!
Similarly, 1 Peter 1:10-11 tells us unequivocally that the NT writers (prophets) “PREDICTED [or prophesied] the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow” (Emphasis added). Otherwise, Philippians 3:20-21 would not say, “We eagerly wait for a savior, the Lord Jesus,” if he had already come! Hence why we find an explicit verse that introduces us to “The Revelation of Jesus Christ” in Revelation 1:1. And that is why we await the white horse of Rev. 6:2 (who is Christ) with such eager anticipation (cf. Rev. 19:11). The previous verse (Rev. 19:10) tells us that the Jesus account is not historical, but prophetic! Revelation 22:7, 10, 18, and 19 further reiterate that this book is all about prophecy, lest we disregard it as nothing more than a historical composition of its time. In fact, the entire New Testament can be summed up in three words: The Jesus Prophecy!
If we read Isaiah 53:1-9, we would swear that this passage refers to past history, and that Isaiah is recounting an event which occurred before his time. For his verses are saturated with past tenses: “He was despised and rejected by mankind”; “Surely he took up our pain and bore our suffering”; “But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities,” and so on. But, surprise, surprise! Despite all of the past tenses, it’s a prophecy that Isaiah is writing about! This passage teaches us that a) past tenses in the Bible do not necessarily reflect past history, and that b) prophecies themselves could equally be set in the past. That is why biblical events are assumed to have taken place – since the authors often use past tense to describe them – even though these events contain prophetic import concerning the future.
If you think that a surface reading of the gospels will give you understanding, you are deeply mistaken:
“The disciples came to him [Jesus] and asked, ‘Why do you speak to the people in parables?’ He replied, ‘Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them.’” —Matthew 13:10-11.
Some refer to Galatians 4:4 about Jesus being incarnated during the so-called “fulness of the times,” but they fail to mention that this same idiomatic phrase is defined in Ephesians 1:10 as the end of the world, “that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things upon the earth.” So, if you think you have it all figured out, think again. In the deepest sense, the Bible is not meant to be interpreted, but rather revealed! Whether you know it or not, the Bible is still a mystery:
“But you, Daniel, keep these words secret and seal the book until the time of the end.” —Daniel 12:4.
The Jesus Story: History or Prophecy?
By Author Eli of Kittim
There is no good evidence to support that Jesus is a real historical figure. The mainstream view concerning the New Testament account of Jesus is fatally flawed. It is inconsistent, and in order for it to work, it must either ignore or gloss over many critical passages. For instance, it contradicts many explicit passages from both the Old and New Testaments regarding an earthly, end-times Messiah (cf. Zeph. 1:7, 15-18; Isa. 2:2, 19; Dan. 12:1-2; Zech. 12:9-10; Heb. 1:1-2; Heb. 9:26; 1 Pet. 1:20; 2 Thess. 2:1-3, 7-8; Rev. 12:1-5), and uses bizarre gaps and anachronistic juxtapositions in chronology in order to make heterogeneous passages appear homogeneous. The existing schema simply does not fit in with the context and content of these passages, nor does it fit into any of the Old or New Testament prophecies either.
What is more, this historical interpretation of Jesus is in error because it confuses theology with history, and tradition with scripture! Let us not forget that much of what we know about this subject is based on tradition, not scripture. And the prevailing view is largely based on a superficial, surface reading of the gospels. In retrospect, it appears that the gospels are giving us a theological outline of Christ’s life, not a purely historical one. For example, scholars now dispute that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. And even if we suppose that it were true, then why doesn’t Paul mention that? Let us not forget that some of Paul’s writings predate the gospels. The idea that Jesus is born in Bethlehem is a theological statement intended to connect Jesus with the Old Testament and to assure us that he is indeed the prophesied Messiah of Hebrew Scripture. Anything more than that would be reading too much into the text. Similarly, Jesus is called the King of the Jews in order to show that he is the new David, the Messianic fulfillment of Hebrew Scripture. Just as he supposedly goes to Egypt in order to show that he is the new Moses. These passages are not meant to be taken literally. They are theological statements.
But, in contrast to Christian Mythicism, I firmly believe that the Bible is verbally inspired by God. Hence I accept the authority of Scripture. However, I am convinced that, according to the Bible, Jesus neither existed, nor was he meant to exist during the time of Antiquity. Therefore, I still believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Lord (God-incarnate), who will appear on earth (for the first time) at the end of the world!
Furthermore, I believe there were eyewitness reports coming from the earliest Christian prophets, but these contained visions of Jesus, not physical encounters. The eyewitnesses saw Jesus just as Paul had seen him. And everyone knows that Paul saw visions of Christ. But Paul never saw Jesus in the flesh! There are many scriptural references to that effect. For example, 1 Peter 1:11 states that the account of Jesus was prophesied by the Holy Spirit, “As he [the Holy Spirit] predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow.” Revelation 19:10 further reveals that the New Testament account of Jesus is not historical: “For it is the Spirit of prophecy who bears testimony to Jesus.“ And Hebrews 9:26 confirms this view by issuing the following statement concerning the precise chronological timing of Christ’s appearance and sacrifice: “Once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.” In some cases, the authors of the Epistles seemingly contradict the gospels because they allude to Christ’s manifestation as occurring in the “last days” (Heb. 1:1-2), so that the correct timing of Christ’s coming suddenly becomes an open question. Thus, according to my research, both the Old and New Testaments agree that the Messiah will come once at the end of time!
There is no mention of Jesus in any secular writings until about 100 AD
(The following is an excerpt from The Washington Post, “Did historical Jesus really exist? The evidence just doesn’t add up.” Raphael Lataster, Ph.D. Religious scholar)
“The first problem we encounter when trying to discover more about the Historical Jesus is the lack of early sources. The authors of the Gospels fail to name themselves, describe their qualifications, or show any criticism with their foundational sources – which they also fail to identify. Paul’s Epistles, written earlier than the Gospels, give us no reason to dogmatically declare Jesus must have existed. Avoiding Jesus’ earthly events and teachings, even when the latter could have bolstered his own claims, Paul only describes his ‘Heavenly Jesus.’ Even when discussing what appear to be the resurrection and the last supper, his only stated sources are his direct revelations from the Lord, and his indirect revelations from the Old Testament. In fact, Paul actually rules out human sources (see Galatians 1:11-12). Also important are the sources we don’t have. There are no existing eyewitnesses or contemporary accounts of Jesus. All we have are later descriptions of Jesus’ life events by non-eyewitnesses, most of who are obviously biased. Little can be gleaned from the few non-Biblical and non-Christian sources, with only Roman scholar Josephus and historian Tacitus having any reasonable claim to be writing about Jesus within 100 years of his life. And even those sparse accounts are shrouded in controversy, with disagreements over what parts have obviously been changed by Christian scribes (the manuscripts were preserved by Christians), the fact that both these authors were born after Jesus died (they would thus have probably received this information from Christians), and the oddity that centuries go by before Christian apologists start referencing them.”
(The following is an excerpt from Valerie Tarico’s article, “Five Reasons to Suspect Jesus Never Existed,” published in ExChristian.net)
“How Jesus Became God” by Bart Ehrman.
No first century secular evidence whatsoever exists to support the actuality of Jesus. In the words of Bart Ehrman (who himself thinks the Jesus stories were built on a historical kernel):
“What sorts of things do pagan authors from the time of Jesus have to say about him? Nothing. As odd as it may seem, there is no mention of Jesus at all by any of his pagan contemporaries. There are no birth records, no trial transcripts, no death certificates; there are no expressions of interest, no heated slanders, no passing references – nothing. In fact, if we broaden our field of concern to the years after his death – even if we include the entire first century of the Common Era – there is not so much as a solitary reference to Jesus in any non-Christian, non-Jewish source of any kind. I should stress that we do have a large number of documents from the time – the writings of poets, philosophers, historians, scientists, and government officials, for example, not to mention the large collection of surviving inscriptions on stone and private letters and legal documents on papyrus. In none of this vast array of surviving writings is Jesus’ name ever so much as mentioned.” (pp. 56-57)
“The earliest New Testament writers seem ignorant of the details of Jesus’ life, which become more crystalized in later texts. Paul seems unaware of any virgin birth, for example. No wise men, no star in the east, no miracles. Historians have long puzzled over the ‘Silence of Paul’ on the most basic biographical facts and teachings of Jesus. Paul fails to cite Jesus’ authority precisely when it would make his case. What’s more, he never calls the twelve apostles Jesus’ disciples; in fact, he never says Jesus HAD disciples –or a ministry, or did miracles, or gave teachings. He virtually refuses to disclose any other biographical detail, and the few cryptic hints he offers aren’t just vague, but contradict the gospels. The leaders of the early Christian movement in Jerusalem like Peter and James are supposedly Jesus’ own followers and family; but Paul dismisses them as nobodies and repeatedly opposes them for not being true Christians!
Liberal theologian Marcus Borg suggests that people read the books of the New Testament in chronological order to see how early Christianity unfolded. 'Placing the Gospels after Paul makes it clear that as written documents they are not the source of early Christianity but its product. The Gospel — the good news — of and about Jesus existed before the Gospels. They are the products of early Christian communities several decades after Jesus’ historical life and tell us how those communities saw his significance in their historical context.’
Even the New Testament stories don’t claim to be first-hand accounts. We now know that the four gospels were assigned the names of the apostles Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, not written by them. To make matter sketchier, the name designations happened sometime in second century, around 100 years or more after Christianity supposedly began. For a variety of reasons, the practice of pseudonymous writing was common at the time and many contemporary documents are 'signed' by famous figures. The same is true of the New Testament epistles except for a handful of letters from Paul (6 out of 13) which are broadly thought to be genuine. But even the gospel stories don’t actually say, 'I was there.' Rather, they claim the existence of other witnesses, a phenomenon familiar to anyone who has heard the phrase, my aunt knew someone who … .”
Conclusion
These are Biblical Scholars who are giving us all of the critical, historical, and textual data to date. They are experts in the field (academics) who are informing us of the facts of scholarship. Even if we disagree with them, there are still certain facts that most scholars agree on that are indisputable, which give us a very clear picture of early Christianity and of Jesus. This cannot be denied.
However, this does not mean that the biblical story of Jesus is “fraudulent” or “manufactured,” as some writers have suggested. These writers got stuck on the Gospels without consulting the rest of the New Testament, namely, the Epistles and the book of Revelation, which tell us categorically and unequivocally that the biblical story of Jesus is a matter of prophecy, not history. In the final analysis, the Gospels are non-historical stories that foretell the prophecy of Christ’s coming!
How Credible is the Evidence for the Historical Jesus?
By Author Eli Kittim
I recently had a discussion with a Christian apologist who, in reaction to our conversation, posted on his blog a list of 9 sources outside the New Testament and a series of texts composed in subsequent centuries to prove the existence of Jesus.
He mentions Josephus, who is writing roughly 70 years after the purported events, and whose references to Jesus have been the source of much controversy in that they may have been subject to Christian redaction (interpolation/expansion/alteration). Incidentally, the scholarly consensus concerning the historicity of Jesus is largely influenced by the writings of Josephus. But Josephus was presumably familiar with some of the early gospels and other NT writings. So, why should his reference to John the Baptist be considered as constituting factual history? The same could be said about his references to Jesus!
Next, he mentions Phlegon who is writing in the second century about a rumored eclipse that allegedly occurred in 29 AD. Then he mentions a group of people like Suetonius, Thallus, Mara Bar Serapion, all of whose writings are considered ambiguous with regard to Jesus (we’re not sure if the references are to Christ or not), and which range from the late 1st to the 3rd century CE.
Some of these writings refer to Christian superstitions, such as the virginal conception of Christ, including those of Celsius (whom the blogger cites) who defends paganism and actually refers to Jesus as a person born to a Roman father. Celsius is not only writing 150 years later, but he’s also embellishing the story with anti-Christian sentiment.
Firstly, these are not independent eyewitness accounts. Secondly, some of these writers have obviously been influenced by the gospels—as is the case with Celsius who is probably drawing on Matthew and Tacitus who is presumably drawing on Luke—and, thirdly, they are writing approximately 70 to 200 years after the purported events.
In other cases, we are either dealing with explicit historical inaccuracies, or with authors who are known for sometimes embellishing a story with myth. For example, Josephus is also known for his expansion on the Moses story, as we find in the Midrash, making it difficult for us to ascertain what is real and what is mythical in some of his works. Take Justin Martyr, for example, whom the blogger cites. Writing in the second century, he proved to be historically inaccurate. In his “Apology” (1.31), for instance, he incorrectly claimed that Ptolemy, under whom the Septuagint had been translated, was a contemporary of Herod. Given his inattention to historical detail, how credible is his reference to the trial of Jesus? Not to mention his reference to the census under Quirinius, which did not exist, or at least not in the way that Luke describes it. So, he’s obviously drawing on the gospel of Luke, and he is, after all, a Christian apologist.
Despite all these discrepancies and historical inaccuracies, this Christian blogger nevertheless mentions all these figures and suggests that they provide indisputable truth for the historical existence of Jesus.
In the final analysis, the fact that Jesus is not mentioned anywhere outside the New Testament for about 70 years after his alleged death should certainly raise some red flags about his existence. It means that Jesus is missing from the historical record until the late first century AD. And the earliest New Testament texts do not mention anything about a historical Jesus, or about his birth or ministry, as we find in later developments (expansions).
And yet, despite the lack of historical evidence, Christ is still who he claims to be, to wit, the son of God! After reading this essay, you might understandably wonder how I can possibly make such a claim. How could I say that Jesus never existed and in the same breath claim to believe in him? Well, because if you study the New Testament you’ll find that Jesus was never meant to come in Antiquity, but rather at the end of the world (Luke 17:30; 1 Peter 1:5, 20; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-3; Hebrews 1:1-2; Hebrews 9:26; Revelation 12:1-5; etc.).
The historical Jesus is based more on mistaken assumptions about the evangelists’ intentions than careful interpretation of their writings. I’m arguing that the traditional Christian understanding of the theology of the gospels is fundamentally incorrect. We have confused apocalyptic literature with history, and turned prophecy into biography. It’s not just the evangelists’ theological problem in finding the literary means to get Jesus to Bethlehem so as to fulfill Micah’s prophecy, it’s ours as well since our “theological needs here create biographical ‘facts’" (W.D. Davies, and E.P. Sanders).
Even so, the gospels are still valid as they give us a theological outline of Christ’s life using stories that are filtered down from the Old Testament. So, in conclusion, the gospels are prophetic parables or apocalyptic stories that are to be believed (paradoxically) and handed down to posterity until the time of their fulfillment:
“Once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. … After this the judgment" (Hebrews 9:26-27).
The Greek New Testament Prophesies the Birth, Death, and Resurrection of Christ in the Last Days
By Author Eli Kittim
Theological Narrative versus Expository Writing in the New Testament
In order to procure accurate information from our interpretative methods, we must first differentiate between “theological narrative” and “expository writing” in the New Testament, which represent two distinct genres.
In narrative writing, the author’s main purpose is to tell a story using characters and dialogue. In the New Testament, the gospels employ this literary technique in an attempt to portray Jesus as the Messianic fulfillment of the Jewish prophecies. That is to say, the gospel “story” now becomes the fulfillment of the earlier Messianic promises of Jewish scripture. That is why the genealogy of Christ is inserted in the gospel texts: to ensure that this connection is established. But in order to do so, the gospel writers actually borrow a great deal from Hebrew scripture and tell a story, using characters and dialogue, which is wrapped in theological language. That’s why we do not encounter these “theological” themes in any of the epistles. For instance, the epistolary authors never once mention the nativity of Jesus, the virgin birth, the flight into Egypt, the star of Bethlehem, the magi, or even the city of Bethlehem as Jesus’ birth place. Therefore, we must come to realize that the gospels are “theological narratives,” not necessarily historical accounts, especially since we now know that the gospel authors were not eyewitnesses of these events, given that they composed their texts sometime around 70-100 CE. And like any good story, they are filled with drama, conflict, and intrigue. The gospel narratives are “characteristic” of situations and events that take place at some unspecified time, as reflected in the idea that Jesus died to redeem us. The timeline of the gospel events is thus in a transhistorical context, or within the context of the entire human history, not just past history.
On the other hand, the epistles (or “letters” of the New Testament) use “expository writing.” Expository writing’s main purpose is to explain. It is a subject-oriented writing style, in which authors focus on a given topic or subject without narrative embellishment or story-telling. The epistolary authors, for example, furnish the reader with relevant spiritual facts and principles but do not include dialogue or characters. So then, if we are to understand the mystery of Christ’s revelation, we must first differentiate between “theological narrative” and “expository writing” in the New Testament. Why? Because the authors of the epistles seemingly contradict the gospels since they allude to Christ’s revelation as occurring “once at the consummation of the ages” (Heb.9:26), or in the “last days” (Heb. 1:1-2), so that the correct timing of Christ’s coming suddenly becomes an open question! But if we realize that there is a clear line of demarcation between “theological narrative” (gospels) and “expository writing” (epistles), the hermeneutical problem ceases to exist and the text resolves itself into a meaningful and “inspired” manuscript.
The second thing that we must do is to challenge the kind of historical interpretation that affords little attention to the issue of translation. The New Testament was originally written in Greek (scholarly consensus). In order to engage in deep biblical exegesis, we must first understand what the original New Testament epistles (“expository writing”) have to say about the timing of Christ’s incarnation. So, let’s dive headfirst into the discussion to uncover the facts and clear the air. I will present the Greek text so that you can go over it and form your own conclusions.
The Greek Text: In the Fullness of Time Jesus is Born
In the Greek text, Romans 5:6 makes it quite clear that Christ died (ἀπέθανεν) at some unspecified time of human history by using the phrase κατὰ καιρὸν, which means “according to the right time,” or at the appropriate time, and does not necessarily refer to past history. http://biblehub.com/interlinear/romans/5-6.htm
Similarly, Galatians 4:4 tells us that when the “right time” or, more specifically, “the fullness of the time” had come, Christ was incarnated, “having been born of a woman” (γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός). In Greek, “the fullness of the time” is τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου. The term πλήρωμα means fulness or completion while the term χρόνου refers to chronological time. It literally means when time reached its fullness or completion. http://biblehub.com/interlinear/galatians/4-4.htm
The consistency of biblical terms allows scripture to define itself. Rather than imposing our own speculations on the text (eisegesis), we should allow the Bible to interpret its own terms (exegesis) so that our interpretations and conclusions are accurate and in line with it.
Accordingly, Ephesians 1:10 defines the idiomatic phrase “the fullness of the times” (τοῦ πληρώματος τῶν καιρῶν, which we encountered in Galatians 4:4) as the summing up (ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι) of all things in Christ (τὰ πάντα ἐν τῷ Χριστῷ), the things in the heavens (τὰ ἐπὶ τοῖς οὐρανοῖς) and the things upon the earth (καὶ τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς). In short, the designation “the fullness of the time” refers to the period of time when all things, both in the heavens and upon the earth, will conclude in Christ. In other words, τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου refers to the completion of time, which is another way of saying “the end of the world.” Yet, surprisingly, according to Galatians 4:4, this is also the time of Christ’s incarnation! http://biblehub.com/interlinear/ephesians/1-10.htm
Using the “expository writing” of the epistles rather than the “theological narrative” of the gospels as our basis for procuring accurate information from our interpretative methods, we find overwhelming evidence pertaining to the incarnation of Christ at the end of days. But there is more.
Christ’s Resurrection in the Last Days
The Septuagint, an early Greek translation of Hebrew Scripture, was heavily relied upon by the New Testament authors when quoting from the “Old Testament” (which in Hebrew is called “Tanakh”). That’s why it’s important to study the Septuagint. For instance, one of Isaiah’s prophecies says that “In the last days the mountain [Messiah] of God will appear and will be exalted above the hills [human powers], and all gentile nations will flow to it” (2:2). The Septuagint translates it as follows:
Εν ταις εσχαταις ημεραις εμφανες το ορος κυριου και ο οικος του θεου επ’ ακρων των ορεων και υψωθησεται υπερανω των βουνων και ηξουσιν επ’ αυτο παντα τα εθνη (Isaiah 2:2).
Once again, notice the allusion to the Messiah becoming apparent (εμφανες) in the last days (Εν ταις εσχαταις ημεραις). The word εσχαταις means last (from where we get the term “eschatology”), while the term ημεραις refers to chronological days (⬇️ see Isaiah 2.2 LXX ⬇️):
But something far more interesting is mentioned by Isaiah in chapter 2. If we drop down to Isaiah 2:19, we get a picture of the great tribulation or the great ordeal of the end times:
“Men will go into caves of the rocks, and into holes of the ground before the terror of the LORD, and before the splendor of His majesty, when He arises to make the earth tremble.”
Here’s the translation from the Septuagint:
Εισενεγκαντες εις τα σπηλαια και εις τας σχισμας των πετρων και εις τας τρωγλας της γης απο προσωπου του φοβου κυριου και απο της δοξης της ισχυος αυτου οταν αναστη θραυσαι την γην.
(⬇️ see Isaiah 2.19 LXX ⬇️):
The game changer in this verse is the Hebrew term “qum,” which is rendered in English as “arises.” Interestingly enough, the Septuagint translates it as αναστη (from the Greek ανάσταση, which in this context means resurrection). Compare the Greek terms *ἀναστῇ* (Isa. 2.19 LXX), *ἀναστήσεται* (Th Dan. 12.1 LXX), and *ἀναστήσονται* (Dan. 12.2 LXX), all of which refer to an eschatological *resurrection* from the dead! This gives us a completely different interpretation concerning the timing of the Lord’s (Messiah’s) resurrection, namely, as taking place in the end times. What’s more, Isaiah doesn’t just say that the Lord arises and then quietly goes away, but that he “arises to make the earth tremble”:
“Men will go into caves of the rocks, and into holes of the ground before the terror of the LORD, and before the splendor of His majesty, when He arises [from the dead] to make the earth tremble.”
There is support for this conclusion in Romans 15:12, a verse which is basically quoting from Isaiah. It reads:
“And again Isaiah says, ‘There shall come the root of Jesse, and he who arises to rule over the Gentiles, in him shall the Gentiles hope.”
The key phrase, here, is “he who arises to rule over the Gentiles.” Firstly, notice that he (Christ) who arises does so with the express purpose of imposing his will upon the Gentiles. That is to say, he arises and does not wait for a two-thousand-year interim to transpire; rather, he arises to rule as king over the nations. And since we know that Isaiah is referring to the last days, as mentioned earlier, it is appropriate to note how the Greek New Testament interprets Isaiah’s prophecy. Secondly, the original Greek New Testament uses the word ἀνιστάμενος (similar to the αναστη of the Septuagint) to define what Isaiah means by the word “arises.” The term ἀνιστάμενος is derived from the Greek ανάσταση, which means resurrection:
Καὶ πάλιν, Ἠσαΐας λέγει, Ἔσται ἡ ῥίζα τοῦ Ἰεσσαί, καὶ ὁ ἀνιστάμενος ἄρχειν ἐθνῶν. http://biblehub.com/interlinear/romans/15-12.htm
Thus, it’s perfectly clear that Isaiah’s use of the term “arises”—translated by both the Septuagint and Paul as “resurrection”—refers to the Messiah’s resurrection at the end of days.
Moreover, 1 Corinthians 15:23 tells of the sequence of resurrection events in the last days without any mention of a more-than-two-thousand-year gap between them; that is, between the resurrection of Christ and that of the rest of the dead. We know this because immediately following the resurrection sequence, the text concludes:
“Then comes the end, when He [Christ] delivers up the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power” (1 Corinthians 15:24).
But what do the previous verses say about the sequence of resurrection events just before the end comes? 1 Corinthians 15:20 says—in a timeless context—that “Christ is raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep.” Here’s the verse in Greek:
Νυνὶ δὲ Χριστὸς ἐγήγερται ἐκ νεκρῶν, ἀπαρχὴ τῶν κεκοιμημένων. http://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/15-20.htm
But now the text becomes very specific in explaining the sequence of resurrection events that take place just prior to Christ’s kingly rule over “all authority and power” at the end of days. 1 Corinthians 15:23 tells us that the first-fruit [to be raised from the dead] is Christ; next, those who belong to Christ are resurrected, in his presence; “then comes the end” (1 Corinthians 15:24):
Ἀπαρχὴ Χριστός, ἔπειτα οἱ τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἐν τῇ παρουσίᾳ αὐτοῦ (1 Corinthians 15:23). http://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/15-23.htm
Jesus Dies for the Remission of Sins at the End of Days
As odd as this may sound, the letter to the Hebrews states:
“God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son” (Hebrews 1:1-2).
In the original Greek text, it is very clear that God speaks to mankind in the last days through his son, Jesus:
Ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων, ἐλάλησεν ἡμῖν ἐν Υἱῷ (Hebrews 1:2) http://biblehub.com/interlinear/hebrews/1-2.htm
The phrase Ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν literally means in the last days, or during the last age when time will reach its fullness or completion. The phrase ἐλάλησεν ἡμῖν ἐν Υἱῷ means that God spoke to us by or in his Son. In the context of prophecy, the tense ἐλάλησεν (spoke) should be understood in a timeless context, or within the context of the entire human history, not just past history, and especially so because these words are said to be spoken in the last days.
But there is a verse that stands out among the others as the one that unequivocally and categorically points to Christ’s sacrifice and death in the end of the world. The first part of Hebrews 9:26 attempts to explain that Christ does not die over and over again, nor offer himself as a sacrifice repeatedly. The second part of the verse instills the epiphany, namely, that Christ is offered once and for all, “to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself,” and that this event takes place not at the beginning of the ages, but rather at the “consummation of the ages” (NASV), or “in the end of the world” (KJV):
Νυνὶ δὲ ἅπαξ ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων, εἰς ἀθέτησιν τῆς ἁμαρτίας, διὰ τῆς θυσίας αὐτοῦ πεφανέρωται (Hebrews 9:26). http://biblehub.com/interlinear/hebrews/9-26.htm
Translation:
“Now, however, once and for all [ἅπαξ] in the end [or completion] of the ages, [Jesus] is revealed [πεφανέρωται] to put away sin, by the sacrifice of himself.”
There is a key phrase within this sentence that undoubtedly places the timeline of this event “in the end of the world,” as opposed to any other time period, because it comprises the words ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων. The term ἐπὶ means “in,” while the word συντελείᾳ refers to “completion” or “end.” The final word of the phrase is αἰώνων, which refers to chronological time and means “ages” or centuries in the modern sense. Simply put, the phrase ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων means at the end or at the completion of all the ages. This is another way of saying at the final point of time, in the last days, in the end times, or “in the end of the world.” The exact same phrase (sinteleias tou aionos) is used in Matthew 24:3 to refer to “the end of the age" (or the end of the world), when Jesus is asked, “What will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” http://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/24-3.htm So, what does Hebrews 9:26 imply? That Jesus is revealed once and for all at the completion of all the ages to die for our sins!
1 Peter 1:5 says, “For [the] salvation is ready to be revealed in the last time.” The Greek text reads:
Εἰς σωτηρίαν ἑτοίμην ἀποκαλυφθῆναι ἐν καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ (1 Peter 1:5) http://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_peter/1-5.htm
Once more, we read of Christ’s salvation as being revealed (ἀποκαλυφθῆναι) “in the last time” (ἐν καιρῷ ἐσχάτῳ), otherwise known as the end-time (or the last days).
1 Peter 1:20 drives home the same biblical notion that Jesus is revealed for the first time in human history in the end times. First, it makes a point of contrast between the foreknowledge of Christ before the foundation of the world and his actual manifestation or revelation in the end times:
Προεγνωσμένου μὲν πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου, φανερωθέντος δὲ ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου τῶν χρόνων (1 Peter 1:20). http://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_peter/1-20.htm
The term φανερωθέντος means “is manifested,” or “made manifest,” or “shall appear.” http://biblehub.com/greek/phanero_thentos_5319.htm
The phrase ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου τῶν χρόνων is a reference to the last days or end times because it literally means “in the last times.” Also, note that the word “times” (χρόνων) is referring to chronological times, ages, or years in the modern sense. http://biblehub.com/greek/chrono_n_5550.htm
However, the most profound statement of all is found in Revelation 19:10. There, we are told in no uncertain terms that the witnesses of Christ, indeed the entire New Testament testimony pertaining to the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus is based on “prophecy” given by the “pneuma” or spirit of God. And then we begin to comprehend how the authors of the New Testament witnessed Jesus. In retrospect, the New Testament authors are bearing witness to Jesus Christ in the exact same manner as Paul. Everyone would agree that Paul never saw Jesus in the flesh. Yet, due to his personal revelations, Paul knew more about Jesus than anyone else! Revelation 19:10 says:
Ἡ γὰρ μαρτυρία Ἰησοῦ ἐστιν τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς προφητείας.
English translation:
“Indeed, the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” http://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/19-10.htm
In other words, the biblical testimony of Jesus is a matter of prophecy, not history!
First Peter 1.10-11 Suggests An Eschatological Soteriology
By Author Eli Kittim
"Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow" (1 Peter 1.10-11 NIV).
BIBLE EXEGESIS
First, notice that the prophets (Gk. προφῆται) in the aforementioned passage are said to have the Spirit of Christ (Gk. Πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ) within them, thereby making it abundantly clear that they are prophets of the New Testament (NT), since there's no reference to the Spirit of Christ in the Old Testament (OT). That they were NT prophets is subsequently attested by verse 12 with its reference to the gospel:
"It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven."
Second, the notion that 1 Peter 1.10-11 is referring to NT as opposed to OT prophets is further established by way of the doctrine of salvation (Gk. σωτηρίας), which is said to come through the means of grace! This explicit type of Soteriology (namely, through grace; Gk. χάριτος) cannot be found anywhere in the OT.
Third, and most importantly, observe that "the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow" were actually "PREDICTED" (Gk. προμαρτυρόμενον; i.e., testified beforehand) by "the Spirit of Christ" (Gk. Πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ; presumably a reference to the Holy Spirit) and communicated to the NT prophets so that they might record them for posterity's sake (cf. v. 12). Therefore, the passion of Christ was seemingly written in advance——or prophesied, if you will——according to this NT passage!
Here's Further Evidence that the Gospel of Christ is Promised Beforehand in the New Testament
In the undermentioned passage, notice that it was "the gospel concerning his Son" "which he [God] promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures." This passage further demonstrates that these are NT prophets, since there's no reference to "the gospel (Gk. εὐαγγέλιον) of God . . . concerning his Son" in the OT:
"Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures, the gospel concerning his Son" (Romans 1.1-3 NRSV).
Also, Paul’s letters are referred to as “Scripture” in 2 Pet. 3.16, while Luke’s gospel is referred to as “Scripture” in 1 Tim. 5.18!
Why Does the New Testament Refer to Christ’s Future Coming as a “Revelation”?
By Goodreads Author Eli Kittim
It’s important to note the language that’s often used with regard to the future coming of Christ, namely, as the “revelation” of Jesus. Why do the New Testament (NT) authors refer to Christ’s coming as a “revelation”? We must first understand what this word means in Greek, and how it is used in the NT. The actual Greek word used in the NT is ἀποκάλυψις (“apokalupsis”). The English word apocalypse comes from the Greek word apokalupsis, which means “revelation.” The terms “revelation” or “revealed” indicate the disclosure of something that was previously unknown. Thus, according to the meaning of the term revelation, no one knows the mystery or secret prior to its disclosure.
Therefore, we cannot use the biblical term “revelation” to imply that something previously known is made known a second time. That’s not what the Greek term apokalupsis means. If it was previously revealed, then it cannot be revealed again. In other words, it’s not a revelation if it’s already known. It’s only a revelation if it is still unknown. Thus, the word “revelation” necessarily implies a first time disclosure or an initial unveiling, appearing, or manifestation. It means that something that was previously unknown and/or unseen has finally been revealed and/or manifested. But if it’s already known and happens to reappear a second time, it is not considered to be a “revelation.” Thus, a revelation by default means “a first-time” occurrence. In other words, it’s an event that is happening for the very first time. By definition, a “revelation” is never disclosed twice.
Let’s now briefly look at some NT verses, which mention the future coming of Christ, to examine whether they are referring to a second coming, a coming back, or a return, as is commonly thought:
1 Cor. 4.5; 15.23; 16.22; 1 Thess. 2.19; 4.15; 2 Thess. 1.10; 2.1; Heb. 10.37; Jas. 5.7; 2 Pet. 1.16; 3.3; Rev. 2.16; 22.20.
As you can see, a second coming or a return is nowhere indicated in the above-mentioned verses. Conversely, Jesus’ Coming is variously referred to as an appearance, a manifestation, or a “revelation” in the last days, which seems to imply an initial coming, a first coming, and the only coming. Surprisingly, it’s not referred to as a return, a coming back, or a second coming. As N.T. Wright correctly points out, the eschatological references to Jesus in the New Testament don’t mention a second coming but rather a future appearance or manifestation. Why not? We'll explore this question a little later, but for now let’s look at the NT eschatological literature with regard to what Christians have traditionally referred to as the “second coming” of Christ. There are many references to Jesus’ future “coming” in the NT——(variously called “the day of Christ”; cf. 1 Cor. 1.8; 3.13; Phil. 1.6; 2.16; 2 Thess. 2.2)——but nowhere is it mentioned as a second coming or as a return!
Let’s examine elsewhere whether a second coming is indicated by the NT authors:
Lk. 17.30; 1 Cor. 1.7; Phil. 1.6; Col. 3.4; 1 Thess. 1.10; 2 Thess. 1.7; 1 Tim. 6.14; 2 Tim. 4.1; Titus 2.13; 1 Pet. 1.13; 5.1; 1 Jn. 2.28; Rev. 1.1.
Astoundingly, if we study these verses, none of them refer to Jesus’ second coming. No return was explicitly mentioned. Many verses refer to Jesus’ “revelation,” which was previously unknown and which will become known in the future. As I mentioned earlier, the term “revelation” means something coming to light or being manifested for the very first time!
The wholesale absence of a second coming or return in all these verses must be addressed. If this is in fact the second coming of Christ, as is commonly believed, then why don’t we find appropriate terminology that is consistent with a “coming-again” or a “return”? Why don’t we find, for instance, words such as επανέρχομαι (come again), or επιστρέφω (return), or ἔρχομαι πάλιν (come again/return), etc.? Although these terms are used with some frequency in the NT, they are never applied to the revelation of Jesus Christ. There are, however, some confusing Bible mistranslations (for example, in Acts 1.11) which claim that Jesus “will return.” But Acts 1.11 never mentions Jesus’ return or his coming back to earth. These misleading translations are not faithful to the original Greek text. Some of these inaccurate translations include the NIV, NLT, BSB, CEV, GNT, ISV, AMP, GW, NET Bible, NHEB, & the WEB. All these Bible versions mistranslate the verse as if Jesus “will come back” or “will return.” However, the original Greek uses a word (ἐλεύσεται) that does not imply a “coming back” or a “return.” It simply indicates *one* single coming! The Greek text uses the word ἐλεύσεται, which simply means “will come.” Not only do the NT writers refrain from calling Jesus’ future visitation “a second coming,” but, conversely, they further indicate that this is his first and only advent, a momentous event that will occur hapax (“once for all”) “in the end of the world” (Heb. 9.26 KJV), or “at the final point of time” (1 Peter 1.20 NJB).
None of the NT authors referred to the future visitation of Christ as a second coming. They all referred to it as a coming, a manifestation, an appearance, especially a “revelation,” but certainly not a second coming; not a coming again: neither a coming back nor a return. And given what we know about the term “revelation” and its unique meaning, the numerous references to Jesus’ “revelation” is a strong indication that these communities expected Jesus to appear for the first time in the end of the world!
What About the Hebrews 9.28 Reference to Christ Who is Said to “appear a second time”?
The only apparent contradiction to the above-mentioned body of evidence is a single reference to Christ appearing “a second time” in Hebrews 9.28. However, I will demonstrate that it is not a contradiction and that it fits perfectly with the previous material. Let me unpack it for you.
Notice that the word in Heb. 9.28 is not παρουσία (Parousia, i.e. “presence”)——which is commonly interpreted as a “coming”——but rather ἐκ δευτέρου (“a second time”), which is a clue that v. 28 is seemingly pointing back to the previous verse (v. 26), and particularly to the term ἅπαξ (which implies “a first time”).
It’s important that we understand the temporal or eschatological timeline of Hebrews 9.26 before we interpret verse 9.28. For example, it’s clear from the textual evidence that the idiomatic expression ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων (“at the end of the age” Heb. 9.26) is referring to the end of the world (cf. Lampe A Patristic Greek Lexicon, p. 1340; Dan. 12.4 LXX; Mt. 13.39–40, 49; Mt. 24.3; Mt. 28.20). Keep in mind that this time period is associated with “the Day of the Lord,” “the day of Christ,” and with Judgment day.
What is more, the book of Hebrews would not explicitly state that Christ will appear ONCE in one verse (v. 26), and then say the exact opposite in the following verse——namely, that he’ll appear TWICE (v. 28). So, that’s another clue that something else is meant by the author. Notice that the term ἅπαξ (“once for all”) is used 3x, once in each verse respectively: in v. 26 to refer to the number of times Christ appears; in v. 27 with regard to how many times people die (in contradistinction to reincarnation); and in v. 28 with regard to how many times Christ dies for the sins of many.
Observe also in Hebrews 1.1-2 that God does not speak to humankind through his Son in Antiquity, but rather ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν “in the last days.” Similarly, Hebrews 9.26b tells us that Christ’s sacrifice is offered hapax “once and for all” at the end of the age (or at the end of the world; see above-mentioned citations). It tells us not only the precise time frame of his visitation but also the reason for his appearance: “to remove sin by the sacrifice of himself.” That would be his DEATH!
The next verse (v. 27) tells us that all mortals (including Christ) live once and die once. But it also begins to show an important parallel or analogy between all mortals and Christ that becomes the key to understanding the meaning of the following verse (v. 28). Notice the specific language that is used to draw an analogy between all mortals and Christ: “Just as all mortals,” “so Christ,” and so on. In other words, what applies to mortals applies to Christ. It implies that just as all mortals die once——followed by the resurrection and the judgment——so Christ having DIED ONCE, “will appear a second time” for the resurrection and the judgment. Given the internal consistency and development of the passage in which Christ will die ONCE “in the end of the world” (Heb. 9.26 KJV), the next two verses then evoke “the judgment” to signify Christ’s resurrection from the dead:
26b νυνί δὲ ἅπαξ ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων εἰς ἀθέτησιν [τῆς] ἁμαρτίας διὰ τῆς θυσίας αὐτοῦ πεφανέρωται. 27 καί καθ’ ὅσον ἀπόκειται τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἅπαξ ἀποθανεῖν, μετὰ δὲ τοῦτο κρίσις, 28 οὕτως καὶ ὁ Χριστὸς ἅπαξ προσενεχθεὶς εἰς τὸ πολλῶν ἀνενεγκεῖν ἁμαρτίας ἐκ δευτέρου χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας ὀφθήσεται τοῖς αὐτὸν ἀπεκδεχομένοις εἰς σωτηρίαν. (NA28)
Translation (NRSV):
26b “But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the age to remove sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And just as it is appointed for mortals to die once, and after that the judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin, but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.”
Conclusion
Just as v. 26 speaks of Christ’s demise, so vv. 27-28 imply his resurrection, which must necessarily follow his death, according to the NT story! Thus, the reference to Christ appearing “a second time” (Heb. 9.28) is referring to his resurrection from the dead, which will “bring salvation to those who are waiting for him” (NIV)! That’s precisely why Jesus says, “In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me” (Jn 16.16). The notion that Christ will be the first to be resurrected in the last days is also mentioned in 1 Cor 15:22-28! Similarly, theologian Dennis McCallum writes, “No Old Testament passage indicates that Messiah will come twice.” In his book, Satan and His Kingdom (p. 38), he writes:
"In some cases, predictions about the [OT] suffering servant are immediately next to prophecies about King Messiah, without any mention of a more-than-two-thousand-year gap between them (e.g., cross-reference Isaiah 61:1 ff and Jesus’ commentary in Luke 4:21)."
Thus, there is a large body of evidence which suggests that the one and only visitation of Christ will transpire in the last days. This is particularly evident in certain verses which imply that Christ has not yet been revealed (cf. Lk. 17.30)! It is reminiscent of the Epistles, in which Jesus’ long anticipated manifestation is variously referenced as “The revelation of Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 1.7; 1 Pet. 1.7, 13):
“And now, little children, abide in him, so that when he [Jesus] is REVEALED we may have confidence and not be put to shame before him at his COMING” (1 Jn 2.28 NRSV emphasis added).
In this verse, notice that Jesus’ •revelation• is exclusively related to his future “coming.” In fact, in John 9.39, the literary Jesus says: “I came into this world for judgment.” In other words, his one and only coming is associated with judgment day!
This brief topical study therefore deserves academic consideration because it presents an original approach to the interpretation of the NT that challenges the way we study the second coming of Christ. It is a new Paradigm Shift!
Eli Kittim - Amazon Author Page
https://www.amazon.com/author/ekittim
The God-Messiah of the Old Testament
By Author Eli Kittim 🎓
In the original Hebrew text, Isaiah 9:6 paints a divine picture of the Messiah, unlike the one erroniously drawn by traditional Judaism of a mere human being. In particular, Isaiah 9:6 claims that the “son” (בֵּ֚ן ben) that is given to us is called “mighty” (גִּבּ֔וֹר gibbor) “God” (אֵ֣ל el). This is reminiscent of Leviticus 26:12 in which God **literally** promises to become **incarnated** as a human being:
I will also walk among you and be your
God.
What is more, in Isaiah 9:6 the Messiah is called “the Prince” (שַׂר־ sar), “the everlasting” (Hb. עַד “ad,” derived from “adah,” which means “perpetuity,” “continually,” or “eternally”). In other words, this “son” that “is given” to us is from everlasting. As a supplemental observation, compare the similarities of Micah 5:2 (NASB) regarding the Messiah:
His times of coming forth are from long ago,
From the days of eternity.
In other words, he is **uncreated**! The Septuagint (LXX), an early Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, confirms this interpretation by also stating that this upcoming (messianic) ruler is from all **eternity.** In Micah 5:2 of the Septuagint (which is technically Micah 5:1 in the LXX), the prophecy is as follows:
ΚΑΙ σύ, Βηθλεέμ, οἶκος τοῦ ᾿Εφραθά,
ὀλιγοστὸς εἶ τοῦ εἶναι ἐν χιλιάσιν ᾿Ιούδα· ἐκ
σοῦ μοι ἐξελεύσεται τοῦ εἶναι εἰς ἄρχοντα
ἐν τῷ ᾿Ισραήλ, καὶ αἱ ἔξοδοι αὐτοῦ ἀπ᾿
ἀρχῆς ἐξ ἡμερῶν αἰῶνος.
English translation by L.C.L. Brenton:
And thou, Bethleem, house of Ephratha, art
few in number to be [reckoned] among the
thousands of Juda; [yet] out of thee shall
one come forth to me, to be a ruler of Israel;
and his goings forth were from the
beginning, [even] from eternity.
So we have compelling evidence from the very early Septuagint translation that the messiah to come is actually **uncreated,** and that he has existed from all **eternity.** This suggests that the “mighty God” of Isaiah 9:6, “the everlasting,” who is promised to become incarnated in Leviticus 26:12, is the same forthcoming messianic ruler that is mentioned in Micah 5:2 (Micah 5:1 LXX), whose “goings forth were from the beginning, [even] from eternity.”
Conclusion
Keep in mind that all this is coming from the Old Testament. We haven’t even touched the New Testament yet. Nevertheless, we find in the Old Testament numerous references to the messiah as an eternal, mighty, and incarnate God! And we haven’t even mentioned the deity of Jesus Christ in the New Testament:
In Jn 1:1 (‘the word was God’); Col. 2:9 (‘in
him the whole fullness of the godhead
[θεότητος] dwells bodily’); Heb. 1:3 (‘The
Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the
exact imprint of his being’); Tit. 2:13 (‘our
great God and Savior Jesus Christ’); ‘being
in very nature God’ (Phil. 2:6); ‘The Son is
the image of the invisible God’ (Col. 1:15);
‘our God and Savior Jesus Christ’ (2 Pet.
1:1); & in Jn 1:3 and Heb. 1:2 Jesus is the
creator and the ‘heir of all things, through
whom he [God] also created the worlds’; Jn
1:3: ‘All things came into being through him
[Jesus], and without him not one thing
came into being.’
Therefore, the eternal, timeless, uncreated, everlasting, almighty God (Rev. 1:8), who has always existed from all eternity, is the very same Creator-God who is promised to be born among us (Isa. 9:6; Mic. 5:2), and to “walk [וְהִתְהַלַּכְתִּי֙] among [בְּת֣וֹכְכֶ֔ם]” us (Lev. 26:12) “and be” our God!
The LXX was initially translated back in the 3rd century BC. This is clear evidence from the earliest sources that the messiah would be divine! The Micah 5:2 version of the LXX essentially confirms the DIVINE origin of the prophesied Messiah:
ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς ἐξ ἡμερῶν αἰῶνος.
It means that his origins are “from the beginning of days.” In other words, the messiah is the “Ancient of Days” (Aramaic: עַתִּיק יֹומִין, ʿatīq yōmīn; παλαιὸς ἡμερῶν, palaiòs hēmerôn), which is another name for God in Daniel 7:9!
Spanish translation of Eli Kittim’s article
Traducción al español del artículo de Eli Kittim
——-
EVIDENCIA QUE DANIEL 12.1 SE REFIERE A UNA RESURRECCIÓN DE LOS MUERTOS BASADA EN LA TRADUCCIÓN Y EXÉGESIS DE LOS IDIOMAS BÍBLICOS
Por el autor Eli Kittim
¡Daniel 12.1 está en el contexto de la gran tribulación de los últimos tiempos! Se repite en Mateo 24,21 como el tiempo de la gran prueba: καιρός θλίψεως (cf. Apocalipsis 7,14).
Daniel Teodoción 12.1 LXX:
καὶ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ ἐκείνῳ ἀναστήσεται Μιχαηλ ὁ ἄρχων ὁ μέγας ὁ ἑστηκὼς ἐπὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς τοῦ λαοῦ σου καὶ ἔσται καιρὸς θλίψεως θλῖψις οἵα οὐ γέγονεν ἀφ’ οὗ γεγένηται ἔθνος ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἕως τοῦ καιροῦ ἐκείνου.
Theodotion Daniel 12.1 de la Septuaginta traduce la palabra hebrea עָמַד (amad) como αναστήσεται, que se deriva de la raíz de la palabra ανίστημι y significa “surgirá”.
Traducción:
En ese momento se levantará Miguel, el gran príncipe, el protector de vuestro pueblo. Habrá un tiempo de angustia, como nunca ha ocurrido desde que las naciones comenzaron a existir.
Mi afirmación de que la palabra griega ἀναστήσεται (“restaurará”) se refiere a una resurrección de entre los muertos ha sido cuestionada por los críticos. Mi respuesta es la siguiente.
La primera evidencia es el hecho de que Miguel es mencionado por primera vez como el que “resucitará” (ἀναστήσεται; Daniel Theodotion 12.1 LXX) antes de la resurrección general de los muertos (ἀναστήσονται; griego antiguo Daniel 12.2 LXX). Aquí, hay evidencia lingüística sólida de que la palabra ἀναστήσεται se refiere a una resurrección porque en el versículo inmediatamente siguiente (12.2) ¡la forma plural de exactamente la misma palabra (a saber, ἀναστήσονται) se usa para describir la resurrección general de los muertos! En otras palabras, si exactamente la misma palabra significa resurrección en Daniel 12.2, ¡entonces necesariamente también debe significar resurrección en Daniel 12.1!
La segunda evidencia proviene de la versión griega antigua de Daniel de la Septuaginta que usa la palabra παρελεύσεται para definir la palabra hebrea עָמַד (amad), que se traduce como “surgirá”.
El griego antiguo Daniel 12.1 versión LXX dice:
καὶ κατὰ τὴν ὥραν ἐκείνην παρελεύσεται Μιχαηλ ὁ ἄγγελος ὁ μέγας ὁ ἑστηκὼς ἐπὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς τοῦ λαοῦ σου ἐκείνη ἡ ἡμέρα θλίψεως οἵα οὐκ ἐγενήθη ἀφ’ οὗ ἐγενήθησαν ἕως τῆς ἡμέρας ἐκείνης.
La versión griega antigua de Daniel de la Septuaginta demuestra además que Daniel 12.1 está describiendo un tema de muerte y resurrección porque la palabra παρελεύσεται significa "fallecer" (morir), lo que indica el fallecimiento de este príncipe destacado en el momento de la muerte. ¡final! Por lo tanto, prepara el escenario para su resurrección, ya que la forma llamada "Theodotion Daniel" de la LXX llena los vacíos al usar la palabra αναστήσεται, que significa una resurrección corporal, para establecer el período de los últimos días como el tiempo durante el cual esta figura principesca resucitará de entre los muertos!