THE THIRD COMING OF CHRIST

[FreeGrace2]

Mm, I wonder how the first century church looked at the words of Revelation. Did they try to find a single verse that pointed to the 21st century?

How is this important? And why don't you answer my questions about WHEN Jesus supposedly ALREADY came to earth?

Perhaps you can help them find out where in this book does it say that its contents were reserved for the end of history.

Of course someone who doesn't have a clue about prophecy would say that.

1 Peter 1:12 - 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. Even angels long to look into these things.

Just as the OT writers KNEW they weren't serving themselves, but FUTURE believers (by you), so John knew he was writing about future events that will happen, but haven't happened YET.

Chapter and verse?

Right. I did and you won't answer. If Revelation isn't prophecy about the Second Coming of Christ, then tell me WHEN He did come back and prove your claim with actual evidence. I'm sure the whole world would have known and written about it.

 

[Jocund]

The widespread belief of the “Second Coming” of the Lord is probably taught and believed in over 90% of the church. All dispensationalists believe in the second coming as their “hope” is always in the future, never thinking of abiding in the present moment in Christ.

If we are going to believe in the “coming of the Lord”, I suggest that we call it the “THIRD COMING”, not the “Second Coming”

Before I state my case, let’s read the following verse that clearly speaking about the “Second Coming”:

Hebrews 9:28 (NASB95) “So Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.”

• In context, the writer of the Hebrews was writing to Hebrew believers of the 1st century who were being tempted to go back to the Law and hope for the best because the life they were living was too hard due to the cruelty of the unconverted Jews who persecuted them and accused them of being heretics.
• In view of the context of these scriptures, the writer of Hebrews was referring to the soon SECOND COMING which was expected to come when Jerusalem was judged for its many sins (Mat. 23:34-38; 1Thes. 2:14-16), and the destruction of the Jewish temple that took place in AD 70.
• Since the first coming took place in the incarnation when God became Man, and the invisible second coming came to be when Christ judged Jerusalem, while officially ending the old covenant, do you believe in the 3rd coming?

How so? Please respond succinctly if you believe the Lord will be coming visibly, for all to see.

By the way, this ridiculous picture of the Lord's coming is nothing but an atrocious way of attempting to imagine the "Second Coming", or the "Third Coming." 😁

View attachment 243290

Chess-Player,

If we look at the verses directly before Heb 9:28, we see that the context is actually about the judgement day:

"For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation." - Heb 9:24-28 KJV

This is clearly talking about the second coming in the context of the judgement at the resurrection, and the first coming as Jesus' life up to His death. It does not have any bearing on the destruction of the temple. I do not believe that a 70 AD "second coming" is compatible with scripture.

 

[MISSION-IMPOSSIBLE]

If we look at the verses directly before Heb 9:28, we see that the context is actually about the judgement day:

"For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation." - Heb 9:24-28 KJV

This is clearly talking about the second coming in the context of the judgement at the resurrection, and the first coming as Jesus' life up to His death. It does not have any bearing on the destruction of the temple. I do not believe that a 70 AD "second coming" is compatible with scripture.
to
Heb. 9:27 speaks of entering judgment at the moment of death. Judgment simply means to set things right; it does not mean condemnation since our sins were forgiven when Jesus took our place on the cross as our covenant representative.

When we die, our bodies are judged while we are finally free from the corruption of the flesh and the soul. The resurrection of the dead (the final judgment of the wicked) will provide us with a spirit-body like the one Jesus has (1Cor. 15:4 4; Phil. 3:20-21).

We err when we think "salvation" simply means the salvation of our souls. The woman with the issue of blood was saved from her diseases by placing her faith in the Lord (Mat. 9:22). To the woman who brought alabaster oil and wept the Lord's feet with her tears was told that her faith had saved them (sins forgiven). See Lk 7:37-50 with emphasis on verse 50.

As for Heb. 7:28, can you tell me when the old covenant officially closed? If you say when the temple was destroyed, you are correct, but if you deny the invisible return of Jesus to judge those who were under the law of Moses and who had rejected the grace of God in Jesus Christ, you err. Actually, the most significant event in the history of the Jews is that the Lord terminated His covenant with them because they refused to believe in Him.

Everyone recognized that the Lord had come because they perceived Him to be during the events that were taking place just as happened throughout the entire OT.

One last point, Rev. 1:7 "Every eye will SEE Him, even those who pierced Him." Forty years later the Jews that crucified Him saw "Him"

Classical Greek
Various forms of this verb (to see) appear in Greek antiquity: horō, horoō, orēmi, and horeō (on the formation and forms see Liddell-Scott). Its meanings in classical Greek include “see, look” (with the eyes), “look at, view, observe” something. In a metaphorical sense “to see” is “to perceive mentally,” “to discern” (ibid.).

If you don't believe the Lord was present when the temple was being destroyed, and the Jews were judged, where was He?

Have you ever sensed the strong presence of the Lord in your life? I have many times, I knew He was there, but I couldn't see Him, but He was there, nonetheless.

Blessings.

 

[Jocund]

Heb. 9:27 speaks of entering judgment at the moment of death.

In queue for judgement, definitely. Judged at the moment of death? There is some debate there.

"And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:" - Heb 9:27 KJV

Heb 9:27 mentions a chronology of appointed events for everyone of mankind:

1st) Death
2nd) Judgement

The verse by itself doesn't indicate whether this happens instantaneously or with a gap of thousands of years. The verse just mentions chronology, not timing.

Following the KJV for this verse, it is part of a larger sentence which includes Heb 9:28.

"So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation." - Heb 9:28 KJV

The flow of the full Heb 9:27-28 sentence is essentially "1st death, 2nd judgement: but Christ appeared and died once for our sins, and Christ shall appear the second time for salvation". Which to me seems like it is tying the timing of judgement with the second coming as a consolidated one time future event.

"The" in "the second time" is a definitive article, meaning that it isn't multiple second events happening individually for people across time.

Salvation in itself is a healing process, or a transformative process. Saving is contextually about preservation from something.

Judgment simply means to set things right; it does not mean condemnation

Judgement means a discernment of some kind. In the case of the day of judgement, it is talking about sorting the sheep from the goats, etc. An outcome of judgement can be condemnation, and an outcome of judgement can be salvation.

Salvation itself is a healing process which essentially means to "put things right".

We err when we think "salvation" simply means the salvation of our souls

I agree. Those in Christ have a bodily resurrection into incorruption. There is an importance in the body that is sometimes overlooked.

The woman with the issue of blood was saved from her diseases by placing her faith in the Lord (Mat. 9:22).

KJV has this as "was made whole". The concept of healing is there (which ties in with the concept of salvation) but I'm not sure I see the entire context you are trying to express here.

As for Heb. 7:28, can you tell me when the old covenant officially closed?

The ordinances of the law were nailed to the cross. The tearing of the veil of the Temple at that event is a significant point in time. The sequence where Christ states, "It is finished" would be a likely candidate. This would mark the changing of the priesthood, and the changing in the ordinances of the law from the law of Moses to the law of Christ. It went from the ever-changing mortal OT priesthoods finally to the immortal priesthood in Christ. And on the first day of the week Christ rose as the head Priest. With the new the old was made obsolete.

A fallen temple became a martyred idol for those that rejected Christ. But the specific function of the temple was already obsolete as soon as Christ's role as head priest and the covenant of Christ in general came into play. The temple was a meaningless husk relative to the true faith when 70 AD rolled along.

if you deny the invisible return of Jesus to judge those who were under the law of Moses

I don't remember the exact passages off the top of my head but Christ readily speaks through the Holy Spirit. Would it be necessary for a bodily return of Christ in the case of 70 AD?

I agree that the Romans could easily be understood as ministering from God's will by the destruction of the Temple.

"For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil." - Rom 13:3-4 KJV

But why would it be necessary to judge every soul in that territory on that day as opposed to keeping them "asleep" awaiting judgement day?

Everyone recognized that the Lord had come because they perceived Him to be during the events that were taking place just as happened throughout the entire OT.

Had come physically? Or through the Holy Spirit?

Experiencing Christ's presence through the Holy Spirit would be the case for any Christian at the time. I just don't see the justification to believe that a physical second coming occurred during 70 AD. I'm looking to have the reasoning laid out for why you would see it as being necessarily or compellingly the case.

There are some nuances in this topic. The RCC and some Protestant groups believe in the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, but this is not counted as an additional coming of Christ each mass. There is a specific kind of coming of Christ that counts as the Second Coming in those perspectives.

 

[FreeGrace2]

MISSION-IMPOSSIBLE said:
Heb. 9:27 speaks of entering judgment at the moment of death.

In queue for judgement, definitely. Judged at the moment of death? There is some debate there.

There shouldn't be any debate here. Both believers and unbelievers will be judged for their works.

Believers at the Bema or Judgment Seat of Christ. 2 Cor 5:10 - 10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.

This will occur when Jesus returns at the Second Advent and all believers receive their glorified bodies. And the judgment will determine whether they get rewards and how much, or not. All based on their works.

Unbelievers at death go to Hades (torments) awaiting their resurrection to appear at the GWT judgment, in Rev 20:11-15. Then they will be cast into the LOF. And their judgment also involves works. However, that will involve whether it will be either more tolerable or less tolerable for each than for others.

Matt 10:15 - Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.
Matt 11-
20 Then Jesus began to denounce the towns in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent.
21 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.
22 But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you.
23 And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted to the heavens? No, you will go down to Hades. For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day.
24 But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.”

"And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:" - Heb 9:27 KJV

Heb 9:27 mentions a chronology of appointed events for everyone of mankind:

1st) Death
2nd) Judgement

The 2 judgments will be 1,000 years apart. Believers at the Second Advent and unbelievers at the end of the Millennial reign.

The verse by itself doesn't indicate whether this happens instantaneously or with a gap of thousands of years. The verse just mentions chronology, not timing.

Rev 20:5 DOES mention timing.

 

[NilsForChrist]

The closest thing what could describe a third coming of Christ is there:

And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. Revelation 20:9

People who believe in Postminelliam or also some Amillenials such as the Church of Christ, who believe are in Revelation 20:7-8, would see this as a proof for a post-millenial second coming. It obviously is no coming. Only a sign of God while Christ already is one earth. Are we in the Millenium now? I think not!