The Prophecies Conspiracy

Bill Henness

 

For nearly 2,000 years Christians have been taught that Jesus fulfilled Messianic prophecy and that his second coming is necessary for the fulfillment of many prophecies yet unfulfilled.

Part one of this work reveals the way Jesus allegedly fulfilled prophecy at his first advent. Part two shows his future fulfillment of prophecy.

The purpose of this work is to reveal the conspiracy the first century writers put upon believers and the continuation of it by Christian theologians since the first century and up to this present day. Some of which do so intentionally while others are naive, only teaching the prophecy of the Bible as they were taught, without thinking or questioning it.

Although there are hundreds of errors, contradictions, and false prophecies in the Bible, this work is limited to only those prophecies concerning the Jewish messiah, or his alleged fulfillment's of them.

I believe most preachers and teachers teach the future fulfillment of prophecies, not because they intend to deceive, but because they also were taught the same by others who were also taught the same, clear back to the first century. In order for a seminary student to get passing grades he must answer the questions the way his teachers want. So continues the Biblical prophecies conspiracy.

 

PART 1

The Virgin Birth

In order to understand the entire context of Isaiah's prophecy of the virgin having a son, I will quote all of the story.

"Moreover, the LORD spoke again unto Ahaz, saying, Ask a sign of the LORD, thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above. But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I test the LORD. And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David: Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also? Therefore the LORD himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a (the) virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Emmanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken by both her kings." (Isa. 7:10-16)

In verse 10 & 11 God is asking the king to ask for a sign concerning what he has just said to him about the enemy not prevailing against Judah (v.v. 1-9). Verse 12, Ahaz refuses and gives his reason. Verse 13 is directed to the house of David. God says, "hear now".

Now we come to the great verse that has caused so much misunderstanding. Verse 14 says, "the LORD himself shall give you (Ahaz and the house of Israel and Judah) a sign." This will be a sign that the lands of the two enemies shall not prevail over Israel. Next is that sign. "A (the) virgin shall conceive, and bear a son,...". Why Isaiah used this word which has been mistranslated "virgin" by the King James Version, is evident.

In Hebrew there were two words that could have been used. One was beth-oo-law', which meant definitely a virgin. (see # 1330 Strong's Heb. Lex.). But the other word was used instead, which was Al-maw', which means, "a lass" or fem. for lad. (#5959)

He also used the definite article "the". The way this should read is, 'the young lass' or 'the young girl'. Apparently Ahaz knew this 'lass', who may or may not have been a virgin. If she had definitely been a virgin, he would have used the correct word for virgin, which he did not do.

This sign to Ahaz was for a definite time period before these two enemy nations would loose their kings.

Another thing worth mentioning is, this lass shall name her baby boy, Emmanuel. She shall call his name Emmanuel, (God is with us, or God has not forsaken us). In the N.T., Mary was told her son would be called the son of God. (Luke 1:35) She did not name him. The father always named his son, and Joseph was told he was to name the son, Jesus, (Matt. 1:21), not Emmanuel. People since have called him Emmanuel.

Verse 15 tells the king that the child will be poor, eating butter from sheep or goats, and honey, as it was found, much like John the Baptist ate.

The time the invasion is to be over is when the child becomes old enough to choose good over evil. The time element was probably several years.

Notice in Ch. 8, verse 10, God is saying that even if they make an alliance and counsel, God is still with them. (Emmanuel) Then in verses 13,14, God says to sanctify the LORD, and let him be your fear and he shall be for a sanctuary. He will also be to both Israel and Judah a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence, also He (god) will be a trap and a snare to those who live in Jerusalem. Read it and think!

Now, back to Isa. 7:14. That word in the K.D.V. is not virgin. It is almah(a lass). but the N.T. quote of Isa. 7:14 word for virgin, is virgin.

"Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which, being interpreted, is God with us." (Matt. 1:23)

No one in the N.T. called Jesus Emmanuel. this wasn't done until centuries later in order to fulfill what Matthew said.

Bethlehem

Matthew names the town of Bethlehem as the place where the Messiah is to be born. He misquotes from Micah.

"But thou, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel, whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." (Micah 5:2)

Matthew said concerning this verse that Bethlehem Ephrathah was a place, a town, however, most bible readers don't know that Bethlehem was a man, and Ephrathah was a woman. Because of this fact, the verse in Micah probably refers to a small clan of people rather than a town. Notice these verses.

"And when Azubal was dead, Caleb took unto him Ephrath, who bore him Hur." (1 Chron. 2:19)

"... the son of Hur, the first born of Ephrathah: Shobal, the father of Kiriath-jearim; Salma, the father of Bethlehem; Hareph, the father of Beth-gader." (v.v.50,51)

"The sons of Salma: Bethlehem..." (v.54)

"And Penuel, the father of Gedor, and Ezer, the father of Hushah. These are the sons of Hur, the first born of Ephrathah, the father of Bethlehem." (1 Chron. 4:4)

The Bethlehem in Micah, rather than being a town, was likely intended as a reference to the head of a family clan. In Micah 5:2, where it says;

"But thou, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth."

The Bethlehem, in this verse was described as "little among the thousands of Judah", casts doubt on Matthew's application of this verse. In a region as small as Judah, one could hardly speak of a town as one of "thousands", yet in terms of a Judean clan descended from one bethlehem of the woman Ephrathah, it would have been an appropriate description for an obscure family group that hadn't particularly distinguished itself in the nation's history.

Another thing is the word, "princes of Judah". A small town isn't called a "prince of Judah", however, a family clan, descending from Caleb as a prince, would be called a "prince of Judah."

Matthew probably intentionally distorted the original statement of Micah, to make it better suit his purpose of wanting it to appear to be a reference to the town of Bethlehem of Judah, rather than a family clan. We have only Matthew's word for the whole story of Herod inquiring of the wise men, chief priests, scribes, where the Messiah would be born.

If the verse from Micah is referring to a family clan, from the prince Caleb, through the woman Ephrathah, and the offspring Bethlehem, then the town of Bethlehem has no significance to the birth of Jesus who was called the Messiah.

The prophecies conspiracy has begun.

 

Parables

Matthew gives several parables that Jesus spoke to the multitudes, which were; the sower and the soil, (Matt. 13:1-23) the tares among the wheat, (v.v. 24-30) the mustard seed, (v.v. 31,32) the leven, (v. 33). Then Matthew gives the reason for all these parables in v.v. 34,35.

"All these things spoke Jesus unto the multitude in parables, and without a parable spoke he not unto them, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world." (Matt. 13:34,35)

The writer of Matthew misquoted the prophet and even made the prophecy say the exact opposite. Here it is.

"Give ear, O my people, to my law; incline your ears to the words of my mouth. I will open my mouth in a parable; I will utter dark sayings of old, which we have heard and known, and our fathers have told us." (Ps. 78:1-3)

This prophecy in Psalms was polluted and applied to Jesus wrongly by the first century writer to fit his need that Jesus fulfilled Psalms. The statement in Ps. 78:1-3 isn't even a prophecy.

 

My Son Called Out of Egypt

After Jesus' birth, according to the gospel of Matthew, an angel told Joseph in a dream to flee to Egypt for fear of Herod.

"When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt: and was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son." (Matt. 2:14,15)

This so-called fulfillment was taken from Hosea 11:1, where God is saying he has called the nation of Israel out of Egyptian bondage.

"When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt." (Hosea 11:1)

"And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my first-born." (Ex. 4:22)

Matthew took the "son" (Israel) in Hos. 11:1, and made it to be Jesus, the son of God, trying to fulfill prophecy.

 

Rachel Weeping

Even though there is nothing in history, other than the gospel of Matthew about Herod killing all baby boys under the age of two at Bethlehem, Matthew tries to make this a fulfilled prophecy.

"Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah, the prophet, saying, In ramah was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not." (Matt. 2:17,18)

This is taken from Jer. 31:15, but it is speaking of children being taken captive by the Babylonians. The rest of the verses say:

"Thus saith the LORD, Restrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears; for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the LORD, and they shall come again from the land of the enemy. And there is hope in thine end, saith the LORD, that thy children shall come again to their own border." (Jer. 31:15-17)

Matthew is trying very hard to make Jesus' birth a fulfillment of prophecy, but he hailed if we read the scriptures with reason.

 

The Voice in the Wilderness

Matthew said, concerning John the Baptist, that he fulfilled prophecy.

"For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet, Isaiah, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight." (Matt. 3:3)

However, the rest of what Isaiah said should be taken with it.

"Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low; and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain; and the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together; for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it. The voice said, Cry. And he said, What shall I cry? All flesh is grass, and all it's beauty is like the flower of the field..." (Isa. 40:3-8)

Matthew again reached back in the O.T. and grabbed a verse out of context, applied it to someone or something entirely different, and passed it off as fulfilled prophecy.

Land of Zebulun and Naphtali

"And Leaving Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is upon the seacoast, in the borders of Zebulun and Naphtali, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah, the prophet, saying, The land of Zebulun, and the land of Naphtali, by the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles; the people who sat in darkness saw great light, and to them who sat in the region andshadow of death, light is sprung up.' (Matt. 4:13,16)

In Isaiah 9:1-4, the prophet is saying the great light is that their burden has been broken.

"Thou hast multiplied the nation, and increased the joy; they rejoice before thee according to thejoy in harvest, and as men rejoice when they divide the spoil. For thou hast broken the yokeof his burden, and the staff of his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, as in the day of Midian." (Isa. 9:1-4)

God had broken their burden and they rejoiced because of that. Not that a man named Jesus came to Capernaum and lived there.

My Servant

When Jesus found out his life was in danger, (Matt. 12:14,15) he told the people to not tell where or who he was. (v.16)

"That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah, the prophets, saying, Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased; I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall show justice to the Gentiles. He shall not strive, nor cry; neither shall any man hear his voice in the streets. A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send forth justice unto victory. And in his name shall the gentiles trust." (Matt. 12:17-21)

In the four gospel accounts, especially John's, they show that Jesus actually did strive, he did cry out, he did raise his voice in the streets.

The word "cry" is # 2905 in Strong's Lex., and it means to clamor, cry out. In John"s gospel it says;

"Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught,..." (John 7:28,29)

In John this word "cried" is # 2896, to croak or scream, to call aloud. (see also John 7:37,38; 12:44-59) Another prophetic fulfillment misapplied.

Jonah

"For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so shall the son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." (Matt. 12:40)

If Jesus was crucified and buried on Friday and allegedly arose early Sunday morning, there is no way one can get three days and three nights, dead and buried.

Thy King Cometh

"Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem; behold, thy king cometh unto thee; he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt, the foal of an ass." (Zech. 9:9)

In Hebrew, to strengthen a statement, it is repeated another way. Matthew apparently didn't know this, but he thought the king rode on two animals.

"All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying,..." (Matt. 21:4)

Then he quotes the verse above from Zech. 9:9. He then goes on to say they brought two asses, and put their clothes on them, and sat him thereon. (v.7) Jesus and Matthew both try very hard to fulfill this prophecy.

Scatter the Sheep

"Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night; for it is written,

I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad." (Matt. 26:31)

Here is that statement in Zechariah.

"Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man who is my fellow, saith the LORD of hosts; smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered; and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones." (Zech. 13:7)

The rest of this prophecy says that even though two thirds of the people will be cut off, yet one third will be refined and will obey their god.

Jesus took this statement out of it's context and applied it to he and his disciples.

There are so many so-called prophecy fulfillment's that were either taken out of context and applied to something else, or misquoted and misapplied. These are in Matthew only, not to mention Mark, Luke and John.

Next I will show how the writers of the N.T., took statements from the O.T. and words of Jesus, and either misapplied them or extended the prophecy to the distant future.

Peter's Misapplication of Psalm 132:11,12

Peter is preaching on the day of Pentecost, and trying to convince the Jews that Jesus was the Messiah or Christ. He said to them concerning King David;

"Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne,..." (Acts 2:30)

Now, lets look at what this O.T. verse really says.

"The LORD hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it: of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne. If thy children will keep my covenant and my testimony that I shall teach them, their children shall also sit upon thy throne forevermore." (Ps. 132:11,12)

Notice, it says that of the fruit of David's body will God set a king on his throne, namely Solomon. In the LXX it says; "..., of the fruit of thy body will I set (a King) upon thy throne." Also, it says if David's grand-children, etc., obey God, then the following generations will be kings also, forever.

There is no hint whatsoever that only one man received the promise. Even if one person were under discussion, why assume Jesus of Nazareth was that specific person? Psalms does not mention Christ, Peter just read Christ into the verse he quoted.

The part that says, "of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne", is speaking of Solomon. It should read, "will I set a king upon thy throne". Read it in it's own context, please!

Was Jesus Dumb?

"He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her sharers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth." (Isa. 53:7)

Later on in the book of Acts, Philip read this verse from Isaiah 53, to the Ethiopian eunuch, and applied it to Jesus being silent before going to the cross.

"..., He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his sheerer, so opened he not his mouth;..." (Acts 8:32)

Just in passing, did you notice in the O.T. it says; "her" shearers is dumb, but in the N.T. it says "his" shearer, (no plural)? But that is beside the point, the point is, was Jesus really silent or dumb, and did he not open his mouth?

I will, to save space, only quote what Jesus said from the time he was before the counsel, to being crucified.

"..., thou hast said; nevertheless, I say unto you, hereafter shall ye see the son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." (Matt. 26:64)

"..., thou sayest." (Matt. 27:11)

"..., I am; and ye shall see the son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." (Mark 14:62)

"..., thou sayest it." (Mark 15:2)

"..., if I tell you, ye will not believe; and if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go. Hereafter shall the son of man, sit on the right hand of the power of God. Ye say that I am." (Luke 22:67-70)

"..., thou sayest it." (Luke 23:3)

"..., I spoke openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, where the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing. Why asketh thou me? Ask them who heard me, what I have said. If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thou me?" (John 18:20,21,23)

"Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me? My kingdom is not of this world; if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now is my kingdom not from here. Thou sayest that I am a King. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice." (John 18:34,36,37,38)

"Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above; therefore, he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin." (John 19:11)

So, was Jesus dumb or silent, and did he open not his mouth? If you will count them, in English, he pronounced no less than 188 words from the time he was taken before the counsel until he was crucified. This is not counting what he said in route.

"..., Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children. For, behold, the days are coming, in which they shall say, Blessed are the berren, and the wombs that never bore, and the paps which never gave suck. Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall on us; and to the hills, cover us. For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry?" (Luke 23:28-31)

Here are an additional 78 words, making a total of 366 words he spoke when, if he was the Messiah, would have been silent.

Jesus Begins His Ministry

In the book of Isaiah, chapter 59, verse 15, starts with God speaking until verse 22. Then the prophet, Isaiah begins to speak in 61:1, where he says;

"The spirit of the LORD God is upon me(Isaiah), because the LORD hath anointed me (Isaiah) to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound; to proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeanceof our (Isaiah & Israel) God; to comfort all that mourn; to appoint unto those who mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness, that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, that he (God) might be glorified." (Isa. 61:1-3)

This is very clear that Isaiah said the spirit of God was upon him, and that the LORD had (past tense) anointed him to, etc..

Some 800 years later, a man named Luke said that a man named Jesus from Nazareth, claimed this verse to himself. Luke said this Jesus went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day and got the scroll of Isaiah, and found 61:1, and read it publicly.

"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord." (Luke 4:18,19)

"And he began to say unto them. This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears." (v.21)

Notice what he did. He claimed this was said about him, not Isaiah. It is no wonder the people who heard Jesus do this said;

"..., Is not this Joseph's son?" (v.22)

"And all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath, and rose up, and thrust him out of the city, and led him unto the brow of the hill on which their city wasbuilt, that they might cast him down headlong." (v.v.28,29)

Matthew adds these words to the incident.

"And they were offended in him." (Matt. 13:57 & Mark 6:3)

This portion in Isaiah is clearly Isaiah telling what God had commissioned him to do. Then 800 years later, Jesus comes along and says this is God commissioning him to do these things. On top of that, he changes some of the things to do and adds one. Then he stops in the middle of a sentence as though the rest of the commission doesn't apply to him.

 

PART TWO

Ever since the first century Bible scholars have had a dilemma with unfulfilled prophecies. What to do with them? If prophecies are unfulfilled then the prophets were false prophets and therefore the whole Bible becomes suspect. They must do something to shore up the character of the prophets. The answer to the problem; MOVE THE FULFILLMENT UP TO THE DISTANT FUTURE, and all generations from the first century will hope and expect the fulfillment to occur in their generation or shortly thereafter.

The following are only a few examples of this unfulfilled prophecy being moved up to the distant future.

Her Seed Shall Bruise His Head

Probably the most important verse in the Old Testament that is supposed to be a prophecy concerning Jesus of Nazareth, fulfilling it, is this one.

"And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." (Gen. 3:15)

This is God saying that he will put enmity between Satan and the woman, who is Eve, and between her seed and Satan's seed. First, I want to show the meaning of the word seed. In all places in the O.T., except one, the word seed (singular) means descendants (plural), even though Paul tried to make the word "seed" refer to one person, even Jesus.

In Strong's Heb. Lex., it is # 2233; seh'-rah; seed; fig. fruit, plant, sowing-time, posterity.

Now lets look at this verse. I think it is obvious that Satan's seed were his posterity, so, Eve's seed would be her posterity also. Her posterity would be plural as is always the meaning of the word "seed". It would not mean her egg because an egg alone, without the sperm, does not produce anyone. It has to mean her future descendants, or posterity. And her "seed" would not mean some certain individual, as her son, who was Seth.

In the modern Jewish O.T., called the "tanakh", it says;

"... they shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise their heel."

The LXX also says the same as the K.J.V.; "he" and "his". So, it means only that Eve's posterity will bruise Satan's head and he will bruise his, or their heel.

The same word, "seed", meaning plural, future posterity, was used concerning Hagar, when she and her son Ishmael, were cast out of Sarai's house.

"And the angel of the LORD said unto her, I will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude." (Gen. 16:10)

Notice Hagar's seed was not Ishmael, but her future posterity, which would be very many.

The same logic applies to Eve in Gen. 3:15. Bible interpreters have made Gen. 3:15, apply to one person, even Jesus of Nazareth, instead of the very many descendants of Eve as the verse really means. The reason the LXX and the K.J.V. has "he" and "his", is because it couldn't very well be her, and hers, when it is speaking of the future posterity of Eve, but rather the future offspring's were called "he" and "his".

I believe the true interpretation of Gen. 3:15, is this: that mankind will bruise Satan's authority in this world by resisting temptations, but Satan will bruise mankind's heel by causing life's problems and troubles, etc..

It certainly doesn't mean that Jesus bruised Satan's head, because Satan's power is as strong as it was before Jesus' time. People still have temptations, troubles, sickness, disappointments, and death, just as they always have had.

All Must be Fulfilled in the Law, Prophets and Psalms

We are taught that when Jesus comes back at the second advent, he will fulfill prophecy by returning at the Mount of Olives, setting up judgments, i.e. judgments of the nations, etc., all nations bringing offerings to Jerusalem, 1,000 years of peace, where the lion shall lie down with the lamb, etc., when he will receive honor from kings, and the list goes on for many more. In other words there are many prophecies that will be fulfilled at and after Jesus' return to earth.

Now, please use your reason and read these two verses.

"And he said unto them these are the words which I spoke unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me." (Luke 24:44)

"Think not that I am come(1st. advent) to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am cot come to destroy, but to fulfill." (Matt. 5:17)

In this verse Jesus is saying that he came(past tense) to fulfill the law and the prophets. In the other verse he says that all things must be fulfilled which are written in the law, the prophets, and the psalms, that concerns him in any way.

In the law there are supposed to be many antitypes of the Messiah. In the prophets there are many prophecies about the Messiah when he comes. In the Psalms there are many prophecies(so called) about the coming Messiah.

If Jesus of Nazareth fulfilled all these from the law, the prophets, and the psalms, when he came, what need is there in his second coming? If he did not fulfill them, then he was a false Messiah.

The facts are he did not fulfill all the prophecies that concerned him when he lived here on earth. So, Bible scholars, such as Paul, John, and modern day ones, have invented the second coming so Jesus can finish fulfilling prophecies that concern him. If you don't have a second chance at finishing fulfillment, you are left with a Messiah who did not fulfill all prophecies about him, and a lying Messiah who said that he did.

"Even So, Come Quickly, Lord Jesus."

Ever since I was converted, I have understood the quick return of Jesus, to mean, he will come in a moment of time. Here are some verses in question. (Rev. 2:5,16; 3:11;22:7,12,20) However, this is not the meaning of the word "quickly", as used in Revelation. All the times it is used in Revelations, it is # 5035, which is: takh-oo'; shortly, i.e. without delay, soon.

So in all of Revelation, it refers to it occurring shortly, as in, without delay, or soon. That was 2,000 years ago! If he was to come back soon or shortly, without delay, it certainly did not happen.

Another word for "quickly", which is very closely linked is # 5032; takh'-ee-on; more swiftly, i.e. (in manner) more rapidly, or (in time) more speedily. As in;

"... then said Jesus unto him, what thou doest, do quickly." (John 13:27)

Here it means to do it very soon in time, as right now. Notice that Judas left immediately.

Another word for "quickly" is # 5031 with # 1722. Takh'-os; a brief space of time. As in; "..., saying, Arise quickly. And his chains fell off from his hands." (Acts 12:7)

Here also it means to happen soon in time, "arise quickly", which is what he did immediately.

When Jesus or John, said this "quickly", 2,000 years has proven it did not happen shortly, without delay or soon.

"Behold, I come quickly; hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown." (Rev. 3:11)

"behold, I come quickly..." (Rev. 22:7)

"And, behold, I come quickly, and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be." (Rev. 22:12)

"He who testifieth these things saith, surely, I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus." (Rev. 22:20)

You see? All these places that speak of Jesus coming back "quickly", speak of him coming, "shortly", "without delay", "soon". It never happened! It's not speaking of his return happening quickly, as in a moment, but rather, soon.

Here are several more verses with # 5035, to show how it means a short duration of time and not quick as a wink.

"Agree with thine adversary quickly, while you are in the way with him,..." (Matt. 5:25)

"And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead,..." (Matt. 28:7)

"And they departed quickly from the sepulcher..." (v.8)

"As soon as she heard that, she arose quickly, and came unto him." (John 11:29)

Even some of the apostles thought and said his coming would be soon.

"For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry." (Heb. 10:37)

"Be ye also patient,...; for the coming of the Lord draweth near." (Jam. 5:8)

"But the end of all things is at hand;..." (1 Pet. 4:7)

Paul also, beside the author of Hebrews, James, and Peter, believed in Jesus' soon return.

"For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not precede them who are asleep... Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air; and so shall we ever be with the Lord." (1 Thess. 4:15,17)

It is quite obvious, after 2,000 years, that "quickly", and "a little while", and "will not tarry", and "draweth near", and "is at hand", was a deception.

The doctrine of the second coming of Jesus was created because Jesus did not complete all the Messiah was expected to accomplish. If Jesus did not reflect the completeness of the Messianic promises, the whole Christian religion collapses. The Christian church could never allow that to happen.

If It Didn't Happen, Move It To the Future

After studying prophecy, it occurred to me that when something that was prophesied came to pass, or so the Bible scholars think has already happened, they classify it as fulfilled prophecy. However, when part of the same prophecy doesn't seem to have been fulfilled, they move it up into the distant future so as to not admit there has been failed, or unfulfilled prophecy. Beside, they will have died thousands of years and scholar will still be looking in the future for it to somehow happen.

The following examples are only some of these somehow yet unfulfilled, or failed prophecies, which they have moved up into the far distant future, even though the context is back in ancient history.

In Isaiah, chapter 10, there is a predicted judgment against Assyria because they were coming against Israel. Verse 5-19, describes this, then verses 20-27, tells of a few of Israel that will return. Verses 28-34, describe Assyria's advance and defeat. Chapter 11:1-5, tells of one who will come on the scene from Jesse, who will be wise, mighty, knowledgeable, who will judge righteously, and will be righteous. Then in the next verses (6-16), it describes a time of peace. Verses 10-16, then says, "in that day", for the second time, a few people will be recovered from Assyria, Egypt, Pathros, Cush, Elam, Shinar, Hamath, etc., and they will be gathered and they will attack the Philistines, the Edomites and Moabites, and Ammonites, etc.. But, since none of this happened (Ch. 11), scholars have decided it must be in the distant future, for, it isn't possible that prophecy failed; so, they say it is in the future, even though the context is historical.

Chapter 12 is also, "in that day". What day? Why, of course the same day Assyria came against Israel.

Chapter 13 starts with an approaching invasion of Babylon. But in verses 6-16, since it did not happen in history, it has been moved up to the future, so that it may yet happen someday.

Chapter 19 starts out with the decline and collapse of Egypt (v.v.1-15). Then in verse 16-25, man says is the future restoration of Egypt and Assyria in Christ's kingdom (future). However, in verse 16, starts by saying, "in that day". What day? Why, the decline of Egypt (v.v.1-15). But in 17-23, since it didn't happen in history, Bible scholars say 17-23 is during the great tribulation, even though verse 21 starts with "in that day". What day? Why, the day Palestine was left desolate by the Babylonians. Chapter 25 follows the same way. Scholars say Ch. 25 is the triumphs of the future kingdom age.

Chapter 26 starts with, "in that day" again, and describes how worship and testimony are restored to Israel (v.v.1-15). Then in verses 16-21, scholars say this is future at the so-called, Day of the Lord, when the dead will be raised.

In Chapter 51, the last verse, describes how Israel had bowed down to her invaders, "... and thou hast laid thy body like the ground, and like the street, to those who went over." (v.23) Then in verse 1 of Ch. 52, it says to Israel, "... Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem the holy city; for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean."

This chapter is said to be future, because it is a failed prophecy, and we can't tolerate that.

Everyone knows that Jerusalem has, ever since the Babylonian captivity, even to Jesus' time, to present time, been entered by unclean and uncircumcised people. Even tourists today enter Jerusalem daily. So, it must be pushed up into the far, unknown, distant future.

These chapters before chapter 60, are generally to Israel and Judah concerning how they have been put down by Babylon and how they may arise afterward. Chapter 60 starts by saying to God's people;

"Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the LORD is risen upon thee." (Isa. 60:1)

The Bible scholars tell us this chapter is the glorious Jerusalem in the future kingdom age, however, it may be that they say that because chapter 60 was not fulfilled and failed.

Chapter 63, verses 1-6, are supposed to be the future days of the Messiah's vengeance. However, that means that Christ will come from the land of Edom, southeast of Judah and the city of Bozrah, located on the kings highway in Edom. (See a Bible map) Christ's dyed garments were from Bozrah.

Then in verse 4 it says of Christ, it is the year of my redeemer. Christ's redeemer? Verse 5 says that Christ's own arm brought salvation to me. This portion of scripture is questions asked by Isaiah and answers by the Messiah.

Chapter 65 of Isaiah, is supposed to be a statement by the LORD that Judah will not return to her land until she repents, (v.v.1-16), but then in verse 17-25, there is more of what will happen when she repents and returns to her land, but, it didn't happen, so, Bible scholars say, "Lets move verses 17-25 up into the distant future, so we won't have to admit this prophecy failed." So they did. This way everyone will live and die thinking it is yet to be fulfilled.

Chapter 66:1-6, say that God rebukes hypocrisy, in 7-9, is the rebirth of Israel. God says when Israel is returned it will become a reborn nation. But, verses 10-24, tells of great joy in Jerusalem, and great peace. In verses 19,20, God says he will send those who escape unto the nations of Tarshis, Pul, Lud, Tubal and Javan. This didn't happen either, so the learned scholars moved this portion (v.v.10-24) into the far distant future.

So much for the prophet Isaiah.

In Ezekiel, chapter 20, God is telling Israel his dealings with her is right, and in verses 33-44, God says he will establish Israel in her land after they have returned, but this never happened as it says in v.v. 33-44, so it also, has been moved up into the future, rather than admit it failed to come to pass.

In chapter 28, there are prophecies about Tyre's ruler, and prophecies against Sidon, then v.v. 25,26, tells of the regathering of Israel after their captivity and scattering. But it didn't happen either as it says, so, it too, has been moved up to the future.

Chapters 34 and 36, both are what will happen to Israel when they have returned from captivity, but it didn't happen, so, both chapters were also put in the future.

Chapters 38 and 39 also, are predictions against the lands of Gog and Magog. Neither did these predictions happen, so, they were also thrust into the distant future, so that, hopefully, sometime they may actually occur.

In Chapter 47, verses 13-23, god tells Ezekiel that the borders of the land at some future time, will be, according to the 12 tribes of Israel. But the 10 northern tribes are lost. They have lost their national identify as the result of the Assyrians hauling off some 20,000 to Assyria and replacing Israel with foreigners. What people were in Assyria intermarried and lost their identity, and what Jews were left in their land intermarried with the foreigners and also lost their identity.

From that time to the time of Jesus, were at least 15 generations of intermarrying Jews. They were known and despised by Judah as Samaritans.

Then imagine all the succeeding generations since the first century, of intermarrying Israelites.

Verses 13-23 could not have happened, so, Bible theologians have moved it up to the future. I don't know how they will be able to explain the 12 tribes, when 10 are totally lost.

In Daniel, chapter 11, he is telling about a king who will greatly hurt Israel. His name was Antiochus Epiphanies, the Syrian king. This is valid history, however, in verses 36-45, it tells more about this king that did not happen, so, naturally, it was moved up to the future also.

These are only a small portion of prophecies that did not come to pass, so, they were moved up into the distant future by Bible interpreters to try to avoid failed prophecies.

Virtually all the prophets who predicted something had some predictions that did not come to pass. They all have died, but people still fear what they said, believing it either did, or will, come to pass.

"When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously; thou shalt not be afraid of him." (Deut. 18:22)

 

Brian Worley     October 16, 2009    Ex-minister.org     All rights reserved!

 


To Return to the Main Page