Old Testament Prophecies


#1

I know this is an old post but just came upon it and was wondering…

If Jewish people believe that Jesus was a prophet, then could Jesus’s words about the second coming not have been considered an “updated” prophecy?


#2

AnswersAbove.

You said:

In my readings of the Old Testament, I note that Jesus did not fulfill many of the propecies (sic).

If you can see layers of prophetic fulfillment, I think you will see them (these prophecies) easier.

Have you read the New Testament? Do you affirm absolute truth? If so, WHO has the God-given-protection to correct people when they are in error? WHO safeguards this absolute truth? Is it YOU? Is it someone else? Is it NOBODY (that’s WHY I asked if you even affirm the existence of truth)?

The first thing we would expect is that if someone here in this world was given the God-protected power and authority to teach with absolute truth and correct error, they would assert as such.

The reason I ask if you affirm the existence of, and an interpreter of absolute truth is it will change the way I answer your other questions. If you you believe someone has God-given and protected authority, I would be more inclined to appeal to your source of authority. If not, then it is for the most part a debate. Nothing wrong with a debate. Either way is fine, but I want to know so I can focus my answers to the foundation of your questions.

Jesus may just not have fulfilled prophecy the way you want to see it—but you cannot conclude the prophetic utterances and writings were not fulfilled in any sense.

It takes grace to see these things. If you can’t see them, you might just dismiss believing Catholics and say as others have for many ages: “Well it just takes extreme credulity to see them and a lot of drawing conclusions, and then working backwards.”

The way to see these things, begin by a search for absolute truth. If you can see the need for absolute truth, and you WANT absolute truth, and are willing to search and conform to absolute truth (by grace) God will show you these things.

The early Jews who became Christians (and later the Gentiles who became Christians) paid a great price for this Catholic faith—frequently with martyrdom.

There is more here in Catholicism than what some see as “drawing conclusions then working backwards.”

All of your objections have reasonable answers.


#3

Thank you for the posts :thumbsup:


#4

So with this in mind, how do you think Jesus will Return? On a cloud? With stars falling? No sunlight from the sun? Are you looking for an earthly fulfillment of these prophecies too?

Subject for another thread, but the principles at play are worthy of contemplation :slight_smile:


#5

Servant19, You asked:

So with this in mind, how do you think Jesus will Return? On a cloud? With stars falling? No sunlight from the sun? Are you looking for an earthly fulfillment of these prophecies too?

There are various layers of fulfillment in all of this.

There has already been a layer of this Servant19.

Read the Old Testament and do a study on various comings of the Lord. This is “Covenant Judgment”.

Read Josephus and how he discusses the Celestial signs that occurred before the destruction of the Temple.

Dr. Scott Hahn does a fine job of discussing this on his Gospel of St. Matthew audio series (“Thy Kingdom Come”) and his series on the Book of Revelation (called “The End”) if you are interested.

Dr. Hahn also has a free audio series he has available on St. Matthew’s Gospel that he did with other speakers which can be listened to or downloaded right from his website here. I don’t know if Dr. Hahn discusses the Olivet Discourse on this series or not (he probably does but I haven’t listened to this series so I cannot say with impunity).

Addendum: Just looked it up. Looks like Dr. Brant Pitre has this talk here. I haven’t heard any of these talks (yet but I will) so I cannot comment but they look like very very good topical information. Both Drs. Pitre and Hahn are excellent insightful speakers (there may be other speakers in this series too–I just do not know but if they are posted on Dr. Hahn’s website they will be very good as well).

When Jesus comes a second time, he does not come to suffer and die again. After all, this would be an implicit denial of Jesus as True God and True Man (it would teach that Jesus’ perfect sacrifice was not really perfect, not really all-sufficient, not really “once for all”). Since to believe Jesus comes to suffer and die again is an inherent denial of the Divinity of Jesus, it would also be an implicit re-hashing of The Arian Heresy.

When Jesus comes at the Second Coming at the end of time, Jesus comes in glory to judge the living and the dead.

Will there be actual real celestial signs then too? Absolutely in one sense. There are other senses when it is allegorical (to find out why there can be differing layers of fulfillments with REAL actual fulfillments AND allegorical fulfillments you might want to see the CCC 112-119 Servant19).

Hope this helps you in regards to your question.

God bless.

Cathoholic


#6

Thankyou Cathoholic, I will certainly look into Dr. Hahns work.

Just out of interest, why would you think that when Jesus comes again that He would die? Personally, I don’t think Jesus ever died, nor will He when He returns again.

In fact, all His loved ones will enjoy eternal life. There is no death for anyone. That was the purpose of His first coming wasn’t it?


#7

Servant19, you have listed your religion as Baha’i.

You said:

Just out of interest, why would you think that when Jesus comes again that He would die?

I don’t think that.

You also said:

Personally, I don’t think Jesus ever died, . . .

This is error. If you think that you are wrong on this point.

I have a Persian (Iranian) friend that is of the Baha’I belief system, who with all the assurance in the world (initially) implied Siyyid `Alí-Muhammad of Shiraz was somehow the gate (“the Bab”) to eternal life. “The Bab” allegedly showed this through his suffering in a Persian prison.

Since our discussion was years ago, today I rechecked (via Wikipedia) what he told me and my memory on these details was verified (there were other things he told me too that I won’t get into here, but were just as unsupportable).

Wikipedia states:

He was a merchant from Shíráz, Persia who, at the age of twenty-four (on May 23, 1844), symbolically claimed to be the promised Qá’im (or Mahdi). After his declaration he took the title of Báb (/ˈbɑːb/, Arabic: باب‎) meaning “Gate”. He composed hundreds of letters and books (often termed tablets) in which he stated **his messianic claims **

As Wikipedia also states:

He claimed to be the prophetic fulfilment of Bábism, a 19th-century outgrowth of Shí‘ism, but in a broader sense claimed to be a messenger from God referring to the fulfilment of the eschatological expectations of Islam, Christianity, and other major religions.

When I challenged him on this, he could not substantiate his religious claims so he later gave me a Bahá’í belief book and he asked me to read it. I should have given him a Christian book and had him read it as a precondition (but unfortunately I neglected to do so).

I read the book, wrote down the myriad of errors (with a LOT of concomitant homework) and we sat down one afternoon and went over these errors.

He again had no answers, and he seemed to accept his belief system based on his mere feelings. He cut me off from his friendship. To this day I have never heard from him again.

What he believed, made “the Báb” turn out to be in essence some sort of secondary Messianic figure (while at the same time denying the Divinity of Christ).

I think he could actually see that these propositions of the Baha’I belief system were incompatible with reason.

A brief “Caveat” or “BEWARE” for my fellow Catholics:

Incidentally for Catholic readers of this thread, I would NOT EVER read literature from the Bahá’í people (or Mormon literature, Jehovah’s Witness literature, Masonic literature, or any other non-Christian religious or cult literature) unless you are very well-read and well-grounded (morally, Sacramentally, etc.) in your Catholic Faith. I suppose I would even say that about Protestantism but to a lesser degree (for reasons beyond the scope of this thread).

At the time I did this years ago, if I could go back and somehow “mentor” to myself, I would have told a younger “me” to absolutely NOT read the Baha’i apologetic book. Alas, I did. I was not very well-read at the time. Fortunately I made up these deficiencies with work. But I had to do a lot of “homework” (my time could have been better spent perhaps and the ideas put in your mind can be quite “poisonous” to your thinking).

My friend did not benefit from our discussion and it possibly served as a detriment to him as he flat-out rejected as what I think he could see as true, which means evidently, he hardened his heart.

These phony religious substitutes can be very confusing for a lot of reasons I won’t get into here.


#8

Hi Cathoholic,

I think your concerns are founded on what you see as the Truth. The concerns of the Pharisees was similarly founded in the absolute Truth which they were the guardians of. Yet they too missed their Messiah.

This is by no means a subject for this thread, but if you do wish to explore the eschatological claims of the Founders of the Babi and Bahai religions you are more than welcome to address it in the Bahai thread in the Non- Catholic religions section

We would be delighted to explore these concepts with extremely well-versed Catholics, we do not wish to debate, let us reason together.

To assign the Bahai religion as being a phony is in my opinion, lacking a true understanding of Christs Revelation.

With humility and blessings :slight_smile:


#9

Servant19,

You said:

The concerns of the Pharisees was similarly founded in the absolute Truth which they were the guardians of. Yet they too missed their Messiah.

Yes and I applied that “missing of the Messiah” to the Baha’i system (among others). And I stand by that.

You apply it to Christianity (and I am saying you are wrong).

You also said:

This is by no means a subject for this thread, but if you do wish to explore the eschatological claims of the Founders of the Babi and Bahai religions you are more than welcome to address it in the Bahai thread in the Non- Catholic religions section

Servant19, you are the one who thought it WAS subject matter for this thread when you asked me:

Just out of interest, why would you think that when Jesus comes again that He would die?

I told you I DON’T think that. Later, I gave evidence that your belief system does.

You also stated :

Personally, I don’t think Jesus ever died . . .

And I said you were wrong. And you are wrong.

And that IS related to the exact topic of this thread.

If Jesus didn’t die and rise, our faith is in vain as St. Paul says (1st Corinthians 15:14).

Jesus death and Resurrection IS part of the fulfillment of Messianic prophetic oracles.

Do YOU think St. Paul wasn’t tuned into this Messianic fulfillment when he wrote 1st Corinthians? Do you think St. Paul was in error?

You said:

To assign the Bahai religion as being a phony is in my opinion, lacking a true understanding of Christs Revelation.

And all I am saying:

To assign the Christian teachings of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ as being a phony is, lacking a true understanding of Christ’s Revelation.


#10

This is an almost childish over-simplification of the Pharisees. The Pharisees knew the subtle distinctions involved in the truths they adhered to. That is exactly why and how our Lord could reason with them. Our Lord pointed out what the Pharisees already knew from the Scriptures: From the Prophets, the Law and Israel’s history. He pointed out their contradictions. The Pharisees knew what took precedent, otherwise our Lord would have been wasting His time with them.

Men can know the truth. We can be aware of it and, notwithstanding, neglect or contradict it. We do this everytime we sin or do something we know to be wrong. God insists through the prophets in the OT, for example, that man’s righteousness is closely linked with his own acknowledgement of his own sinfulness. The fact that we do this does not negate the reality of truth.


#11

Hi Cathoholic,

I acknowledge that I made a mistake in contributing to this thread in the manner that I did. It’s for this reason that I “tried” to rectify it by asserting that our conversation be better suited to the Bahai thread. I wasn’t pointing fingers at you friend, my apologies if that’s how it came across, it was not my intention.

I would love it if you addressed your post above to the Baha’is. The responses would be quite eye opening :slight_smile:

Just as a side note, the “I am” component of " Before Abraham was, I am" never dies, not even for three days…

God bless!!


#12

Hi August,

Are you here implying that the Pharisees etc recognized Jesus as the Messiah yet went ahead with pushing for His crucifixion anyway?


#13

Servant19, you stated:

I wasn’t pointing fingers at you friend, my apologies if that’s how it came across, it was not my intention

No problem. No apology wanted by me or needed.

You also stated:

“I am” component of “Before Abraham was, I am” never dies, not even for three days . . .

This is a clever way of denying Jesus’ human nature, but a denial it is.

All that your point makes is that you do not affirm Jesus as True God and/or True man. If you affirm either aspect, part of your statement is correct, the other part incorrect.

The incorrect aspect of your statement (Jesus “never dies”) is an attack on the Hypostatic Union of Jesus (His uniting of His Divine to Human nature).

In making a statement like this you are not appealing to Divine revelation (as I already pointed out with St. Paul for example), but rather appealing to your personal sentiment.

God the Son, who is eternal has a Divine nature, and took humanity upon Himself too and now has a human nature in addition to His Divine nature. Jesus maintains this for the rest of eternity; He does not discard His human nature . . . . ever.

The Church has dealt with this heresy a long time ago, roughly 1500 years before the Baha’i religious system was invented.

As is here:

We teach . . . one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, known in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation.

Jesus is the “sperma” or the “seed of the woman” in Genesis 3:15.

Some would say this is the earliest of Messianic prophecies (in Genesis 3:15); others assert even earlier Messianic prophecies and think these earlier Messianic prophecies are among what St. John is alluding to in his Gospel (John 1) as a recollection of Genesis 1.

GENESIS 1:1 1 IN the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. . . .

JOHN 1:1, 3a, 14-16 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . .3 all things were made through him, . . . 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father. 15 (John bore witness to him, and cried, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, for he was before me.’”) 16 And from his fulness have we all received, grace upon grace.

If this is the case, here is one among many instances where St. John seemed to think Jesus fulfilled the Messianic prophecies.

In Genesis 3:15, this “seed” of the woman is also a clue as to the human aspect of the TWO natures that the Messiah would eventually possess, which takes us right back to the topic of this thread: “Did Jesus fulfill the Messiah prophecies”? The answer of course is: “Yes. Jesus DID fulfill the Messianic prophecies”.

Also as regards to the correct part of your statement (“I am”):

. . . “I am” component of “Before Abraham was, I am” never dies, not even for three days . . .

You think about what you said here and the implication of the infinity of God (“I am”). When you meditate upon this long enough, and if you ask for grace, it will occur to you that we NEED an infinite sacrifice to redeem us.

Why?

Because God has perfect mercy, but God ALSO has perfect justice.

Recall you just affirmed an infinite God (I am who am).

Even a little sin against an infinite God, is a sin against ALL of God and has infinite consequences. Without a real and actual payment of this infinite account, God cannot “overlook” our sins. God will not and cannot betray His perfect justice.

God cannot deny Himself (2nd Timothy 2:13).

Likewise God will not betray His perfect mercy . . . . this philosophically pieced together with Divine revelation from God leads you to see Jesus fulfilling the Messianic prophecies too with the information YOU have provided. Jesus’ sacrifice WAS infinite and if we are IN-Jesus (as we were united to Him in Christian Baptism), and REMAIN IN JESUS, we, after our death will remain united to Him in Heaven.

ROMANS 6:3-5 3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. 5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.


#14

Hi cathoholic,

I would like to firstly emphasise that I am in no way denying Jesus’ human nature, it’s acknowledging Jesus’ TRUE nature, His Divine nature which is present in every single Christian interaction that’s made in His name.

“That which is flesh is flesh, and that which is spirit is spirit”.The hypostatic union does not mean that the two natures of Christ are “comingled”, the true nature of Christ is not found in His physical body which was conquered by the Jews, that needed to eat and to drink, that felt physical pain. His true nature is way way above the incidents and accidents of this puny world. It was His true, eternal nature, His Spirit that existed before birth and never died after His death, and still lives today.

You say that this was declared a heresy 1500 years ago. So it took 500 years for the Church to work that one out? My friend, this is a man-made teaching. You tell me that Jesus’ twin human aspects are “without confusion, without change, without division, without separation.” Yet there is separation of our natures when we die as human beings. How do you reconcile that truth?

You would probably say that we are not fully human as spirits without a body, right? But how do you explain the separation?
So here we are waiting, as spirits, after we die so we can become reconciled with our perfected, glorified bodies at the end of time.

Was Jesus’ body “imperfect” then before His resurrection? Was Mary’s?
How do you reconcile a soul which resides after death in a timeless heaven with a body which is restrained by time?
All questions that this theology needs to answer satisfactorily. Man made theologies always respond with, “it’s a mystery”

As regards to Jesus fulfilling Messianic prophecy with information I provided? I’m not sure I follow that part at all?


#15

Servant19 stated:

Man-made theologies always respond with, “it’s a mystery”

One thing is for sure Servant19, if you have no mysteries in your belief system you can be SURE you are not dealing with God.


#16

Servant19. Before dealing with the Monophysite heresy you are imbibing, you will have to see Jesus as True God and True man.

CCC 464 The unique and altogether singular event of the Incarnation of the Son of God does not mean that Jesus Christ is part God and part man, nor does it imply that he is the result of a confused mixture of the divine and the human. He became truly man while remaining truly God. Jesus Christ is true God and true man. During the first centuries, the Church had to defend and clarify this truth of faith against the heresies that falsified it.

Servant19, you stated:

You say that this was declared a heresy 1500 years ago. So it took 500 years for the Church to work that one out? My friend, this is a man-made teaching.

Do you see that this is a classic tu quoque fallacy Servant19? “You Catholic guys defined it 500 years or so later (or so I allege), so we Baha’is get to do this too 1400 more years later”.

Do you see this is fallacious reasoning?

You know that does nothing to defend your position don’t you?

The reason you incorrectly have drawn this conclusion (that the Catholic Church taught this “500 years” later), is you don’t understand that the Church teaches not by taking “500 years” to figure it out; but rather by responding to various heresies that threaten the faithful on a large scale that arise whenever they arise. Heresies like the Arian and Monophysite heresies.

Notice what the Church DOESN’T teach:

NOT CCC 467 The Monophysites affirmed that the human nature had ceased to exist as such in Christ when the divine person of God’s Son assumed it. Faced with this heresy, the fourth ecumenical council, at Chalcedon in 451, confessed:
[INDENT] Having finally figured it out after 400 years or so we unanimously teach and confess one and the same Son. . . . [/INDENT]

The Church will continue responding to new heresies that arise, hundreds of years in the future (if the earth is around that long). And the Church won’t just be “figuring it out” then either. Rather they WILL be responding to new heresies that arise.

But the Church WILL respond to the errors as they arise—not with “new revelation” but with the deposit of faith the Bishops have been given from Jesus and the Apostles and are safeguarded against transgressing under certain circumstances (beyond the scope of this discussion to lay those circumstances out).

The Baha’i religious system was invented in the 1800’s. You may not like it, but that’s just a fact.

Here is what the Church teaches and has ALWAYS taught (bold mine) . . .

CCC 467 The Monophysites affirmed that the human nature had ceased to exist as such in Christ when the divine person of God’s Son assumed it. Faced with this heresy, the fourth ecumenical council, at Chalcedon in 451, confessed:

[INDENT]Following the holy Fathers, we unanimously teach and confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ: the same perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity, the same truly God and truly man, composed of rational soul and body; consubstantial with the Father as to his divinity and consubstantial with us as to his humanity; “like us in all things but sin”. He was begotten from the Father before all ages as to his divinity and in these last days, for us and for our salvation, was born as to his humanity of the virgin Mary, the Mother of God.91

We confess that one and the same Christ, Lord, and only-begotten Son, is to be acknowledged in two natures without confusion, change, division or separation. The distinction between the natures was never abolished by their union, but rather the character proper to each of the two natures was preserved as they came together in one person (prosopon) and one hypostasis.92
[/INDENT]

Recall:

The Monophysites affirmed that the human nature had ceased to exist as such in Christ . . . .

You have stated:

Just as a side note, the “I am” component of " Before Abraham was, I am" never dies, not even for three days…

And I am stating that your statement is Monophysitism. This is not a new heresy.

Might I suggest Dr. Hahn’s series on early Church Christology (here): The Real Jesus: Christ In the Creeds and Councils

Hopefully this helps.


#17

My brother (now Fr. Eric Filmer, an accredited CAF apologist) attended a presentation many years ago by a Jewish convert to the Christian faith.

This speaker said that the Jews thought that there were three “proofs” of the Messiah:

[LIST]
*]He could heal a person who had been blind from birth.
*]He could cast out a demon who had possessed a mute person.
*]He could raise a person from the dead who had been dead for more than three days.
[/LIST]
Jesus did all three of these things. Interestingly, in all of the Gospel accounts of these miracles, there was some special emphasis placed upon the event.

Jesus healed MANY people. But, ion the case of the blind person from birth, the Jewish authorities seemed to take particular notice. They called upon the man’s parents to question them if he had actually been born blind, and if he had really been cured.

In the case of the demon expelled from a mute person, the Jews thought that one could only gain power over a demon ONLY by forcing it to reveal its name, giving the person power over the demon. If a demon possessed a mute person, this person could not reveal the name of his possessor. When Jesus expelled a demon from a mute, his detractors accused him of being in collusion with Satan, where Jesus famously replied, “If Satan be against himself, how can his house stand?”

Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead. This particular account is interesting. Jesus received word that his dear friend was gravely ill, and please come right away. But the Gospels tell us that he “tarried,” and only returned after Lazarus had been dead four days. He COULD have returned sooner, but he did not. Shortly before raising Lazarus, he prayed,

Father, I thank you that you have heard me. I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me

(the entire 11th Chapter of the Gospel of John bears reading here, because it is almost entirely devoted to this event)


#18

Well, he fulfilled the prophecies that Christians associate with the Messiah.
The Jews, who wrote the OT, are still waiting so either one of us is late off the blocks or one is a bit too early! In the end who objectively knows…:shrug:. Only God.

I think if we wind back the zoom we can see this is but one technique of many that NT writers and evangelists used to try and convince people that Jesus was the awaited Messiah. Other involved his miracles. In the end I suppose few of these techniques are airtight but they do build up a high level of credibility based on circumstantial evidence, many deeply credible witnesses, harmony of the message, strength and survival of the Church over the ages…

Ultimately though Christianity stands or falls on the validty of the Resurrection as reported to us by many credible witnesses who were prepared to die for that fact.

I don’t think it matters a lot if the “Jesus as the fulfiller of the OT prophecies” approach by some of the Evangelists doesn’t wash very well today.


#19

Jesus did not inherit the kingdom or kingship from David, and this is the first straw-man argument of any rabbi. They say Jesus is not the son of David because through mother he did not have inheritance rights; when Samuel anointed king Saul he told the people to remember that the Lord God is their king. They admit that Holy Virgin Mary and St Joseph were descendants from David. (king Herod didn’t ask any questions)
Second they say that the gospels are corrupted because there is St Joseph with 2 genealogies; But the second genealogy is written backwards and is symbolic and in fact is the genealogy of Holy Virgin Mary. My personal opinion is that on that time when Jews kept family name and property very close, if somebody moved in on the property inherited by his wife, like St Joseph did, they and their kids had to declare in some way their local relationships and from whom they have the property; A “son in law” or declaring “father in law” says nothing about property.
Third they say that the translation of Isaiah 7:14 is not correct and instead “virgin” there should be used the wording “young woman”; if you put there the wording “young woman” the prophecy is meaningless, because it was common event that a young woman give birth to a boy and give him a godly name; also they say that Jesus was born in a poor family and couldn’t afford to eat milk and honey; not that way, God promise for the people was that they will have abundance of milk and honey and regarding Jesus God didn’t have any reason to hold it back.


#20

Blue,
. There are many who would agree with you, but I fully believe in Christ without accepting His “physical” Resurrection as is commonly understood.

. I believe that His eternal Reality, as in: “Before Abraham was, I am”, is what survived the crucifixion of His body, and I am prepared to die for that fact, as well, my friend…


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.