Is there a Second Coming in the New Testament?

The son of man is Jesus.
That is clear.

Duvduv said:

Then why bother writing about it in the third person?!:At least admit that it reads like it refers to somebody else.[/QUO

Click to expand...

Duvduv said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_man_(Judaism)
At least the summary in Wikipedia shows that it is in Ezekiel and in Daniel where Ben Adam is used as a name for the prophet and then the Messiah. In other places it's just a reference for an ordinary person.

Click to expand...

I wonder if you could explain this a bit more to me, because we are clearly not seeing the expression in the same way. I do not read those verses of Ezekiel or Daniel as though they are speaking only to Jesus Christ, but they seem to speak just as much to any other person who has faith as though to receive divine instruction through scripture.

Duvduv said:

It still remains ambiguous in Matthew etc. that Jesus is referring to anyone other than the future Messiah or at most if people want to read into it that he refers to himself, well, then simply as a holy man, which is not Christological, and certainly has nothing to do with the separate notion of the triune God.

Click to expand...

Notice that this expression is used to describe a special type of devout faithful one in the times long before Jesus (eg: Job 25:6). This sets them apart from a common believer, who probably has a blind faith - not having the personal relationship with God. In this way, we see that there has been a number of people who could be recognised as a "son of man", and Jesus was saying that because the son of man was about to suffer terribly (being rejected by the Jews and crucified by the Romans), He also said that the sheep would be scattered (Zechariah 13:7), and He also warned in John 12:35 that the light was not going to be with them much longer, that the darkness was threatening to overtake them (and it did - as you read the scriptures (eg: Matthew 13:24-25) it becomes clear that Christianity did get overtaken by darkness - this is also consistent with the foretold prophecies, of course - eg, Daniel 7:21-22).

Duvduv said:

I hate to disappoint you, but none of the verses efer to the Jesus of the New Testament, the avatar of Christianity. Anything referring to Messiah are to a mortal man who will be king and bring peace.

Click to expand...

Contextual interpretation really relies upon perspective.

As Jesus says in His Word and today,
if anyone rejects Jesus, they reject Yahweh His Father.

Your ideas are age old, from others who rejected Jesus instead of repenting and serving Yahweh in Truth. Woe to them if they never repented.

Duvduv said:

I hate to disappoint you, but none of the verses efer to the Jesus of the New Testament, the avatar of Christianity. Anything referring to Messiah are to a mortal man who will be king and bring peace.

Click to expand...

Duvduv said:

Although the epistles are unambiguous about the expectation of a second coming as a doctrine, it is rather ambiguous in the synoptic gospels. Jesus refers to the Son of Man in the third person, as if it wasn't him. In other words, it seems as if the New Testament wove together different strands of interpretation of who Jesus was and when. Indeed, in Matthew he comes across as nothing more than a Jewish holy man. And he doesn't address accomplishing any of the traditional Jewish expectations of the arrival of the messiah at that time. Even in the gospel of John, it is not exactly clear what a second coming is supposed to be, i.e. in John chapter 14. So in a way it seems that the creators of the New Testament wove together different views, 1) Synoptic gospels; 2) Gospel of John; 3) Epistles; 4) Revelation. But universal Christian doctrine assumes a second coming, as if it were unambiguously established in a single image in the texts, but it isn't true.

Click to expand...

If one reads the Gospels its pretty obvious that the "Son of Man" statements, though third person, are about Himself.

He says things like the foxes have their holes, but the Son of Man has no place to lay His head--He's talking about the fact that He didn't have a place to sleep that night.

-CryptoLutheran

Nihilist Virus said:

The epistles actually do not mention a *second* coming. They don't use language like "come back", "return", or "second coming". The occasional use of words like "reveal" indicate a first coming, or the actual arrival. Absolutely nothing in the epistles indicates a second coming.

Click to expand...

The use of the word parousia--coming, appearing, arrival--and is used in the future tense.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

The use of the word parousia--coming, appearing, arrival--and is used in the future tense.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Exactly in line with my expectations.