Jesus' Failed Second Coming Prophecy & What this Means for Christianity

[Rational Agnostic]

The central doctrine of Christianity states that Jesus will return in his Father's glory with his angels to judge the living and the dead, gathering up his elect to take them to spend an eternity in heaven with him, while casting the unbelievers into eternal hellfire. However, what many Christians do not realize is that when reading the Bible, we find that Jesus himself actually gave a very specific timeframe of when this apocalyptic event was supposed to occur. And, as it turns out, this timeframe has long expired. Jesus predicted that he would return, and that the apocalypse and final judgment, would occur within the lifetimes of his disciples, certainly no later than 100 AD.

One example Scripture where Jesus mentions this is found in Mark 13:9-30, where (referring to the final judgment), Jesus states:

“You must be on your guard. You will be handed over to the local councils and flogged in the synagogues. On account of me you will stand before governors and kings as witnesses to them. And the gospel must first be preached to all nations. Whenever you are arrested and brought to trial, do not worry beforehand about what to say. Just say whatever is given you at the time, for it is not you speaking, but the Holy Spirit. “Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. Everyone will hate you because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved.

“When you see ‘the abomination that causes desolation’ standing where it does not belong—let the reader understand—then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let no one on the housetop go down or enter the house to take anything out. Let no one in the field go back to get their cloak. How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! Pray that this will not take place in winter, because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now—and never to be equaled again.
“If the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would survive. But for the sake of the elect, whom he has chosen, he has shortened them. At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘Look, there he is!’ do not believe it. For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. So be on your guard; I have told you everything ahead of time.

“But in those days, following that distress,

“‘the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’

“At that time people will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens.

“Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that it is near, right at the door. Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

A common explanation that apologists and pastors give to explain away this passage is that "this generation" referred to in verse 30 is not actually referring to the generation alive at Jesus' time, but instead is referring to a future generation, or perhaps defining "generation" to mean something different than its usual sense. But when we examine other passages in the Bible where Jesus makes this same prophecy, we see that clearly, this is not the case. Jesus is in fact referring to the literal generation alive at the time he was. Let's take a look at another instance where Jesus makes this same prediction of his return, but even more explicitly states that it will be within his disciples' lifetimes: Matthew 10:17-23. Notice that the language used in Matthew 10:17-22 EXACTLY mirrors the language used in Mark 13:9-13, which is very clearly a chapter about end times, so there is no ambiguity about what Jesus is referring to here. He is very clearly returning to his Second Coming and the subsequent end of the world. Mark 10:17-23 states:

Be on your guard; you will be handed over to the local councils and be flogged in the synagogues. On my account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles. But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say, for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.

“Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. You will be hated by everyone because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

Here we can see very clearly that "this generation" referred to in Mark 13 is in fact the generation alive at Jesus' time, and that Jesus explicitly and unambiguously predicted that he would return within the first century A.D.

This failed prophecy is also found in Matthew 16:27-28, in which Jesus states:

For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done.

“Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

So, clearly, the second coming of Christ and subsequent Apocalypse that was supposed to occur in the first century never happened, and Jesus was wrong. Yet, more than 2000 years later, billions of Christians around the world still earnestly believe that it will occur in the future, and are not aware that this prophecy already failed. The truth is, there is no reason to expect that this second coming will ever happen, and is anything more than a fairy tale. If Jesus was wrong about something as key and central to Christianity as this, there is no reason to trust that Jesus was right about anything else he said, and no reason to believe that the Christian god exists outside the imaginations of those who believe in him.

[Mae von H]

We need to take actions by people seriously, we don't need to take their claims seriously. Let's face it, religious claims are laughable and childish.
However, the actions of the ridiculous religious people who kill, maim and torture ought to be taken seriously.

Atheism (and atheists, generally) do not mind if there are religions. They can be quite entertaining as artforms, but their influence is a problem, and never more so than right now. Though I do perceive that many of their false claims have been debunked, even though the believers trot them out. We saw the 'sea shells on mountains' argument not long ago.

The atheist run countries in the world hated the religious people and tortured and killed many of them over the decades. Atheists are notoriously intolerant of religions. I do not think that there is a single atheist state that did not do this. The atheist states, by the war, are the communist nations. They did not produce any kind of government free nations envy.

[Mae von H]

The central doctrine of Christianity states that Jesus will return in his Father's glory with his angels to judge the living and the dead, gathering up his elect to take them to spend an eternity in heaven with him, while casting the unbelievers into eternal hellfire. However, what many Christians do not realize is that when reading the Bible, we find that Jesus himself actually gave a very specific timeframe of when this apocalyptic event was supposed to occur. And, as it turns out, this timeframe has long expired. Jesus predicted that he would return, and that the apocalypse and final judgment, would occur within the lifetimes of his disciples, certainly no later than 100 AD.

One example Scripture where Jesus mentions this is found in Mark 13:9-30, where (referring to the final judgment), Jesus states:

“You must be on your guard. You will be handed over to the local councils and flogged in the synagogues. On account of me you will stand before governors and kings as witnesses to them. And the gospel must first be preached to all nations. Whenever you are arrested and brought to trial, do not worry beforehand about what to say. Just say whatever is given you at the time, for it is not you speaking, but the Holy Spirit. “Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. Everyone will hate you because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved.

“When you see ‘the abomination that causes desolation’ standing where it does not belong—let the reader understand—then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let no one on the housetop go down or enter the house to take anything out. Let no one in the field go back to get their cloak. How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! Pray that this will not take place in winter, because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now—and never to be equaled again.
“If the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would survive. But for the sake of the elect, whom he has chosen, he has shortened them. At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘Look, there he is!’ do not believe it. For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. So be on your guard; I have told you everything ahead of time.

“But in those days, following that distress,

“‘the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’

“At that time people will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens.

“Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that it is near, right at the door. Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

A common explanation that apologists and pastors give to explain away this passage is that "this generation" referred to in verse 30 is not actually referring to the generation alive at Jesus' time, but instead is referring to a future generation, or perhaps defining "generation" to mean something different than its usual sense. But when we examine other passages in the Bible where Jesus makes this same prophecy, we see that clearly, this is not the case. Jesus is in fact referring to the literal generation alive at the time he was. Let's take a look at another instance where Jesus makes this same prediction of his return, but even more explicitly states that it will be within his disciples' lifetimes: Matthew 10:17-23. Notice that the language used in Matthew 10:17-22 EXACTLY mirrors the language used in Mark 13:9-13, which is very clearly a chapter about end times, so there is no ambiguity about what Jesus is referring to here. He is very clearly returning to his Second Coming and the subsequent end of the world. Mark 10:17-23 states:

Be on your guard; you will be handed over to the local councils and be flogged in the synagogues. On my account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles. But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say, for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.

“Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. You will be hated by everyone because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

Here we can see very clearly that "this generation" referred to in Mark 13 is in fact the generation alive at Jesus' time, and that Jesus explicitly and unambiguously predicted that he would return within the first century A.D.

This failed prophecy is also found in Matthew 16:27-28, in which Jesus states:

For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done.

“Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

So, clearly, the second coming of Christ and subsequent Apocalypse that was supposed to occur in the first century never happened, and Jesus was wrong. Yet, more than 2000 years later, billions of Christians around the world still earnestly believe that it will occur in the future, and are not aware that this prophecy already failed. The truth is, there is no reason to expect that this second coming will ever happen, and is anything more than a fairy tale. If Jesus was wrong about something as key and central to Christianity as this, there is no reason to trust that Jesus was right about anything else he said, and no reason to believe that the Christian god exists outside the imaginations of those who believe in him.

Actually, the judgement against Jerusalem was to happen before that generation disappeared. Jesus clearly said that the time of his return was not known and so was not in that time frame. Paul I believe wrote that judgement would not happen until the man of Sin appeared which happened in 60 Ad something. Then in the chapters after Matthew 24 he outlined how things would go after that judgement. Life would go on for a long time.

The Dispensationalism teaching you know of only appeared in the church in the last 100 years and mostly in America. That is the eschatology that thinks Jesus is coming at any moment to bring about a bloody and violent attack against the earth and afterwards will be the new and undefeatable tyrant of the world. It is pretty terrible and an awful theology.

Your claim is against the eschatology, not the Bible nor Jesus.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #38]

Chapter 5 of Revelation is referring to what happens before the 1000 year period after Jesus returns. ...

I dont see and scriptures supporting your conclusions...have you lost your bible?

[TRANSPONDER]

We need to take actions by people seriously, we don't need to take their claims seriously. Let's face it, religious claims are laughable and childish.
However, the actions of the ridiculous religious people who kill, maim and torture ought to be taken seriously.

Atheism (and atheists, generally) do not mind if there are religions. They can be quite entertaining as artforms, but their influence is a problem, and never more so than right now. Though I do perceive that many of their false claims have been debunked, even though the believers trot them out. We saw the 'sea shells on mountains' argument not long ago.

The atheist run countries in the world hated the religious people and tortured and killed many of them over the decades. Atheists are notoriously intolerant of religions. I do not think that there is a single atheist state that did not do this. The atheist states, by the war, are the communist nations. They did not produce any kind of government free nations envy.

There is a counter argument. Those 'atheist' states were not based on atheism, they were based on dogmatic authoritarianism. Just as we find in one - party theocracies. You may not be aware but you are now that Europe is run on humanist lines (indeed the US is, too) and any good is down to the fact that religion does not dictate policy. Atheism as such is against any authoritarian one party state, whether of leftor right. To blame atheismfor the communist dictatorship is like blaming Christianity for the Crusades,slavery and the holocaust.

I would earnestly propose that finger -pointing and attempts to smear atheism not be made part of your case. Christianity has a few glass windows to worry about.



Incidentally, I have a question. Do you remember where you got this idea? I only recall one answer and it was Walt Brown for the hydroplate theory. I do recognise the same stock apologetics (read smears and brickbats) over and over and I'll risk a big bet the apologists pick thisstuffup from Apologetics sources.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #36]

I'm sure the ruling elite wants to believe the stories are true-that they have the divine right to rule-so that they continue their little power trips, but that doesn't mean they are true.

Christians have informed me that God set up the rulers and that we should obey them. Are they being truthful or lead astray?

If they know the stories aren't true, does that imply a conspiracy? It would seem to, but who knows? Who knows what really goes on? Not me.

Well, you don't know for sure (who does?) but as I pointed out your/our suspicions are not unnecessary, even in the context of conspiracy theory.

I agree that we allow them their power. There are more of us than them. What are we going to do about it? Probably nothing because as you pointed out, the one who wins that battle will become just like them. I guess it's the nature of the beast, so to speak

.

A relevant point. The nature requires time and understanding in order for "the beast" to be understood and tamed/healed/bandaged et al.

Millions (billions?) of religious folk awaiting saving and godly order from "above" could rather be using that "waiting" time be demanding (of themselves/one another) that such be built and maintained by recognising the false way to do things and figuring out better ways, rather than mooching along as the status quo because they are under the impression that "God" will eventually intervene and thus somehow "allow" them to build the godly thing ( or have the already built thing gifted to their deserving selves) and in the mean-time we all just have to "sigh" and agree to follow the leaders God has "appointed/allowed to be in control" in the interim (as God surely must know what God is doing, right?) and we mere humans do not understand "the ways of God" and must trust that eventually God will send the savior back to rescue the "maiden in distress" from the "Nature of The Beast" apparently because the maiden has no ability to do this for herself.

[Sioux See Q]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #43]

I got rid of it. But I did give you scriptures. The book of Revelation. Chapter 5. And any other chapter that refers to the saints and the bride and robes etc.

You didn’t give a scripture but I understand you are implying that followers of Jesus were kings because they reigned. That was during the 1000 year period following the destruction of the temple. If you have a verse where Christians are called kings in the new Jerusalem I’d be happy to see that. But you don’t. After Jesus ascends to the father following Armageddon there is no more mention of his followers. See the entire Bible, Revelation. 1 Cor. 15:20

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #43]

I got rid of it.

That's alright, you can find many bibles free online. I Will LINK you to the Jehovah's Witness New World translation HERE: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/binav/r1/lp-e

You didn’t give a scripture but I understand you are implying that followers of Jesus were kings because they reigned.

No Jesus disciples were never KINGS while that were on earth; they were ordinary working men and women.. farmers, fishermen, servants and slaves. HOWEVER Jesus promised them that once they died and were raised to heaven they would in the future rule over the earth (from heaven). This is what we Christians call The Kingdom (use the LINK to the online bible above and read Matthew Chapter 6 verse 10 and then click on the book of LUKE chapter 12 verse 32 . Now CLICK on the book REVELATION choose CHAPTER 20 and read the very last sentence in verse 4)

If you have any questions just quote this post and feel free to ask me.



Hope that helps,


JEHOVAH'S WITNESS



RELATED POSTS

Who were the KINGS mentioned in the book of Revelation Chapter 21 verse 24?
viewtopic.php?p=1140073#p1140073

What is the New Jerusalem spoken of in the book of Revelation?
viewtopic.php?p=1021283#p1021283

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

GOD'S KINGDOM , THE 144, 000 and ...THE BOOK OF REVELATION

[Mae von H]

We need to take actions by people seriously, we don't need to take their claims seriously. Let's face it, religious claims are laughable and childish.
However, the actions of the ridiculous religious people who kill, maim and torture ought to be taken seriously.

Atheism (and atheists, generally) do not mind if there are religions. They can be quite entertaining as artforms, but their influence is a problem, and never more so than right now. Though I do perceive that many of their false claims have been debunked, even though the believers trot them out. We saw the 'sea shells on mountains' argument not long ago.

The atheist run countries in the world hated the religious people and tortured and killed many of them over the decades. Atheists are notoriously intolerant of religions. I do not think that there is a single atheist state that did not do this. The atheist states, by the war, are the communist nations. They did not produce any kind of government free nations envy.

There is a counter argument. Those 'atheist' states were not based on atheism, they were based on dogmatic authoritarianism. Just as we find in one - party theocracies.

What you’re doing, and you’ve done it before, is divorce a man’s actions from this world view as though theirs no connection. That is, you don’t recognize the freedom or restraints a man’s thinking has coming from his atheism or beliefs in God. You refused to see that it is christianity that motivated people to end slavery, for example. You said it was something else. This shows us why people don’t believe in God.They don’t want to do so. That a man is under compulsion to end injustice because God hates it just is not an answer you’ll allow. This is quite common with atheists.

You may not be aware but you are now that Europe is run on humanist lines (indeed the US is, too) and any good is down to the fact that religion does not dictate policy.

I don’t know if you’re aware that honesty in dealings in those nations is now fairly low and crime has increased. If there’s no God (in the thinking of a man) then all actions are permissible.

Atheism as such is against any authoritarian one party state, whether of leftor right.

Why? Where’s the evidence for this?
What atheists have taken down authoritarian states? When did atheists bother to risk their lives for any such action because of atheism? Where’s the logic in that?

To blame atheismfor the communist dictatorship is like blaming Christianity for the Crusades,slavery and the holocaust.

Why? The Nazis weren’t christians but atheists or occultists if anything. They hated christians.

I would earnestly propose that finger -pointing and attempts to smear atheism not be made part of your case. Christianity has a few glass windows to worry about.

The difference is when Christians defy the teachings of Christ and fail to treat others as they do themselves, they stand against the precepts of what they claim they believe. There are no restraints on what an atheist is allowed to do. There’s no evil selfish act that is against when he believes.

Incidentally, I have a question. Do you remember where you got this idea? I only recall one answer and it was Walt Brown for the hydroplate theory. I do recognise the same stock apologetics (read smears and brickbats) over and over and I'll risk a big bet the apologists pick thisstuffup from Apologetics sources.

I am likely older than you and known of the horrors allowed and in the practices of the atheist there in communistic countries. As atheists they were forbidding the Bible and christian meetings. There is no reason for this except atheists are intolerant of religion. So I am educated on the logical outcome of the atheist position.

It’s interesting that you clip cannot point to any historical fallacy in the position. It just repeats the line mocking it. John Lennox traveled extensively in the communist days of Russia and his observation of them is enlightening. So I have the understanding I do because I want to understand people. That’s why I enjoy exchanges. You get to see how people think. It’s fascinating.

[TRANSPONDER]

We need to take actions by people seriously, we don't need to take their claims seriously. Let's face it, religious claims are laughable and childish.
However, the actions of the ridiculous religious people who kill, maim and torture ought to be taken seriously.

Atheism (and atheists, generally) do not mind if there are religions. They can be quite entertaining as artforms, but their influence is a problem, and never more so than right now. Though I do perceive that many of their false claims have been debunked, even though the believers trot them out. We saw the 'sea shells on mountains' argument not long ago.

The atheist run countries in the world hated the religious people and tortured and killed many of them over the decades. Atheists are notoriously intolerant of religions. I do not think that there is a single atheist state that did not do this. The atheist states, by the war, are the communist nations. They did not produce any kind of government free nations envy.

There is a counter argument. Those 'atheist' states were not based on atheism, they were based on dogmatic authoritarianism. Just as we find in one - party theocracies.

What you’re doing, and you’ve done it before, is divorce a man’s actions from this world view as though theirs no connection. That is, you don’t recognize the freedom or restraints a man’s thinking has coming from his atheism or beliefs in God. You refused to see that it is christianity that motivated people to end slavery, for example. You said it was something else. This shows us why people don’t believe in God.They don’t want to do so. That a man is under compulsion to end injustice because God hates it just is not an answer you’ll allow. This is quite common with atheists.

You may not be aware but you are now that Europe is run on humanist lines (indeed the US is, too) and any good is down to the fact that religion does not dictate policy.

I don’t know if you’re aware that honesty in dealings in those nations is now fairly low and crime has increased. If there’s no God (in the thinking of a man) then all actions are permissible.

Atheism as such is against any authoritarian one party state, whether of leftor right.

Why? Where’s the evidence for this?
What atheists have taken down authoritarian states? When did atheists bother to risk their lives for any such action because of atheism? Where’s the logic in that?

To blame atheismfor the communist dictatorship is like blaming Christianity for the Crusades,slavery and the holocaust.

Why? The Nazis weren’t christians but atheists or occultists if anything. They hated christians.

I would earnestly propose that finger -pointing and attempts to smear atheism not be made part of your case. Christianity has a few glass windows to worry about.

The difference is when Christians defy the teachings of Christ and fail to treat others as they do themselves, they stand against the precepts of what they claim they believe. There are no restraints on what an atheist is allowed to do. There’s no evil selfish act that is against when he believes.

Incidentally, I have a question. Do you remember where you got this idea? I only recall one answer and it was Walt Brown for the hydroplate theory. I do recognise the same stock apologetics (read smears and brickbats) over and over and I'll risk a big bet the apologists pick this stuf fup from Apologetics sources.

I am likely older than you and known of the horrors allowed and in the practices of the atheist there in communistic countries. As atheists they were forbidding the Bible and christian meetings. There is no reason for this except atheists are intolerant of religion. So I am educated on the logical outcome of the atheist position.

It’s interesting that your clip cannot point to any historical fallacy in the position. It just repeats the line mocking it. John Lennox traveled extensively in the communist days of Russia and his observation of them is enlightening. So I have the understanding I do because I want to understand people. That’s why I enjoy exchanges. You get to see how people think. It’s fascinating.

You couldn't possibly be older than me and still be able to move. I am well aware of the horrors perpetrated in various dictatorial regimes, religious or atheist. The religious position of the dogma underlying the regime is no more to blame than religion is shown false by the crusades, colonialism and slavery. Your attempt to use Communist regimes to smear atheism is invalid, just as it is invalid to say that Christianity is wrong because of the crusades or indeed that Christianity should get the credit for abolition, when slavery could quote the Bible for its' case.

I find it fascinating how people think, too. Especially observing theistthink, faithbased denialism and dismissal of science and logic unless it can be used to support the faith.

Incidentally, I noticed a post claiming that secular European countries were worse than the US. I had a look as I know that the US does not look too good in world crime rates. I found a list dating from a few years ago
Uruguay 8.902 9.857 11.492 12.285 8.270
Uganda 8.532 10.044 10.985 10.832 11.800
Paraguay 7.831 7.267 8.484 7.713 8.512
United States 6.808 6.421 4.986 4.930 5.244
Russia 6.799 7.346 7.686 8.214 9.139
Mongolia 6.153 6.223 6.342 6.195 6.169
Zimbabwe 6.140 4.978 5.145 4.876 0.000
Suriname 5.710 9.060 4.998 6.400 6.127
Kenya 5.275 3.576 3.093 3.141 5.038
Liechtenstein 5.123 2.580 2.599 2.619 2.639
Seychelles

USA was worse than any European country in crime rates. I like to watch top tens and the US singularly rates worse than 1st world countries in almost everything but military budget.

[Sioux See Q]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #47]

Are you purposely being obtuse? If not, just reread my previous posts. It’s very simple to understand. If yes, then ask yourself why you’d rather push a lie than know the truth.

I think you can easily understand what I’ve posted-if you only want to. I have nothing further to add.

Best to you!