111. Two Days of the Lord ~ Not Two Lords

Matthew chapter 24 speaks much concerning the second coming of the Lord, as do a number of other scriptures including the book of Revelation and the latter-day books of revealed scriptures. There in no question in a true Christian's mind that the Lord Jesus Christ will come again to the earth in glory and healing in his wings.

The Jewish scholars knew as well that there would be two but they made the mistake of making of it to be two separate Messiahs. And they divided these two events of into a depiction as to what each of the 'two' Messiahs would do, the suffering Messiah and the glorious Messiah. Of course, since they kept the understanding that there would be a true Messiah come of the house of Joseph out of Ephraim, they assigned to him what they considered the less glorious role of the suffering and dying Messiah. And from their very Jewish perspective, they assigned to themselves, the Jews, the glorious exalted Messiah. This twist, as covered in a previous topic, has aided in keeping the world from seeing in Jesus Christ not only the two comings of the Messiah, but also that Christ did have a dualistic ancestory out of the House of Joseph, as prophesied Rachael and out of the House of David which the Jews would make into their Jewish Messiah of the tribe of Judah.

Now before we get to the prophetic considerations with respect to the two comings of the Messiah, we must consider just what roles a prophet does undertake. A prophet not only gives prophetic insight and understanding to future events, but he also give prophetic insight and understanding to past events as well. Now before any so considers that the author does profess himself to be a prophet, let it be presented that all in the LDS Church believe in personal revelation and this is to include in respect to their understanding of the scriptures and as to the nature of God and his Christ. It is one thing to profess to be the prophet at the head of Christ's church and it is quite another to speak prophetically by the spirit of revelation.

This particular distinction was well established in Old Testament times when once having had the Holy Ghost descend upon them, Medad and Eldad, did so begin to prophesy and testify according to the spirit in the camp of Israel. In this respect, Joshua was quite concerned that they did usurp the position of the Prophet Moses. To which Moses replied:

To this end is such as herein stated set forth, that if it be of such that the credit for such be established. Not in himself, but in that 'spirit', that is the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of Revelation; be given the credit for any such prophetic insights as are revealed in this work so published. And if the truth be not in it, then the author but speaks of himself. But it was to this end that this case study was undertaken to explore and produce such evidence and consideration as to the matter concerning Jesus Christ being both the promised Messiah ben Joseph of the house of Joseph through Ephraim and also at the same time being that same Messiah ben David, who the Jewish records proclaim him to be a descendant of Boaz and Ruth by their first born Obed, and thus of the bloodline of the tribe of Judah.

Now upon that premise and understanding, each of the two separate comings of the Messiah will be reviewed in their particulars in respect to him being both Messiah ben David and Messiah ben Joseph.

His First Advent

This first advent, if either, is that which ought to be in truth considered to be unto the Jews. Yet the Jews in the fulfillment of many Old Testament prophecies, did reject the 'Suffering Messiah', whose suffering they in part, in that consideration of being the cause of his death upon the cross, did cause to come upon him. Yet in also denying the Christ, the Jews also denied that they suffering 'dead' Messiah was theirs at all, just as did the false mother who stood be for Solomon of old did in denying that the dead child was hers. And so also like Judah, that false mother went on to furth proclaim herself to be the true mother of the living child, just as Judah continues on to profess of itself the the glorious living Messiah is their Messiah, Messiah ben David.

Yet we have covered much evidence that the many of the Jews well understood during the days of Christ just who the Messiah would be, and that he would be the Messiah ben Joseph of the descent from Jacob by Rachel though Joseph and Joseph's Son Ephraim, Philip declared to Nathanael that they had found the Messiah of whom Moses in the law and other prophets had written, that he was so prophecied by them to be 'Jehoshua' of Nazareth, the promised son of Joseph, even Messiah ben Joseph (John 1:45). And then shortly Nathanael gains his own witness of the Lord and calls him, 'Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel' (John 1:49). And Nathanael credits the Lord properly as being 'King of Israel' and NOT merely 'King of the Jews'. For indeed Christ was the King of the Kingdom of Israel, which kingdom was that of Ephraim and not of Judah, and thus the Messiah is more properly referenced by the name of Israel than that of Judah.

Even the learned Jewish rulers recognized that Jesus the Messiah would have that heritage which would make him to be a 'Samaritan' or the dual ancestry of Ephraim and of other nations. For as they accused him, 'Say we not well, that thou art a Samaritan?' (John 8:48) Concerning being a Samaritan, Christ DID NOT deny, but to that added accusation, that he 'hast a devil', did he rebuke them for and for so stating such in a slanderous, malicious and disrespectful manner as to blaspheme against God (John 8:49).

And then there was that well versed Samaritan woman at the well, who according to Samaritan traditions would have looked and under stood the Messiah to come to be of the house of Joseph through Ephraim. Yet she had recognized Jesus to be a Jew, but she must have also understood that those of the house of David, as Christ was, was by greater right of the house of Joseph and Ephraim, that is of Israel's Kingdom, for when she came to understand just who Jesus, who she spoke to was, she readily accepted him as that promised Messiah to come and not merely as a prophet of God. And for many Samaritans to have believed on her words and who later also gained further testimony that Jesus was the promised Messiah, the explanation must have been given that he was that Son of David, that David who legally and rightfully was of the house of Joseph by way of the commandments and Laws of God.

Then more particularly, there comes the question, was the Messiah sent unto Judah or was it just a matter of location, that is where the house of David was and recognized, where the scriptures had been maintianed though from a very Jewish perspective, and where the temple of David, or more properly the House of the Lord, had been maintained? Certainly Christ did not go out of his way to convert the Jews of Jerusalem, Rather he proclaimed and did practically the opposite.

On the one hand, Jesus well taught that he was sent but to the 'lost sheep of the house of Israel.' Now the Jews of this era did not consider themselves to be lost. They knew well who they were. Even those in other lands had for the better part maintained their identity. 'They were not the lost sheep of the house of Israel'. For that matter, 'the house of Israel' more properly referenced the kingdom of Ephraim and his companions, especially when spoken of in the context of being 'the lost sheep'.

It is important to note that at the beginning of his ministry Christ did start out in Jerusalem and the land of Judaea, it was for the purpose of the lawful passover to start. Then it quickly accelarated into a direct confrontation between Christ and the Jews. It was at this passover that Christ first cleansing of the temple took place in defiance of Jewish authority. And when requested by the Jews a sign as to by what authority he did these things, Christ gave then direct confrontational sign of his death being caused by them.

Jesus did not waste any time in 'kowtowing' to the Jews. And though he did teach and show forth miracles upon which many did believe, this was but to the end and purpose of his mortal ministry and mission. But before we get to that one other item ought to here be remembered. When Jesus left Jerusalem that first time, he did not travel the common way of the Jews. Many make a big deal that 'Christ did not sent his disciples to the Samaritans of Ephraim'. But in context, that was at a later time when the Samaritans had began to rebell against the apostles and possed an unnecessary danger to them at that particular time. Jesus, upon leaving Jerusalem, took particular action of 'having to go through Samaria'. This was not for the enability of going the preferred route of the Jews to avoid Samaritan contact, this appears more to be according to the mission requirement of the Savior that 'he must needs go through Samaria' for that subsequent result of the conversion of the Samaritan that resulted there from.

Now then, if Christ's main mission and purpose was not to be sent unto the Jews, but to be sent to the 'lost sheep of the house of Israel', then for what purpose did Christ come unto Jerusalem? Here we must recall that during his mortal ministry Christ was to perform as what has been termed by the Jews as the 'Suffering Messiah'. And it is unto this end that Christ himself so stated his mission of his mortality.

Christ's mission was to the end that though by Adam came death into the world, that through Christ, his atonement, all men would again live. 'For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.' This was a central purpose of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. That atonement was for the most part accomplished in the Garden of Gethsemane, what that was but the major portion of the 'bitter cup' that Christ was given to drink of. He death at the hand of the Jews consisted of the rest of that 'cup'. As Christ said to Peter when Peter attempt to resist his Master's arrest, 'Put up thy sword into the sheath: 'the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?' (John 18:11).

It was also in the gospel of John where Jesus plainly set forth that the Jews of their own selves had not the power to take Jesus' life but that he would lay down his life of himself (John 10:17-18). Yet still the act of the cause of the death was not to be personally inflected by was to be inflected by those who hated him and who were of his adversary, which were the leaders of the Jews.

Now while the Jewish nation rejected Christ, after his resurrection Jesus Christ came unto the 'lost sheep of Joseph'. And there upon the American Continent was the resurrected Lord accepted by the house of Joseph. This account we have in the Book of Mormon which is in part the record of the house of Joseph and is the current representation to the world of the stick of Joseph.

Now we have reviewed through Christ's first advent unto the world, and that how he was recognized by many as being that promised heir of the kingdom, even as Messiah ben Joseph, that 'Samaritan' Messiah of the house of Israel. And we have set forth how he was sent unto the 'lost sheep of Israel' and not particularly unto the Jews. But for the purpose that he might suffer for the sins of the world did he come unto the Jews of Jerusalem, the only nation on earth which was wicked enough to crucify the Lord, and this that he might die a ransom for sin.

And Christ took particular care that the wickedness of the Jews was preserved. Not that it was of Christ that their wickedness did come, but even the wicked are prone to temporary phases of reduced participation in their wickedness. Now some would think Christ caused the Jewish wickedness, He did not. He merely prevented a temporary posture by which they would not fulfill their just fate and reward as the cause of the death of the Messiah. And for this reason stated Christ as to why he taught the Jews in parables:

Thus the Jews were to be left in that state of 'darkness' as pertaining unto the recognition of the Messiah, which the test of history had substantiated was and is the case. But this was not so that they were prevented from righteousness, for if righteousness had been in them, they could not have been kept from it. But that they might remain in their wickedness unto the fulfillment of the crucifixion of the Messiah, to that end were they purposefully not preached to in a manner which would have convinced them despite their wickedness as to the true identity of the Messiah. In truth, at that great day of the Lord, all the sins of men will be removed from then in one day (Zechariah 3:9). And every knee will bow and every tongue confess (Mosiah 27:31) and all will recognize Jesus to be the Christ at that day and even the sins will be removed from the wicked. And then they will be rewarded according to their works. Now even if the wicked of the Jews had come to recognize Christ in their day, their reward in heave would be but that same. For their works would still be unto wickedness. And even then in Christ's day there were signs enough and understanding enough upon the part of the Jews, that they had not excuse.

Now with an understanding of Christ's first advent, we now turn to his second advent. And though this if still yet to come there is enough in the scriptures and as a matter as to what has been organized and set forth herein with which we might proceed to consider it in respect to the question at hand, and that is as to the Christ of the Second Advent being that promised Messiah ben Joseph as well as Messiah ben David, which we have be so establishing here.

His Second Advent

Now in terms of Christ's second advent, is will be to the end of total success and glory. And all that is so associated with it will so roll forth to fill the world. It is important to have this understanding for in considering the Second Coming of the Lord, we must first begin with that immediate preparatory work first laid upon which it will be founded and come to pass.

In this we turn to the promise made unto the fathers, particularly unto father Abraham, though it is that same promise which was made from before the foundation of the earth, and to Adam, and Enoch, and Noah and so forth. Now Abraham was promised that throuh his seed the nations of the earth would be blessed. Now 'his seed' is to be considered in both the singlular in respect to Jesus Christ and in the plural to all of the seed of those upon whose shoulders the promise was laid and that was those of the house of Joseph, and in particular those of Ephraim.

It was of no little consequence that Joseph Smith was to be recognized as being a 'pure Ephraimite' of the tribe of Ephraim. And further it is of great significance that those for the most part unto whom the gospel was first restored were to be those who were of the scattered seed of Joseph, particularly that of Ephraim. For it was in Joseph of Egypt that the promises of the fathers did remain (D&C 27:10). And this included those promises of both the Messiah and the dispensation that those of Joseph would carry forth unto all the world of the blessings of the covenant ordinances of the gospel unto the salvation of all men.

That the original promised land of Adam was so chosen upon which both the restoration and the eventual building of the New Jerusalem and the coming of the Lord unto it would take place is significant. And that this land is the land of Joseph as previously set forth and established is also significant.

And thus when Jesus Christ comes again, he will come unto Joseph, they who will accept him to be their King, and unto they who have so prepared the way before him. And he will come as that true David who is of the house of Joseph, being so rightfully established and set forth by the Laws of God to stand at the head of those of Joseph, so being the rightful and legal heir of Joseph himself.

And it is unto this remnant of Joseph, unto this remnant of Israel and all of his companions, that the kingdom of God will come. This is the remnant of Israel of the promises of God. And it will be 'Israel's King', that is Joseph's King David, who will rule and reign upon the earth.

Now true, that Jerusalem of the Jews will also be rebuilt. And they will then come to recognized Jesus Christ to be the promised Lord of all of Israel and not just of the Jews. And though they will see the blood of Judah having been in him, they will also recognized that it is by right of that covenant that came down through Joseph and thence to Ephraim by the blessing of Jacob upon his head, that the Messiah does in truth rule over all of Israel. And then they will understand why it is that they do so recognized Rachael to be the true mother of Israel over Leah

And this understanding given before the whole of the world to see and understand will relieve Ephraim's envy of Judah. For there well no longer be cause for Ephraim to envy Judah's claim to the Messiah in that King David of old did prefer Judah over Israel in the days of his wickedness. And this because Ephraim will come to understand that in truth the Messiah is by the right and law of God actually of the house of Ephraim and of the seed of Joseph. And then also Judah will no longer vex Ephraim in their attempt to usurp their claim unto the covenant and firstborn in Israel, for all will know and understand that Ephraim is in truth that firstborn of Israel and of the covenant by which the blessings of the seed of the covenant doth come (Jeremiah 31:9). How else is Jehovah's rightful firstborn in Israel Ephraim rather than Judah if Christ is not that Messiah ben Joseph in right and in truth?

And as the head of Israel, as the head of Joseph, Christ will come in the fulness of the glory of the Father. And he will come in judgment and in all of those respects which the prophets have spoken of him in terms of his glorious advent as the King of Israel.

The Parallels to be Noted

Now we have spoken concerning the two advents with extended meanings, which if they are true are of a prophetic nature. But if so, they are of the spirit of God, the Holy Ghost were gives light and understanding by revelation unto men. And men of their ownselves are nothing. Thus if it be so the glory be to God for it. If not, then the author has considered this case of Messiah ben David being the same as Messiah ben Joseph of his own consideration. Be it so which ever. But at least the matter has been so honestly approached to have considered it in the later case. But unto the end that this thesis might continue, there ought to be a 'parallel comparison' of the two advents in relationship to each other.

Now such 'dualistic parallels' as this may be considered take various forms. One parallel is that of the same thing in a similitude of the other. Another form may seem to be somewhat symmetrical is some respects but is rather quite asymmetrical though having a semblance and likeness where the parallel may be expressed as a counterpart, as a left to right mirroring in comparision, as an opposite or in opposition to parallelism, and/or even a refective parallel where top becomes bottom and bottom top; first become last and last first.

For example if indeed Jesus were of the tribe of Judah, or at least seemingly so in the presentation to the world in both advents, then that would be a symmetrical similitude in parallel in relationship to both occurances. However if Christ were to be denoted as of the tribe of Judah in the first advent, as he as so been depected before the world mostly because of the perspective of the record of the Jews, and then if Christ is actually to be found in the second advent to be rightfully and lawfully of the tribe of Ephraim, Messiah ben Joseph, in the second advent then there would be a counterpart parallel relationship in which the one advent has been somewhat distorted from the facts of the other, though both are based upon fact. For Christ was of the blood of Judah through his mother Mary, but by the laws of adoption of God, he would legally and rightfully be considered the seed of Ephraim and of the house of Joseph. Both are correct with the exception that the Jewish perspective is but a limited perspective which favors but the Jews and ignores the full truth of the matter. So thus we proceed.

Perhaps in passing, but the counterpart parallels may be began as early as the days of Moses when but two out of Egypt were allowed to enter into the promised land. And they were the two 'true' sons of the two tribes of Israel of which we are concerned. The one was Joshua, who as the successor to Moses and a similitude of Christ in name and in representation in many respect. And then there was Caleb of Judah, the only true son of Judah who came out of Egypt. Joshua was of the covenant lineage of Ephraim, a son of the covenant and is in this thesis the presumed ancestor of the Ephraimite Elimelech and thus his son Mahlon and Mahlon's son and true seed by the Law of God, Obed—born of Ruth by that vicarious surrogate parent Boaz of Judah. But Boaz was not a descendant of Caleb, though Caleb was recognized by Moses as the true representative of Judah. Thus is Christ was of Boaz of Judah, he was not of the true representative of Judah, as Caleb was that recognized person by Moses.

Now as to the course and purpose of each advent. Christ in his mortal ministry was the 'Suffering Messiah' as fairly well divided out by the Jews, though they do not apply it properly to Jesus. On the other hand Christ in his Second Coming has been raise up to glory by the spirit and the power of the resurrection to be the 'Glorious Messiah' possessing the powers over life and death. Now here the Jews attempt to divided the seemingly asymmetrical parallel of the courses and purposes of the two advents into being that of two separate Messiahs, Messiah ben Joseph, who comes, suffers and dies, and then is later raised from the dead by the power of the second glorious Messiah ben David of Judah. But this we know to be false, for the 'Suffering Messiah' is the same as the 'Glorious Messiah'. They are not two different people but one person coming at two different times for two different courses and purposes. Thus the counterpart here is in the purpose and the events, not in the person. The person here is the same.

In the meridian of time, Jesus came being born into mortality, having the capacity of death obtain by his birth of a mortal Mary. But he also had the power to lay down his own life and to take it up again because of his sonship of God the Father. When Jesus comes again he will come in a complete immortal state of spirit templed in an immortal body of flesh and bone. Over the course of Christ transition from his mortal body to that of his immortal one, the only notable characteristic which will remain is that of the markings in his hands, feet and side, which are the marks of his crucifixion. And these only will remain for the purpose of identifying him to the Jews and to the world. And then when appropriate even these pass into celestial completeness.

In mortality, that which was corruptible, the blood of man was that corruptable blood of Judah. This may be the purpose in the surrogate parenting of Boaz. And that is so that the blood of corruption of Judah would be that which was the sacrifice for sin rather than that covenant blood of the promise unto Ephraim. And it would be Judah, even 'Judas', who would be the causing of the spilling of that blood upon the cross. But we understand that that part of the atonement was but a secondary part, as the greatest suffering for sin was in the Garden of Gethsemane when the weight of the bitter cup of sin rested so heavily upon the Lord that he suffered and bleed from every pore. Then in his immortal state at his second coming, the Lord will not have the blood of man coursing through his body, but in the words of Joseph Smith it will be the pure life of spirit itself.

In mortality, Jesus had descended below all things, and though he had acted in the capacity of God as the Great Jehovah by, in and through the power of the Father, he was within the vail and did progress grace upon grace until he obtained by the spirit a greater and fuller understanding of who he was. And though he was 'sinless' in mortality, he had not become 'complete' as to that celestial condition of God the Father yet before him. It is best said that he was perfect in his generation, but yet had not reached that final completed perfected conditiona of God the Father of Spirits. When Jesus comes again, he will come in all the glory and fulness and completeness and perfection of God the Father with that one exception so already noted which is given to identify who he is, the marks of his crucifixion. These are not 'imperfections' in a spiritual sense, but are but lingering impression so place, and temporarially so to the fulfillment of all righteousness in identifying the Son of God unto the children of men.

It is of some interest that in his mortality of condescension, in that some what less than Godly state, Jesus was noted unto all the world, even unto his disciples as being a Jew—though some knew and understood him to be in truth legally and rightfully the son of Joseph of Egypt. In his glorified fullness at his Second Coming he will be rightfully identified unto the world as the son of the covenant house of Ephraim though some will still recognize in him that he was of the blood of Judah. This is kind of a left is right or top is bottom type of asymmetric parallel. In the one the denotion of being of Judah out weighs the recognition of Joseph. And in the other the recognition of being of Joseph will over shadow that of being of the blood of Judah. The first will be lastly of consideration, and the last will be of the greater consideration.

In mortality, Jesus performed the works of the atonement which is unto the mercy of God to the removing of the sins of the world from all those who do come unto Christ. In this alone are all men to be 'saved'. That is all will be resurrected with an immortal body in which their immortal spirit will dwell forever. In this Jesus did bring about the resurrection of the dead, a free gift unto all men, and perhaps to this end was the suffering of death upon the cross to atone for that fall of Adam. 'For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But this is just half of the story. Christ also performed the suffering atonement for sin, an infinite and eternal atonement and sacrifice in the Garden of Gethsemane to the end that he might come to judge men, not according to their sins, which will be removed because of that garden atonement, but that he might so judge men according to their works to varying degrees of glory.

And to this end does Christ come as the Eternal Judge of the Covenant of the fathers, which did remain and was preserved in the earth by Joseph, not by Judah (D&C 27:10). And to this end when Christ comes again, he will stand as the Judge of Israel, in that seat of Joseph, even as Joseph did when he administered a righteous and saving judgment upon his brothers in Egypt as the ruler over all of Egypt in the house of Pharaoh, which was a similitude of the Kingdom of God the Father and of Jesus Christ the son ruling over and judging the entire house of the Father. In this was and is Jesus the same as Joseph. And in that Second Coming will Jesus be that ruler over the entire Kingdom, as was Joseph in the house of Pharaoh.

And thus we have two days of the Lord. A day which is recognized as being in Judah unto death and suffering though to the end of atonement and mercy. And we have that day unto Joseph through Ephraim which does bring about the Lord's judgement unto all the earth, both the living and the dead, and this by the saving ordinances of the covenant as performed by the house of Joseph. Yes as performed by the house of Joseph, from that all encompassing universal covenant ordinance of the vicarious atonement, performed by the Servant of God, that Servant of Pharaoh if you will, Joseph, even Messiah ben Joseph; and thence even down to every baptism for the dead, endowment, sealing and celestial marriage performed in those saving ordinances restore in and through the house of Joseph, his companions unto every son and daughter of God the Father of Spirits who ever have lived. And this so that man might become even as God is, and one with God even as the Son and the Father are one.

Now many more details of this matter have also been set out in item number 46. But let it here be so 'prophesied' that Jesus Christ is the Patriarchal heir of Joseph of Egypt and by that right he will so come to judge the whole earth even as did Joseph in his day over the known world of the kingdom of Egypt. And that this patriarchal linage link will be so established and presented to effectly show Jesus' genealogy back to Joseph through Elimelech much the same as here in presented, and from Joseph back to Adam as so also presented. And as is stated in D&C 113:1-4, Jesus Christ is that servant, in his own hand as it were, he being the Great God Jehovah of the Old Testament as well as the Son of Got of the New Testament who is partly descendant from Jesse. So partly stated for only in his linage from Mary can he so claim it as his Father was God the Father of Spirits and not of any man of this earth. And further that Jesus as so stated being partly of Jesse, Jesse being that son of Obed who was legally and rightfully of the house of Elimelech, Jesus is therefore as well as of Eprhaim in that straight genealogical line which makes of him to be a 'pure Ephraimite' even as Joseph Smith was as pertaining to this world. And as thus further stated, or in other words 'of the house of Joseph', and therefor upon whom there is laid much power, even that rightful Patriachal Order of the power of the priesthood from Adam.

Now herein lies another prophetic consideration. Some pose the question as to whether Jesus Christ was married and if he had children and if those children to live amongst us today. In this same line of thought. if that right of the priesthood and its keys of the kingdom must come by a rightful descendant as stated in D&C 113:6, that is 'a descendant of Jesse, as well as of Joseph, even as Jesus Christ was in being a 'pure descendant of Ephraim'; then based upon that logic, then Joseph Smith is such a son in his own genealogical linage. Not that any such son would have retained the attributes of the self sustained powers of the Messiah in that magnitude, but that he by right of such descent is the legal and rightful heir, if so found righteous to the Patriarachal head of this dispensation of the fulness of time and all does go back through him to God even as it so does back through Christ and all the dispensation heads so appointed.