That Other “King of the Jews”

James Tabor on Jesus’ Davidic lineage and dynasty

This article was originally published on Dr. James Tabor’s popular Taborblog, a site that discusses and reports on “‘All things biblical’ from the Hebrew Bible to Early Christianity in the Roman World and Beyond.” Bible History Daily republished the article with consent of the author. Visit Taborblog today, or scroll down to read a brief bio of James Tabor below.


And they clothed him in a purple cloak; and after twisting some thorns into a crown, they put it on him. And they began saluting him, ‘Hail, King of the Jews!’ (Mark 15:18).

According to the Gospel of Mark, when Jesus was on trial before the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate he was asked if he claimed to be the “King of the Jews,” and his ambiguous answer was “You say so,” which might be translated “as you say” (Mark 15:2). Pilate then refers to Jesus as “the King of the Jews,” apparently echoing back a charge of Jesus’ enemies, that he claimed to be a “king”  (Mark 15:9, 12).1 Later that morning when the Roman cohort of soldiers gathered inside the Praetorium2 to beat and mock their new prisoner, draping him with a purple robe and crowning him with a victor’s wreath of thorns, they saluted him, “Hail! King of the Jews!” (Mark 15:18). Finally, the placard that bore the charge against him, which was placed over his head on the cross, read “The King of the Jews” (Mark 15:26).3

What few Bible readers realize is that the claim to be “King of the Jews” was a highly charged political act of sedition or lese-majesty, considered a capital crime by Roman Law4. Robert Eisler, in his classic work The Messiah Jesus and John the Baptist (1931), as well as S. F. Brandon in Jesus and the Zealots (1967), have thoroughly explored these political dimensions.5

In the free ebook Who Was Jesus? Exploring the History of Jesus’ Life, examine fundamental questions about Jesus of Nazareth. Where was he really born—Bethlehem or Nazareth? Did he marry? Is there evidence outside of the Bible that proves he actually walked the earth?

The emperor Augustus gave Herod the title King of the Jews and his connections with Rome, the emperor Augustus and his court were extraordinary.6 Throughout his long reign he desperately, but abortively, wanted to establish some kind of “dynasty” or royal line, as evidenced by his marriage to the Hasmonean princess Miriame. So obsessed was he with genealogical records that Josephus reports that he had the archives at Sepphoris destroyed, lest any rivals challenge his pedigree or put forth their own. His son, Herod Antipas,7 tried much the same, seeking to forge royal connections through marriage and building his magnificent capital at Sepphoris, just a stone’s throw northwest of the tiny village of Nazareth. Meanwhile, in Rome, Octavian, as the emperor Augustus, also sought to establish a dynastic line of succession by his adoption of Tiberius not long before his death. It seems that “Dynasties” were in the air in the 1st-century CE Roman world.

I have collected books on Herod the Great for 30 years now and I find him endlessly fascinating and alluring as an historical figure, but much more so as a study in contrasts with that other “King of the Jews,” Jesus of Nazareth, crucified in 30 CE at Passover as a potential insurrectionist and heir to the royal throne of David. Unlike many of my colleagues in the area of Christian Origins who see Jesus as a healer, prophet-like figure, or teacher (all of which he surely was!), I have not the slightest doubt that he laid claim to the royal Davidic lineage and understood himself as the legitimate King of Israel or “messiah.”8 In my book, The Jesus Dynasty, I try to lay out the full implications of this understanding, one I consider key to recovering the “historical Jesus,” see my post here.9

Our earliest source for Jesus as a Davidic “Royal” comes from Paul (Romans 1:3). Indeed, I believe that the Davidic messianic claims for Jesus are an essential factor for any interpretation of the figure of Jesus in his own time and context. I am convinced the Messianic self-identity of Jesus opens up a world of understanding of both the man and his movement, and that without it, any interpretation of the historical Jesus fundamentally fails. I have always been a bit puzzled when I have been asked: “But why would you think Jesus thought himself to be of Davidic lineage?” when my question would be the opposite: “How could he have possibly viewed himself otherwise, given what we know of the movement, its beliefs, and its history?” Teachers, prophets and charismatic healers are one thing, but the coming of the “Messiahs of Aaron and Israel” was at the heart of Jewish expectations of the future under the rule of a succession of Herodian rulers who were considered to be corrupt and illegitimate kings. (See my recent post here on the “Two Messiahs” concept).

Learn about the archaeological evidence of King Herod’s palace in Jerusalem, where the trial of Jesus may have occurred >>


The Talpiot Jesus tomb is below under the concrete slab in the foreground. Herod’s tomb, the Herodium, is the dome-like structure in the distance, in the center of the photo above the roof tops.

I am further convinced that part and parcel of the Davidic lineage idea was that one was part of a dynasty, made up of brothers and sons. And this is what we find in the Jesus movement as James, the brother of Jesus, becomes his successor, and Simon, another brother (some say cousin but of the same royal lineage), takes on the leadership following the death of James. Yose, Jesus’ second brother after James, had apparently died by the time of the death of James in 62 CE or he would have likely been next in line. All of this evidence fits “hand-in-glove” with what we find in the “Jesus family tomb” at Talpiot. (See posts here, here, and here for background.)

We known the splendor with which Herod was buried from the account in Josephus and the ruins of the Herodium, especially the more recent discoveries of the late Ehud Netzer (see here). Jesus, in contrast, was crucified as a criminal and was hastily and temporarily placed in a rock-hewn tomb near the place where he died. Joseph of Arimathea, who had taken charge of his burial, likely provided a more permanent tomb for Jesus, and perhaps for the rest of his family, shortly thereafter (see my exposition on this here). Like other rabbis and teachers of the time we can expect that the followers of this “Branch of David” would have made sure that he and his family were well taken care of, in death as in life. The elaborately decorated sarcophagus of Herod stands in sharp contrast to the plain undecorated ossuary of Jesus, son of Joseph, of the Talpiot tomb. That the Jesus of the tomb also has a son named Judah makes the entire Dynasty concept all the more dynamic.

Several years ago, standing in the parking lot of the condominium complex overlooking the Talpiot Jesus family tomb I suddenly realized, looking to the south, that the Herodium, which became Herod the Great’s fortress Tomb, was clearly visible in the distance. I thought to myself–how appropriate! The two men called “King of the Jews” – but for very different reasons and in very different contexts – buried within sight of one another!

In the BAS DVD Where Jesus Walked, Hershel Shanks visits Nazareth, Galilee, Capernaum, Bethsaida, Qumran, Sepphoris, and Jerusalem to view sites where Jesus walked. Along the way, Shanks meets with the world’s most prominent archaeologists and biblical scholars to discuss the archaeological discoveries that link these sites to Jesus. Their lively, in-depth conversations offer a clear picture of how current archaeology is illuminating the New Testament.

Dr. James Tabor is Chair of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte where he is professor of Christian origins and ancient Judaism. Since earning his Ph.D. at the University of Chicago in 1981, Tabor has combined his work on ancient texts with extensive field work in archaeology in Israel and Jordan, including work at Qumran, Sepphoris, Masada, Wadi el-Yabis in Jordan. Over the past decade he has teamed up with with Shimon Gibson to excavate the “John the Baptist” cave at Suba, the “Tomb of the Shroud” discovered in 2000, and ongoing work at Mt Zion. Most recently, Tabor, along with Rami Arav, have been involved in the re-exploration of two tombs in East Talpiot; the controversial “Jesus tomb” and a related tomb less than 200 feet away that has ossuary inscriptions Tabor and Arav interpret as Judaeo-Christian. Among his publications are Things Unutterable (1985), A Noble Death (1992) Why Waco: Cults and the Battle for Religious Freedom in America (1995) and The Jesus Dynasty: A New Historical Investigation of Jesus, His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity (Simon & Schuster, 2006). His most recent book, co-authored with Simcha Jacobovici, is The Jesus Discovery: The New Archaeological Find that Reveals the Birth of Christianity (Simon & Schuster, 2012). He has a new book, Paul and Jesus: How the Apostle Transformed Christianity (Simon & Schuster), coming out in November, 2012. You can find links to all of Dr. Tabor’s web pages, books, and projects at



1. Such a claim would be considered the capital crime of lese majesty under Roman law, see Tacitus, Annals 4. 70; 6.7

2. See my post “Standing Again with Jesus: Ecce Homo Revisited,” here.

3. John has an significantly expanded version of this trial scene in Mark that seems to be more theologically reflective than “historical,” see John 18:28-19:21

4. See Tacitus, Annals 4. 70; 6.7

5. Eisler, whose 1929 German edition was translated into English is long out of print but it can be found in most libraries and is available in a photocopy edition, see more here.

6. See Peter Richarson, Herod: King of the Jews and Friend of the Romans (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1999.

7. For more on Herod Antipas in Bible History Daily, see “Herod Antipas in the Bible and Beyond.”

8. See my arguments in this regard in the article “Are You the One? The Textual Dynamics of Messianic Self-Identity,” in “Knowing the End from the Beginning: The Prophetic, the Apocalyptic, and their Relationships,” edited by Lester L. Grabbe and Robert D. Haak, Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2004), pp. 180-191.

9. If you have never read this book, published in 2007, I recommend it, modestly but highly! See

Posted in Jesus/Historical Jesus.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

Add Your Comments

20 Responses

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. RABBI says

    This article is IMPORTANT for anyone truly wanting to understand the climate that pervaded the first century and the subsequent creation of Christianity.

  2. Frank says

    I note that Matthew’s Gospel contains a geneaology that traces Jesus’ lineage to David through Jospeh of Nazareth. Jesus was not a blood relation of Joseph because, per the Virgin Birth, He did not have a human father,

  3. Duncan says

    I’m curious about the reference to Josephus, genealogies and Sepphoris. I find reference to the burning of Sepphoris by Varus in Josephus, and to the burning of the genealogies by Herod in Eusebius (quoting Julius Africanus). On what basis are the two being conflated here?

  4. Robert says

    To have “not the slightest doubt” about the claims made on behalf of Jesus is somewhat presumptive in the light of all the uncertainties about Jesus’ life. Even his place of upbringing and title of Jesus of Nazareth is very doubtful, as there was no Nazareth in his time.
    Jesus apparently assumed the mantle of Melchizdek, which makes some sense, but why would he want the stigma of King David’s persona – a person who ruled around approximately 950 BCE and noticeably failed to live up to the righteous ideals demanded by the prophets of the books of Kings and Chronicles, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Micah. David’s hands were stained with blood and he broke almost every one of the Ten Commandments. He had Uriah, an officer in his army, effectively murdered in order to marry Uriah’s wife; he brought destruction on 70,000 Israelites for his evil doings. In a castigation by the prophet Nathan, David is roundly condemned for his evil acts against God and told that his descendants will suffer as a result of his murderous deeds. This is hardly a worthy pattern for a future messiah.
    He may have understood himself as a legitimate King of Israel, but was ambiguous about his role as the Messiah and we cannot know if any assumption was self-awareness or placed on him by the gospel writers.

  5. Krzysztof says

    1) The historical Jesus claimed only to be th Son of Man (check any biblical litrature even, the last Benedict xvi, Jesus from Nazareth, vol.I); Christ/Messiah title is a pos-ressurection event of writing
    2) Mk 3:21 makes a theory that James, th brother of Jesus, followed Jesus in his lifetime to build a Messiah line a …fiction. Hey, go to libraries@read comments on it!!!
    3) On the cross were “lestei”, therefore, not criminals but political enemies

  6. Rose says

    Seems like a lot of inductive reasoning, there are some problems with Jesus in the line of David.

    1) Josephus gives the lineage of almost all kings in and around Jerusalem and Galilee in that day and the lineage of David is not on the radar.
    2) The lineage of David isn’t on the radar in the Dead Sea Scrolls, Melchizedek is the ancient ancestor and Melchisedec is without lineage.
    3) The genealogies going back to David in the New Testament do not match, in fact the genealogy in Luke’s gospel isn’t even a genealogy as it never says ‘son of’ in the Greek and lists both women and God (Eli) as ancestors. (However if you understand Greek and Hebrew then the genealogy in Luke’s gospel says something entirely different when hearing it read aloud 😉
    4) When asked about the linage of David, Jesus side steps the issue.
    5) Zorobabel son of Salathiel are not people and never were, in Hebrew it literally means, “born in Babylon, of the sons held prisoner”. This is also made explicit in Haggai 2:23 when Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel is declared a ‘signet’ or sign. It was a place holder for the genealogies lost, there never were individuals named Zorobabel or Salathiel.
    6) The LORD told Jeremiah the lineage ended with the Babylonian captivity. Why? Because they didn’t observe the Jubile Calendar and the day and night got out of season. (See the Dead Sea Scrolls a New Translation; The Calendar Texts)

    Jeremiah 33
    19 And the word of the Lord came unto Jeremiah, saying,
    20 Thus saith the Lord; If ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, and that there should not be day and night in their season;
    21 Then may also my covenant be broken with David my servant, that he should not have a son to reign upon his throne; and with the Levites the priests, my ministers.

    25 Thus saith the Lord; If my covenant be not with day and night, and if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth;
    26 Then will I cast away the seed of Jacob and David my servant, so that I will not take any of his seed to be rulers over the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: for I will cause their captivity to return, and have mercy on them.

    And the captivity returned.


  7. Duncan says

    Rose, what translation of Jeremiah are you reading? And where in Luke’s genealogy do you find the women? And what do you make of Haggai 2:21 where Zerubabel is identified as the governor of Judah?

  8. Paul says

    If the assertion of Rose is true, that Zerubbabel never existed, then it may indicate that this post held by Zerubbabel will remain for future posterity. After the ancient near east was decimated by the Babylonians, Zerubbabel began the first stage of restoration in Jerusalem. The Lord will choose a signet ring (Haggai 2:23). “For before the blessed Holy One created the world, He and His name were enclosed within Him, one. Nothing existed – He alone – until there arose within the will of the thought actualizing all by impress of the signet, creating the world.” (Matt, The Zohar vol. I p.171)

  9. Angie says

    Rose was quoting the KJV.

  10. J.A. says

    Assumptions about the historical Jesus often rest on the belief that Paul was a follower of Jesus and a messenger of Jesus’ own teachings.

    There is considerable evidence that Paul was trying to found a Hellenistic religion that used Jesus’ name but not his teachings.

    A careful analysis of the Gospel of Mark, when read on its own merits without the later revisions of Matthew and Luke, reveals the story of a wealthy, educated, aristocratic man from a priestly bloodline who REJECTED the status of his birthright and tried to teach about “new wine in a new wineskin” (Mark 2:21-22).

    The author of Mark knew what he was doing when he first references David as that guy who broke the letter of the law for the sake of the spirit of the law (Mark 2:23-28).

    Mark’s David is not the king of 2 Samuel, but is instead the other David, the young David of 1 Samuel, the humble shepherd who drives away “evil spirits” with his lyre and never lets his heart fail.

    If Mark had wanted to show Jesus as a man who touted his royal lineage, we might have expected to see Jesus carrying out his ministry of healing and teaching inside the walls of the City of David. Instead, we see Jesus going just about everywhere except the royal city until the fractious final scenes.

    Mark even makes a point of showing Jesus leaving the royal city after the final meal ( a meal that includes artos not azymos) and heading over to the Mount of Olives, where it would have been very easy to stumble over a tomb in the dark and end up in immediate need of ritual purification. Are these the actions of a man who claims to be a king from a sacred bloodline?

    Mark 12:35-37 is quite clear on the question of the restoration of a Davidic state. According to Mark, it will not be happening through the man named Jesus.

  11. MIchael says

    The issues of a Davidic line “restoration” or of the ‘hoped for” MESSIAH of DAVID od AARON or of even JOSEPH (the rebel decades before Jesus) must be separated as ideas…A DAVIDIC descent Monarchial “restoration” iis
    like some Bourbon Restoration Movement in France be of both interest to the actual descendants of such royal lineage and their supporters to bring them back to the throne as PRACTICAL rulers.. BUT to the people of Jesus’ time the ideas of mESSIAHS (Davidic royals, Priestly lineage from AARON-ELIEZER ,or even the latest incarnation of the idea –to the successor of the rebel JOSEPH who tried to uprot Rome several decades earlier)–theese were all UTOPIAN SALVATION ideas to usher in some perfect age free of the Roman YOKE –FREE to live with the blessings and peace given under the special agent sent by the God of Israel to bring this about..
    THUS any MESSIAH type would be seen as an agent of God brnging such sALVATION from the heel of Rome…
    The trouble is that these BELIEFS and HOPES were NOT actually promised by God in the Jewish Holy Scriptures –the people -inluding JESUS–should have known that but such was the mESSIANIC FERVOUR expectation that both RESTORATIVE MOANACHY and UTOPIAN SAVIOURS still were being expected.

    HAD the people read the scripture propely-they would see that NOWHERE does any Scripture (that made it into the canon of the TANNACH) later—promise GOD will send a MESSIAH to save the people (EXCEPT for the prophecy in ISAIAH about KING CYRUS of PERSIA who is called a MESSIAH)—otherwise the use of the word M’shiach (MESSIAH) or any of its derivatives like M”shicho (HIS MESSIAH –refering to GOD’s MESSIAH) is NEVER used anywhere else in the TANNACH to indiicate a SUCCESSFUL “ANNOINTED” who will SAVE the people ,,,,M’shiach is used to indicate a MESSIAH who FAILS TO SAVE (in Daniel -though the CONTRAST of the ACTUAL SAVIOUR who is not called a mESSIAH but only SAVES after a MESSIAH fAILS TO SAVE –is also revealed in the Book of Daniel)..M’shiach is ued in its quotidien sense of high priest performimng his function ,or of a royal descendant of the Davidic luiine–but in neither cases is there ANY promise of SALVATION of the PEOPLE from their enemies …THE BOOK of PSALMS uses lots of references to M’shiach –but where the word is used is mostly in reference to a future Davidic Messiah for whom the Psalmist pleads with GOD TO SAVE! IT is not the MESSIAH who CAN SAVE–but only GOD who CAN SAVE HIS MESSIAH FROM the ENEMIES OF THE MESSIAH! THis is more GOD SAVE THE KING HOPE than any promise of a future MESSIAH who SAVES the PEOPLE from their enemies..

    WELL–what about prophecies where the word MESSIAH is not used but there is clear indication the promise MEANS a future MESSIAH will save.

    AGAIN one needs to distinguish verses of a hoped for SAVIOUR of the people from the ENEMY vs. a MESSIANIC designation ,and also to distinguish fuzy or erroneous allusions to royal or priestly linkage with some promised SAVIOUR.

    THUS the famous “SHOOT OF JESSE” prophecy in ISAIAH is deemed to be MESSIANIC -when again the term MESSIAH is not used but the allusion is suppoed to be referencing a DAVIDIC descent because JESSE is DAVID’s FATHER..however ,the allsusion to JESSE is erroneous because IF the prophet wanted to be precise about MESSIANIC linkage he SHOULD HAVE STATED “shoot of DAVID” –by putting the possibility that such a SAVIOUR (who is not called a MESSIAH) of being descended from JESSE”s oTHER offspring–thus NOT ROYALS — the prophet is really indicating that this NON-MESSIANIC SAVIOUR may stem from JESSE but is not from DAVID and so NOT MESSIANIC.
    You may get a SAVIOUR in prophecy but you can’t claim this is guaranteed to come from a ROYAL RESTORATION .

    OR the prophecy that the SAVIOUR will come from NOB (which rabbis today say is the area near Jreusalem where the COHANIM resided ..thus the hint of a priestly Messiah–but again the word mESSIAH is not used and so –the little child that shall lead them (from Nob) is in any case a priestly Saviour and yet Isiah also confuses in his DAVIDIC royalty serrtions withn the shoot of and root of Jesse allusions in other verses. He seems to be promising 2 Saviours–one priestly,one Davidic –yet NEVER calls either by the term MESSIAH ..Contrast to the prophecy of CYRYS –who is called a MESSIAH in clear aspect –and one might think that the 2 ISAIAH authors have differing ideas anout what GOD actually promises. One of the ISAIAHS predicts GOD sends a MESSIAH KING (CYRUS) to save the people-IT HAPPENED LATER so that prophecy was fulfilled! THE other Isaiah gets confused on whether God will send a preiestly Saviour from NOB or a DAVIDIC saviour who goes to NOb as David did to Abimelech the Priest —YET by NOT CLEARLY STATING that the alleged DAVIDIC SAVIOUR is a shhot and root of DAVID but only of JESSE –this leaves OPEN the idea that -IF IT is an actual prophecy and not just a mere poetic “HOPE” of the Isaiah who wrote this —THEN it is possible the prophesied SAVIOUR willbe a shoot/root of JESSE”S NON-ROYAL offspring…
    SO is it a “PROPHECY” from GOD via his propjhet or a mere hope of that author? IS the author confused about evven whther the SAVIOUR predicted willbe a priestly or a royal Messiah? OR even a MESSIAH (“annointed) -SAVIOUR?

    IT is not as clear as the less poetic other Isaiah who simply stated KING CYRUS of PERSIA who he called MESSIAH would come and save the people.

    THUS we see CLEAR PROPHECY of a MESSIAH vs. fuzzy HOPE for a SAVIOUR who might be priestly or royal or simply decended non-royal of Jesse’s other offspring. THE poetic Isiah is very confused. THE other Isaiah is clear and to the point.
    I leave you to determine which of the 2 isaiah’s is the true prophet 9well score one for the Messianic King Cyrus prophecy)–the other fuzzier “predictions” have not yet come to pass. BUT you would THINK GOD would have sent a clearer message along the CLEAN CLEAR KING CYRUS mESSIANIC tremplate… YET NOWJERE else in the TANNACH is such a ‘MESSIANIC PROPHECY” of an “ANNOINTED” SAVIOUR ever again specified.Instead we get fuzzy UNAMED SAVIOURS who may or may not be ROYALS ans MAY or MAY NOT be Priests or maybe thewre are 2 SAVIOURS -piestly and of the line of Jesse -but in that case if the Jesse-line is not Davidic that Saviour cannot be of the Restored Davidic “annointing” -and s not a Messiah -Saviour -only a Saviour.

    In all this confusion–no wonder the people-including JESUS were confused about MESSIANIC promises and what type could be a SAVIOUR ..

    FINALLY when the “REBEL” MEESIAH SON OF JOSEPH idea formulated a few decades before Jesus -this further could confuse things–either a mESSIAH could simply be annointed from common folk –not a DAVIDIC ROYAL or descended from the AARONIC priest line — OR you could STILL link it via shoot of JESSE/root of Jesse prophecy to descent from any of Jesse’s offspring and thius ANNOINT a NEW ROYAL –not a DAVIDIC RESTORATIVE ROYAL .

    So there were lots of ways to turn fuzzy monarchial hopes into a “PROMISED MESSIAH” …BUT how to square that with the child shall lead them and NOB priestly Messiah prophecies. THE people then had to SEPARATE their MESSIANIC dreams into alomost anything goes hopes for any sort of Messiah or Saviour.

    YET -clearly NO SAVIOUR came to SAVE THE JEWS from the rOMAN YOKE …JESUS FAILED (though he was a success with the GENTILES who even DEIFIED him to GODHOOD later and so founded an entirely new religion) .

    IN FACT THOUGH -we DO GET ONE CLEAR prophecy of a SAVIOUR to COME at the END TIME to SAVE THE JEWS from enemies attacking them. THE TEMPLATE is a CLEAR as in the KING CYRUS prophecy in that this SAVIOUR is NAMED –he is MICHAEL and given the epithet SAR HAGADOL –while some take this a GREAT PRINCE MICHAEL (indicating royal lineage) the fact he comes and saves only AFTER a character call MESSIAH —fails to save— and is killed (“cut-off”) and the FACT that this MICHAEL saves HIS PEOPLE (the JEWS) and is called a SAVIOUR but never called a MESSIAH indicates that he is NOT A ROYAL OF THE DAVIDIC LINE ….neither is he associated with the AAARONIC-ELIEZER priestly line-he is not a COHEN!
    HE is an ordinary “YISRAEL” and thus NOT TO BE ANNOINTED — he is a SAVIOUR but NOT A MESSIAH …
    HE is NOT A CHILD . THUS the entire “HOPE” prophecies of Isiah are cast into the rash heap by this CLEAR STATEMENT of WHO will ULTIMATELY SAVE JEWS at the END.

    AND WHY should we take that prophecy as more VALID that the fuzzy ones in Isaiah –because the autor of Isaiah who was so confused and unclear –REEKS of mere HOPE –as it it is not really FROM GOD that assurance is given that in the FINAL END of the SCRIPT -GOD’s promised SAVIOUR will show up…IN CONTRASt the ASSURED ,CLEAR STATEMENT of the SAR HAGADOL PROPHECY given in DANIEL is of a HIGHER QUALITY since it comes NOT from a mere “PROPHET’s” statements but from the AUTHORITY he got the prophecy from –quoting the words of the arch-angel GABRIEL ! AND when GABRIEL tells DANIEL that nobody can understand the TRUTH of the END-TIME PROPHECY he has given him UNTIL THE TIME OF THE END and the SAR HAGADOL MICHAEL stands up to save his people-THIS MEANS NOBODY can say any truth about the END-TIME
    and after END-TIME till then –which MEANS no rabbis can determine any OTHER PROPHECY given before by other prophets as VALID -you cannot take for instance the hopes of Isaiah or EZIKIEL or any prior prophecy about the end time as having ANY TRUTH at all!
    THUS MESSIANIC prophecy concerning the END-TIME is exposed as UNRELIABLE or even a HOAX.


    FROM this it is clear:

    1. THERE willbe NO MESSIAH SAVIOUR at the END-TIME,but the JEWS will get a SAVIOUR.

    2. THE SAVIOUR is known–at least by his first name: MICHAEL.

    3. JESUS anin’t coming back to save anyone.
    4. NO JUDGEMENT DAY for JEWS –makes sense since NO propmise of HEAVEN or HELL for JEWs anywhere in TANACH …

    HOW COME nobody paid any attention to this SAR HAGADOL MICHAEL prophecy but instead tried pulling predictions out of IOsiah, Esiekiel and several other prophets to suit their fuzzy ‘hopes”?
    Precisely BECAUSE the archangel GABRIEL said nobody could guess the ACTUAL END-TIME TRUTH till SAR HAGADOL MICHAEL shows up to reveal it.

    FROM the portion GABRIEL does reveal we KNOW a MESSIAH figure comes and tries to save his people fro invader armies attacking Israel from the North and South . This guy makes a deal for peace,it gets overturned and he is killed off ,ONLY then does the REAL SAVIOUR–MICHAEL show up to save his people. HE is given the ephither SAR HAGADOL in this case GREAT COMMANDER or GREAT LEADER (so he is either military or some leader official or maybe just given the ephithet later for what he does –so maybe just an honourary title?

    IN any case-NONE of these events including the invasions happen UNTIL the TEMPLE has been re-built -and then some abomination causing desolation is placed in it..

    SO we need not worry-or rejoice that the END is at hand yet.

    SINCE SAR HAGADOL MICHAEL saves the JEWS ultimately (WE are not told how) —we DO AT LEAST KNOW THAT ultimately JEWS WIN,INVADERS LOSE.

    THAT is all we do know–except that there willbe a RESSURRECTION of all those whose names are written in the SCRIPTURE OF TRUTH ..

    Does this mean your name must be wriiten sowhere in the TANACH or just in ORAH? OR is it just metaphorical meaning those who were Jews in the past til they dies willbe ressurrected? OR does it mean SAR HAGADOL MICHAEL reveals to us some NEW SCRIPTURE from GOD? WE simply cannot say.

    HOWVER we can IMPLY that IF TIME ENDS ,but if JEWS survive on EARTH –then we will require a brand new CALENDAR t mark time going forward from that NEW START POINT? THIS IMPLIES JUDAISM will CHANGE. THE ERA of the rabbis willcertainl;y be OVER.

    WE may get new rules and new holidays –but I guess we’llneed to wait to find ou.

    In any case had JESUS –or even today’s “rabbis” read the Scriptures better they could have learned all this ..WE could have avoided MESSIANIC hope hoaxes and got down to the important stuff of preparing to welcome our SAVIOUR–MICHAEL -whoever he is …

    O cousrse I am a candidate–my first name is Michael -but as I have zero idea how to save my people
    maybe i’m not the guy after all.

    ALSO trying to predict the END-TIME –NEWTON though the hints given led to a possible time around 2059-60–my own attempt to decode Daniel suggests 2039–Hebrew year HET TET TET (5800) –but until they re-build the TEMPLE –none of the END-TIME events can happen..
    So i guess you can stillbreath easy–BUT FOR SURE–JESUS ain’t coming back–GAbriel is blowin no horn nor is ELIJAH coming ahead to announce anything ..TAKE GABRIELS’s word on this -NOT gonna happen—so whether you believe rabbis erroneous olf wives tales ,whether you believe the followers’ “HOPES” for a Jeus come-back–whether you believe in some UTOPIAN after END-TIME “paradise on EARTH” -we are told NONE OF THAT …IF you are Christian or Muslim and want to fantasize about Judgement Day and reward-punishement ,heave or hell–THESE ARE NOT JEWISH IDEAS–NOT PROMISES BY THE JEWISAH GOD–we are promised ONLY survival on earth and a NEW TIME starting .WE JEWS are promised ultimate victory over our attacking enemies -WE get to GO on –but if YOU attacked us -YOU GONNA LOSE and bye-bye to whatever heaven or hell you believe in –but we can take a less crowded earh if you are gone.
    HOWVER if you add back our RESSURECTED DEAD then there willbe a lot more JEWS back on EARTH .. SO christians -JESUS ain’t coming vack-if you want to stay on earth in the NEW TIME–either convert to Judaism while you can or go atheist -BUT DO NOT ATTACK US or sUCCOR OUR ENEMIES –listening Mr. OBAMA ?
    IF YOU ARE one billion MUSLIMS–same thing –become ZIONISTS while you still can– or maybe it is HELL for you if you harm ISRAEL.. TAKE this from GABRIEL (JIBRIL) the same angel who 12 centuries later allegedly told MUHAMMEd that ALL the land he showed to MOSES belonged to the JEWS-this ois In the KORAN !

    LET everyone get this clear –the rabbis MESSIANIC end-time prophecies are bunkum;the christian Jesus comes back to save a rule is bunkum; the IMamms and ayatolllahs admonition to hate zionists is the exact opposite of what the Koran instructs–and GABRIEL is the same angel who instructed both DANIEL and MOHAMMED so if you ‘BELIEVE” –you had better BELIEVE IN ZIONISM and that the JEWS therefore OWN ALL THE PROMISED LAND … (sorry PALS) ..

  12. David says

    Consider this — Jesus is King of Israel, northern half of Israel today (Judea being southern half), and because everyone knows Herod bought his crown, Jesus accordingly rejects money — we cannot serve two masters, as the outcome is Herod and the like. Blessed are the destitute for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven…. there are four major books of Islam, relating the action and words of four prophets, Moses, David, Jesus, and Mohammad, all Kings in their own way. Islam reveals what Christianity and Judaism obscure, as they are 2/3rd of the experience of Abraham’s legacy (or half, Ishmael/Isaac) We often get wrong what we see incompletely, and Islamic Christianity reunites the Abrahamic people and promise,

  13. Daniel says

    One thing about the history of Jesus has always puzzled me: allegedly, all of this took place during the Roman occupation of Judea…but he stumble on the first hurdle: Rome considered its victory ovr Judea and the Jews an outstanding feat, attested by the building of the Arc of Titus, where it is depicted the destruction (the second one) of the Temple and Roman troops parading triunfally along the streets of jerusalem. Rome found very difficult to defat Judea because Jews were the sole monotheistic religion, whilst all the other nations, Rome included, had several gods. This polytheism was normally used by Rome to show some respect for the vanquished, by adding the defeated people’s gods into the own Roman pantheo, so as to appease the defeated. thus, a Gaul, a German… couldfind a shrine where his gods were present.

    This, however, was impossible with Jews, because their God was exclusive invisible and above all the others. So, when Rome finally subdued jews, the first thing to do was to try to erase the memory of this rebellious monotheistic nation by changing its name (thet is, to be known hene) as Philistine (Palestine); Judeas’s ingabitants (Jews9 as Philistines (Palestines) and, extremely important, the city of jerusalem, whom Romans recognized as the “capital city of the kingdom of Judea”, they renamed Aelia Capitolina.

    Summarizing: while under Roman occupation, nobody would speak of Judea, or jews, or jerusalem, even less of a King of jews (A messiah) for Romans new too well that the mere mention to these elements of Jewish religion might easily ignite another revolt. Consequently, how is it possible tht the supposed history of Jesus mentioned things as Judea, Jews, the Sanhedrin (by that time, all the high priests had either been killed or deported from the now Philistine; also, that Jesus expelled the merchants from the Temple…what temple, if Romans had destroyed it, to supress another element of Jewish religion? I would be very glad to have an answer to all of these questions, for it is still being debated who Christ was and not only there are no objective references (the Gospels are interested parties) of his existence, but that same history from the Gospels has served to bring pain and death to Jews for a long, long time, so i feel that to have a learer idea about these aspects of the alleged life of Jesus would be very useful.

    Thank you

  14. James says

    Sar Hagadol Prophesy
    I’ll do some research.
    Is it true that rapture theory doctrine has been taught for only the last two centuries?
    How does the prophesy negate this doctrine or give arguments against it?
    Please respond by email if you would be so kind.
    Thanks ;

  15. James says

    Please respond to
    J.T. Steele

  16. Johnathan says

    ct ea eayest = Thou thyself sayest [it).

  17. Johnathan says

    Sorry error in my first note …..

    Mark 15:2

    Pilate asked Him. Matthew and Mark carefully distinguished between this interview with the Lord and the rulers alone, and a subsequent interview with the multitude
    ( Luke 23:4 ).

    answered said. Looking at Deuteronomy 1:41 >
    answered and said. Idiom. Ap 6 ( Bullingers appendixes ).

    In this idiom the word “answered ” receives its meaning from the context. Here it = confessed , or repented and said.

    sinned. Heb ch-at’-a. Ap 44. i.

    will go up. Cp Num. 14:40-42

    ready. Heb. hu-n. Occurs only here: = rash, or presumptuous.

    back to
    Mark 15:2 > Thou sayest = Thou thyself sayest [ it ] .

  18. Jaqi says

    Who was the Lord GOD speaking to in Genesis 1:26? Who does Isaiah refer to in Isaiah 52:13-15, 53:1-12? How many prophets sent by GOD did Israelites kill because they did not like GOD’s message telling them to repent? Does the history of the Jewish nation repeat itself?

  19. Krzysztof says

    Jesus did NOT consider himself as a messiah – so called “messianic secret” is resolved only if the title messiah is a post-ressurection title (Wrede, 1911)! Sure, as a trouble maker was treated as an enemy of State and Priestly Hierarchy Collaborators with the Occupant and Taxing enslaved sheep (read Josephus). Fortunately that man was vindicated TOTALLY=ressurected.
    Scandalous that maybe just few sees this one perfect interpretation: together with the bloody Justice against those who participated in the killing of an innocent rebel on A.D. 70@TEmple Anihilation.

  20. Jason, says

    I expect nothing less from some here to whom these verses apply: “…he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. “This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. “For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.” John 3:18b-20 NASB.

    Stop trying to poke holes with your finite human fingers in the divine tapestry of God’s plan to save your souls. Humbly consider that if God is God, His wisdom is vastly better than your own on your best day. Humble yourself to consider that you could be wrong, and that if you are wrong about God and His Son Jesus then the consequence is your own eternal judgement in flames of fire (Luke 16, etc.) apart from God. Please, repent of your pride, sins and evil deeds, and believe on and bow to Jesus Christ as your King and Savior.

Some HTML is OK

or, reply to this post via trackback.

Send this to friend

Hello! You friend thought you might be interested in reading this post from
That Other “King of the Jews”!
Here is the link:
Enter Your Log In Credentials

Change Password