franshansen.com
▾ required

He Had to Come Once to Deal with Sin

By Frans Hansen

Torah never said that. Not once.

This idea—“first coming for sin, second coming for redemption”—is repeated so often that people assume it must be ancient, biblical, obvious. It isn’t. It’s a theory built after expectations collapsed. And once you look at Torah’s own logic, the theory doesn’t just wobble—it falls apart.

The Claim Everyone Inherits Without Question

Christian theology teaches this sequence as if it were inevitable:

  1. Humanity’s deepest problem is sin.
  2. Sin requires blood atonement.
  3. Therefore the Messiah must die first.
  4. World peace, justice, and restoration come later—at a second coming.

It sounds tidy. It sounds serious. It sounds necessary.

But Torah doesn’t work that way.

So let’s do something dangerous:

Let Torah speak before theology.

What Torah Actually Treats as the Obstacle to Redemption

In Tanakh, redemption is not blocked by an abstract metaphysical stain called “original sin.”

It is blocked by very concrete realities:

When the prophets describe redemption, they describe public change:

None of the prophets say: “None of this can happen until the Messiah dies.”

Not Moses.

Not Isaiah.

Not Jeremiah.

Not Ezekiel.

If that rule existed, Torah would have taught it clearly—because Torah never hides governing rules of history inside metaphors.

“But Sin Must Be Dealt With First”

That sounds powerful—until you ask a simple question:

Dealt with how?

Torah already answers that.

Sin is addressed through teshuvah (repentance), justice, restitution, prayer, and Yom Kippur. God forgives repeatedly without anyone dying for someone else.

“Return to Me, and I will return to you.” (Malachi 3:7)

There is no verse that says:

“Repentance is insufficient until a human being is killed.”

In fact, Torah says the opposite:

“The soul that sins—it shall die.” (Ezekiel 18:4)

“Each person shall be put to death for his own sin.” (Deut. 24:16)

That is not a suggestion. That is law.

The Sacrificial System Was Never a Cosmic Sin-Reset Button

Another myth sneaks in here: that Torah’s sacrifices were a crude preview of a future human sacrifice.

They weren’t.

Torah’s system is limited by design:

Sacrifice is repair, not ransom.

Relationship comes first. Covenant comes first. Redemption comes first.

God redeemed Israel from Egypt before Sinai, before sacrifice, before anything was “dealt with.”

That alone destroys the “sin-first” theory.

The Two-Coming Messiah: A Doctrine Born from Failure

Here is the question Christianity never answers honestly:

Which prophet teaches that the Messiah must come twice?

There is no prophecy that says:

That idea appears only after the expected messianic outcomes didn’t happen.

It is not prophecy.

It is explanation.

If the world had entered the messianic age—peace, justice, knowledge of God—no one would need a “second coming.”

The doctrine exists because history didn’t cooperate.

“Already / Not Yet”: The Escape Hatch That Breaks Prophecy

Christianity often says:

“The kingdom has begun spiritually, but not yet physically.”

That move has a cost.

If prophecy can be fulfilled invisibly, internally, spiritually—then prophecy can never be falsified. Any failure can be postponed. Any unmet promise can be spiritualized.

That turns prophecy into poetry with no teeth.

Torah prophecy is the opposite:

When it happens, you can see it.

Isaiah 53: Poetry Is Not a License to Rewrite Torah

Even if we grant layers of meaning, patterns, and depth, one rule never changes:

No poem cancels Torah law.

Isaiah 53 does not say:

Those ideas are imported—then read back into the text.

If your doctrine needs a poem to say what the law explicitly forbids, the doctrine is already disqualified.

The Moral Price Nobody Talks About

Think carefully about what the “sin-first” theory asks you to accept:

That justice means the innocent dying for the guilty.

That forgiveness requires blood, even when repentance is present.

That God demands what He once called an abomination.

Torah calls that injustice.

“Shall the Judge of all the earth not do justice?” (Gen. 18:25)

The Question That Ends the Debate

If the Messiah had to come twice because the first time didn’t bring redemption, then answer this plainly:

In what sense was the first coming messianic at all—other than as a label applied after the fact to rescue belief?

Torah’s Messiah succeeds.

He doesn’t need explanations.

Related Books

Continue this line of investigation with these books from the site: