Replacement/Supersessionism Theology,Why it Matters

[kaylagrl]

I am not aware that anyone apart from God has blamed 'all Jews' for the crucifixion of Christ. But I seem to remember that God destroyed 'all Jews' in 70 AD. He did not discriminate apart from those who were still part of the true Israel, the election of Israel, whom He saved through prophecy. However, that was that generation, not Jews living since.

We ALL crucified Christ. So how can we blame others?



True but a different view was taken in Acts 4.25-27





Hardly an unbiased witness An understandably bitter man trying to find something to blame.



well if the Roman Catholic church denounces it, it MUST be right. They are no judge of true doctrine.





Now that is simply a lie. There is no hiding the fact. In my view you simply ignore the New Testament because of your bias.




I forgive you because you are a woman. If you thought logically you would realise that you are reading into my views something totally foreign to them. I do not judge the Jews one way or the other. They are in God's hands. I simply teach what God has said about the situation that Jesus Christ the Messiah brought into fruition the true Israel, rejecting the unbelieving.





And that's your opinion. None of the men you cited, however bad their behaviour, taught those things. You just make sweeping generalisatons





LOL how can a theology which makes one claim to be semitic be anti-semitic? Beats me lol But then you are a woman. Logic is not your strong point





None of those quotes mentioned replacement theology (which I don't believe in. The new church WAS the true Israel. It did not replace it. God broke the unbelievers off.





WE are His chosen people. God rejected them. However we are responsible for how we treat ALL people.





Lol I prefer to live in the Apostolic past when the Apostles taught that we are the true Israel (John 15.1-6; Matt 21.43; Rom 11.12-24; Eph 2.11-22; 1 Peter 1.9; Gal 3.29; James 1.1; etc)





Of course it is NOT. No one suggests a replacement. The true Israel continued on in the persons of the Apostles and all the Jews who were converted by them. For a number of years only Jews formed the church, and there were a great many of them. They were the true Israel abiding in the true vine. Unbelieving Jews were cast off. So Israel continued on in those who believed in the Messiah. Then God showed them that they had to accept Gentile proselytes as Israel always had done. Those Gentiles then became Israelites. And so the true Israel continued to grow until it is what it is today.

Unbelieving Jews are no longer a part of Israel. Not are unbelieving Gentiles. I do not believe in persecuting any of them. But I do believe that they are under the wrath of God.





I have written a commentary on it, and in order to do that you have to understand it thoroughly, So I think I know it better than you do.





My pleasure and no offence intended

I will take a pass on this tonight and get back to you. As I said earlier in the thread my old buddy,my dog of 14yrs died on Monday. I stayed at my parents all week and this is my first night back to my house without him here. Its a lonely feeling...and my heart just isnt in discussion or serious things tonight. I have to bury him yet and thats all I have on my mind.Hope you understand.Blessings and goodnight to all.

 

[Ahwatukee]

That's only your opinion based on a flawed reading of Romans 11:26, which actually says that all of Israel will be saved by the new covenant removal of their sins. In no way does it say that all Israel will be saved (as you interpret it). This is such an ignorant statement that it's pointless for me to comment.

Good evening HeRose,

Romans 11:26 aside, there are other scriptures that demonstrate that the nation Israel proper, that remnant, will be saved during the last 3 1/2 years until Christ returns to end the age, not as the church, but as Israel. In fact, the very fact that the will be here during that last seven years would demonstrate that they are not the church, but the nation Israel, otherwise they would have been removed with the rest of the church.

==============================================

"A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. (Rev.12:1-2)

"She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.” And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. The woman fled into the wilderness to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days." (Rev.12:5-6)

"The woman was given the two wings of a great eagle, so that she might fly to the place prepared for her in the wilderness, where she would be taken care of for a time, times and half a time, out of the serpent’s reach."

The identity of woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and wearing a crown of twelve stars is revealed in Gen.37:9-10 regarding Joseph's dream which utilizes the same exact symbols as found here in Rev.12:1

Joseph's Dream:
"Then he had another dream, and he told it to his brothers. “Listen,” he said, “I had another dream, and this time the sun and moon and eleven stars were bowing down to me.” When he told his father as well as his brothers, his father rebuked him and said, “What is this dream you had? Will your mother and I and your brothers actually come and bow down to the ground before you?”

Sun = Jacob

Moon = wive(s)

Eleven Stars = Eleven son's of Jacob, Joseph makes twelve = twelve tribes of Israel

The woman = The Nation Israel

============================================

Referring back to the scriptures above, it is said that the woman gives birth to a son, a Male Child, which is a collective name representing the 144,000. According to Rev.14:4, these are those who will have not defied themselves with woman, which means that they are all males, ergo, Male child. These are the first fruits to God out of the nation Israel (gives birth to) who will have recognized Jesus as their Messiah. This group is not the church, but another individual group and a separate group out of Israel, just as the great tribulation saints are not the church.

The woman who gives birth to the Male child is unbelieving Israel who, at the setting up of the abomination in the temple, will flee out into the desert, which is the desolation caused by the abomination (Mt.24:15-17, Rev.12:5,14). The reference in Daniel 9:27 where that ruler makes his covenant and then in middle sets up the abomination leaving 3 1/2 years until Christ returns , is synonymous with the 1,260 days that the woman is cared for out in the wilderness. Jesus told that generation of Israel, as well as future Israel, that they would not see him again until they said, "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord." I believe that some time during that last 3 1/2 years, while they are being cared for, that they will come to the understanding that the One whom their ancestors had crucified is indeed their Messiah and will then say, blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.

I hope that this explanation provides some clarity that there are specific, unfulfilled, promises and prophecies regarding the nation Israel proper and that she is a separate entity from the church, ergo, the church is not spiritual Israel nor is Israel the church.

 

[Cassian]

Greetings Hoffco,

I don't know if you have realized this yet, but Valiant, Bowman and Cassian are A-Millennialists. Therefore, if you haven't studied anything about this belief, you might want to, for it would help you to understand why they don't adhere to scripture. For the most part, most end time events and anything related they spiritualized or allegorized, which is why it makes it so difficult to prove your literal point through scripture.

Great assertions again without any facts. I am still looking for the facts that premillennialism has always been the teaching of scripture. Most of you don't even give credit to the person who in the modern, most recent times, the last 200 years, originated the basis of the more recent advocates who themselves cannot agree just what it means.

There is a vast difference between what the Bible is teaching according to the Apostles who were given the revelation for this Messianic Age, than what some man thinks it might mean. One would think that the Bible arrived by mail to Miller and Darby and it was up to them to determine what it might mean. The sad fact is that even after 200 years, no one can actually factually state what the theory actually means. It constantly is evolving with every new proponent thinking he has the better idea. Hardly the Gospel once given in the beginning 2000 years ago.

So, where are the facts, not man's opinions that premillennialism has always been a teaching of scripture?

 

[crossnote]

Maybe each of us should explain what they mean by 'remnant'.

I take it to mean those truly believing Jews from amongst national Israel as here..

But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel,
(Rom 9:6)

in the above case those descended from Israel and are true believers are the remnant and it is those who will be saved.

God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he appeals to God against Israel? "Lord, they have killed your prophets, they have demolished your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life." But what is God's reply to him? "I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal." So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace.
(Rom 11:2-5)

Again we see who the remnant are, those Jews chosen by grace.

Today, this remnant are very few in proportion to the great many who will be saved in the Tribulation.

 

[crossnote]

Great assertions again without any facts. I am still looking for the facts that premillennialism has always been the teaching of scripture. Most of you don't even give credit to the person who in the modern, most recent times, the last 200 years, originated the basis of the more recent advocates who themselves cannot agree just what it means.

There is a vast difference between what the Bible is teaching according to the Apostles who were given the revelation for this Messianic Age, than what some man thinks it might mean. One would think that the Bible arrived by mail to Miller and Darby and it was up to them to determine what it might mean. The sad fact is that even after 200 years, no one can actually factually state what the theory actually means. It constantly is evolving with every new proponent thinking he has the better idea. Hardly the Gospel once given in the beginning 2000 years ago.

So, where are the facts, not man's opinions that premillennialism has always been a teaching of scripture?

It is historically accurate that the early Church comprised mainly of Jews was Premil, maybe not pre wrath rapture but it was Classical premil. Amil came about a few hundred years after the 1st century with Augustine & Co.

 

[Angela53510]

Greetings Hoffco,

I don't know if you have realized this yet, but Valiant, Bowman and Cassian are A-Millennialists. Therefore, if you haven't studied anything about this belief, you might want to, for it would help you to understand why they don't adhere to scripture. For the most part, most end time events and anything related they spiritualized or allegorized, which is why it makes it so difficult to prove your literal point through scripture.

Hey! You left me out! I'm amillennial! I have been for 35 years, although I was afraid to say it because the pre-mils got so upset. After reading Hal Lindsey's insane books I became utterly convinced that Amill was the only way to go.

I've been meaning to post on this thread, but I've been reading through two scholarly Reformed books and I am bogged down in Romans 11. Needing to look closer at the Greek, because all doesn't mean "every" in the case of "all Israel." It can mean that most or many Jews will be saved.

But no rapture, as I have said here many times. Not in the Bible, and 1 Thess. 4:17 in the Greek doesn't hold up.

"Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord." 1 Thess. 4:17

"ἔπειτα ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι ἅμα σὺν αὐτοῖς ἁρπαγησόμεθα ἐν νεφέλαις εἰς ἀπάντησιν" 1Thess. 4:17

The word apantasin or ἀπάντησιν is Greek for "meet and return." So if you want to take this literalistically, it means meet Jesus in the air, and then return to earth with him. Only one second coming, not two!

Two scholarly books to read which confirm the traditional churches position historically regarding eschatology are:

The Case for Amillennialsim: an Understanding of End Times by Kim Riddlebarger

The Bible and the Future by Anthony A. Hoekema

I had professors in Seminary who were premill and amill. One thing we had to do in New Testament when studying Revelation was watch a video done by another prof. He showed the strengths and weaknesses of all 4 end times scenerios. And told us scholarly books we could read showing each viewpoint. That was very instructional. (He included Preterist)

The thing that drives me crazy about "some" (not all!) premils, is that they interpret the Bible wrongly. They take today, and apply it to scripture, esp. Revelation. Instead of taking who the letter was written to and why it was written and then finding the things that apply to today. And I do not mean saying the insects are modern helicopters, like Hal Lindsay. That is just very bad hermenetics!

 

[crossnote]

Hey! You left me out! I'm amillennial! I have been for 35 years, although I was afraid to say it because the pre-mils got so upset. After reading Hal Lindsey's insane books I became utterly convinced that Amill was the only way to go.

I've been meaning to post on this thread, but I've been reading through two scholarly Reformed books and I am bogged down in Romans 11. Needing to look closer at the Greek, because all doesn't mean "every" in the case of "all Israel." It can mean that most or many Jews will be saved.

But no rapture, as I have said here many times. Not in the Bible, and 1 Thess. 4:17 in the Greek doesn't hold up.

"Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord." 1 Thess. 4:17

"ἔπειτα ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι ἅμα σὺν αὐτοῖς ἁρπαγησόμεθα ἐν νεφέλαις εἰς ἀπάντησιν" 1Thess. 4:17

The word apantasin or ἀπάντησιν is Greek for "meet and return." So if you want to take this literalistically, it means meet Jesus in the air, and then return to earth with him. Only one second coming, not two!

Two scholarly books to read which confirm the traditional churches position historically regarding eschatology are:

The Case for Amillennialsim: an Understanding of End Times by Kim Riddlebarger

The Bible and the Future by Anthony A. Hoekema

I had professors in Seminary who were premill and amill. One thing we had to do in New Testament when studying Revelation was watch a video done by another prof. He showed the strengths and weaknesses of all 4 end times scenerios. And told us scholarly books we could read showing each viewpoint. That was very instructional. (He included Preterist)

The thing that drives me crazy about "some" (not all!) premils, is that they interpret the Bible wrongly. They take today, and apply it to scripture, esp. Revelation. Instead of taking who the letter was written to and why it was written and then finding the things that apply to today. And I do not mean saying the insects are modern helicopters, like Hal Lindsay. That is just very bad hermenetics!

I agree Angela it is sad you got your premil education from Hal Lindsay, a rather sensational type. Did you ever take a look at Fruchtenbaum's book (Israelology, the Missing Link in Systematic Theology) I referred you to?

 

[Gr8grace]

"ἔπειτα ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι ἅμα σὺν αὐτοῖς ἁρπαγησόμεθα ἐν νεφέλαις εἰς ἀπάντησιν" 1Thess. 4:17

The word apantasin or ἀπάντησιν is Greek for "meet and return." So if you want to take this literalistically, it means meet Jesus in the air, and then return to earth with him. Only one second coming, not two!

I completely agree with you here. It's the timing of the return to earth with Him that is the concern. Does this word clue us in on that it is an "instant" return or a "future" return with Him?.

ἀπάντησιν does not imply an instant return nor a "in one month" return............Just a return with Him. SO, this gives time for the Bema seat judgement of ALL believers and rewards and rank given and THEN the return with His Bride.

 

[Cassian]

It is historically accurate that the early Church comprised mainly of Jews was Premil, maybe not pre wrath rapture but it was Classical premil. Amil came about a few hundred years after the 1st century with Augustine & Co.

Nice assertion again. Cite the historical facts. Scripture does not even support it, even if you had no historical facts to support it.
Augustine came almost 100 years after the Church declared Chiliasm heretical because it did not align with scripture. Scripture has always been understood in what today is called amillennialism.

Sola scripturist make the classical miscalculation thinking that individual men in the early Church actually determined what the Church believed or practiced. The very few who wrote about it never represented what the Church believed. If the Church had accepted these writing as authentic teachings they would have so stated. However, as throughout the history of the Church, no man has been able to impose any new innovative teachings upon God's revelation to man including scripture. Thus the very primitive view of Papias, of Iraneous and Justin were eventually declared heretical.

That is how the Holy Spirit has worked within Christ's Body from the beginning. He has preserved the original deposit entrusted to the Church unchanged from then to today.

Unfortunately, sola scripturist will be debating this topic as long as Christ tarries and there will not only never be a consensus but the view will be so drastically different in the next 50 years as it has become from Darby's version to the present day where numerous versions exist side by side. And those who like to have their ears tickled will nimbly follow the leader of the newest, ever changing view.

Actually the view was essentially dormant for almost 100 years, at least in the US, until Lindsey wrote his Book, "The Late Great Planet Earth" and popularized it. Then many others jumped on the bandwagon, such as Walvoord, Lyrie, and the real fascinating perveyors such as Hagee and Impe. There hardly could be a better example of false, man made theory than what is known today as dispensational/premillennialism.

 

[Angela53510]

I completely agree with you here. It's the timing of the return to earth with Him that is the concern. Does this word clue us in on that it is an "instant" return or a "future" return with Him?.

ἀπάντησιν does not imply an instant return nor a "in one month" return............Just a return with Him. SO, this gives time for the Bema seat judgement of ALL believers and rewards and rank given and THEN the return with His Bride.

I guess I failed to mention the only other two times apantasin was used in the New Testament imply "instant." See Acts 28:15 and Matt 24:6


No TWO second comings necessary! Only one second coming in the Bible!

 

[Cassian]

I completely agree with you here. It's the timing of the return to earth with Him that is the concern. Does this word clue us in on that it is an "instant" return or a "future" return with Him?.

ἀπάντησιν does not imply an instant return nor a "in one month" return............Just a return with Him. SO, this gives time for the Bema seat judgement of ALL believers and rewards and rank given and THEN the return with His Bride.

The problem is that all of it happens in a twinkling of an eye.

 

[crossnote]

Hey! You left me out! I'm amillennial! I have been for 35 years, although I was afraid to say it because the pre-mils got so upset. After reading Hal Lindsey's insane books I became utterly convinced that Amill was the only way to go.

I've been meaning to post on this thread, but I've been reading through two scholarly Reformed books and I am bogged down in Romans 11. Needing to look closer at the Greek, because all doesn't mean "every" in the case of "all Israel." It can mean that most or many Jews will be saved.

But no rapture, as I have said here many times. Not in the Bible, and 1 Thess. 4:17 in the Greek doesn't hold up.

"Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord." 1 Thess. 4:17

"ἔπειτα ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι ἅμα σὺν αὐτοῖς ἁρπαγησόμεθα ἐν νεφέλαις εἰς ἀπάντησιν" 1Thess. 4:17

The word apantasin or ἀπάντησιν is Greek for "meet and return." So if you want to take this literalistically, it means meet Jesus in the air, and then return to earth with him. Only one second coming, not two!

Two scholarly books to read which confirm the traditional churches position historically regarding eschatology are:

The Case for Amillennialsim: an Understanding of End Times by Kim Riddlebarger

The Bible and the Future by Anthony A. Hoekema

I had professors in Seminary who were premill and amill. One thing we had to do in New Testament when studying Revelation was watch a video done by another prof. He showed the strengths and weaknesses of all 4 end times scenerios. And told us scholarly books we could read showing each viewpoint. That was very instructional. (He included Preterist)

The thing that drives me crazy about "some" (not all!) premils, is that they interpret the Bible wrongly. They take today, and apply it to scripture, esp. Revelation. Instead of taking who the letter was written to and why it was written and then finding the things that apply to today. And I do not mean saying the insects are modern helicopters, like Hal Lindsay. That is just very bad hermenetics!

ἀπάντησις, εως, ἡ. as an action meeting, encountering; εἰς ἀπάντησιν to meet (MT 25.6)ANLEX

15.78 ἀπαντάω εως f εως f: (includes: ἀπάντησις, ὑπαντάω[α], ὑπάντησις) to come near to and to meet, either in a friendly or hostile sense - to draw near, to meet, to meet up with. ἀπαντάω ἀπήντησαν αὐτῳ̂ δέκα λεπροὶ ἄνδρες the ten lepers met him LUK.17:12. ἀπάντησις ἁρπαγησόμεθα ἐν νεφέλαις εἰς ἀπάντησιν του̂ κυρίου εἰς ἀέρα we will be snatched up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air 1TH.4:17. ὑπαντάω[a]: ὑπήντησαν αὐτῳ̂ δύο δαιμονιζόμενοι two demon-possessed persons met him MAT.8:28. ὑπάντησις πα̂σα ἡ πόλις ἐξη̂λθεν εἰς ὑπάντησιν τῳ̂ Ἰησου̂ all the people of the city came out to meet Jesus MAT.8:34. Greek/English Lexicon

[561] ἀπάντησις apantēsis 3x a meeting, encounter; εἰς ἀπάντησιν, to meet, Mt. 25:6; Acts 28:15; 1 Thess. 4:17* [529] Mounce

Angela, i looked at a number of lexicons and I don't see the meaning you give to meet, i.e.'meet and return', they seem to indicate meet.

 

[Gr8grace]

I guess I failed to mention the only other two times apantasin was used in the New Testament imply "instant." See Acts 28:15 and Matt 24:6


No TWO second comings necessary! Only one second coming in the Bible!

Of course they went and met Paul......instantly upon their greeting. But how long did it take them to get to Rome? Act 28:15

 

[crossnote]

Nice assertion again. Cite the historical facts. Scripture does not even support it, even if you had no historical facts to support it.
Augustine came almost 100 years after the Church declared Chiliasm heretical because it did not align with scripture. Scripture has always been understood in what today is called amillennialism.

Sola scripturist make the classical miscalculation thinking that individual men in the early Church actually determined what the Church believed or practiced. The very few who wrote about it never represented what the Church believed. If the Church had accepted these writing as authentic teachings they would have so stated. However, as throughout the history of the Church, no man has been able to impose any new innovative teachings upon God's revelation to man including scripture. Thus the very primitive view of Papias, of Iraneous and Justin were eventually declared heretical.

That is how the Holy Spirit has worked within Christ's Body from the beginning. He has preserved the original deposit entrusted to the Church unchanged from then to today.

Unfortunately, sola scripturist will be debating this topic as long as Christ tarries and there will not only never be a consensus but the view will be so drastically different in the next 50 years as it has become from Darby's version to the present day where numerous versions exist side by side. And those who like to have their ears tickled will nimbly follow the leader of the newest, ever changing view.

Actually the view was essentially dormant for almost 100 years, at least in the US, until Lindsey wrote his Book, "The Late Great Planet Earth" and popularized it. Then many others jumped on the bandwagon, such as Walvoord, Lyrie, and the real fascinating perveyors such as Hagee and Impe. There hardly could be a better example of false, man made theory than what is known today as dispensational/premillennialism.

This thread isn't about sola scriptura or your conspiracy ideas of how ideas crept into the Church. Rephrase your point please.

 

[crossnote]

"Premillennialism was the most widely held view of the earliest centuries of the church. Philip Schaff has said, "The most striking point in the eschatology of the ante-Nicene Age (A.D. 100-325) is the prominent chiliasm, or millenarianism, . . . a widely current opinion of distinguished teachers, such as Barnabas, Papia, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Methodius, and Lactantius." (History of the Christian Church, Scribner, 1884; Vol. 2, p. 614)

Premillennialism began to die out in the established Catholic Church during the life of Augustine (A.D. 354-430). Chiliasm was suppressed by the dominant Catholic Church, but survived through various "fringe" groups of Christians during the mediaeval period. During the Reformation, Anabaptists and Hugenots helped to revive premillennialism and it was adopted among some Puritans during the Post-Reformation era."

Premillennialism | Theopedia

 

[Angela53510]

I agree Angela it is sad you got your premil education from Hal Lindsay, a rather sensational type. Did you ever take a look at Fruchtenbaum's book (Israelology, the Missing Link in Systematic Theology) I referred you to?

Actually, Hal Lindsay is the one who scared me to death about ALL eschatology. After 35 years, I am finally feeling that God is allowing me to go back and study this.

I did study all the viewpoints in theology and my New Testament prof was pre-mill. He put in a pretty good plug for it, but I wasn't buying.

As for apantesin, I get this out of my Exegetical Book by Cleon Rogers and Cleon Rogers. And my Lexicon, which is Bauer, if I remember. I am not in my office with all my books. If I am wrong about that Lexicon, I will get back to and correct myself.

And I will get that book. But I doubt very much it will convince me. I do like to read all the scholarly sources, and other than theology texts, I have not read an individual pre-mill book on this. Not scholarly, anyway!) Yet another book to read. My concentration has been really down since my RA meds failed.(RA really messes with my brain and cognitive function!) That is over 10 long months, and may be forever. I believe there is not going to be a Ph.D in my future at the rate I am going. But then, you people would all miss me too much, right? LOL

 

[Angela53510]

Sorry Crossnote - that book is over $75 in Canada. Maybe I need to look on some other websites besides Amazon.ca? Trouble is, our dollar is worth nothing against the American these days. Oh well, maybe Trudeau will pull us out of that hole? NOT!!

By the way, Kayla this is an interesting topic, unique to the BDF and I am glad you started it!

 

[crossnote]

I will be bowing out of this discussion as it is apparent everyone is well set in their convictions. It just seems tromping over the same ground endlessly has met it's point of diminishing returns.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

This is certainly one possible interpretation of Revelation (and some other things you mentioned), but I don't believe it's the right one. It appears to be classic dispensationalism, which I find to be untenable.

Good evening HeRose,

Romans 11:26 aside, there are other scriptures that demonstrate that the nation Israel proper, that remnant, will be saved during the last 3 1/2 years until Christ returns to end the age, not as the church, but as Israel. In fact, the very fact that the will be here during that last seven years would demonstrate that they are not the church, but the nation Israel, otherwise they would have been removed with the rest of the church.

==============================================

"A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. (Rev.12:1-2)

"She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.” And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne. The woman fled into the wilderness to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days." (Rev.12:5-6)

"The woman was given the two wings of a great eagle, so that she might fly to the place prepared for her in the wilderness, where she would be taken care of for a time, times and half a time, out of the serpent’s reach."

The identity of woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and wearing a crown of twelve stars is revealed in Gen.37:9-10 regarding Joseph's dream which utilizes the same exact symbols as found here in Rev.12:1

Joseph's Dream:
"Then he had another dream, and he told it to his brothers. “Listen,” he said, “I had another dream, and this time the sun and moon and eleven stars were bowing down to me.” When he told his father as well as his brothers, his father rebuked him and said, “What is this dream you had? Will your mother and I and your brothers actually come and bow down to the ground before you?”

Sun = Jacob

Moon = wive(s)

Eleven Stars = Eleven son's of Jacob, Joseph makes twelve = twelve tribes of Israel

The woman = The Nation Israel

============================================

Referring back to the scriptures above, it is said that the woman gives birth to a son, a Male Child, which is a collective name representing the 144,000. According to Rev.14:4, these are those who will have not defied themselves with woman, which means that they are all males, ergo, Male child. These are the first fruits to God out of the nation Israel (gives birth to) who will have recognized Jesus as their Messiah. This group is not the church, but another individual group and a separate group out of Israel, just as the great tribulation saints are not the church.

The woman who gives birth to the Male child is unbelieving Israel who, at the setting up of the abomination in the temple, will flee out into the desert, which is the desolation caused by the abomination (Mt.24:15-17, Rev.12:5,14). The reference in Daniel 9:27 where that ruler makes his covenant and then in middle sets up the abomination leaving 3 1/2 years until Christ returns , is synonymous with the 1,260 days that the woman is cared for out in the wilderness. Jesus told that generation of Israel, as well as future Israel, that they would not see him again until they said, "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord." I believe that some time during that last 3 1/2 years, while they are being cared for, that they will come to the understanding that the One whom their ancestors had crucified is indeed their Messiah and will then say, blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.

I hope that this explanation provides some clarity that there are specific, unfulfilled, promises and prophecies regarding the nation Israel proper and that she is a separate entity from the church, ergo, the church is not spiritual Israel nor is Israel the church.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Sorry Crossnote - that book is over $75 in Canada. Maybe I need to look on some other websites besides Amazon.ca? Trouble is, our dollar is worth nothing against the American these days. Oh well, maybe Trudeau will pull us out of that hole? NOT!!

By the way, Kayla this is an interesting topic, unique to the BDF and I am glad you started it!

Do you have interlibrary loans in Canada?