Gen 12:3

Revelation 12 is about things which have occured and are currently occuring, not things which haven't yet been. The woman represents, in my humble view, the institution of the church. The devil, after he is defeated by the Son of God, makes war with the woman, but she is supernaturally protected. He then makes war with the remnant of her seed, realizing that the gates of hell cannot prevail against the institution of t he church. The remnant of her seed are the individual saints, described as those that keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. Chapter 13 then describes his current assault on the remnant of her seed. This well accords with Paul's warnings.

 

No, the woman is Israel. The twelve stars stand for the twelve tribes of Israel. The man child is Jesus.

Rev 12:1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:
2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

How do we know the child is Jesus? Because he will rule all nations and he was caught up to heaven to "his" throne.

Rev 12:5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.

In Revelations 12 Satan is going after Israel, not the church.

Rev 12:13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.

The Gentile church did not bring forth Jesus, Jesus was born of the Jews, of Israel.

Satan sends a flood, a great army after the woman (Israel), but the earth opens up and swallows the flood. I believe this is when the mount of Olives divides in two and allows the Jews to escape shown in Zechariah 14.

Zech 14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee

This is what Jesus was speaking of when he told his disciples to flee in Matthew 24. Notice that the "saints" come with Jesus. This is the church. The church is raptured out but returns with Jesus to save Israel.

Matt 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

I believe this is going to be a repeat of God delivering the Jews as he did when he parted the Red Sea, except this time Jesus is going to set foot on the Mount of Olives and it will divide in two, allowing the Jews to escape this advancing army.

And just as the Red Sea swallowed up Pharaoh's army, I believe the Mount of Olive may collapse back upon this persuing army in the future.

 

That verse in Matthew 24 has already been fulfilled when Christian Jews fled Judea and Jerusalem after Cestius removed his army around 66 AD. It's evident this is what Jesus meant when one reads the parallel place in Luke 21.

The woman represents the church, both OT and NT. It's an institution and Satan attacks it but then realizes he cannot destroy it. He then turns his attack to the remnant of her seed. In my humble view of course.

 

You've got your Preterist blinders on. The mount of Olives did not divide in half in 70 A.D., regardless of what others have said here. One person said the Romans dug a trench that divided the mount of Olives. How foolish, the mountain lies on the direct east of Jerusalem and shall divide from the east toward the west (vs. 4). What army in the world would dig a seige trench perpendicular to a city they were invading? Pure nonsense.

And in Zechariah 14, Jesus is fighting for the Jews, defending them, not destroying them as happened in 70 A.D.

Zech 14:3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.

You will never understand these prophesies with Preterist blinders on. God is coming to save Israel, not destroy it.

 

I'm not talking about Zechariah 14. I'm talking about Matthew 24. Those two sections of scripture aren't necessarily connected together, in fact I lean towards them not being. Matthew 24, in the part you referred to, is clearly stated by the parallel place in Luke 21 to be talking about events fulfilled in the period leading up to 70 AD.

 

Well, that's your choice, but Zechariah 14 explains what will happen in detail. The Lord is coming to defend Israel against this invading army, not to destroy Jerusalem.

Zech 14:9 And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.
10 All the land shall be turned as a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem: and it shall be lifted up, and inhabited in her place, from Benjamin's gate unto the place of the first gate, unto the corner gate, and from the tower of Hananeel unto the king's winepresses.
11 And men shall dwell in it, and there shall be no more utter destruction; but Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.

There are more physical changes that will take place, the land shall be turned into a plain from Geba to Rimmon. Jerusalem will be inhabited (that did not happen in 70 A.D.) there shall be no more utter destruction and Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.

This dividing of the mount of Olives is shown in Rev. 12.

Rev 12:15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

Again, this is speculation on my part, but I believe this will be very similar to the Jews who fled Pharaoh through the Red Sea, except this time it will be the mount of Olives that divides in two to allow the Jews to escape, and when the army follows (the flood), it shall be swallowed up of the earth.

 

And Luke 21 does not support 70 A.D., it also shows the Jews escaping and God taking out revenge on the nations that come against it.

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

Notice the city is surrounded, but Jesus tells them to flee to the mountains? How can they do that if they are surrounded? They can do that because Jesus will divide the mount of Olives and create a valley for them to escape through (Zech 14:4-5).

Zech 14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee

 

And we can discuss those verses. Yet, I think when you look at Jeremiah 31 and Hebrews 8, we see that the Bible calls the church Israel at times.

Yes, and I was there when there were 88 reasons Jesus would come in 1988, because that represented the generation. Dispy's had to rewrite their book about a Generation. I do not think reading the Bible with the Newspaper in the other hand is good hermeneutics. I would prefer to stick to exegesis of the text than assumptions of prophecy.

First, I was a Dispensationalist for most of my Christian life. I was convinced otherwise. I found their thoughts unconvincing and they refused to address some of the covenant arguments.

Jeremiah 31 is before Jeremiah 32. Chapter 31 is my favorite to quote against you because Hebrews 8 refers to this as the New Covenant and directly referring to the Church. I cannot deny Hebrews 8, as it directly quotes Jeremiah 31. Thus, my rebuttal to your quotation is simple, the Bible refers to these passages as referring to the New Covenant in Christ, not the end times.

Yes, I agree, if Hebrews 8 does not convince you this is referring to the New Covenant and referring to the Church, not the future of physical Israel, nothing will. I would rather trust the author of Hebrews over a Dispensational interpretation. Thus, can you give me your interpretation of Hebrews 8 and would you not agree that Hebrews 8 is talking about the New Covenant, not the end times for physical Israel?

As you can see, when Dispy's contradict the Bible's own interpretation of the same passages I must go with the Bible. This is a reason I am no longer a Dispy.

BTW, if you note my first post on this topic, I reference Jeremiah 31 and Hebrews 8. Thus, I am not reacting to your Jeremiah 32 verse, I actually would love to go there as this verse is why I rejected Dispensationalism.

 

It's also ironic that Christians today are doing the same thing that the Jews did in the first century - carnalizing the OT scriptures. Even though the kingdom of God was clearly set at contrast to the kingdoms of this world, the Jews nevertheless expected a thoroughly worldly kingdom. They carnalized many great OT promises, and taught the people to view the scriptures this way, and thus when Messiah came to set up that kingdom, they had a terribly wrong impression of what He was going to do. This attitude had so thoroughly infested the Jewish nation that the apostles still held on to these notions until the Holy Ghost came upon them and revealed the truth to them. They, then, told us how we are supposed to view the OT scriptures.

Modern day Christians are making the same foolish errors that the Jews did in those days. They are expecting God to set up a thoroughly worldly kingdom for the Jews. The Jews were wrong back then, and these modern day Christians are wrong too. A great example of this is Isaiah 65. The first 16 verses are about the destruction of natural Jerusalem due to the continued rebellion of the Jewish people, which was accomplished in AD 70. In verse 17 we are told of a new Jerusalem that God would build rejoicing, and her people a joy. This is not a national restoration text, but a view into how God wrote the OT scriptures. This new Jerusalem is the heavenly Jerusalem, spiritual Jerusalem. God uses a natural example first to illustrate a greater spiritual truth. This is the case all over the OT.

 

The woman in Revelations 12 is Israel, the 12 stars above her head are the 12 tribes of Israel.

Rev 12:1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:

This is from Joseph's dream where he dreamed his brothers would bow down to him.

Gen 37:9 And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me.
10 And he told it to his father, and to his brethren: and his father rebuked him, and said unto him, What is this dream that thou hast dreamed? Shall I and thy mother and thy brethren indeed come to bow down ourselves to thee to the earth?
11 And his brethren envied him; but his father observed the saying.

These 11 stars are Joseph's brothers, Joseph being the 12th star. These are the 12 stars in the crown of the woman in Revelations 12.

And how do we know it is speaking of Israel and not the church? Because Christ is born of the woman. Jesus was a Jew and came from Israel, not the church.

Rev 12:5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.

We know this man child is Jesus because he will rule all nations, and because he was caught up unto God and to "his" throne.

The woman is Israel, not the church.

 

When the apostles asked Jesus directly if he would restore the kingdom to Israel at this time, Jesus did not deny that the kingdom would be restored, he simply told them it was not for them to know when this would happen.

Acts 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.
8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

Jesus didn't correct the apostles, he didn't tell them that they were wrong in expecting a literal restoration of the kingdom of Israel, he told them is was not for them to know the times or seasons the Father hath put in his own power.

The scriptures show that the kingdom of Israel will be restored, and that Jesus will sit on the throne forever.

Jer 33:14 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised unto the house of Israel and to the house of Judah.
15 In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land.
16 In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, The LORD our righteousness.
17 For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel;

Jesus is coming back to save Israel, not destroy it, and he will literally sit on the throne.

 

The church clearly has both Jews and Gentiles in it.

But there is still a distinction between Jew and Gentile.

Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

Paul here speaks about a temporary blindness that has come upon national Israel. Although many Jews believed and were part of the church (Acts 2:47), the majority were blinded. Now the gospel goes to the Gentiles, and once the fulness of the Gentiles be brought in, God will once again turn to national Israel and a remnant shall be saved out of it. When this final remant is saved, then "all Israel" that is, all that are going to be saved, will be saved.

 

Jesus didn't answer their question at all. He didn't confirm or deny a restoration of the Jewish nation is a natural sense. He often answered questions in this fashion, particularly because the question itself was foolish and showed that those asking the questions had a basic misunderstanding at that time of the truth. Another instance is in John 6 when the people who come over the sea ask Him how He get to that side. That's a foolish question, and it shows their lack of understanding of who He is. He never even acknowledged the question but rather starting preaching to them concerning their faulty motives for following Him. I contend that after Pentecost those same apostles wouldn't have asked Him that question.