Birth Pangs & First Fruits

[AdHoc]

45 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi Ad Hoc,

No where did I say that Gen. 37 is about Rev. 12. It is ONLY the symbols of the sun, moon and stars representing Israel. Nothing else. 

No where does Rev. 12 say the man-child is plural. Where is your proof?

`Then being with child..... to devour her child....she bore a male child...her child was caught up....` Rev. 12: 2, 4 & 5)

`Unto us a child is born, unto us a son (male/man) is given...`  (man child) (Isa. 9: 6)  CHRIST.

 

`...a male child who was to rule all nations...` (Rev. 12: 5)

`...And the government shall be upon His shoulder....` (Isa. 9: 6)

 

You have not addressed any scriptures that I gave in my comments. That is what is needed for a profitable discussion. Your comments are just that, your opinions with a misunderstanding of scripture. Just a confused mixture there, bro.

Please address the person`s comments when they post scripture, for that is what we look for not a download of someone`s philosophy. 

Come sister. My two postings above this one of yours are full of points made. These you ignored. Your answer above is smokescreen. But I will uphold Christian courtesy and answer yours - when you have answered mine. There are but TWO entities that will rue the Nations, - our Lord Jesus (n:19:15) AND the Overcomers (Rev.2:27). The fact is, if you answered my points in the above postings, you would have to admit that the Man-Child is the Overcomers because the Woman fits New Jerusalem and not Mary.

But this is not all. The text that follows the rapture of the Man-Child tells the following:
- Verses 7-9 tells of an immediate war in heaven. If this war took place when our Lord Jesus was raptured, then Ephesians is untrue for it still names him "prince of the power of the air". Added to this, Satan is said by the text (verse 12) tat he is bound to the earth and "hath but a short time". When our Lord was raptured he still had the whole New Testament age  - a long time (Matt.25:19, Lk.20:9)

But if this war and immediate expulsion of Satan and his angels to place just before the Great Tribulation, then Satan wold have just about 1260 days -a "short time". This is the time the Woman uses the wilderness as refuge.

Added to this, if Satan was cast down when our Lord Jesus was raptured there would be no need for the Lord Jesus as our Mediator, Advocate and High Priest - for how could Satan accuse them night and day BEFORE GOD (unless you maintain that God dwells on earth)??

- Then, verse 11 starts with an "AND" - a conjunction. That means that verse 10 and 11 are one unit and verse 11 describes the "BRETHREN" (plural) who OVERCAME. "THEY" (plural) is used throughout. It is no small point that God said in Genesis 1:26-28, "let THEM ... subdue and rule". God would not displace the enemy for one Man, though He be Jesus. Not because He can't, but because God's councils are immutable.

Thus, ALL the evidence points to the Man-Child as the Overcomers. Conversely, our Lord Jesus was not raptured straight after His birth. It would be untrue if scripture said that Jesus was a "Child" at His rapture.

Now, I have answered you in detail for the third time. Let us see what you do - esteemed sister.

[Vine Abider]

22 hours ago, Marilyn C said:

Thank you too VA, for opening more discussion.

As I said the man-child is the Lord, and Rev. 12: 1- 6 is the scriptural identity of the Lord.

1. Born of the nation of Israel. (Rev. 12: 1) Israel is represented as the woman with sun, moon and 12 stars. God`s interpretation is seen in Joseph`s dream - `....the sun, the moon, and the eleven stars bowed down to me....` (his father said) `Shall your mother and I and your brothers ...` (Gen. 37: 9 & 10)

God explains who is represented by the sun, moon and stars. That is Israel. 

2. The promised man child of Israel.  (Rev. 12: 5) `For unto us a child is born, unto us a Son (male/man)is given...` (Isa. 9: 6)

3. Satan tried to kill Him as soon as born. (Rev. 12: 4)  (the angel said) `Arise, take the young child and his mother, flee to Egypt, and stay there until I bring you word; for Herod will seek the young child to destroy Him.` (Matt. 2: 13)

4. Satan through King Herod seeks to kill the man child. (Rev. 12: 4) `Then Herod, when he saw that he was deceived by the wise men, was exceedingly angry; and he sent forth and put to death all the male children who were in Bethlehem and in its districts, from two years old and under, according to the time from the wise men.` (Matt. 2: 16)

5. Jesus is born of the nation of Israel and will rule all the nations with a rod of iron. (Rev. 12: 5) (the Father said to His Son) `I will give you the nations for your inheritance, and the ends of the earth for your possession. You shall break them with a rod of iron...` (Ps. 2: 8 & 9)

6. Jesus ascends to God the Father and to His own throne. (Rev. 12: 5) (the Father) `raised Him (Jesus) from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places...` (Eph. 1: 20)

The sign was in heaven for Israel was made of God and not man of the earth.

Also, Jesus was of the Father (sun) and not the earthly mother, (moon under feet.)  (Rev. 12: 1)

 

I had thought to answer each of these, however @AdHoc has done a good job of showing various specific reasons why the common view of the man child being Jesus doesn't square with what is stated in the first part of Revelation 12.  For this reason, I believe the man child is actually the stronger part of God's people (the woman), in whom Christ has matured to the point of the birth we see in Rev 12. 

Which brings us to the purpose of why the child is born, which is stated in the latter part of Rev 12.  Here are verses 7 - 11:

"And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceives the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. 

And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, 'Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.' And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death."

Looking at the last part of this passage, the loud voice proclaims the great victory in casting the dragon down.  Who is this voice coming from? The voice says, "the accuser of our brethren is cast down."  This makes the voice a human, because it says "our brethren." And how did they overcome the dragon?  "They overcame him by the blood of the Lamb." This shows it was not the Lord Himself who did the overcoming here - it is the brethren who overcame the dragon "by the blood of the Lamb." It was based on the authority they had as sons of God, who are filled with the life of Christ.  Here's a verse that also proclaims this occurrence: "Now the God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly." (Rom 16:20) 

It will be members of the Lord's body who will do this casting down of the great dragon - ones full of the life of "Christ in you, the hope of glory!"  (Col 1:27)  Hard to think of anything more glorious, isn't it!?  The ones the serpent had deceived and usurped their authority, have been restored to their rightful place by Christ, who is both their Redeemer and their life.  As promised to the overcomers in Rev 2:27, they will then go on to "rule the nations with a rod of iron."

(BTW - I would also just mention that the verses after verse Rev 12:11, speak about the woman more, whom the dragon pursues. The timing and circumstances given do not fit with the woman being either Mary or Israel, but do fit the end-of-the-age scenario well, but I'll save that for another post if it seems good to do . . .)

[Vine Abider]

15 minutes ago, AdHoc said:

Come sister. My two postings above this one of yours are full of points made. These you ignored. Your answer above is smokescreen. But I will uphold Christian courtesy and answer yours - when you have answered mine. There are but TWO entities that will rue the Nations, - our Lord Jesus (n:19:15) AND the Overcomers (Rev.2:27). The fact is, if you answered my points in the above postings, you would have to admit that the Man-Child is the Overcomers because the Woman fits New Jerusalem and not Mary.

But this is not all. The text that follows the rapture of the Man-Child tells the following:
- Verses 7-9 tells of an immediate war in heaven. If this war took place when our Lord Jesus was raptured, then Ephesians is untrue for it still names him "prince of the power of the air". Added to this, Satan is said by the text (verse 12) tat he is bound to the earth and "hath but a short time". When our Lord was raptured he still had the whole New Testament age  - a long time (Matt.25:19, Lk.20:9)

But if this war and immediate expulsion of Satan and his angels to place just before the Great Tribulation, then Satan wold have just about 1260 days -a "short time". This is the time the Woman uses the wilderness as refuge.

Added to this, if Satan was cast down when our Lord Jesus was raptured there would be no need for the Lord Jesus as our Mediator, Advocate and High Priest - for how could Satan accuse them night and day BEFORE GOD (unless you maintain that God dwells on earth)??

- Then, verse 11 starts with an "AND" - a conjunction. That means that verse 10 and 11 are one unit and verse 11 describes the "BRETHREN" (plural) who OVERCAME. "THEY" (plural) is used throughout. It is no small point that God said in Genesis 1:26-28, "let THEM ... subdue and rule". God would not displace the enemy for one Man, though He be Jesus. Not because He can't, but because God's councils are immutable.

Thus, ALL the evidence points to the Man-Child as the Overcomers. Conversely, our Lord Jesus was not raptured straight after His birth. It would be untrue if scripture said that Jesus was a "Child" at His rapture.

Now, I have answered you in detail for the third time. Let us see what you do - esteemed sister.

Ha - we were posting very similar response at the same time, brother!  @Marilyn C may I suggest you consider both recent posts together, as AdHoc's and mine enhance each other's thoughts well I think.

[AdHoc]

1 minute ago, Vine Abider said:

Ha - we were posting very similar response at the same time, brother!  @Marilyn C may I suggest you consider both recent post together, as AdHoc's and mine enhance each other's thoughts well I think.

To this I agree.

[Vine Abider]

14 minutes ago, AdHoc said:

To this I agree.

One thing I did want to ask you - in the OP I cited Romans 8:22-23

"We know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until the present time. Not only that, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies."

Because both childbirth and first fruits are mentioned almost synonymously in this passage, I then asked the question - Could it be that the man child and the first fruits are referring to the same group of overcomers?  What is your thought on this?  (I think Govett taught that the man child was those saints who had died and the first fruits were ones living, but not sure how he derived this . . .)

[WilliamL]

On 12/21/2024 at 1:22 PM, Vine Abider said:

The man child comes from the woman, who in my thinking is all the people of God (aka the new Jerusalem coming down from heaven adorned as a bride).

1 hour ago, Vine Abider said:

For this reason, I believe the man child is actually the stronger part of God's people (the woman)

Want to explain how the Church, who is a Virgin bride, is already pregnant?

[AdHoc]

3 minutes ago, Vine Abider said:

One thing I did want to ask you - in the OP I cited Romans 8:22-23

"We know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until the present time. Not only that, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies."

I then asked the question - Could it be that the man child and the first fruits are referring to the same group of overcomers?  What is your thought on this?  (I think Govett taught that the man child was those saints who had died and the first fruits were ones living, but not sure how he derived this . . .)

Govett tried with all his might to stick to his (admirable) plan of taking every thing literally unless otherwise indicated or it created an absurdity. As Revelation is a book indicated in "signs" (Rev.1.1) he sometimes got into difficulties. With his superior knowledge and brilliant logic, he could get out of most of them. But sometimes he used his other admirable virtue and admitted that he did not know how to expound a certain text. I would say that his attempt to make New Jerusalem literal is the place we disagree most. But who am I against such a student of scripture? Govett, like Darby, Kelly etc, were pioneers - opening up long lost treasures and fighting the rest of Christendom - and each other. They got some things wrong (I say this with trembling but I reserve, at all times, the right to disagree). In my opinion, Govett mangled John 16.

Those bold words having been said, let me try to answer your question - briefly. Our salvation is five-fold.
1. We need a Substitute to pay for our sins
2. Once this was done, we needed a second and spiritual birth for the human spirit to impart divine life into us, make us royalty and heirs and have the means to be conformed to the image of Christ
3. We needed our souls to be transformed
4. We needed a metamorphosis for our corrupt bodies
5. We needed to be found worthy to be stewards of God's resources in His Kingdom

All of these are accomplished by Christ and applied by the Holy Spirit. But when we are born again, a long period of dealings is needed to transform our soul. This in turn means that our resurrection is delayed. So an "earnest" or guarantee of our future resurrection is given - the same Holy Spirit that dwells in our human spirit. So Ephesians 1 says;

13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, 14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

 The deal of a glorious body is "sealed" by a guarantee. In the old days, when you reserved a piece of land to buy later, the owner gave you an hand full of soil from that plot. This was an "earnest" or guarantee of the purchased possession. Romans 8 deals with the next step of God's full recovery, the recovery of the earth (or creature). We, the Christian, are an integral part of this recovery. After our resurrection God can institute righteous government on earth and lift the curses. On the way to this full recovery, we are given the Holy Spirit as a guarantee. We already HAVE the Spirit from rebirth but must wait for the recovery of our body. We have the "firstfruits of the Spirit - rebirth (Jn.7:39). but must have faith that we will not languish i death forever. The Holy Spirit in our spirits is the guarantee for this recovery.

The Man-Child is for ruling the earth. In Revelation 20 we have the rulers of the earth with Christ. But they encompass ALL from Abel. Revelation 12 is about God's people who are alive at the time. The Firstfruits, in my opinion are BOTH those who died ripe and those living who are ripe. The Woman is mother of us all, but to flee to a wilderness assumes you are alive. The Jewish REMNANT of Romans 9 and 11 is to fulfill Deuteronomy 30:1-5. So they must be alive at the time. But if you disagree and place them all in one pot, I won't oppose. It's just that the Book of Revelation is mostly about the last 7 years - specifically the last 3,5 years. The birth pangs are what it costs the Woman to bring forth Overcomers (the price) and the Birth is what it costs the Church to have the House broken up by a split rapture (see Matt.24).

Hope this helps

 

[AdHoc]

17 minutes ago, WilliamL said:

Want to explain how the Church, who is a Virgin bride, is already pregnant?

Good question. May I give my opinion. The Woman of Revelation 12 is not the Church. She is New Jerusalem and mother of US ALL (Gal.4:26). In Galatians the whole Book is about the CONTRAST of the Church (under grace) and the Jews (under Law). In one instance they are "brothers" - in the matter of God's Kingdom. This constellation is seen four times. Galatians, The Olive Tree of Romans 11, Revelation 12 and New Jerusalem. There, BOTH are God's people, and BOTH have purpose in the Kingdom.

[Vine Abider]

10 minutes ago, AdHoc said:

Good question. May I give my opinion. The Woman of Revelation 12 is not the Church. She is New Jerusalem and mother of US ALL (Gal.4:26). In Galatians the whole Book is about the CONTRAST of the Church (under grace) and the Jews (under Law). In one instance they are "brothers" - in the matter of God's Kingdom. This constellation is seen four times. Galatians, The Olive Tree of Romans 11, Revelation 12 and New Jerusalem. There, BOTH are God's people, and BOTH have purpose in the Kingdom.

@WilliamL I would agree.  The woman is a composite of all God's people, hence, synonymous with the new Jerusalem. (and are we not "pregnant" with Christ now, since the Father's seed of life is in us?)

[Vine Abider]

23 minutes ago, AdHoc said:

The Man-Child is for ruling the earth. In Revelation 20 we have the rulers of the earth with Christ. But they encompass ALL from Abel. Revelation 12 is about God's people who are alive at the time. The Firstfruits, in my opinion are BOTH those who died ripe and those living who are ripe. The Woman is mother of us all, but to flee to a wilderness assumes you are alive. The Jewish REMNANT of Romans 9 and 11 is to fulfill Deuteronomy 30:1-5. So they must be alive at the time. But if you disagree and place them all in one pot, I won't oppose. It's just that the Book of Revelation is mostly about the last 7 years - specifically the last 3,5 years. The birth pangs are what it costs the Woman to bring forth Overcomers (the price) and the Birth is what it costs the Church to have the House broken up by a split rapture (see Matt.24).

Hope this helps

 

It does seem like the man child is for dominion, since by their authority (which is vested in Christ's sacrifice & victory) they are responsible for casting the dragon out.  First fruits on the other hand, if I reason the typology correct, are taken to the house for enjoyment.

So I don't know if the man child overcomers and the first fruit overcomers are the same, but it is interesting to me that both seem to be mentioned together in Romans 8:22-23.