Let's see, before I read, I want to read part of Revelation chapter 12, that's where we'll be reading from and then pray, but Sheriff's reminded me last week that it would be a good thing if we looked around and asked if there are any visitors this morning, let's see I'm looking, here's, no she's not a visitor, she's a special guest, are there any visitors here yet this morning? Do you like to introduce? Okay, I just, I guess I didn't know what I should have known about Evelyn's wrist that we could pray for, are there any other particular prayer requests this morning? Okay, well I'll read from Revelation chapter 12, are we on back there Mark, you know? Oh, thanks, Don says we are. Okay, I'm going to read a ways in Revelation chapter 12,
let's hear the word of God. And a great portant appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and on her head a crown of twelve stars, she was with child and she cried out in her pangs of birth in anguish for delivery and another portant appeared in heaven. Behold, a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns and seven diadems upon his heads. His tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth and the dragon stood before the woman who was about to bear a child that he might devour her child when she brought it forth. She brought forth a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne. And a woman fled into the wilderness where she has a place prepared by God in which to be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days. Now war arose in heaven, Michael and his angels fighting against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought, but they were defeated and there was no longer any place for them in heaven. And the great dragon was thrown down that ancient serpent who was called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world. He was thrown down to the earth and his angels were thrown down with him. And I heard a loud voice in heaven saying, now the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ have come. For the accuser of our brethren has been thrown down, who accuses them day and night before our God, and they have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony. For they love not their lives, even unto death, rejoice then, O heaven, and you that dwell therein, but woe to you, O earth and sea, for the devil has come down to you in great wrath because he knows his time is short. Okay, let's pray. Great and glorious Father in heaven. We give you praise and thanks this morning for the way in which you have ruled in our lives and the way in which you have ruled over all of your creation. O Lord, we pray that you would tear our attention away from any idols that we have constructed and the idols of our generation and our culture, and allow us to focus all of our worship completely upon you, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. We thank you for this great text in your word for the wondrous truths that it reveals to us. I pray that today and in the coming weeks as we as we reflect upon it, you would deepen our sense of awe at your greatness, your victory, and the salvation that you have revealed to us. We pray this morning for Evelyn, in particular, that you would attend the healing of her rest. Lord, you know as well all of the concerns of our hearts, you know those secret things, and we pray that you would minister to us, be a God of strength and of comfort. Now, be with us, Lord, forgive our sins and cause us to hear your word. In Christ's name, we ask it. Amen. We prayed and they showed up. That's great.
I mentioned last week that I was thinking of talking to Bob about extending the class another, I guess, 12 weeks or so, and we got to go ahead. So we're going to do that. Lord willing, that means that we don't have to go at such a breakneck speed like we have been, right? That's the ceaseless. But I think it's, I really don't want to go any faster than we've been going. I didn't want to rush it anymore. And so we really need more time. I don't know if we need enough full 12 weeks, but I think we'll find something to talk about. You know, testimony time, whatever. So that's where we are. We don't have to rush. And I thought that that being the case, this might be a good time, sort of to sit back and take a quiz. No. Sit back, relax, sort of review what we've, I'm sorry, I'm a professor, just in my blood.
Maybe we can review where we've been, sort of, yeah, try to get our bearings. If there are any just outstanding questions that you still have that are bugging you, we can talk about that for a bit before we go on to start chapter 12. We can certainly do that today. But let's just see how it goes. I think chapter 12 really does give us some some keys to understanding the book. So by the way, have any visitors come in since my first announcement that should be introduced?
Anybody want to introduce any visitors? Okay. Well, let's just see what we remember about what we've studied so far. In the book of Revelation, how many visions have we talked about there being? Four, right. Four major visions. You could call everything he sees a vision if you wanted to. But I think that literally you can see that that John experiences four major visions and then sees a lot of things that happen, sort of as a result of these four major visions. Okay. And now with regard to these four, where are we now at the end of chapter 11 in what major vision or after which vision? The second, right, the second vision. The second vision was the vision. Can anybody remember what was the major foundational vision? The second one. Either the chapters or what it was about. Let's go to the first, all the way back to the beginning. What was the first major vision of?
Christ, right, in chapter 1 there's the revelation to John. He mentions he's on the island of Patmos. And he has a vision and experience of being in the presence of the risen Lord and he's revealed as well, you could call him the Son of Man, the glorious Son of Man, because this seems to pick up on Daniel chapter 7, where we have the Son of Man figure who appears before the ancient of days, he comes upon the clouds of heaven. Okay, that seems to be the foundational vision and what's the aftermath of that vision? The letters to the churches, right, in chapters 2 and 3. They can follow on that first vision. And we saw how even in those letters they keep referring back to the vision of Jesus. And so we learned that he appeared to John in a way that was appropriate for those seven churches at that time. A very interesting aspect of those letters. Okay, the second vision then is what? Okay, the scroll is revealed. Who is worthy to open the scroll? So that's chapters what? 4 and 5, where John is taken up into the heavenly throne room. All right, and you remember he witnesses the worship there. And one main aspect, there is a scroll in the hand of him who sits on the throne and no one is found worthy to open that scroll except the lamb who was slain. Okay, good. So then the seven trumpets follow, excuse me, before the seven trumpets we have seven what? Seven seals that are broken. Those seals that held the scroll closed. All right, so okay, that's very good. How many we saw how many visions? How many churches of Asia Minor? That's an easy one. Seven churches of Asia Minor. How many trumpets? Seven trumpets. How many horsemen? Think four? Yes, four horsemen. Four of the seven seals have to do with horses and horsemen that ride off after the four living creatures say, come. How many quote Israelites? How many of the tribes? 144,000 and where is that revealed to us? Chapter seven. Okay, very good. We're on a roll. I don't think we've missed one yet. So as a class, you're doing very well. Okay, tell me the chapter the chapter in which we find the four horsemen. Chapter six, very good. The chapter in which we find the four living creatures and the 24 elders. Where they're first introduced. Chapter four. That's in the great throne room vision. Okay, some of you are getting tired of the quiz, but now we move on to deeper, you know, interpretative sorts of questions. Who can tell me what predatorism is? Now, no smart remarks. No, okay, yes, sure? Yeah, okay. Good, good. That's at least the most, the bulk of revelation, if not all of it, depending on where you are in the preterist scale of things, has to do with the first century and should be read in that context. So you look to the first century for the fulfillment of revelation. And in fact, most of the preterists that we might engage with that are in the in the reformed camp somewhere would relate almost everything to 70 AD. And what happened then? The destruction of the temple and the city of Jerusalem. So remember that's how they they tend to see the focus of the book, excuse me, as God's judgment upon the apostate nation of Israel. Now, you know, we want to try to keep some of these major interpretive possibilities in mind as we go. So that's one of them. What about futurism? I say futurism, was that? Okay, we associate that with pre-mill, yes, Ed? Were you saying? All going to happen. And all going to happen in the future. And future, not just from John's standpoint, but even from ours from the interpreters today. So the book of Revelation, instead of being mostly about first century things, and the futurist view has to do with things that are future even to us, we associate it more or less with the pre-millennial approach and even more particularly dispensational pre-millennial approach. Now, if you're lost on that, don't worry. That's not a course requirement. That's a bonus question on the quiz. So there's the futurist, look at things as happening in the future. What about if I were to say the word recapitulation? Oh, that's a lovely word. It flows off the lips. But what does it mean? Recapitulation. Right, right. Nobody knows what it or he means. Right. Recapitulation. When looking at the interpretation of Revelation, repetition, same events looked at again. What? Non-linear. Okay, good. Those are all good words. Non-linear. So instead of things in Revelation happening in chapter 6 and chapter 8, chapter 13, whatever, all these things happening in sequence. Recapitulation is the view that sees that what happens in chapter 6 might be recapitulated. That means spoken of again in chapter 8, chapter 13, or whatever. We keep coming round to the same realities throughout the book. In particular, the last judgment, the last day. So you can see how if this is the case, and I've argued that it is, that can make a big difference in how we look at Revelation. Because we don't necessarily look for sequence, we look for the meaning. And if we see that John is shown a vision of the last day in chapter 6, and then he's shown one in chapter 11, and then chapter 15, that affects how we read the book. And we see then that in between those, we might get a look at the whole period between Christ's first and second coming. Sort of cycles keep going through the book of Revelation. So that's position that I take on the interpretation of Revelation. Anything, any questions on that, or on these three basic approaches we've just mentioned? Andy?
Well, it's Matthew 24 and 25 is the all of that discourse, and it's probably in there.
Yeah, at some, at least would. Yeah, I'd have to look at that in its context. We'd have to find that
of Jerusalem, yes, yes. And that is what I think gives the preters to approach some plausibility. And why, you know, you just can't reject any of these approaches out of hand. Yeah, in fact, in this, the all of that discourse, remember that's the discourse that Jesus spoke on the mount of all lives, he does speak about the destruction of Jerusalem, very definitely. And the question has always been, how much of that discourse relates specifically to the destruction of Jerusalem, and how much if any, transcends that coming catastrophe and speaks about his second coming. Christian interpreters just traditionally have seen both of being spoken of in that passage. Then the tricky interpretative questions come down to where we make the dividing lines and how much of it concerns Jerusalem and how much of it concerns a second coming. But yeah, when he, when he speaks in Matthew 25 about fleeing from Jerusalem, he's talking about the coming destruction on Jerusalem. Mainly Matthew 24, 15 through 28, 40. Okay, when two men will be in the field, one is taken and one is left, two on the ground, grinding at the meal, one is taken and one is left, watch there for, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming. Yeah, that's a section that I would relate to the the second coming, previous section to the destruction of Jerusalem. Because there's a contrast in verse 34 up above. Truly, I say that you, this generation will not pass away till all these things take place. And I think he's talking about really focusing on the destruction of Jerusalem there as if you could look and you'll see signs that this is about to take place. But then he goes to the next paragraph, but of that day. See, I think he's making a contrast between these things and that day, but of that day, namely the day I return, of that day and hour no one knows. Not even the angels of heaven or the sun, but the Father only, that is you're not going to have the same kind of warning for the, for the second coming as he's giving them warning signs to observe the coming destruction of Jerusalem. See, so that's mm-hmm. Yeah. Yeah.
Yeah, it is not, it's not an easy passage to interpret, but I do think that in Matthew's version
you've got references to those days and that day. You notice the way the original question is put to Jesus in verse three. Tell us when this will be, actually the word could be these things will be and what will be the sign of you're coming in the close of the age. Now in the disciples' minds, those may have been put together. These things, meaning when Jesus has just said you'll, you know, not one stone will remain upon another of the great temple you see across the valley. And they may have been connected in the apostles' minds, but Jesus says, or they ask him what we the sign when these things are about to take place and the sign of you're coming in the close of the age. So there are potentially two foes of the whole discussion here. What are the signs that these things, namely the destruction of Jerusalem and all those events are going to take place and the sign of you're coming. So that really sets the stage for all of what follows in that discourse being focused on those two points and where I would make those divisions may not be exactly, well it wouldn't be where the preterists do, but we would both agree. Most preterists would agree that some of it at least is referring to the second coming. So we would agree some of it's referring to 70 AD, some of it's the second coming and we'd have to take a whole class to go through that to try to sort that out at least one class. But does that give you just a sort of perspective on that? I hope. And this is a good question because we've already seen how Revelation seems to pick up on all of that discourse. It's a very fascinating thing. It says if Jesus' prophecy in the Gospels is now being in a sense elaborated on in the book of Revelation. So it is an important background passage. Bob?
It's actually the first chapter. There's still asking if you're missing any questions. And it was long but we're saying that it's just a couple of lines of mine. He's getting ready. Now we've already passed the Byzantines to Stadford Peter and 500 and so forth. And he asked the first of the Lord, number 6, will you at this time restore the king of Israel? And this one is not really a prevailing thought. He's in a permanent church there where they were waiting for the Lord to come like him in that glory. And I think it was kind of colored. What a church was this time. Oh, definitely. The prevailing expectation among Jews at the time. It was very... Right, right. Well, yeah, Paul and I think even Jesus here when you remember their question as Bob said, this is an Acts chapter 1, verse 6, just before the ascension, they asked him, Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel? And what exactly? It almost seems as though they still have in mind a sort of national geopolitical idea of the kingdom. It's not completely clear, but that seems like the mode. But Jesus says to them, it is not for you to know times or seasons, which the Father has fixed by his own authority. But you shall receive power. And I think we shouldn't disconnect this from their question. They're asking about restoring the kingdom. The kingdom has to do with power. But you shall receive power when, when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria to the end of the earth. In other words, I think Jesus is redefining their notions of kingdom even there. When will Israel receive its power? You will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you. And you will be witnesses. The whole nature of Christ's kingdom is not the geopolitical domination that they may have still have remnants of in their minds. It's the kingdom of witness. And we saw last week in Revelation 11, the two witnesses, right? The two witnesses that we connected as an image of the church. That's very much the character of the church between this first and the second coming, is to be Christ's witness in the world. So I think he's redefining their understanding of kingdom, and it has to do with receiving the Spirit for our witness in the world. John. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, it is. And in fact, you know, we might just note down
the sort of the foesci of these three major views we've been talking about. On the futurist view, and notice that the position top to bottom is not any indicator of quality here, but the futurist
tends to see, whoops, tends to see the book of Revelation is having to do with, well, essentially, the last seven years of history. Christ comes back and the church is raptured on some miles, the dispensational model anyway. Three and a half years and three and a half years. And this is right before the second coming. So this is like this is a major grid. You look at you look at Revelation, and you try to see, you try to understand everything is happening in this three and a half and three and a half year periods, right at the end of history, right? Now on the preterist view, you have really not so much of an input here, but the end point is really 70 AD. And so you try to look at the whole book as much as you can as having to do with the events leading immediately prior to 70 AD in the destruction of Jerusalem. So you try to read things, and you try to fit them in with that sort of grid. And again, we have to point out there are preterists who go all the way and say even the last judgment has already taken place, and we're the new heavens and the new earth. But the preterists that probably will have more contact with would not be extremists like that. They would just they would still say that there is the future second coming. But most of the book is still concerned with this period immediately prior to every 80-70. Okay? Oh, very good. Very is a man who's been paying attention. That is precisely one of the big questions when the book was written. If this approach is true, of course the book couldn't have been written. When I think it was written in the 90s, when in John's old age. It would have have to have been written sometime in the 60s of the first century. Wouldn't it? And so this is this is one of the great debates between the views, just when was Revelation written? Yeah, good question. If let's say you became convinced on whatever grounds that Revelation is written in the 60s, does that commit you to a preterist position to look at the whole book as having immediate fulfillment before 80-70? I would say no. There have been people who have who have thought Revelation was written early in the 60s and have not taken a preterist overall preterist view or an overall post millennial view who have been more on the millennial. So that doesn't necessarily determine it. Excuse me, but if you think it's written in the 90s, that rules up preterism. Okay, so preterist has to date it early. If you're not a preterist, it doesn't, you can go either way. Okay, these are good questions. Okay, then the last view, let's see. No, I should probably call this, what do you call this? All millennial recapitulation.
That would tend to look at the book of Revelation. Yeah, you're right. It's just too simple. It's too elegant, right? It's too elegant. It'll never catch on. But this seems to, this tends to look at the book of Revelation as having to do. And let's get back to John's original question. With the whole interadvent era, interadvent meaning between the two events of Christ. So we find various ways in Revelation of picturing that period. Sometimes we hear, we hear about the first coming and the lamb who was slain and he did ransom men for God from every tribe, tongue, nation, people. We hear about the first coming. And I think we get in Revelation 12 as well. Sometimes we have pictures of the second coming. And even in chapters 21 and 22, we're going to go a little bit beyond that into eternity. But most of the book gives us a perspective. And I think this is, you know, the way we should really read Revelation in a very helpful way gives us a perspective on our age, on our time, on our day, on today. See, in this view, I won't say it has nothing to do with today, with us. But the focus is on the last seven years of history. And according to this, the dispensational view, we're going to be watching it from above. You know, we're not even going to be here because we, if any of us are alive at that time, will be raptured off the planet. So it has to do with events that are way in the future. And again, on at least the dispensational view, we won't even be here. The preterous view has to do with things that happened mostly in the past already. And I won't say that that makes it irrelevant, the book irrelevant. Some critics would say that I don't think that's necessarily case. Even if it were already fulfilled, it could have relevance for us. But you see how it doesn't really provide the same kind of perspective on our age and our life as this perspective does. That's not so much an argument for this view. It's just saying that if you take this view, you really have to relate revelation to our time. This is true. Ken's bringing up a deep dark secret from the past. There's always one in the crowd. No, he's just pointing to the fact that you can't really say that the omelennial view is, let's say, the reformed view. I don't think you can say you might be able to say that about this century, Ken. Yeah, I think in the 20th century, if there's one view that's been more accepted by reformed thinkers, it's been the omelennial view. But in the 19th century, I wouldn't have said that because most reformed teachers tended to be post-millennial. Yeah, it's a little bit different.
Right. In our circles, and again, those of you who don't really belong to these circles, I don't know what you're talking about, just sort of think of another question right now. But that, it's a relevant question, Tom, for, well, no, I think it is relevant. I think it is relevant for especially, you know, for those of us who may have studied this a bit before, you're right, the post-millennialism of today tends to be in our circles more connected with, well, reconstructions of the word you mentioned or theonomist movement, you know, without trying to paint too broadly, whereas what you said called classic post-millennialism. If anybody has ever read Lorraine Bettner or Charles Hodge Warfield, this was a post-millennialism that in many ways wasn't much different from, from omelennialism. They're just, they tend to be close in the way they looked at prophecy and so forth. But yeah, John?
Here is a purpose that is to scare people into going to heaven, or is it to be by putting a thing through everything, what purpose did they say? Well, that's a pertinent question. Yeah. You see, I mean, just think of the way you have seen it exposited this way. You tend to see movies and books and it tends to have to do with what? The tribulation, the great tribulation time and what's going to happen in the great tribulation. And again, the church is out of the picture, so what effect does it have? Well, you know, I think when I was more involved in, you know, earlier days when I was more involved with this sort of interpretation, we thought it had an evangelistic impact, as you're saying, I wouldn't put it so crassly, the scare people. But it, the sort of outreach, evangelistic motive, we would show movies on campus that had to do with this. Some of you probably remember those movies. But this was an evangelistic tool. Right. Exactly. Exactly. That's right. You remember some of you don't, but the idea would be leave tracks and leave bibles behind because as soon as the rapture comes, you know, that's all that people are going to have to go by. They won't have Christians around until until the two witnesses come and they start converting Jews. And it's mostly Jews who are going to be saved during this time and we can go on and on. But you see that it's a good point, John, because what then does it have to do with before this period? It's mainly an evangelistic tool. We can get an idea of what's going to happen in the future. But it doesn't affect our daily lives like this does. I wouldn't make a complete dichotomy there, but this shows us really, I think, how we should look at our day, this approach. I wish I would leave and have this sensational familial process on mind. It's too much correct. When we think primal journalism, it does not affect the familial thinking very much. And they come together to deal with the nation again and stuff of war.
Yeah. No, it didn't.
No, not really. Bob's pointing that if you've spent some time in sort of pre-millennial circles, often the restoration of Israel in this century, 1948. Oh, Ezekiel 38, I'm sorry.
Okay. Right. The restoration of Israel has been seen in those circles as a real fulfillment of prophecy. The Israelites are back in the land and the temple then potentially can be rebuilt at any time. Of course, there's one big problem with that now, namely the. But she doesn't lose my
story yet. Yeah, right. That's the next chapter in the story. But that's a good point in the omelennial view that the restoration of Israel in this century doesn't make a lot of difference. Doesn't make a lot of difference. Well,
no. Andy's asking would people across the board believe that the restoration of Israel in our day is that a fulfillment of prophecy and on an omelennial or even probably post-melennial viewpoint classical. No, not really because if you look at those prophecies in the Old Testament that speak of a restoration, first of all, most of them are probably talking about the restoration from Babylon, the Babylonian captivity. But if there's some that point beyond that, they always talk about Israel coming back in obedience. They come back in belief in faith and it's a new obedience. And from a Christian standpoint, I don't see how you can see the modern restoration of Israel in that light. You'd have to put it out. You'd have to say, well, someday in some of the future, they're going to believe. But you can't really identify that with the coming back of the tribes into the land with what's been going on. I don't think. Yeah, we are Israel. Right. That's a very key theological point that plays in through all these questions. Who is Israel in the Bible? Is Israel defined mainly in terms of physical descent from Abraham? Or is it defined mainly in a spiritual way, those who are spiritual sons and daughters of Abraham, not denying that there is a physical aspect to it? But that's very key. And the pre-millennial view puts a lot of stock in the physical decennancy. And post-millennial put a lot more stock in the spiritual essence of what it is to be an Israelite. And so that becomes very important. Yeah. I think Sandy, way back, Heather Hannah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, yeah. That's why it is a huge issue, biblically, because there are a lot of verses that can be cited and have been cited to support all three positions. But let's just take the position that talks about the restoration of Israel. You have huge portions of the Old Testament that talk about God restoring His people in general sense. But you always have to look at the whole context, I would say, and then you start seeing things like, well, does this restoration talk about something that happened in Old Testament times? Because there was the restoration from Babylon. And then if it's something that points forward, does it really fit what's going on now? Or shouldn't we interpret that as talking about the true Israel, all those who will believe in Christ? So you can come up with scores of passages in the Old Testament that talk about the restoration of Israel. But you've got to go back and look at each one and try to find the context. And that's what's so hard about it. The Omnilist approach would see the rapture as coming, where are we? Right about here. Right at the time of the second coming. So in these terms, it would be not pre-tribulation, mid-tribulation, but post-tribulation, or it would be right at the end. So the classic rapture passage, which is first Thessalonians 4, all views believe in that. It's not as though the only people who believe that are the pre-millennialists. But on the Omnil point of view, this comes right at the end. There's nothing said in first Thessalonians about a seven-year tribulation or any tribulation period after that. It associates this with the coming of Christ. Jesus is coming in the clouds. And he descends with the voice of an archangel and the sound of a trumpet. And those who are dead in Christ are raised first and we will always be with the Lord. It's what Paul takes from that. So this seems to be associated with the whole group of events that have to do with the second coming. Well, it is part of the second coming. It's how the Omnilist would say. It is part of the second coming. It's part of the process. So when that happens, the second coming has started. So how long will that take? I don't know. That's the sort of thing where we just don't have good information, I don't think. Does that at least make sense? As he comes down, we're brought up with him and we'll always be with the Lord. And then at some point, at some point, there will be a judgment of the earth. And exactly where we are at that point, whether we're still above the earth or on the earth. That I don't think is so clear. Is that? Yes. Right. She's got it folks. Yeah. When we get to this more, when we come to Revelation 20, when Satan is released from his prison that goes around to deceive the nations of the four corners of the earth. And so there is going to be a time it looks like right towards the end, when the church, when things look bad for the church. And remember in chapter 11, we saw that the two witnesses were actually killed. So there is a time of greater tribulation, I think, towards the end. But what I don't, what I wouldn't want to affirm is that we know how long that will take and just what the circumstances are going to be. It will look to the world as though we've lost or we're losing. And then a Christ will come and rescue his church. Trip. Yeah. I know you run into 11 as a spiritual Israel that any notion that that God will work grace and the nation of Israel at some point for. Okay. That's a good question. Trip is referring to Romans chapter 11 and how this fits in. And with what we've been talking about, I'll just read the appropriate verses, Romans 11, 25, 227. Paul says, lest you be wise in your own conceits, I want you to understand this mystery, brethren. A hardening has come upon part of Israel until the full number of the Gentiles or the fullness of the Gentiles come in. And so all Israel will be saved. And that's the key phrase, and so all Israel will be saved. As it is written, the deliverable come from Zion, he will banish on Godliness from Jacob, and this will be my covenant with them when I take away their sins. What does it mean when he says, and so all Israel will be saved? And do all millennia, let's see that as a time of great conversion among the Jewish people or not. And I have to answer that some do and some don't. Some actually do think that this implies that there will be a great conversion among Jews. Others don't, and we have to be reminded that the very small word there that's in this translation, it's translated so, I don't know what it is in your translations, but it's often mistaken to mean then. And then at that point in time, all Israel will be saved, but that's not what it says. It says, and so meaning thus, and thus in this way, in what way? Well, if you look at the rest of the chapter before, Paul's talking about a certain, well, a certain path of the gospel. The gospel goes out to the Jew first, and in Paul's day, most Jews rejected it. So what happens? He says, their rejection has meant life for the nations. They rejected it, and the nations accepted it, and what then happens? That's not the end of the story either, is it? He says, then this made Israel jealous. So there's sort of a rebounding action, this makes Israel jealous, and then many of them come to faith. And I think Paul's talking about that whole process as characterizing the whole time until he comes back. That this, and this is how all Israel would be saved, by the gospel going to them, rejection, and then some of them, some of them believe, because they see it in the lives of Gentiles. So I think all he's saying is, this is how all Israel will be saved, that will be saved, all Israel that will be saved, will be saved by this means. That's just to illustrate the trip that's, well, some do think that implies a great conversion and some don't.
But the key thing there, I think, between Amalennial and Premalennial is, even if masses of Jews convert, and I think we ought to pray that they should, that they will, then they become the church. Right? They're no longer primarily physical Israelites. They're one with the church. So that can even that, to break down, I think this hard distinction between Israel and the church that we see in Premalennial ways of thinking. Okay, I would like to go just this just a little bit into Revelation 12, just sort of to candleize us for next week. This has been really good. I hope it's been helpful. I'd like you to think about this great portant in heaven, verse 1, the woman clothed with the sun, and she is with child and about to bear the male child, who is to rule the nations with a rod of iron. Let me think about that, and think about the dragon that is ready to devour her child, and that she gives birth to the child, and the child then is caught up to heaven to the throne of God. And the woman then flees into the wilderness where she has a place prepared for 1,260 days, where she is nourished and protected. Let's think about what that canotes. Just off the top of your head, what comes to your mind in this symbolism, the birth of Christ? Does anybody think of something different than that? I think that is one of the most obvious symbolism in the book of Revelation. Isn't that the natural what you think of when you read this passage? It's talking about the birth of the Messiah, the incarnation, and then what about when he's caught up to the throne of God? His ascension, okay? I don't think there's anything too difficult, no, it's a little bit difficult, just exactly who the woman is. Her identity, I think, is a very composite symbol, but when we'll talk about that next week. But if we can get in our minds, this interpretation, this is somehow talking about the birth and then the ascension of Christ, I think that's going to be a key to understanding a lot of the book. Well, Carol, and now that you asked, gee, do we have time? Despite that, that I think that this is a pretty obvious symbolism, one pre-millennialist interpreter says this, it is not at all clear that the birth of the Messiah, that is, he's calling the Messiah in the passage, is meant to represent the birth of the historical Jesus, or that his catching up to heaven is his Christ's ascension. The picture seems to be all together symbolic of a great struggle in heaven. That's pretty vague to me. Symbolic of a great struggle in heaven, he doesn't get much more specific than that, and another pre-millennial interpreter, oh, well that's George Ladd, George Eldon Ladd. Another interpreter, John Walbert says, John Walbert would agree that this is talking about the birth of Christ, but then in chapter in verse six. Well, this is what he says, but there is an obvious, obviously there is a considerable time gap between verses five and six, verses five and six are this. She brought forth a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne, verse six, and the woman fled into the wilderness where she has a place prepared. Is there a huge time gap between verses five and six? What's going on? Now here's what I think is going on. If you say that this is talking about the birth of the Messiah and his ascension and what happens immediately in that context, then I think you have a starting point for the three and a half years because it says right immediately with that the woman flees into the wilderness where she has a place prepared for one thousand two hundred sixty days. That's the three and a half year period we're talking about. Now if that's the case, when does the three and a half years start? What? At the time of the ascension and if you're getting the sense of how momentous this is, but that means it started in the first century with the ascension not some time way way in the future and that means it can't be literal, right? If it started at the ascension, what happened? The world's got to come to an end in three and a half years after the ascension, okay, and it didn't. It's going on and I think that shows going to be a picture of the whole age there. So I think that's why Carolyn, that's my suspicion, why pre-millennialists want to find some other way of looking at this. Yeah. Lat is post and Walbert is post-tribulation and he's historic pre-mill, right, and Walbert is pre-tribulation. But see, we'll talk about this again next week, but I think that is a key thing because it tells us how to interpret the three and a half years. Okay, any parting shots on that, Larry? Well, I just wanted, I mean, if the distinction ends between the land and what their views are, the fact that Lat was historic pre-millennial and Walbert is sensational, and then secondly, are you putting the historic pre-mill under the same futuristic time frame? It is under the same futures time frame, but the hard and fast distinctions here really only go with dispensationalism. Lat, excuse me, would be much more vague about the whole seven-year thing. Much more. No, he wouldn't have the rapture there. He would be more like the omel rapture at the end.
Okay, anything else? Three and a half years. One of the keys to the interpretation. Okay, let's close in prayer. Our gracious father, we do thank you for this marvelous portion of your word. Please be with us throughout the day as we meditate upon it and upon the sermon, and may our Lord's day be pleasing in your sight, in Christ's name. Amen. Good.
Well, it was nice to think a little about certain questions that are going up for you.
I know. That's striking. Yeah.