Study Question: Revelation 12:1-6 - Who is the Woman?

[taisto]

LOL, do none of these "taint so" posters know gender designation does not indicate actual gender? Give me a break.

Stop distracting from the question. Show us the people who have taught the woman as the Holy Spirit in Revelation 12, besides yourself.
If no one in 2000 years plus has ever said what you claim then let that be a bright red flag to you.

 

[Van]

I'll stick with how the second Person of the Trinity addresses the third Person of the Trinity - MALE!
SNIP

Note, not one of the Greek experts posting on this forum is willing to correct this poster. Go figure

 

[Van]

Stop distracting from the question. Show us the people who have taught the woman as the Holy Spirit in Revelation 12, besides yourself.
If no one in 2000 years plus has ever said what you claim then let that be a bright red flag to you.

Yet another who denies that the "gender" in the grammar does not necessarily indicate the biological gender of the entity in view.

Did I say the Holy Spirit was a "woman?" Nope so who is hoisting yet another straw-women distraction?

I said the "woman" of Revelation 12:1-2 is a "personification" of the Holy Spirit."

 

[taisto]

Yet another post from Van where he provides no other person in all of human history who holds his view of the woman being the Holy Spirit.

2000 plus years of commentary and no one says what Van is saying.

The reader can be the judge regarding the validity of Van's interpretation.

 

[David Kent]

If you think that, then it is not I who needs to do some learning before posting. Go back and study the history of futurism and see the false prognosticators who have abounded.
In fact, multiple cults have been formed based on their futurism interpretations. The Jehovah's Witness is readily known

The earliest non Catholic futurist teachers, the Irvingites, taught that the rapture would be in July 1835. Irvingism in its rise, progress, and current state. by Robert Baxter 1836.
It should have been ditched then, but that was soon forgotten. And many
Y Baptists adopted Futurism in the early 20th century with the introduction of the Scofield bible. As one writer said, "The new doctrine needed it's own bible" this bible was given free to many seminaries in the USA and the rot set in.

 

[percho]

What is to come in the future? Is there a future?

Relative to God and man:

What took place, in the past?
What is taking place in the moment of the present?
Is there a future and if the answer is yes, what will take place.

Relative to God and man.

Was the Passover, that is the Lamb of God, Christ, considered slain from the foundation of the world, actually at a spacific moment in time slain? When? What did that do relative to God and man?

What did the slaying of the Lamb of God set forth in motion relative to God and man? Is what set forth in motion relative to the holy convocation feast's of God?

Consider this verse?
cleanse out, therefore, the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, according as ye are unleavened, for also our passover for us was sacrificed -- Christ, 1 Cor 5:7 YLT

The 15th day and the 211st day of the first month, unleavened bread.

When was the next holy convocation? Let me post a verse and ask a question. Verse Rom 8:23 YLT
And not only so, but also we ourselves, having the first-fruit of the Spirit, we also ourselves in ourselves do groan, adoption expecting -- the redemption of our body;

When did the Spirit become available to be poured out? Acts 2:32,33 YLT 'This Jesus did God raise up, of which we are all witnesses; at the right hand then of God having been exalted -- also the promise of the Holy Spirit having received from the Father -- he was shedding forth this, which now ye see and hear;

What day did that shedding forth take place?

What holy convocation follows?

Are trumpets relative to the appearing of Christ and resurrection of Christ's and or instant change of Christ's?
1 Cor 15:23,52 1 Thes 4:14-17

Any of your friends been resurrected? When?

 

[David Kent]

Have you ever wondered why God gives us so many geneologies in the Old Testament and in Matthew and Luke?

It is to show us that God could not be thwarted by Satan, the dragon, who kept standing by to try devour the Promised One. God, painstakingly shows us how the woman, the line of the Promised One, was cared for and kept from the angry maul of the dragons fury.



Revelation 12 makes the connection for us, showing us how God has worked from Adam and Eve to this very present moment.

What a great encouragement Revelation is to us today.

If you think that, then it is not I who needs to do some learning before posting. Go back and study the history of futurism and see the false prognosticators who have abounded.
In fact, multiple cults have been formed based on their futurism interpretations. The Jehovah's Witness is readily known

Exactly. The first dispensationalist teachings were "confirmed" by charismatic prophets, one of whom recall Ted and accuse himself of delusion. The rapture, according to them would occur 1260 days after Jan 1832 , and occur in July 1835. They gathered together at that day to await the great event.

 

[David Kent]

No where in scripture is the church referred to as the woman. Calling the church the Bride is not the same as calling the church as a woman. Setting aside that the church will be absent during this literal time,

That is purely futurist teaching. No evidence in scripture that the church will not be here. Revelation is a history of The Church, written in advance.

No where in scripture is the church referred to as the woman. Calling the church the Bride is not the same as calling the church as a woman. Setting aside that the church will be absent during this literal time, we can see that the nation of Israel has been called the woman in many places throughout scripture. Passages such as Isaiah 47:7-9; 54:5-6; Jeremiah 4:31; Micah 4:9-10; 5:3; Isaiah 66:7-8.

There are two women in Revelation, The bride, the true church and the hadlot, the false church. They are also two cities, The New Jerusalem, and Mystery Babylon the Great , which pesecutes the true church and its members. Which church has multiple idols, has persecuted the true believers of Christ throughout the ages, with its Inquisition and other fiendish methods?

The answer should be obvious to you.

 

[Van]

I see a valiant effort to change the subject of this thread from the identity of the woman in Revelation 12:1-2, to a rejection that Christ's return is immanent.

And once again I see the effort to take an illustration from one allegory and claim the illustrative detail means the same thing in another allegory. Fundamentally unsound.

 

[Revmitchell]

That is purely futurist teaching. No evidence in scripture that the church will not be here. Revelation is a history of The Church, written in advance.

This is one of the many problems on this board with regard to these discussions. Sophomoric assertions such as "there is no evidence" is often bandied about by insecure individuals who have no idea how to support their own view. Further, they want to win a debate rather than have a reasonable discussion. It is flat out not true that there is no evidence. Reasonable people can have diffrerent views of the same scripture. Admitting that does not mean one is then compelled to succeed to the other persons view hence the sophomoric nature.

There are two women in Revelation, The bride, the true church and the hadlot, the false church. They are also two cities, The New Jerusalem, and Mystery Babylon the Great , which pesecutes the true church and its members. Which church has multiple idols, has persecuted the true believers of Christ throughout the ages, with its Inquisition and other fiendish methods?

You make a claim here without any support or substantiation. If you are going to try and assert there is no evidence of someone else's view but then provide no evidence your your won opinion what does that say about your view? Can you actually defend it or do you just want to make nasty posts to those with whom you disagree with?

The answer should be obvious to you.

No no, your opinion will never be obvious to me.

 

[taisto]

This is one of the many problems on this board with regard to these discussions. Sophomoric assertions such as "there is no evidence" is often bandied about by insecure individuals who have no idea how to support their own view. Further, they want to win a debate rather than have a reasonable discussion. It is flat out not true that there is no evidence. Reasonable people can have diffrerent views of the same scripture. Admitting that does not mean one is then compelled to succeed to the other persons view hence the sophomoric nature.



You make a claim here without any support or substantiation. If you are going to try and assert there is no evidence of someone else's view but then provide no evidence your your won opinion what does that say about your view? Can you actually defend it or do you just want to make nasty posts to those with whom you disagree with?



No no, your opinion will never be obvious to me.

Where is the evidence that the church will not be on earth during Tribulation? It's never suggested in the book of Revelation. Are you extrapolating from Paul's writings and projecting into Revelation?

Better yet, I will make a new thread to address this.

 

[Van]

]I see a valiant effort to change the subject of this thread from the identity of the woman in Revelation 12:1-2, to a rejection that Christ's return is immanent.

And once again I see the effort to take an illustration from one allegory and claim the illustrative detail means the same thing in another allegory. Fundamentally unsound.

Who is the "woman" of Revelation 12:1-2?

Is she supposed to represent Mary, the mother of God? Nope

Is she supposed to represent the promise of the Old Covenant? Nope

Is she supposed to represent the nation of Israel? Nope

Is she supposed to represent the New Covenant church? Nope

Is she the personification of the Holy Spirit that facilitated Christ's physical birth and facilitates the new birth of each and every member of the church? You bet.

 

[taisto]

]I see a valiant effort to change the subject of this thread from the identity of the woman in Revelation 12:1-2, to a rejection that Christ's return is immanent.

And once again I see the effort to take an illustration from one allegory and claim the illustrative detail means the same thing in another allegory. Fundamentally unsound.

Who is the "woman" of Revelation 12:1-2?

Is she the personification of the Holy Spirit that facilitated Christ's physical birth and facilitates the new birth of each and every member of the church? You bet.

Nope.

And no one in over 2000 years has ever said what you say.

 

[Van]

Nope.
And no one in over 2000 years has ever said what you say.

Who is the "woman" of Revelation 12:1-2?

Is she supposed to represent Mary, the mother of God? Nope

Is she supposed to represent the promise of the Old Covenant? Nope

Is she supposed to represent the nation of Israel? Nope

Is she supposed to represent the New Covenant church? Nope

Is she the personification of the Holy Spirit that facilitated Christ's physical birth and facilitates the new birth of each and every member of the church? You bet!!

Exactly 3 Billion, 400 million believers agree with me. [One idiotic claim deserves another. ]

 

[taisto]

Who is the "woman" of Revelation 12:1-2?

Is she supposed to represent Mary, the mother of God? Nope

Is she supposed to represent the promise of the Old Covenant? Nope

Is she supposed to represent the nation of Israel? Nope

Is she supposed to represent the New Covenant church? Nope

Is she the personification of the Holy Spirit that facilitated Christ's physical birth and facilitates the new birth of each and every member of the church? You bet!!

Exactly 3 Billion, 400 million believers agree with me. [One idiotic claim deserves another. ]

You have not provided even one person who has claimed what you claim. I wait for evidence of even one scholar who shares your opinion, Van.

 

[Van]

You have not provided even one person who has claimed what you claim. I wait for evidence of even one scholar who shares your opinion, Van.

"YOU" have provided not even one valid objection, only fallacious arguments.
Note no specific position is addressed?

1) Does the grammatical gender require the entity in view is of that gender. Greek experts say no.

2) Is the Holy Spirit personified in scripture, say as our "Helper?" Greek experts say yes.

3) Did the Holy Spirit facilitate the birth of Christ? Yes

4) Does the Holy Spirit facilitate the birth of every born anew believer? Yes

Therefore others would agree the woman of Revelation 12:1-2 could be the Holy Spirit. And IMHO, that view is probably the correct view.

 

[JonC]

Nope.

And no one in over 2000 years has ever said what you say.

Not exactly true. The earliest I can think of somebody expressing that view is in the 1930's. I can't say that there are not earlier references as I don't know. But the idea didn't originate with Van (or at least, he is not the first in over 2000 years to express that view).

 

[percho]

And the LORD God said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.”

Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name. So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him.

And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said:

“This is now bone of my bones
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man.”

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.
And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

Was the woman taken from the man for the very purpose of bringing forth the one, through whom, this stated by @Van [ Is the Holy Spirit personified in scripture, say as our "Helper?" Greek experts say yes.] would be made available to man?

Was there a preconceived path of the Holy Spirit from God to man?

'This Jesus did God raise up, of which we are all witnesses; at the right hand then of God having been exalted -- also the promise of the Holy Spirit having received from the Father -- he was shedding forth this, which now ye see and hear;

Is that how woman was going to be the, "helper," of the man?

Maybe the woman is a woman.

 

[Van]

[QUOTE="percho, post: 2861855, member: 9897"
SNIP

Was there a preconceived path of the Holy Spirit from God to man?

'This Jesus did God raise up, of which we are all witnesses; at the right hand then of God having been exalted -- also the promise of the Holy Spirit having received from the Father -- he was shedding forth this, which now ye see and hear;

Is that how woman was going to be the, "helper," of the man?

Maybe the woman is a woman.[/QUOTE]

1) Yes, God had determined before creation how His Lamb would provide the "path" for believers to be indwelt with the Helper.

2) The woman is not the helper, the Holy Spirit is!!!!!! Genderless!!!!!!!!

3) No, the woman of Revelation 12:1-2 is a personification. Do you know what that means??????????????

 

[Van]

Revelation 12:1-2 (NASB)
A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars;and she was pregnant and she *cried out, being in labor and in pain to give birth.

1) A great sign - the personification of the Holy Spirit as the woman
2) The crown of 12 stars- a reference to the apostles anointed either with the Holy Spirit and Power.(Luke 24:49) or the inspired witness about Judas fulfilling the betrayer prophecy.
3) The personified Holy Spirit gave birth (facilitated) the birth of Christ and His spiritually born anew siblings.