The Manchild Ministry 45 Minutes

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Bowas

Bro Benincasa. I have always enjoyed your perspective and studies, so I ask this as one would ask an elder. (not in the aged sense, but in the respect sense) but what do you see Rev 12 as?

There are so many ideas, but most have fatal flaws, and I can't help but see it as the woman in the church, and she was clothed with the glory of God (sun) the moon under her feet (law or satan Rom_16:20) and the twelve stars, the authority of the Apostles ministries, and the man child being the gospel of Jesus Christ. (short version)

I'll make this as skinny as I can. The sun is the greater light Genesis 1:16? Also in Genesis 1:16 the moon is called the lesser light. Genesis 37:9-11 again shows us the symbolic meaning of sun, moon, stars, all governmental symbols. The woman is Israel/Jerusalem, and she can only be Israel because Mystery Babylon is also Israel/Jerusalem. One is the remnant those who held to faithful Abraham, and were dedicated to the prophets. The stars which make up her crown are none other than the 12 tribal elders. She is clothed in the sun the greater light of leadership in the word. The lesser light is under her feet which enables her to even be clothed with the greatness of Illumination. The moon as the lesser light is was the Jesus concealed in the Tanakh. By having revelation of who Christ is was the only way Israel could bring forth Jesus Christ. Who is then taken up to sit in heavenly places Ephesians 2:6. Sister Amana and Brother Esaias explained what the eagle wings symbolized in scripture.

[Bowas]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

I'll make this as skinny as I can. The sun is the greater light Genesis 1:16? Also in Genesis 1:16 the moon is called the lesser light. Genesis 37:9-11 again shows us the symbolic meaning of sun, moon, stars, all governmental symbols. The woman is Israel/Jerusalem, and she can only be Israel because Mystery Babylon is also Israel/Jerusalem. One is the remnant those who held to faithful Abraham, and were dedicated to the prophets. The stars which make up her crown are none other than the 12 tribal elders. She is clothed in the sun the greater light of leadership in the word. The lesser light is under her feet which enables her to even be clothed with the greatness of Illumination. The moon as the lesser light is was the Jesus concealed in the Tanakh. By having revelation of who Christ is was the only way Israel could bring forth Jesus Christ. Who is then taken up to sit in heavenly places Ephesians 2:6. Sister Amana and Brother Esaias explained what the eagle wings symbolized in scripture.

What or why then is that put in the Book of Revelation? I see the Book of Revelation as John's Olivet discourse, but using symbolic imagery more than the others. i can't help but see it as events that happened and culminated @AD70.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Bowas

What or why then is that put in the Book of Revelation? I see the Book of Revelation as John's Olivet discourse, but using symbolic imagery more than the others. i can't help but see it as events that happened and culminated @AD70.

Because Paul said it was an allegory, Hagar and Sarah. We don't seem to realize the impact of lineage in genealogy for Israel, Judah. Nicodemus issue was that he had a lineage, so why did he have to be born again. That rock cut out of the mountain which would slam into the Iron and baked Potter's clay would turn into a mountain which would engulf the world. No fire anywhere in those verses. The mountain consumes everything. The empires which started out as the most precious metal ends up as not only the least of metals, but mixed with pottery. Which Romans mixed iron with mud to make the mud stronger. Yet, no matter how strong she thought she was she is defeated. Only one woman survives who is the mother of us all.

[Evang.Benincasa]

[Bowas]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Because Paul said it was an allegory, Hagar and Sarah. We don't seem to realize the impact of lineage in genealogy for Israel, Judah. Nicodemus issue was that he had a lineage, so why did he have to be born again. That rock cut out of the mountain which would slam into the Iron and baked Potter's clay would turn into a mountain which would engulf the world. No fire anywhere in those verses. The mountain consumes everything. The empires which started out as the most precious metal ends up as not only the least of metals, but mixed with pottery. Which Romans mixed iron with mud to make the mud stronger. Yet, no matter how strong she thought she was she is defeated. Only one woman survives who is the mother of us all.

Must be I am missing something, as I don't see how that works with what we are speaking of.
I agree all about the Rock, but not sure about some of the rest.
I agree the woman of rev 12 is the mother of us all, but I see her as the New Covenant Israel, what we typically call "the church," and yes, I know the church is not a new Covenant creation, but a revived alive Old.
The Book of Revelation describes two woman, which are the two Covenants. The woman in Revelation 12 is one of these women, and I see her as the one clothed with the glory of God depicted as the Sun, the highest of the authorities, and the moon under feet, an authority she has overcome.
Having said all that, I still see Rev 12 as a picture of events that befell the early church as she was persecuted for proclaiming the name of Jesus, but she continued and overcame the Jews and Gentiles that sought to destroy the message of Jesus, and is describing the first century church.
That is a simplified view of what I see in Rev 12.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Bowas

Must be I am missing something, as I don't see how that works with what we are speaking of.
I agree all about the Rock, but not sure about some of the rest.
I agree the woman of rev 12 is the mother of us all, but I see her as the New Covenant Israel, what we typically call "the church," and yes, I know the church is not a new Covenant creation, but a revived alive Old.
The Book of Revelation describes two woman, which are the two Covenants. The woman in Revelation 12 is one of these women, and I see her as the one clothed with the glory of God depicted as the Sun, the highest of the authorities, and the moon under feet, an authority she has overcome.
Having said all that, I still see Rev 12 as a picture of events that befell the early church as she was persecuted for proclaiming the name of Jesus, but she continued and overcame the Jews and Gentiles that sought to destroy the message of Jesus, and is describing the first century church.
That is a simplified view of what I see in Rev 12.

What did the Greek word ἐκκλησία mean to Judeans? Not to Greeks, but to first century Judeans who read their Bible scrolls in Greek? Matthew 16:18 is the first place the Judean would read of Jesus using the word ἐκκλησία. Deuteronomy 4:10 is the first place in the LXX where the word ἐκκλησία is employed. I said that to say this, many of us never had Greek as our birth language. My wife, her brother, and her mother all birth language is Greek. Yet, they don't think like first century Judeans, or first century Judean Christians. We all have to get past the things we accepted as we came up in "church" because we use words without much thought about how THEY used those words. The ἐκκλησία was ( to a Judean ) the assembly of Israel. But just not any assembly. An assembly who heard the voice of God as in Deuteronomy 4:10. The woman is Israel, the church and Israel are inseparable. The stars which are her headship are the 12 tribal elders of Israel. When we can understand how they originally understood what they were reading we can see what they were seeing. Not taking an ancient document and adjusting it to fit our ecclesiastical traditions.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Sorry I posted part 2 first

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Bowas

3.5 years, time, times and half a time, 1260 days is all the same, and we find the Church (woman) fled Jerusalem during the Gentile surrounding of Jerusalem, and according to scripture, she was protected for 3.5 years.

But Jerusalem was encompassed about with armies, as Jesus prophesied in the Olivet prophecy, in 70AD. So I'm missing where the 3 other years are, historically?

If the woman is the church/new covenant Israel, who are the "they" that will nourish her in the wilderness (Rev 12:6)?

The Book was beneficial to the ones it was addressed to, as it was telling them of what was about to befall that region.

Asia Minor?

Why do I believe Rev 12 was written for the first century? Quite simply, the book is written to them of things that would be fulfilled during that time, the time of the end.

Why would you think it was not for them then, the ones it was addressed to?

I never said it wasn't for them to whom it was written. I think you are confusing me with futurists? I'm asking what makes you conclude it was FULFILLED in the first century only? It seems you base that on the a priori assumption that it concerned events in the first century only, so from there you draw the conclusion "it was historically fulfilled in the first century only". As opposed to saying "What are the historical data?" first and then drawing a conclusion as to whether the data supports a first century only fulfillment. Which to me is a bit backwards?

Not sure how you derive the Kingdom of God was confined to the first century church, as I never suggested that, however, that is when it did arrive.

If "at hand" necessarily means "in that immediate time frame, completed within the generation to whom the time statement is made" - which seems to be your argument for the Revelation - then it logically means the kingdom of God was likewise restricted to that immediate time frame and to those to whom it was addressed. Applying that promise of the Kingdom to yourself and our day is like applying Rev 12 to yourself and our day. See?

As far as, if I understand Revelation as they did, the ones it was written to, I cannot say I understand it fully as they did, but I am trying, but I do not find any credible scripture to suggest they thought it was referring to people or places thousands of miles and thousands of years removed. No. It is simply not there.

Again, sounds like you are confusing me with Mike or the other guy? But in any event, it sounds like your hermeneutic is "Prophecy only applies to the immediate initial audience", is that correct?

So with that fact, the "manchild ministry" is not some super Christian ministry as some try to make it, but was birthed from the woman, with is the church.

Yeah I think you got me confused with Mike.

There are two women in Revelation. One a harlot, one a virgin. One Old Jerusalem, the other New Jerusalem. One the old Covenant, the other the New Covenant.

I have always maintained just that.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

The Romans Destroy the Temple

at Jerusalem, 70 AD


In the year 66 AD the Jews of Judea rebelled against their Romans. In response, the Emperor Nero dispatched an army under the generalship of Vespasian to restore order. By the year 68, resistance in the northern part of the province had been eradicated and the Romans turned their full attention to the subjugation of Jerusalem. That same year, the Emperor Nero died by his own hand, creating a power vacuum in Rome. In the resultant chaos, Vespasian was declared Emperor and returned to the Imperial City. It fell to his son, Titus, to lead the remaining army in the assault on Jerusalem.


The Roman legions surrounded the city and began to slowly squeeze the life out of the Jewish stronghold. By the year 70, the attackers had breached Jerusalem's outer walls and began a systematic ransacking of the city. The assault culminated in the burning and destruction of the Temple that served as the center of Judaism.

In victory, the Romans slaughtered thousands. Of those sparred from death: thousands more were enslaved and sent to toil in the mines of Egypt, others were dispersed to arenas throughout the Empire to be butchered for the amusement of the public. The Temple's sacred relics were taken to Rome where they were displayed in celebration of the victory.

The rebellion sputtered on for another three years and was finally extinguished in 73 AD with the fall of the various pockets of resistance including the stronghold at Masada.

"...the Jews let out a shout of dismay that matched the tragedy."

Our only first-hand account of the Roman assault on the Temple comes from the Jewish historian Josephus Flavius. Josephus was a former leader of the Jewish Revolt who had surrendered to the Romans and had won favor from Vespasian. In gratitude, Josephus took on Vespasian's family name - Flavius - as his own. We join his account as the Romans fight their way into the inner sanctum of the Temple:

"...the rebels shortly after attacked the Romans again, and a clash followed between the guards of the sanctuary and the troops who were putting out the fire inside the inner court; the latter routed the Jews and followed in hot pursuit right up to the Temple itself. Then one of the soldiers, without awaiting any orders and with no dread of so momentous a deed, but urged on by some supernatural force, snatched a blazing piece of wood and, climbing on another soldier's back, hurled the flaming brand through a low golden window that gave access, on the north side, to the rooms that surrounded the sanctuary. As the flames shot up, the Jews let out a shout of dismay that matched the tragedy; they flocked to the rescue, with no thought of sparing their lives or husbanding their strength; for the sacred structure that they had constantly guarded with such devotion was vanishing before their very eyes.

...No exhortation or threat could now restrain the impetuosity of the legions; for passion was in supreme command. Crowded together around the entrances, many were trampled down by their companions; others, stumbling on the smoldering and smoked-filled ruins of the porticoes, died as miserably as the defeated. As they drew closer to the Temple, they pretended not even to hear Caesar's orders, but urged the men in front to throw in more firebrands. The rebels were powerless to help; carnage and flight spread throughout.

Most of the slain were peaceful citizens, weak and unarmed, and they were butchered where they were caught. The heap of corpses mounted higher and higher about the altar; a stream of blood flowed down the Temple's steps, and the bodies of those slain at the top slipped to the bottom.

When Caesar (Titus) failed to restrain the fury of his frenzied soldiers, and the fire could not be checked, he entered the building with his generals and looked at the holy place of the sanctuary and all its furnishings, which exceeded by far the accounts current in foreign lands and fully justified their splendid repute in our own.

As the flames had not yet penetrated to the inner sanctum, but were consuming the chambers that surrounded the sanctuary, Titus assumed correctly that there was still time to save the structure; he ran out and by personal appeals he endeavored to persuade his men to put out the fire, instructing Liberalius, a centurion of his bodyguard of lancers, to club any of the men who disobeyed his orders. But their respect for Caesar and their fear of the centurion's staff who was trying to check them were overpowered by their rage, their detestation of the Jews, and an utterly uncontrolled lust for battle.


Most of them were spurred on, moreover, by the expectation of loot, convinced that the interior was full of money and dazzled by observing that everything around them was made of gold. But they were forestalled by one of those who had entered into the building, and who, when Caesar (Titus) dashed out to restrain the troops, pushed a firebrand, in the darkness, into the hinges of the gate Then, when the flames suddenly shot up from the interior, Caesar (Titus) and his generals withdrew, and no one was left to prevent those outside from kindling the blaze. Thus, in defiance of Caesar's (Titus') wishes, the Temple was set on fire.

While the Temple was ablaze, the attackers plundered it, and countless people who were caught by them were slaughtered. There was no pity for age and no regard was accorded rank; children and old men, laymen and priests, alike were butchered; every class was pursued and crushed in the grip of war, whether they cried out for mercy or offered resistance.

Through the roar of the flames streaming far and wide, the groans of the falling victims were heard; such was the height of the hill and the magnitude of the blazing pile that the entire city seemed to be ablaze; and the noise - nothing more deafening and frightening could be imagined.

There were the war cries of the Roman legions as they swept onwards en masse, the yells of the rebels encircled by fire and sword, the panic of the people who, cut off above, fled into the arms of the enemy, and their shrieks as they met their fate. The cries on the hill blended with those of the multitudes in the city below; and now many people who were exhausted and tongue-tied as a result of hunger, when they beheld the Temple on fire, found strength once more to lament and wail. Peraea and the surrounding hills, added their echoes to the deafening din. But more horrifying than the din were the sufferings.

The Temple Mount, everywhere enveloped in flames, seemed to be boiling over from its base; yet the blood seemed more abundant than the flames and the numbers of the slain greater than those of the slayers. The soldiers climbed over heaps of bodies as they chased the fugitives."

References:
Josephus' account appears in: Cornfield, Gaalya ed., Josephus, The Jewish War (1982); Duruy, Victor, History of Rome vol. V (1883).

How To Cite This Article:
"The Romans Destroy the Temple at Jerusalem, 70 AD," EyeWitness to History, www.eyewitnesstohistory.com (2005).

...Esaias now has to dig out Ussher's Annals and Whiston's Chronology and some other dusty old tomes, and grumbles about "homework"...

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

What did the Greek word ἐκκλησία mean to Judeans? Not to Greeks, but to first century Judeans who read their Bible scrolls in Greek? Matthew 16:18 is the first place the Judean would read of Jesus using the word ἐκκλησία. Deuteronomy 4:10 is the first place in the LXX where the word ἐκκλησία is employed. I said that to say this, many of us never had Greek as our birth language. My wife, her brother, and her mother all birth language is Greek. Yet, they don't think like first century Judeans, or first century Judean Christians. We all have to get past the things we accepted as we came up in "church" because we use words without much thought about how THEY used those words. The ἐκκλησία was ( to a Judean ) the assembly of Israel. But just not any assembly. An assembly who heard the voice of God as in Deuteronomy 4:10. The woman is Israel, the church and Israel are inseparable. The stars which are her headship are the 12 tribal elders of Israel. When we can understand how they originally understood what they were reading we can see what they were seeing. Not taking an ancient document and adjusting it to fit our ecclesiastical traditions.

So in other words there really is no hope for us in our time frame to understand what the Bible is saying.