pkrause, Exactly--that is my point. Since when are there two ways for salvation? All of the 'sheep' must come into the same fold. It is the Kingdom of Heaven that Jesus the King will reign. If you are not born of the woman (Holy Spirit) then you must be 'married', making you part of the bride--those found in Rev. 7:9-14. Nowhere do I see that Jesus said anything about adoption and it is not found in Revelation either.

You might want to compare John 15:1-11 with Rom. 11:17-26. Jesus has a bad branch being thrown into the fire (verse 6) but Paul has these bad branches being grafted back in, not thrown in the fire. Sounds like Paul gave out some false information, to me.

It doesn't seem to me that Paul is saying anything different. Seems to me he's telling the gentile believers that after there grafted in they should not hold that over the Jews that don't believe, because just as easily they could be cut off.

pk

Yes, I agree Paul said what you said, but it does not agree with what Jesus said no matter how you put it and add flavor--it just does not taste the same as what Jesus said and taught.

Ever read where Jesus said "oops, if you are not born again, and therefore are not with my sheep, then you can be adopted"? I don't think so.

Jesus was talking to the Jews and Paul was talking to the Gentiles. And it seems they are pretty much saying the same thing.

pk

Dr. Rich, when the the woman of Rev. 12:1 fled, she fled on earth. The sun of the righteousness of Christ shines from Christ, but shines upon the earth, upon us who receive the imputed righteousness of Christ. The moon is a "faithful witness in the sky" but we have the Word of God on the earth. The faithful people of God--the church of all ages--have always stood upon the law and sound doctrines and prophecies of the Word of God.

The three angels of Rev. 14 are pictured as flying in the midst of heaven, or mid-heaven. Yet these three angels represent the movements among God's people on earth to proclaim the final three warning messages to the world.

We should avoid jumping to conclusions based on things that appeal to our imagination. We must understand all Bible prophetic symbols in their contexts with each other, and see how the symbols generally tend to be used throughout the Bible. Remember, in all Bible prophecy, we are dealing with ONE divine mind who inspired them all, Who chose the symbols used in all cases.

Ron,
Where did the idea come from that the "Wilderness" means the earth? Just asking.

Musicman and Ron, from what I have observed, the wilderness represented the nations of the world that were not part of the kingdom of heaven. The goat of removal was sent into the wilderness--away from the kingdom of heaven (Israel) but was not killed since it is Satan that is in the world.

When the woman of Rev. 12 fled to the wilderness, this must mean that the kingdom of heaven ceased to be ever since the 2nd kingdom regected Jesus saying 'we have no king but Ceasar'.

To me, this would agree with the prophecy in Dan. 2 about the rock cut out w/o hands being set up during the last days--and not before. The Holy Spirit, not having a Kingdom until 1843 would therefore be in the wilderness, the Nations being controled by Satan. So no, there was no one who was being led by the Holy Spirit during the 'dark ages' but there were individuals who were searching for truth but since Dan. 12:10's prophecy is true, no one would understand during that time.

This is only my understanding as I am still in the process of discovery here.

The wilderness in Bible prophecy would logically represent the opposite from what "waters" or "sea" represents. Since the latter connotes areas of heavy population (see Rev. 17:15; compare Dan. 7:2, 17), the former should be expected to indicate areas that are relatively sparsely inhabited. This interpretation also fits with the symbol of "earth" used in Rev. 13:11, seen in contrast to "sea" in Rev. 13:1. We have both symbols sea and earth used together in Rev. 10:2, which reasonably represent the Old World and the New World. Taken together, they encompass the entire planet and all its human inhabitants.

Wilderness in Rev. 12:6 is also literally true, since those who refused to compromise their faith and were threatened with destruction fled into the Piedmont Mountain valleys of Italy, and later religious minorities fled to the Americas, when the "earth" opened up its mouth to swallow the "flood" that threatened to inundate the faithful.

The symbols God picks are noteworthy for their appropriateness. Just as mountains dominate the landscape, so empires dominate the region. Just as trees provide shelter and nurture for many life forms, so kingdoms and empires may provide peace and safety and cultural nurture. Both these are used as symbols for kingdoms or empires. Beasts are also used as symbols for kingdoms and empires, as if God is implying that nations that engage in wars of conquest are behaving like animals.

Ron, what you wrote is interesting, but I don't buy it. One of the reasons I reject it is that this interpretation is a very old one and has been around the SDA church as ‘doctrine’. I question everything and every interpretation that has been handed down by our forefathers since it probably was not the whole truth because of what God told us in Dan. 12:9-12. The other reason I reject it is because of Rev. 12 itself. It is impossible for the woman of Revelation 12 to be the church. Try as you may, a round peg can’t be forced into a square hole.

Dr. Rich, I can counter by saying it is impossible for the woman of Rev. 12:1 to represent anything other than the church through the ages. If you refuse to accept something like this that is so well-reasoned and argued on the basis of Biblical evidence, and as you say has been accepted by the SDA church ever since its inception, and by the Christian Church in general as long as Historicism has been embraced as the proper approach to interpreting Bible prophecy, then I can only conclude you are just being contrary.

You need better arguments--Biblical arguments--than you have provided so far, before I will concede your view is even reasonable. I agree that just because a view has been held by the majority for a long time, that does not mean it is true. But you do need sound Biblical arguments if you are going to maintain that long-standing traditional views need to be revised. That a view has been held for a long time in itself is not an argument against it.

You need more than subjective impressions and personal preferences in order to interpret any prophecy of the Bible. Remember this fundamental rule for interpreting Bible prophecy given by the Apostle Peter: "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." (2 Peter 1:20, 21)

The key to avoiding a private interpretation of Bible prophecy is implicit in verse 21. Because we believe all the prophecies of the Bible came from One Divine Mind, therefore we can expect consistency in the way that prophetic symbols are used, and so we not only can, but MUST, allow Scripture to supply its own definitions for all symbols, so that the meaning of any symbol is consistent with every case in Bible prophecy where the same symbol is used.

The interpretation of Bible prophecy is not a contest to see who can be the most clever and imaginative. It is an honest and sincere and HUMBLE effort to find the truth of God that is there to be found. Remember, "the spirit of prophecy" is "the testimony of Jesus." (Rev. 19:10) Therefore it is His truth, not our "truth." In seeking to understand the prophecies, we must of necessity draw closer to Jesus. Pride of opinion will always interfere with this.