5 Theologians on the Child of Revelation 12

Last weekend one of my favorite pastors implied that "Every conservative theologian that's worth reading..." interprets Revelation 12 in a way contrary to how those of us following the sign do. Among other things this pastor was quite adamant that Revelation 12 is simply talking about the birth and ascension of Jesus Christ, and has nothing to do with the rapture of the Church.  In his words this view is "longtime held, conservative, orthodox eschatology."

Well, I would like to address that statement...

Wait....who cares what I have to say?  How about we let some longtime, conservative, orthodox, eschatology teachers address the subject!  And when I say longtime, well, you'll see what I mean...

1. John Nelson Darby (1855)

"If the mighty man, the mystic man, the man-child of Revelation xii. is to act [in judging the world with a rod of iron], He must first be complete (of course He is so, essentially so, in Himself, but as Head over all things to the Church which is His body). The head and the body must be united before He can act as having this title before the world; because the mystic man as a whole cannot take it until the Church is taken up to Him. For not until then—until the Church, the body, is united to the Head, Christ, in heaven—is the mystic man in that sense complete; and therefore, the Church must be taken up before Christ can come in judgment. "

And this...

"In the chapter we have read, you have first Christ Himself and the church, figured in the man-child; and then in the woman who flees from persecution for 1260 days you have the Jewish remnant, those who are spared in the time of judgment but are not yet brought into glory."

And this...

"I have no doubt that the “man child” spoken of in the chapter that we have been reading includes the church as well as Christ. But it is Christ that is principally meant, for the church would be nothing without Christ; it would be a body without a head. It is Christ who has been caught up; but the church is included, for whenever He begins to act publicly, even as regards Satan being cast down, He must have His body, His bride, with Him; He must have His brethren, His joint-heirs."

Reference: John Nelson Darby, Seven Lectures on the Prophetical Addresses to the Seven Churches (3d rev. ed.; London: G. Morrish, c. 1855)

2. William Kelly (1870)

"On this principle then I cannot but consider that the rapture of the man-child to God and His throne involves the rapture of the church in itself. The explanation why it is thus introduced here depends on the truth that Christ and the church are one, and have a common destiny. Inasmuch as He went up to heaven, so also the church is to be caught up."

Reference: William Kelly, Lectures Introductory to the Study of the Acts, the Catholic Epistles, and the Revelation (London: W. H. Broom, 1870)

3. Richard Chester (1882)

"Now if the male Man-child of Rev. xii. is to be regarded as solely representing the Lord Jesus Christ ascended into the heavens, as some interpreters affirm; or as representing the visible Christian Church exalted into political power, as taught by others, it were not easy to establish any parallelism, or any correspondence whatsoever between Zech. iii. and Rev. xii. But if the Man-child represents, as is the belief of many students of prophecy, the entire body of “the dead in Christ” raised, and the living in Christ who shall be changed, and both together caught up to meet Him in the air—or if, as I have suggested in the article above referred to—he is to be rather regarded as a portion of the Jewish people—of “the remnant according to the election of grace” incorporated by conversion to Christ into the Church of this dispensation—and thus “brought forth”—“born again,”—and then, “caught up to God and to His throne,” in the rapture of the risen and living saints of 1 Thess. iv.—then, in either of these cases, I submit that this vision of Zechariah iii. corresponds most accurately."

Richard Chester, “Old Testament Light on New Testament Prophecy,” The Prophetic News and Israel’s Watchman (December, 1882)

---

She gave birth to 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,
Revelation 12:5

---

4. Harry Ironside (1919)

"I have read or carefully examined several hundred books purporting to expound the Revelation. I have learned to look upon this twelfth chapter as the crucial test in regard to the correct prophetic outline. If the interpreters are wrong as to the woman and the man-child, it necessarily follows that they will be wrong as to many things connected with them."

And this...

"If we allow Scripture itself to answer, we find there is a person and a company of people answering to this description. In the 2d Psalm Jehovah says to Messiah, “Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten Thee. Ask of Me, and I shall give Thee the nations for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; Thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel” (vers. 7–9). This, clearly enough, is our Lord Jesus Christ, who is soon to reign over all the earth, and undoubtedly He is primarily the Man-child who is to rule the nations with a rod of iron, and the special object of Satan’s malignity. But we have already seen, in Rev. 2:26–28, that when He reigns He will not reign alone. . . . Is there then any incongruity in understanding the man-child to represent both Christ Jesus our Lord and His church? Surely not, for He is the Head of the body, the church, which is the fullness, or completion of Himself, so that the title, “The Church” is applied to both head and body viewed as one in 1 Cor. 12:12. . . . We may then, on the authority of Scripture itself, safely affirm that the man-child represents the one New Man who is to rule the nations with a rod of iron—Christ, the Head, and the church, His body. If this be so, then it is impossible that the woman should symbolize the church."

And this...

"We have seen that the man-child symbolizes both Head and body—the complete Christ. Therefore, as in other prophecies, the entire present dispensation is passed over in silence, and the church is represented in its Head, caught up with Christ. For immediately after this, Satan, again acting through the Roman Empire which is to be revived in the last days, turns upon the woman Israel and seeks to vent his wrath and indignation against her."

Reference: Harry A. Ironside, Lectures on the Revelation (New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1919)

Quotes 1-4 were compiled by Dr Michael Svigel, a Department Chair and Associate Professor at Dallas Theological Seminary.  You can read more context surrounding those quotes (and many more which weren't included) here:
Proof of the Rapture in Revelation 12

---

UPDATE: Unsealed.org just put up an amazing post listing 15 Conservative Scholars who agreed that the Male Child of Rev 12:5 Represented The Church. Be sure out that expanded list out as well!! 

Here is the link:
http://www.unsealed.org/2017/08/conservative-scholars-agree-male-child.html

---

5. Chuck Missler (approx. 2005) / G. H. Pember (1884)

We need one guy who is still living, don't we?   One of the greatest teachers of our lifetime, Chuck Missler, says the following about Rev 12:5...  He references a fairly famous book written in the 1800's by G.H. Pember:

"I always USED TO view that as the ascension of Our Lord.  But there is a guy by the name of Pember who wrote a book about Genesis, Earth's Earliest Ages.  And it BLEW ME AWAY because he see's this differently and I don't know that he's wrong.  He see's... that child... as the Body of Christ.  He see's in that The Rapture.   Isn't that wild?  And it doesn't alter the text because what happens from verse 6 on is Tribulational."

Listen to the quote for yourself here: (58 seconds)

---

Additional Notes

1. Here is the information for Svigel's paper:

"What Child is This?" 
Dabry's Early Exegetical Argument for the Pretribulation Rapture of the Church.
Dr Michael Svigel - Dallas Theological Seminary
Trinity Journal (2014)

According to the paper, others who held this view included Michael Baxter (1863),  Adolphus Spalding Worrell (1900), William E. Blackstone (1904) and Henry Proctor (1904). 

2. There are also commentaries on Revelation written long ago that include this view. 

Here is one example shared with me in the comments section of a previous post. Thank you, Myrhh!

The Millennium Bible
A Complete Commentary on All Scripture Passages Related to the Second Coming
William Biederwolf  (1924)

Here is a portion of what this commentary had to say under Revelation 12:5:

"Petingill, Mackintosh and a few others have a curious idea here. They think the "catching up" does not refer to the historical, bodily ascension of Christ from the Mount of Olives, but to His spiritual body, believers who are to be caught up at the coming rapture, that the manchild therefore is still in progress of birth, the Church not being fully formed as yet...."

FYI:  This is exactly what Scottie Clarke has been teaching lately.... makes total sense!

UPDATE 8/31/17: Here is another example shared with me on Facebook. Thank you, Christine!  This is huge!

Matthew Henry Commentary On The Whole Bible
Originally written in 1706, Matthew Henry's six volume Complete Commentary provides an exhaustive look at every verse in the Bible.

"The unsuccessfulness of these attempts against the church; for, 1. She was safely delivered of a man-child (v. 5), by which some understand Christ, others Constantine, but others, with greater propriety, a race of true believers, strong and united, resembling Christ, and designed, under him, to rule the nations with a rod of iron; that is, to judge the world by their doctrine and lives now, and as assessors with Christ at the great day. Care was taken of this child: it was caught up to God, and to his throne; that is, taken into his special, powerful, and immediate protection. The Christian religion has been from its infancy the special care of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ. 3. Care was taken of the mother as well as of the child."

http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/matthew-henry-complete/revelation/12.html

Did you notice the phrase Henry used there.... "greater propriety"....  Here is the definition:

3. Know Your Roots

Most Pretribulation Rapture teachers love John Nelson Darby.  Most think he is "a brilliant guy" as so eloquently put by my very own conservative pastor. But they simply aren't aware that the foundational verse for Darby's view of the timing of the rapture rested upon a correct interpretation of Revelation 12:5.  Darby saw Rev 12:5 has the KEY exegetical proof in regards to the timing of the event. In his mind it clearly differentiated it from Pre-Wrath which was more popular at the time.  Again, you can learn all about that in the paper from the professor at the Dallas Theological Seminary. Print it off, read it and share....

4. Need a Checklist?

For more information on why the Child is best interpreted as The Body of Christ, see here:
Who Is The Male Child In Revelation 12? | Unsealed

5. Still unsure of who the pastor is that inspired this article? 

See here and here.
And yes, I still love him... even though I think he is wrong on this one. : )