Conservative Scholars Agree: The Male Child Is The Church

A number of prophecy teachers, including Joel Richardson and Jack Hibbs, dismissed the Revelation 12 Sign by suggesting it wasn't unique and that conservative evangelical scholars have taught that the male child of Revelation 12:5 is not the Church.  We have already demonstrated that they are mistaken about the Sign's uniqueness (it is completely unique) and Revelation 12 Daily has uncovered numerous examples of conservative scholars who taught that the male child is the Church.  As a matter of fact, these prominent examples are so numerous one must wonder if it would be more accurate to say that there was widespread agreement among conservative evangelical scholars in the 16th through 19th centuries that the male child is in fact the Church.

The first two arguments Jack Hibbs presents to debunk the Revelation 12 Sign are as follows:

First of all, every conservative theologian that's worth reading does not interpret Revelation chapter twelve, the woman and the stars and all, as this young man [Steve Cioccolanti] has just stated.  It refers to the nation of Israel.  It's a eschatological, parenthetical insert.  It's an announcement that the nation of Israel will bring forth the man-child, the Messiah.  The Messiah came from Israel.  The twelve stars representing the twelve tribes.  This is longtime-held conservative, orthodox eschatology of the book of Revelation.  Number two: It's Revelation chapter twelve.  It's very clear that this is during the Tribulation period, Jan, and this young man says it's going to happen soon...

For starters, having seen Brad's research, I'm concerned that Hibbs is being disingenuous here.  He makes a bold statement that has now been shown to be incorrect.  Why is a man of God making such a patently false statement?  Could he not have at least said "I think" or "I bet" that "every conservative theologian... does not interpret Revelation chapter twelve [this way]"?  No, he stated something as cold, hard truth that is anything but.

Secondly, it seems a little (or a lot) convoluted to state that Revelation 12:5 is a "parenthetical insert" about the birth and ascension of Christ, but then turn around and take issue with Cioccolanti because Revelation 12 is supposedly only about the Tribulation.  That is completely illogical.  We all agree the passage deals with the Tribulation, but it's unfair to say it can't be parenthetical for us (those teaching the man-child is Christ and the Church), but it can be parenthetical for you (Hibbs' belief that the man-child is only Christ and not His Body).  That's hypocrisy.  What we can determine from this debate is that there is just about universal agreement on all sides that Revelation 12:5 is parenthetical.  The question is: is it speaking of Christ or the Church or both?

Going back to the initial claim, I want to challenge Pastor Hibbs.  Tell us which of the following men of God are not conservative theologians worth reading:

Theodore Beza

Born in France in 1519, Beza was one of the earliest and most prominent theologians in the Protestant Reformation.  He lived most of his life in Switzerland.  A student of John Calvin, he went on to help author the Geneva Study Bible, the very first mass-produced, publicly-available study Bible.  This was the most popular English translation until the King James Version came along in the following century.  The notes on Revelation 12:5 state the following about the man-child:

That is Christ the head of the Church joined with his Church (the beginning root and foundation of which is the same Christ) endued with kingly power and taken up into heaven out of the jaws of Satan (who as a serpent did bite him on the cross) that sitting on the heavenly throne, he might reign over all.

Considering the Geneva Study Bible was authored with the help of John Calvin and John Knox, one might wonder if they also shared or at least entertained Beza's view.

Hanserd Knollys

One of the earliest Baptist theologians, Knollys was born in England in 1599.  He served first as a bishop and later as a Baptist minister and is known for numerous scholarly works.  In Hanserd Knollys' Commentary on Revelation he writes of the man-child:

The man child brought forth was Christ, and his saints, the spiritual seed of this mystical woman, the church of the firstborn written in heaven, {Hebrews 12:22-23} the Jerusalem, that is above, which is the mother of us all. {Galatians 4:26} This child was prophesied of. {Psalm 2:6-10} And also her spiritual seed, the saints. {Revelation 12:16-17} Christ and his saints shall have the dominion over the nations, Daniel 7:27-28 and {Revelation 11:15}.

Matthew Poole

An English Nonconformist Reformer and theologian, Matthew Poole was born in 1624 and died in 1679.  He has a number of works and commentaries to his name.  In his Latin commentary he expresses deep skepticism towards the theory that the man-child is only Christ or Constantine and entertains the possibility the child is in fact the Church:

By this man-child some understand Constantine the Great; others understand Christ mystical, or many children brought forth unto God. As the Jews multiplied, do Pharaoh what he could to destroy them, so the church increased, notwithstanding all the malice and rage of her enemies. Interpreters accordingly are divided concerning the person or persons here spoken of, that should 'Rule all nations with a rod of iron.' It was prophesied of Christ, Psalm 2:9, that he should break the nations with a rod of iron. It is applied to the servants of Christ, who overcome, and keep Christ’s words to the end, Revelation 2:27. So as it is here applicable to believers, whom the church should bring forth, who shall judge the world, as the apostle tells us; and I had rather thus interpret it, than concerning Constantine the Great.

'And her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne': these words are something hard to be interpreted. To interpret it of Christ’s being taken up into heaven, is to turn a mysterious prophecy into a plain relation, or history of things past. To interpret it concerning Constantine the Great, seemeth very hard; for how was he, more than any other Christians, caught up unto God, and to his throne?

Matthew Henry

One of the most highly regarded Protestant theologians in history.  He wrote one of the most exhaustive biblical commentaries ever produced.  His massive six-volume work, which was published in 1706, had this to say about the man-child:

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.

Take careful note of Henry's thoughts.  He called the man-child = Church theory of "greater propriety."  Propriety - the state or quality of conforming to conventionally accepted standards of behavior or morals.  This was well over a century before Darby supposedly "invented" the pre-trib rapture doctrine.  Whoever Henry's sources were, some of them must have thought likewise.

John Wesley

No biography is needed for this cleric from the 1700s.  He just happened to be the founder of Methodism, but no big deal y'all.  Here is what Wesley said about the man-child:

And she brought forth a man child - Even Christ, considered not in his person, but in his kingdom. In the ninth age, many nations with their princes were added to the Christian church. Who was to rule all nations - When his time is come. And her child - Which was already in heaven, as were the woman and the dragon. Was caught up to God - Taken utterly out of his reach.

John Nelson Darby

The founder of modern dispensationalism and futurism, he is perhaps the single most influential evangelical theologian aside from Luther, Melancthon, Calvin, and Christ and the Apostles themselves.  Though he has been falsely accused of inventing the pre-trib rapture doctrine, he did in fact popularize it in his time.  He saw Revelation 12:5 as key textual evidence of a pre-trib rapture:

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...

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...

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.

William Kelly

Following on the heels of Darby was the Irish theologian William Kelly who wrote in 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.

G.H. Pember

George Hawkins Pember was an Englishman and prolific Christian writer and scholar in the 19th and early 20th centuries.  In his 1876 book Earth's Earliest Ages, Pember not only espoused the theory that the male child is the Body of Christ, but also that the Nephilim would return after the rapture of the Church (source):

But of far more intense interest to those who love the Lord Jesus, and long for His appearing, is that which is signified as taking place just previously to the expulsion of the Devil and his angels from heaven (Rev. xii. 1-5). For without going into details, which we have considered elsewhere, we may mention our conclusion that the birth and rapture of the man child refer to the completion of the mystic Christ — of which the personal Christ is the Head and His Church the body — as manifested by the sudden translation of all waiting saints, whether dead or alive, to meet their Lord in the air.

It thus appears that this long-expected event will precede Satan’s banishment from heaven, and, therefore, also it’s results…and the revelation of the Man of Sin. Like Enoch, the Church of Christ will be called away before earth is for a time abandoned to the Nephilim, before the fearful woes of the end.

Richard Chester

Anglican Rector of Midleton and Canon of Cloyne, Chester wrote in his expansive 1882 work Old Testament Light on New Testament Prophecy:

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.

Charles Stanley

English preacher and evangelist, Charles Stanley, was one of the first to popularize the use of Gospel tracts in evangelism.  Stanley roamed England and Scotland evangelizing and starting revivals.  He was the author of numerous books, tracts, and writings.  In The Great Tribulation or the Time of the End he wrote:

Here, as the man child He is revealed as the mystic Christ; the unmeasured interval completed. 'And she brought forth a man child who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up to God and His throne' (Rev. 12:5). Now the church is associated with Christ in this, as it is written in Revelation 2:26. 'And he that overcometh, and keepeth My works unto the end; to him will I give power over the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron.' And when Christ comes to exercise this judgment, the church comes with Him (Rev. 19:14-15). So that the full ascension of the man child is complete, when the church, His body, is caught up to be with Him where He is: and to come with Him when He comes.

Edward Dennett

A faithful scholar in the Anglican communion, he later became a Baptist minister and scholar.  In his Revelation commentary The Visions of John on Patmos, Dennett wrote:

His expulsion from heaven is celebrated by a loud voice, which John heard, 'saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night' (vs. 10). This loud voice in heaven explains two things; first, that the expulsion of Satan and his angels from heaven was connected with, and preliminary to, the establishment of Christ’s kingdom on earth, such being the import, we apprehend, of the words, 'Now is come,' (vs. 10) etc.; and secondly, it gives the justification of the interpretation that the church is regarded as caught up together with the Manchild; for the voice speaks of our brethren whom Satan had accused night and day before God.

Walter Thomas Prideaux Wolston

Another English evangelist, Walter Wolston was known for a dramatic conversion and an utter determination to preach the Gospel of Grace.  He was a surgeon and also the author of numerous Christian booklets.  He was also the editor of the famous The Gospel Messenger magazine for some 45 years.  Of Revelation 12:5 he wrote:

A little careful perusal of the Scripture will show that the one hundred and forty-four thousand are an earthly company, and not a heavenly company at all. The 'man-child' of Revelation 12 will have been 'caught up unto God, and to His throne,' before the scenes of chapter 14 are enacted. But who is the man-child? Christ? Yes, but not Christ only. Those that are Christ’s, I take it, are included in the expression. The man-child is going 'to rule all nations with a rod of iron'; and in Revelation 2:26-27, we find the Lord promising this position to the overcomer in Thyatira. Hence, not only is it Christ, but those that belong to Christ, and who, like Himself, have been taken up to heaven.

Henry Allen "Harry" Ironside

Harry Ironside, popularly called the "Archbishop of Fundamentalism", was a Canadian theologian born in 1876 who later moved to the United States and became one of the most influential conservative dispensationalists of all time and the author of more than 100 books.  In one of his famous lectures he explicitly defined the male child as the Church:

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...

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...

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.

William Biederwolf

This famous Presbyterian evangelist and scholar wrote more than 30 books including a prophetic commentary called The Millennium Bible in which he wrote of Revelation 12:5:

Pettingill, 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 man-child therefore is still in progress of birth, the Church not being fully formed as yet...

William L. Pettingill

Dr. Pettingill authored 21 books and co-founded the Philadelphia College of the Bible with C.I. Scofield.  In 1923 (interesting date there) he wrote the following in God's Prophecies For Plain People:

Some of the language in this paragraph reminds us at once of the Second Psalm, where it is said of the Son of GOD:

'I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen 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' (Psalm 2:7-9).

The person in the Psalm is also seen in Revelation 12:5, coming forth out of Israel, 'a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron.'

As He comes out of Heaven at the head of His armies, He brings with Him His co-rulers, in fulfillment of the promise of Revelation 2:26, 27:

'And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations: And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.'

Chuck Missler

A name most all of us are familiar with, Chuck Missler is one of the most famous prophecy scholars in modern times.  Founder of Koinonia House, ex-CEO of Western Digital, and a former teacher at Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa (the "home church" of the Calvary Chapel movement). Missler has authored numerous books and hosted numerous television shows.  It's ironic that prominent shepherds in the Calvary Chapel movement are unaware of what one of their primary theologians has taught.  Missler not only entertained the possibility that the man-child is the Church, but also the astrological significance of the descriptions in Revelation 12.

For many, many years as I read verse five I recognized of course that the woman is Israel... the man-child is who?  Jesus Christ.  And her child was caught up unto God and to his throne.  And I just took for granted that was an allusion to what?  The ascension, right?  It was G.H. Pember I believe, back probably in 1914, he was the first that I encountered at least, that saw this as possibly alluding to something else.  Not the ascension, but the rapture.  Her child, the Body of Christ, was caught up to God and his throne.  That could be an allusion to the ascension, no problem.  It also might be an allusion to the Body of Christ caught up in the rapture because the word 'caught up' there in the Greek is guess what?  Harpazo.  Snatched.  The same word that occurs in First Thessalonians chapter four.

This list is by no means exhaustive as I found a number of other conservative evangelical scholars who taught that the man-child is the Church, including Barton Johnson, Arthur Bloomfield, David Wilkerson, Thomas Blackburn Baines, Charles Henry Mackintosh, Robert Jamieson, Andrew Robert Fausset, and David Brown, the latter three being the authors of the world famous Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary (source), which along with Matthew Henry's commentary, are widely used in online Bible study tools.  Add in the more recent Dr. Michael Svigel, and that brings just a cursory count to 25 prominent theologians.

So my question and challenge to these pastors and naysayers within the Church is why are you disparaging God's "Great Sign"?  A fair rebuttal has yet to be offered and this alignment has withstood continual scrutiny for over three years now.  It really is unique, the male child really is the Church, numerous "conservative theologians" really do support this particular interpretation of the male child, and the alignment takes place in just three weeks.  Hear me clearly: I'm not saying the rapture will occur on September 23rd, but I fervently believe it is a sign that we are now exceptionally close.  This might be the exit sign.

I can understand the pastoral concerns about sensationalism and "date setting", but do you really want to ignore what might be a very clear sign from God that the Church is about to enter the heavenly Promised Land?  This sign doesn't exist in a vacuum, by the way (see here, here, here, and here).  Disparaging God's Great Sign seems like a far more frightening thing than at least having an open mind to it.  How many in your flocks are ignoring the significance of this because you are?

Frightening.  Truly frightening.  Consider the bad report from those spies who spied out the Promised Land and God's response to their unbelief (Numbers 13:30–14:12):

But Caleb quieted the people before Moses and said, 'Let us go up at once and occupy it, for we are well able to overcome it.'  Then the men who had gone up with him said, 'We are not able to go up against the people, for they are stronger than we are.' So they brought to the people of Israel a bad report of the land that they had spied out, saying, 'The land, through which we have gone to spy it out, is a land that devours its inhabitants, and all the people that we saw in it are of great height.  And there we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak, who come from the Nephilim), and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seemed to them.'

Then all the congregation raised a loud cry, and the people wept that night.  And all the people of Israel grumbled against Moses and Aaron.  The whole congregation said to them, 'Would that we had died in the land of Egypt!  Or would that we had died in this wilderness!  Why is the Lord bringing us into this land, to fall by the sword?  Our wives and our little ones will become a prey. Would it not be better for us to go back to Egypt?'  And they said to one another, 'Let us choose a leader and go back to Egypt.'

Then Moses and Aaron fell on their faces before all the assembly of the congregation of the people of Israel.  And Joshua the son of Nun and Caleb the son of Jephunneh, who were among those who had spied out the land, tore their clothes and said to all the congregation of the people of Israel, 'The land, which we passed through to spy it out, is an exceedingly good land.  If the Lord delights in us, he will bring us into this land and give it to us, a land that flows with milk and honey.  Only do not rebel against the Lord.  And do not fear the people of the land, for they are bread for us.  Their protection is removed from them, and the Lord is with us; do not fear them.'  Then all the congregation said to stone them with stones. But the glory of the Lord appeared at the tent of meeting to all the people of Israel.

And the Lord said to Moses, 'How long will this people despise me?  And how long will they not believe in me, in spite of all the signs that I have done among them?  I will strike them with the pestilence and disinherit them, and I will make of you a nation greater and mightier than they.'

Newer Post Older Post