M
Mannyfit75
Guest
No mine. It’s yours. Early Christians believe that the woman is Mary even St. John who wrote the Book of Revelation. You say she isn’t Mary. John says she is.We all have our biases. I have mine you have yours.
Its yours also.
Faulty conclusion. I think.The child would be Jesus. However in such a book as Revelations which by far is the most metaphorical etc book of the NT it requires us to keep this in mind when seeking to understand it. Saying the the woman is Mary has some serious problems with the rest of the texts as Brown points out.
There is no problem with the interpretations. It’s your problem with the interpretation. That is your problem, and there is no problems.
My interpretation is in accordance with the with the Magisterium.Unless your Magisterium has infallibly interpreted this passage it won’t help you here. What we are forced to do is to deal with the passage itself and compare it with your understanding that it is Mary and see if it fits. Raymond Brown clearly shows that it does not fit for Mary for the reasons he gives.
I don’t see that way. The male-child is Jesus Christ and the mother of Jesus is Mary. So the woman in Revelation 12:1-6 is Mary.I don’t see you engaging Brown but just dismissing him because he is not the Magisterium. That won’t do. You need to fit for example 12:6 to Mary. That verse alone is enough to tell us its not Mary.
You can’t prove to me that she isn’t.
I’m done with you justasking4. I already have to say what I have to say concerning the woman in Revelation 12:1-5. You haven’t prove to me that the woman isn’t Mary.
I like to add when it comes to theology Protestants gets it wrong. The Magisterium of the Catholic Church is always right.