How does Gen. 3.15 support the Assumption?

[The_Truthinator]

Shalom.

I’ve noticed that while many places don’t give any Scripture readings for the Assumption and Coronation Mysteries of the rosary (as they are Tradition, after all), some try to support the Assumption with Genesis 3.15. While this is certainly a prophecy about Mary, and ultimately Christ, how does it correlate to such a doctrine?

I don’t get the connection.

Thanks!

 

[Petergee]

These readings are meant to help us reflect on the mystery. They are not meant to be “proof texts” to prove that the event happened. There is no explicit “proof text” of the Assumption in the Bible; we know that these texts refer to the Assumption through the light of Sacred Tradition and the constant teaching of the Church’s magisterium (episcopal and papal teaching authority given by Christ).

 

[Todd_Easton]

Perhaps Genesis 3:15 is a prophecy of Mary and Jesus’ complete faithfulness towards God and emnity with the devil.

Sharing Jesus’ complete faithfulness towards God and emnity with the devil, would tend to support the notion that, like Jesus, God would neither abandon Mary’s soul to the nether world nor suffer her body to undergo corruption but would show her fullness of joy in his presence and delight at his right hand forever. (Psalm 16:7-11)

 

[Janet_S]

Shalom.

I’ve noticed that while many places don’t give any Scripture readings for the Assumption and Coronation Mysteries of the rosary (as they are Tradition, after all), some try to support the Assumption with Genesis 3.15. While this is certainly a prophecy about Mary, and ultimately Christ, how does it correlate to such a doctrine?

I don’t get the connection.

Thanks!

Mary is identified with the “woman” of Genesis 3:15 and Revelation 12:1.

Genesis 3:15, “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel.”

Revelation 12:1, “A great sign appeared in the sky, **a woman **clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.” The woman in Revelation can be seen as the Church, Israel, or Mary.

Redemptoris Mater (see section 24.2):
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031987_redemptoris-mater_en.html

24.2 The words uttered by Jesus from the Cross signify that the motherhood of her who bore Christ finds a “new” continuation in the Church and through the Church, symbolized and represented by John. In this way, she who as the one “full of grace” was brought into the mystery of Christ in order to be his Mother and thus the Holy Mother of God, through the Church remains in that mystery as “the woman” spoken of by the Book of Genesis (3:15) at the beginning and by the Apocalypse (12:1) at the end of the history of salvation. In accordance with the eternal plan of Providence, Mary’s divine motherhood is to be poured out upon the Church, as indicated by statements of Tradition, according to which Mary’s “motherhood” of the Church is the reflection and extension of her motherhood of the Son of God.50

Pope Pius XII, MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS–Moreover, the scholastic Doctors have recognized the Assumption of the Virgin Mother of God as something signified, not only in various figures of the Old Testament, but also in that woman clothed with the sun whom John the Apostle contemplated on the Island of Patmos.

In Revelation 12:1 we see Mary as Queen of Heaven. This verse is used to support the doctrine of the Assumption, and we read it at Mass on this feast day.

So, why Genesis 3:15? Because of its connection to Revelation 12:1 which is a verse used to support the doctrine of the Assumption.

 

[tee_eff_em]

:twocents: I never thought of that verse supporting the Assumption. Genesis 3:19, on the other hand…

tee

 

[paarsurrey]

Shalom.

I’ve noticed that while many places don’t give any Scripture readings for the Assumption and Coronation Mysteries of the rosary (as they are Tradition, after all), some try to support the Assumption with Genesis 3.15. While this is certainly a prophecy about Mary, and ultimately Christ, how does it correlate to such a doctrine?

I don’t get the connection.

Thanks!

Hi

This is just becoming superstitious or it may be termed as wishful thinking only, in my opinion, otherwise, there seems no inter-relationship or co-relationship of Genesis 3:15 with the attempted killing of Jesus on Cross and with the migration of both Jesus and Mary together to India and dieing there. This is only my opinion , others could differ with me, no compulsion.

Thanks

 

[Jesusstreet]

Shalom.

I’ve noticed that while many places don’t give any Scripture readings for the Assumption and Coronation Mysteries of the rosary (as they are Tradition, after all), some try to support the Assumption with Genesis 3.15. While this is certainly a prophecy about Mary, and ultimately Christ, how does it correlate to such a doctrine?

I don’t get the connection.

Thanks!

We must understand that MOTHER MARY, is the “woman” refered to here, and in revelation. There’s a lot to be said on this. Because we must show that MOTHER MARY is the “new eve” and “the mother of all the living” means we need to show the REAL PRESENCE and that MOTHER MARY was born without original sin, and remained pure.

We as Catholics inherit MOTHER MARY as OUR MOTHER, because we are united to the BODY OF CHRIST by the REAL PRESENCE of JESUS CHRIST in the HOLY EUCHRIAST. (we can also show then that the Rosary honors GOD OUR FATHER and MARY OUR MOTHER which offers us promises by covenant within a covenant, much as the ten commandments contain a covenant within a covenant, a commandment with promise, in the commandment to honor mother and father that you will live a long life).

Esther 2:2,7-8,17
Luke 1:28-30
Esther 5:1-3,8
Esther 7:3,8
Esther 10:6
Esther 15

Esther 15 and Revelation 12 give us evidence to support the Assumption in Sacred Scripture.
The Book of Esther, in particular (Esther 7:3) gives us ample evidence of the intercession of MOTHER MARY.

But we must first show that MOTHER MARY is the New Eve, made without original sin, born as GOD made HER the NEW ARK OF THE COVENANT BODY AND BLOOD OF OUR LORD, a vessel undefiled to carry in her womb the sacred flesh of OUR LORD, that could not be defiled, but is a perfect sacrifice for our sins. And it is by her mothering the CHURCH, the BODY OF CHRIST, that the serpent shall have his head crushed.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Shalom.

I’ve noticed that while many places don’t give any Scripture readings for the Assumption and Coronation Mysteries of the rosary (as they are Tradition, after all), some try to support the Assumption with Genesis 3.15. While this is certainly a prophecy about Mary, and ultimately Christ, how does it correlate to such a doctrine?

I don’t get the connection.

Thanks!

Gen 3:15 supports a basis for the Immaculate Conception not the Assumption. The Assumption is supported remotely by a passage in the book of Revelation.

 

[Petergee]

Hi

This is just becoming superstitious or it may be termed as wishful thinking only, in my opinion, otherwise, there seems no inter-relationship or co-relationship of Genesis 3:15 with the attempted killing of Jesus on Cross and with the migration of both Jesus and Mary together to India and dieing there. This is only my opinion , others could differ with me, no compulsion.

Thanks

You’re right, your opinion is superstitious wishful thinking with absolutely no evidential basis in either historical records or scriptural exegesis.

 

[Atemi]

Shalom.

I’ve noticed that while many places don’t give any Scripture readings for the Assumption and Coronation Mysteries of the rosary (as they are Tradition, after all), some try to support the Assumption with Genesis 3.15. While this is certainly a prophecy about Mary, and ultimately Christ, how does it correlate to such a doctrine?

I don’t get the connection.

Genesis 3:15 does not speak of Mary at all, so I see no connection either.

It’s all about Christ and how He would crush the head of the serpent.

…

 

[Church_Militant]

Genesis 3:15 does not speak of Mary at all, so I see no connection either.

It’s all about Christ and how He

would crush the head of the serpent.Really? That’s all huh? :dts:

Genesis 3:15 reads,[15] I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel."

I think you are ignoring the prophetic aspect of this verse. Certainly it speaks of Christ, but it is also the first good news or proto-evangelion, which in speaking of the woman, her seed, and crushing the serpent’s head is the first place in which God promises a savior and speaks of the incarnation through a new Eve (meaning the other of all living), who would in effect be the mother of all the new living by her consent to become the Mother of God by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit.

It’s there.

 

[Atemi]

Really? That’s all huh? :dts:

Genesis 3:15 reads,[15] I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel."

I think you are ignoring the prophetic aspect of this verse. Certainly it speaks of Christ, but it is also the first good news or proto-evangelion, which in speaking of the woman, her seed, and crushing the serpent’s head is the first place in which God promises a savior and speaks of the incarnation through a new Eve (meaning the other of all living), who would in effect be the mother of all the new living by her consent to become the Mother of God by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit.

It’s there.

The text speaks nothing of Mary or any “new” Eve.

The text does speak of Eve herself, but nothing about a “new” Eve.

From the beginning of the Scriptures until the account of Abraham, the word “woman” speaks directly about Eve and no one else. To force Gen 3:15 to suddenly mean “Mary” when all before then it refers to Eve specifically, and then after it refers to Eve specifically, does not do justice to the text at all.

Eve is spoken of by the Holy Spirit as “mother of the living” in Gen 3:20, but nowhere says that Mary is the “mother of all the new living” anywhere in the entirety of His Word.

Actually, the Holy Spirit is clear (mulitple times) that Sarah is the mother of Christians, not Mary.

To seek to find a “new” Eve and “mother of all the new living” where the Spirit gave us none is not the best way to study His Word from my view.

…

 

[Church_Militant]

Actually, the Holy Spirit is clear (mulitple times) that Sarah

is the mother of Christians, not Mary.I don’t think you can support this scripturally.

To seek to find a “new” Eve and “mother of all the new living” where the Spirit gave us none

is not the best way to study His Word from my view.Just because you refuse to see the prophecy there in Genesis 3:15 does not make it not there.

I won’t offer comment on your particular style of Bible study…

 

[Atemi]

Actually, the Holy Spirit is clear (mulitple times) that Sarah is the mother of Christians, not Mary.

I don’t think you can support this scripturally.

The Holy Spirit never said anything about Mary being our mother. Actually, He already gave that role and position to someone else:

Isa 51:1 “Listen to me, you who pursue righteousness and who seek the Lord: Look to the rock from which you were cut and to the quarry from which you were hewn; look to Abraham, your father, and to Sarah, who gave you birth”

1Pe 3:6 “Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right”

Gal 4:26 “But Sarah, the free woman, represents the heavenly Jerusalem. And she is our mother”

God says Sarah. The Prophet Isaiah says Sarah. The Apostle Peter says Sarah. The Apostle Paul says Sarah.

We must believe God and His Apostles and not what is never mentioned anywhere in the entirety of the Scriptures. I am sure you can understand.

But this is getting OT, I think.

We should keep this on Gen 3:15 and the Assumption.

…

 

[Petergee]

I understand (any Hebrew scholars can confirm) a better translation is actually “**She **shall crush your head, and you shall lie in wait for her heel”. IIRC this is the LXX version which the BVM and Our Saviour would have read at Nazareth.

 

[Petergee]

The Prophet Isaiah says Sarah. The Apostle Peter says Sarah. The Apostle Paul says Sarah.

I’ll listen to what Our Saviour Himself said as He died for me: “This is your Mother.”

 

[Pax]

The text speaks nothing of Mary or any “new” Eve.

The text does speak of Eve herself, but nothing about a “new” Eve.

From the beginning of the Scriptures until the account of Abraham, the word “woman” speaks directly about Eve and no one else. To force Gen 3:15 to suddenly mean “Mary” when all before then it refers to Eve specifically, and then after it refers to Eve specifically, does not do justice to the text at all.

Eve is spoken of by the Holy Spirit as “mother of the living” in Gen 3:20, but nowhere says that Mary is the “mother of all the new living” anywhere in the entirety of His Word.

Actually, the Holy Spirit is clear (mulitple times) that Sarah is the mother of Christians, not Mary.

To seek to find a “new” Eve and “mother of all the new living” where the Spirit gave us none is not the best way to study His Word from my view.

…

Atemi,

You can’t be serious!

Eve brings sin into the world.
Mary brings Jesus into the world.

Eve is the mother of a fallen human race.
Mary is the mother of Jesus the first born of the household of God.

Genesis speaks of three individuals and says that there will be enmity between the serpent and the mother and her son/seed.

Revelation 12 speaks of three individuals and indicates that there is a battle between the woman who gives birth to a son that will rule with a rod of iron and the ancient serpent/Satan.

There is a clear connection here between the first book of the bible and the last book.

Jesus is the first born son. Mary is his mother. Romans 8:29 says that Jesus is “…the first-born among many brethren.” Likewise, Hebrews 2:1 says that “Jesus is not ashamed to call us his brothers.” At the foot of the cross Jesus gives to “the disciple whom he loved” Mary as his mother. Likewise, he told the disciple, “Behold your mother.”

Mary is the mother of Jesus and she is our mother. She is the woman that is at enmity with Satan as prophesied in Genesis and pointed to in Revelation. Eve simply does not fit the bill. Who is greater the woman that brought sin into the world or the woman that bore the redeemer in her womb and thus brought salvation into the world.

Look at the scriptural comparisons between Jesus and Adam:

1 Cor 15:22
For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.

1 Cor 15:45-47
Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. But it is not the spiritual which is first but the physical, and then the spiritual. The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven.

Is there a counterpart to the comparison between Adam and Jesus? Absolutely, and it could not be more clear than the contrast between Eve and Mary as pointed to in Genesis and Revelation.

 

[Atemi]

I’ll listen to what Our Saviour Himself said as He died for me: “This is your Mother.”

Who is the “your” that Christ was speaking to? The Scriptures do say.

And I cannot find a single Catholic translation that says “Mother.” They all say “mother.”

Anyway…

 

[Petergee]

Who is the “your” that Christ was speaking to? The Scriptures do say.

Indeed, but Pax beat me to it.

And I cannot find a single Catholic translation that says “Mother.” They all say “mother.”

Anyway…

And this has some special significance to you?

 

[Janet_S]

The text speaks nothing of Mary or any “new” Eve.

To seek to find a “new” Eve and “mother of all the new living” where the Spirit gave us none is not the best way to study His Word from my view.

…

The earliest Christians saw the connection between Mary and Genesis 3:15

newadvent.org/fathers/0103521.htm

1. He has therefore, in His work of recapitulation, summed up all things, both waging war against our enemy, and crushing him who had at the beginning led us away captives in Adam, and trampled upon his head, as you can perceive in Genesis that God said to the serpent, “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall be on the watch for (observabit) your head, and you on the watch for His heel.” Genesis 3:15 For from that time, He who should be born of a woman, [namely] from the Virgin, after the likeness of Adam, was preached as keeping watch for the head of the serpent. This is the seed of which the apostle says in the Epistle to the Galatians, “that the law of works was established until the seed should come to whom the promise was made.” Galatians 3:19 This fact is exhibited in a still clearer light in the same Epistle, where he thus speaks: “But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman.” Galatians 4:4 For indeed the enemy would not have been fairly vanquished, unless it had been a man [born] of a woman who conquered him. For it was by means of a woman that he got the advantage over man at first, setting himself up as man’s opponent. And therefore does the Lord profess Himself to be the Son of man, comprising in Himself that original man out of whom the woman was fashioned (ex quo ea quæ secundum mulierem est plasmatio facta est), in order that, as our species went down to death through a vanquished man, so we may ascend to life again through a victorious one; and as through a man death received the palm [of victory] against us, so again by a man we may receive the palm against death.

St Irenaeus