Lack of Mary in the Bible

[ComplineSanFran]

You believe that the Covenant Writings took place during Jesus’ earthly Ministry?

I have not heard the term ‘Covenant Writing.’ What does it mean, and which scholars use it?

If you are asking was the Torah written down during the first century CE, of course not. My grammar should make that clear.

 

[jcrichton]

One can argue that Christians did an add-on to the Old Testament, but they added a few hundred possible scriptures. The Magisterium canonized only 27 as inspired Scripture, for the NT. THAT is the new testament we use today.

The problem would be the source… wouldn’t it?

Who was there at Creation?

Who was taking notes during the pre-Ten Commandment epoch?

Who went up with Moses to Witness the Writing of the Ten?

If we start shooting from the hip a whole mess of people will end up with bullets in strange places!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Francis]

@Treacy

Talking to a Protestant and this question came up. If Mary is so important, why does she not get any mentions at all in the Epistles?

No not true, Mary it is written right from genesis to Revelations
Galatians 4:26 But the other woman corresponds to the Jerusalem above; she is free and she is our mother ( MARY). (MOTHER MARY IS SINLESS and Mary retain "perpetual virginity), 27 For it is written, “Rejoice, you childless one, you who bear no children(Mary didn’t have children from any man), burst into song and shout, you who endure no birth pangs; for the children of the desolate woman are more numerous than the children of the one who is married.”

In Gen 3:15 Genesis 3:15 I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she (Mary) shall crush thy (satan) head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

I agree that through out history, women have been mistreated and frequently treated horribly but there are many very great women in the Bible, even in the OT. Women such as Debra, Ruth, Esther, Tabitha and more did great things

In the NT, Jesus only elevated women with dignity.

Mary may not be mentioned by name throughout all of Scriptures, but even in the OT, there are prophecies pointing to her, and women who forshadow her.

 

[jcrichton]

I have not heard the term ‘Covenant Writing.’ What does it mean, and which scholars use it?

God made a Covenant with man; the first Covenant had Sacred Writings; the Old Testament is the Old Covenant–the New Testament is the New Covenant.

I use the term Covenant to remind us that Revelation is not simply knowledge put to ink but actually a CONTRACT made by Yahweh God with man. The first Contract was in function till the Son would be Revealed; the Son then rectifies the implementation of the Old Contract (things that were set as type, things that were circumvented by man and things that man did not understand/adhered to) and makes it so with His Blood:

28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. (St. Matthew 26)

If you are asking was the Torah written down during the first century CE, of course not. My grammar should make that clear.

No. I’m referring to this:

…during the time of Jesus’s life on earth as well as in the texts of the Gospels, letters, and other writings. Christians DID do an add-on to those Scriptures.

From the above it seems that you are:
a) asserting that the New Testament’s (Covenant’s) Writings took place during Jesus’ earthly stay, and,
b) that Christians added to those writings.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[ComplineSanFran]

I use the term Covenant to remind us that Revelation is not simply knowledge put to ink but actually a CONTRACT made by Yahweh God with man

So you are the one to coin the term ‘Covenant Writing’? I think you may be confusing some things here. The Covenant that God (Yahweh, by the way, is not a valid name for God) made with the people of Israel was made first with Noah, then with Abraham and his line, and then with Moses. None of them were actually ‘put to ink.’

They are all valid to this day.

From the above it seems that you are:
a) asserting that the New Testament’s (Covenant’s) Writings took place during Jesus’ earthly stay, and,
b) that Christians added to those writings.

Not at all. Perhaps you misread. I claimed that the Hebrew Bible was in existence and used daily during the time of the first century CE.

 

[jcrichton]

So you are the one to coin the term ‘Covenant Writing’? I think you may be confusing some things here. The Covenant that God (Yahweh, by the way, is not a valid name for God) made with the people of Israel was made first with Noah, then with Abraham and his line, and then with Moses. None of them were actually ‘put to ink.’

They are all valid to this day.

No. Just like I use the term Maran atha–there’s nothing more than re-using what was set long ago.

As for the inking… you’ve never heard of the Old Testament Writings?

It was Commanded by Yahweh God (yeah, I’m a stickler) to be read to all of the people (Hebrew) so that they would understand that He chose them to be His people and that He would be their God.

…as for the Promise, it was first made to Abram, through whom God would bless all the nations of the world, not just the Hebrews.

That Promise was Jesus Christ!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Masihi]

The fact Mary was chosen to birth God incarnate as a virgin makes her important enough for us to sing her praises in Church, how many times she’s mentioned matters not. Even if she was only mentioned once by name in the whole Bible, that doesn’t make her any less important.

 

[Gorgias]

If my wife is so important to me, why isn’t she mentioned in any of my work emails?

Clearly it’s because you don’t love or respect her.



(Nice analogy, BTW. I might have to steal it sometime, if you don’t mind! )

 

[Cor_ad_Cor]

@Gorgias Go right ahead!

I think people need to be reminded that these Epistles weren’t casual writings or intended to be all-encompassing. They had a “down to business” purpose to address and later were elevated to the understanding of sacred.

 

[runningdude]

bible was compiled after the Epistles and the Gospels were written. So of course the “bible” wouldn’t be mentioned in either of them.

No body doubted the significance of Mary in the early church, so no Epistles were written to clarify her role.

In Judaism, the mother of king was considered the queen of the nation (See Bathsheba and Solomon), which automatically placed Mary in a central role. Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary Mary Magdalene, and John were the only followers of Jesus to stay with him at cross. The Angel Gabriel called her “Blessed”; the Prophet Simeon said that she would suffer.

Jesus’ first public miracle was made at Mary’s intercession.

How could an insignificant person be so honored in the Gospel? What more could an Epistle author say to clarify her holiness and central role in the life of the church?

 

[Aulef]

Saint Paul mentions Our Lady to the galatians in a short, yet, very important way.

“But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law: That he might redeem them who were under the law: that we might receive the adoption of sons.” (DRB)

Why is it important? The Word could had come to our world to save us in any way he wanted. Ways that people might find “spectacular” such as in a hurricane or a fireball from the sky.

Instead, He chose to come in the womb of a woman. This makes her remarkably special.

 

[Telstar]

I remember hearing that the Latin Vulgate didn’t translate that verse correctly. https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/who-will-crush-the-serpents-head

I don’t recall where I read about this, but apparently, St. Jerome spent a very long time pondering how he should translate this section. He consulted and argued with many language experts, as well as people who were more familiar with how the Apostles and other elders of the Church had understood the meaning to be in the past. He originally wanted to translate it with the masculine, but it didn’t make grammatical sense to do it that way. That’s also the reason I hate the masculine translation. It really doesn’t make any sense to read it that way, because the entire sentence before it, is referring to “the woman”, and “her seed”, but it suddenly switches in midstream to the pronoun “he”? That’s just really bad grammar.

 

[Dhc8_Type]

You know what else isn’t in the Bible the requirement to be celibate. Paul actually writes Timothy that minster should be married with children. In 1st Timothy.

 

[SeriousQuestion]

He extorts celibacy to those that can hold it somewhere else.

 

[ZMystiCat]

Paul actually writes Timothy that minster should be married with children.

Paul permits a single marriage (i.e. no polygamy and/or divorce/remarriage) and obedient children. I’m not really sure I’d call his exhortation to Timothy laying out that they have to be married, especially since Paul was himself celibate and encouraged celibacy to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 7:7-8, 25-28). It could also be reasonably argued, based on that fact, that Paul allowed marriage because the early Church didn’t have a large pool of celibate men to pull from, but given more celibate candidates, he may have gotten more strict to encourage greater focus on serving God, similarly to what Jesus encouraged (Matthew 19:12).

That said, most of us are aware that the requirement for priestly celibacy was a discipline that developed over time. (It also isn’t so universal that you can’t find any married priests.) However, we also don’t hold to Sola Scriptura, so we aren’t required to prove the usefulness of a discipline using Scripture. (Though, as with the above, it isn’t impossible in this case.) Protestants, on the other hand, assert Sola Scriptura so need to prove it via Scripture. Otherwise, there’s no reason to believe the doctrine itself based on the criteria of Sola Scriptura.

 

[jcrichton]

The fact Mary was chosen to birth God incarnate as a virgin makes her important enough for us to sing her praises in Church, how many times she’s mentioned matters not. Even if she was only mentioned once by name in the whole Bible, that doesn’t make her any less important.

…and all Bible onlies should pay heed to their own claims: Scriptures demonstrate that God Himself places the Virgin in such position as to be venerated by all generations–hence, failing to venerate the Virgin Mary is countering the Word of God!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

I think people need to be reminded that these Epistles weren’t casual writings or intended to be all-encompassing. They had a “down to business” purpose to address and later were elevated to the understanding of sacred.

I don’t think that they were “later elevated.” It’s more like they were recognized as Scriptures; we can see from the New Covenant’s Sacred Writings that the Emerging Church was hounded by control freaks, confused Believers, and charlatans and heretics.

So as the Gospels were Preached and Written Epistles were also Written to combat the errors and heresies and to solidify the Faith (Oral Tradition second through Written Tradition). When the issue/s arose about the status of the Gospels and Epistles they were quickly address and, at one point, St. Peter made the pronouncement that Apostolic Writings were being attacked along with the Old Covenant’s Sacred Writings.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

He originally wanted to translate it with the masculine, but it didn’t make grammatical sense to do it that way. That’s also the reason I hate the masculine translation. It really doesn’t make any sense to read it that way, because the entire sentence before it, is referring to “the woman”, and “her seed”, but it suddenly switches in midstream to the pronoun “he”? That’s just really bad grammar.

…actually, it is about the seed (offspring); the seed being Christ (the Promise) it falls quite normally into the male pronoun (compare with the prophecy about the “Virgin” giving birth–it seems quite disparaging to refer to the term “Virgin” instead of “young woman” or “young maiden;” yet, when we truly delve in we must reconcile the fact that throughout young girls have been having sex (marriage, fornication, rape) and young girls have been getting pregnant–so it is a poor “sign” to suggest: ‘this is a Divine sign, a young woman/girl gets pregnant.’

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

You know what else isn’t in the Bible the requirement to be celibate. Paul actually writes Timothy that minster should be married with children. In 1st Timothy.

…and yet, he desires that all who Serve Christ follow his example and remain chaste (virgin) and unmarried (1 Corinthians 7:1-9)… and Jesus calls that “choice:”

11… All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given… 12… and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it. (Matthew 19)

None is forced into Serving Christ; those who choose to Serve Christ, let them Serve Christ!

Maran atha!

Angel