Mary, Queen of Heaven?

[wanner47]

Solomon took it upon himself to set up a throne for his mother. The tradition then began with Solomon, not David, and that apart from any Divine instruction.

David’s court did not have a Queen Mother for the simple fact David’s mother was probably dead.

1 Samuel 16 tells us the story of Samuel meeting Jesse and Jesse’s sons, but says nothing Jesse’s wife or the mother of Jesse’s sons. Though it’s not explicity stated, it can be assumed that Jesse’s wife is dead since it’s not mentioned that Jesse is married or that his wife is present.

Given that Samuel was going to anoint one of her sons KING, I doubt that the mother of Jesse’s sons would have hid in the house until it was over, if she was alive.

The Bible does not give us the name of David’s mother; she is, however, referred to as the “handmaid of God” in Psalms 86:16 and 116:16. Specifically, David entreats God to save “the son of your handmaid.”

So, that is more than likely why you do not hear of the office of “Queen Mother” in David’s court - because David’s mother was no longer living.

 

[wanner47]

This is a complete misunderstanding of Sola Scriptura. Any view looks inane, if it’s not fairly treated.​

Sola Scriptura includes a denial that that any other source of teaching is of the same authority or finality - other sources do not have the God-given, God-breathed, inspired authority of the Word of God - which is why in Reformed theology ideas of theologians, the Reformers included, are subject to correction by God Who speaks through the words of Scripture.

So how did the Christan faith exist after Jesus’ ascension without a Bible? The books of the New Testament were written years and years after Jesus went to Heaven, and it took HUNDREDS of years for Christians to be in agreement as to which books should be included in the canon.

And believe it or not, it was the CATHOLIC CHURCH who eventually decided which books were canon and which books weren’t.

As Catholic Answers says:

"The fact is that the Holy Spirit guided the Catholic Church over time to recognize and determine the canon of the New and Old Testaments in the year 382 at the synod of Rome, under Pope Damasus I. This decision was ratified again at the councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397 and 419). You, my friend, accept exactly the same books of the New Testament that Pope Damasus decreed were canonical, and no others.

"Furthermore, the reason you accept the books you do is that they were in the Bible someone gave you when you first became a Christian. You accept them because they were handed on to you. This means you accept the canon of the New Testament that you do because of tradition, because tradition is simply what is handed on to us from those who were in the faith before us. So your knowledge of the exact books that belong in the Bible, such as Philemon and 3 John, rests on tradition rather than on Scripture itself!

 

[apophasis]

I never said that the parable say, “that the kingdom he inherits from his father David is heavenly”. I said that the king must travel to a distant land to receive his crown. This is a parable for Jesus going to heaven to receive his crown.

So it’s not based on revelation but your own (or somebody else’s) interpretation of the word “land.” And all based on a parable .

 

[NotWorthy]

So it’s not based on revelation but your own (or somebody else’s) interpretation of the word “land.” And all based on a parable .

I’ve heard enough on these forums from Bible-Only people that rely on interpretation to explain the meanings. Please don’t cast stones from glass houses, my friend!!!

 

[apophasis]

I’ve heard enough on these forums from Bible-Only people that rely on interpretation to explain the meanings. Please don’t cast stones from glass houses, my friend!!!

But be reasonable, NW, the doctrine of Jesus as “King of Heaven,” and His mother as “Queen of Heaven,” must be based on something more than a parable and one’s interpretation of it. These require clear revelation.

The O.T. states and then confirms repeatedly that the promises given to David are valid promises that will be fulfilled in connetion with Christ’s second coming. But there is no hint in any of these passages that the promise was intended to extend beyond the people of Israel or beyond the Davidic throne to God’s heavenly throne.

Jesus Christ is the designated King to sit on David’s throne, but Scripture gives no evidence that He is exercising this power now.

 

[NotWorthy]

But be reasonable, NW, the doctrine of Jesus as “King of Heaven,” and His mother as “Queen of Heaven,” must be based on something more than a parable and one’s interpretation of it. These require clear revelation.

The O.T. states and then confirms repeatedly that the promises given to David are valid promises that will be fulfilled in connetion with Christ’s second coming. But there is no hint in any of these passages that the promise was intended to extend beyond the people of Israel or beyond the Davidic throne to God’s heavenly throne.

Jesus Christ is the designated King to sit on David’s throne, but Scripture gives no evidence that He is exercising this power now.

Where is the New Jerusalem, as indicated in Revelation?

 

[NotWorthy]

But be reasonable, NW, the doctrine of Jesus as “King of Heaven,” and His mother as “Queen of Heaven,” must be based on something more than a parable and one’s interpretation of it. These require clear revelation.

The O.T. states and then confirms repeatedly that the promises given to David are valid promises that will be fulfilled in connetion with Christ’s second coming. But there is no hint in any of these passages that the promise was intended to extend beyond the people of Israel or beyond the Davidic throne to God’s heavenly throne.

Jesus Christ is the designated King to sit on David’s throne, but Scripture gives no evidence that He is exercising this power now.

Who is speaking in Revelation 3:21 to John?

I will give the victor the right to sit with me on my throne, as I myself first won the victory and sit with my Father on his throne.

 

[apophasis]

Who is speaking in Revelation 3:21 to John?

I have referenced this passage before. You must not read my posts. Notice what it says,"He who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit down with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne."Note that Jesus makes a distinction between His throne, which is yet future, and His Father’s throne, which He is presently sharing in heaven.

Jesus anticipates to yet sit on His throne in Jerusalem where He will reign and rule over this present earth as King of kings and Lord of lords:Zech. 14:8-9 “And in that day living waters will flow out of Jerusalem, half of them toward the eastern sea and the other half toward the western sea; it will be in summer as well as in winter. And the LORD will be king over all the earth; in that day the LORD will be {the only} one, and His name {the only} one.”

Zech 14:16 “Then it will come about that any who are left of all the nations that went against Jerusalem will go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to celebrate the Feast of Booths.”

This prophecy by Zechariah concerning Israel’s Messianic King is yet to be fulfilled, and will be fulfilled at Christ’s return when He will sit on HIS (father David’s) THRONE in Jerusalem (cf. Rev. 19:11-16). The same Jerusalem in which His father David ruled. This is not referring to the New Jerusalem.

Jesus is not now exercising His power as King, but as the believer’s High Priest and Advocate before the Father in heaven, while building His Church on earth (Matt. 16:18).

He is never referred to as "King of Heaven." He was born “king of the Jews” (Matt. 2:2), and as their Messianic King, He will rule on His father David’s throne here on earth.

And as I said, none of the prophecies that speak of this glorious event say anything about a “Queen Mother” at His side.

And if He is not presently reigning as “King of Heaven,” certainly His mother is not reigning as its “Queen.” Scripture mentions only one “Queen of Heaven.”

 

[NotWorthy]

I have referenced this passage before. You must not read my posts.

Apophasis, a little brotherly love would help, my friend. The threads I’m most involved in have a total of over 600 posts in them. I may not be able to remember everything you post, no matter how much I love you.

Notice what it says,"He who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit down with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne."Note that Jesus makes a distinction between His throne, which is yet future, and His Father’s throne, which He is presently sharing in heaven.

No, I’m sorry, I don’t note that. He says, I will grant to him to sit down on my throne. It DOESN’T say “on my throne, when I get it”. It says, (paraphrase), “when he overcomes, I will grant him to sit with Me on my throne”. The “in the future event” will be “he who overcomes”.

Jesus anticipates to yet sit on His throne in Jerusalem where He will reign and rule over this present earth as King of kings and Lord of lords:Zech. 14:8-9 “And in that day living waters will flow out of Jerusalem, half of them toward the eastern sea and the other half toward the western sea; it will be in summer as well as in winter. And the LORD will be king over all the earth; in that day the LORD will be {the only} one, and His name {the only} one.”

Zech 14:16 “Then it will come about that any who are left of all the nations that went against Jerusalem will go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to celebrate the Feast of Booths.” This prophecy by Zechariah concerning Israel’s Messianic King is yet to be fulfilled, and will be fulfilled at Christ’s return when He will sit on HIS (father David’s) THRONE in Jerusalem (cf. Rev. 19:11-16). The same Jerusalem in which His father David ruled. This is not referring to the New Jerusalem.

This event has already happened. When the water flowed out of Jesus’ side. The Holy Spirit traveled from east to west with the spread of the Church.

Jesus is not now exercising His power as King, but as the believer’s High Priest and Advocate before the Father in heaven, while building His Church on earth (Matt. 16:18).

That Church has been built and is still being built, while Christ our King reigns in heaven.

He is never referred to as "King of Heaven." He was born “king of the Jews” (Matt. 2:2), and as their Messianic King, He will rule on His father David’s throne here on earth.

And as I said, none of the prophecies that speak of this glorious event say anything about a “Queen Mother” at His side.

We’re arguing from silence, now. I guess that’s the best argument when you trap yourself in the corner with “Where the Bible is silent, the Church is silent” AND totally ignore the teaching authority of the Church that He built.

And if He is not presently reigning as “King of Heaven,” certainly His mother is not reigning as its “Queen.” Scripture mentions only one “Queen of Heaven.”

I’m sorry, I tend to disagree with you. And I still thinks it’s a little un-christian of you to relate our veneration of the Virgin Mary with a pagan idol.

 

[LilyM]

I have referenced this passage before. You must not read my posts. Notice what it says,"He who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit down with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne."Note that Jesus makes a distinction between His throne, which is yet future, and His Father’s throne, which He is presently sharing in heaven.

How on earth can Jesus not be King of Heaven if he is PRESENTLY sharing His father’s throne in heaven? If Queen Elizabeth of England made a proclamation tomorrow that Prince Charles was to share her throne with her, that would make him KING …

 

[porthos11]

Catholics acknowledge Mary as Queen only because Jesus is King. What I find most amusing about this thread is that there are those who would really deprive Jesus of his Kingship so that Mary won’t be called Queen.

Jesus is King of kings and Lord of lords. Now.

 

[apophasis]

This event has already happened. When the water flowed out of Jesus’ side. The Holy Spirit traveled from east to west with the spread of the Church.

When you start spritualizing Scripture in order to conform it to your own theology, then we no longer have a common ground on which to comunicate; and Scripture no longer means what it says, but is left to the subjective imaginations of men. There’s absolutely nothing in those passages in Zechariah to indicate that they are to be interpreted non-literally.

That Church has been built and is still being built, while Christ our King reigns in heaven.

Catholics always say this, but it’s a blatant contradiction. No building is “built,” and is yet being “built.” It is either being built, or the building process is finished. You’re outside the realm of logic.

We’re arguing from silence, now. I guess that’s the best argument when you trap yourself in the corner with “Where the Bible is silent, the Church is silent” AND totally ignore the teaching authority of the Church that He built.

With the topic of Mary and her heavenly Queenship, you’re always arguing from silence. Scripture reveals nothing of it. Now why do you think that is?

I’m sorry, I tend to disagree with you. And I still thinks it’s a little un-christian of you to relate our veneration of the Virgin Mary with a pagan idol.

I didn’t relate Mary to a pagan goddess. I said Scripture speaks of only ONE “queen of heaven.” I did not say she was Mary. My whole argument has been that she (Mary) is not “Queen of Heaven.” Nor do the Scripture reveal her to be so. It refers to only ONE “queen of heaven,” and in truth, that one is not "queen of heaven, either.

There simply is no “Queen” in heaven. Nor do the propehtic Scriptures reveal a “Queen” on earth when the Son of David sets up His Messianic Kingdom for a thousand years at His return to this present earth.

 

[NotWorthy]

When you start spritualizing Scripture in order to conform it to your own theology, then we no longer have a common ground on which to comunicate; and Scripture no longer means what it says, but is left to the subjective imaginations of men. There’s absolutely nothing in those passages in Zechariah to indicate that they are to be interpreted non-literally.

This is too funny!!! On these forums, we’ve been dealing with people who use subjective imaginations of men, seemingly inventing doctrine as they type it out on the keyboard. I’m just showing you how the Church interprets the symbols in OT and NT readings.

 

[NotWorthy]

This comes from something I did recently:

On the last day of the Feast of Tabernacles, during the Liturgy, the Levites would go down to the pool of Saloom, fill a huge pitcher of water, and proceed back to the temple. They would circle the altar seven times. Then they would pour the water out over the altar and let it wash down onto the floor. This is what’s going on when Jesus stands up and makes this statement. Becomes a little clearer, right? But it goes deeper. This ritual is part of prophecy from the Old Testament. The Scripture comes from Ezekiel 47, which is read in the Jewish Liturgy for this feast. It starts off with Ezekiel being brought to the entrance of the Temple, where he saw “water flowing out from the threshold of the temple towards the east”.

The water was issuing out from under the altar of the temple, the heart of the temple. Ezekiel leaves the altar and starts walking. As he walks, he measures the depth of the water. In verse 3, the water is ankle deep. In verse 4, it is knee deep, then it’s waist deep. In verse 5, it became a river that could only be crossed by swimming. In verse 8, he hears, "This water flows into the eastern district down upon the Arabah (Arabia), and empties into the sea, the salt waters, which it makes it fresh (it cleanses the Dead Sea). Where ever the river goes there’s life. And one of the key themes to John is “Life”. (9) Wherever the river flows, every sort of living creature that can multiply shall live, and there shall be abundant fish, for wherever this water comes the sea shall be made fresh. (10) Fishermen shall be standing along it from En-gedi to Eneglaim, spreading their nets there. Does this bring anything to mind? Jesus called the disciples (fishermen) to become “fishers of men”. It goes on to describe trees that bear fresh fruit every month, for they shall be watered by the flow from the sanctuary. The fruit from trees are the good works of righeous men.

So, let’s go back to the Jewish Feast. Back in Ezekiel chapter 10, Ezekiel had a vision of the “Shekinah” the Holy Spirit leaving the Temple. The Feast of Tabernacles is the feast of the Temple. It celebrates Solomon when he originally dedicated the Temple, and the “Shekina”, the Glory Cloud of the Holy Spirit descending upon the Temple and remaining there. So in your mind, what are the Jews trying to invoke with the water being poured onto the altar and reading from Ezekiel? The Jews feel that when the Holy Spirit returns to the Temple, it will overflow with this life-giving source of the Holy Spirit (which the water symbolizes) and spread Israel’s glory throughout the land.

With that in mind, let’s look again at what Jesus means when he says, “If anyone thirsts, let him come to me”… If we look at Ezekiel, we see that the water will flow from the altar of the Temple, but Jesus says, ***“Scripture has it: ‘From within him rivers of living water shall flow’”.

Why does he say this? In John, 2:18-19, at this the Jews answered and said to him, “What sign can you show us for doing this?”***Jesus answered and said to them, "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up."What does Jesus mean by saying this? The Temple Jesus is referring to, is His Body. “Destroy this body, and I will raise it up on the third day”, but they did not understand Him. So Jesus is showing the true meaning of Ezekiel. The water, that gives life to everything it touches, is the living water. And Jesus is the Temple from which this living water flows. What is this living water? It is the Life Jesus gives us through the Holy Spirit. The water getting deeper as Ezekiel’s walking away from the Temple represents Time, and the water’s depth increasing as time passes, represents Jesus’ Gospel spreading throughout the World. The Growth of the Church through the Holy Spirit springs from the Sacred Heart of Jesus! John is telling us that Jesus is the fulfillment of Ezekiel’s vision.

John tells us that (vs. 39), “Here he was referring to the Spirit, whom those that came to believe in him were to receive. There was, of course, no Spirit as yet, since Jesus had not yet been glorified”. What John is continuing to show is that Jesus is fulfilling the Jewish Festivals, but in ways the ancient Israelites were completely un-prepared for.

 

[NotWorthy]

No building is “built,” and is yet being “built.” It is either being built, or the building process is finished.

Is Christ the bridegroom to a building?!? The Church is His bride, and she is still being built (with new Christians) until His 2nd coming!!!

You’re outside the realm of logic.With the topic of Mary and her heavenly Queenship, you’re always arguing from silence. Scripture reveals nothing of it.

If you think that, then you’re going to love the thread that was started that deals with Mary being the Ark of the New Covenant, which also helps Catholics in teaching that Mary is the Queen of Heaven.

Now why do you think that is?I didn’t relate Mary to a pagan goddess. I said Scripture speaks of only ONE “queen of heaven.” I did not say she was Mary. My whole argument has been that she (Mary) is not “Queen of Heaven.” Nor do the Scripture reveal her to be so. It refers to only ONE “queen of heaven,” and in truth, that one is not "queen of heaven, either.

There simply is no “Queen” in heaven. Nor do the propehtic Scriptures reveal a “Queen” on earth when the Son of David sets up His Messianic Kingdom for a thousand years at His return to this present earth.

That’s your opinion, my friend. I’m simply repeating what’s been taught by the Church for over a thousand years!!!

 

[apophasis]

Is Christ the bridegroom to a building?!? The Church is His bride, and she is still being built (with new Christians) until His 2nd coming!!!

You’re mixing two different analogies: The Church as a temple, in the Lord, now being built. And the Church as the Bride of Christ.

If you think that, then you’re going to love the thread that was started that deals with Mary being the Ark of the New Covenant, which also helps Catholics in teaching that Mary is the Queen of Heaven.

Yes, I am very familiar with this teaching regarding Mary. And it, too, is extra-biblical.

That’s your opinion, my friend. I’m simply repeating what’s been taught by the Church for over a thousand years!!!

It’s not simply my opinion. ALL the extra-biblical, Marian doctrines are just that, extra-biblical. They have no Biblical support, no Divine origin. They themselves are, in fact, based on the “opinions” of mere men, eventually accepted, by men, as dogma. True Christianity, however, is based solely on Divine Revelation. Divine revelation is what separates true Christianity from all the man-made religions of the world. It’s what separated national Israel from all the other nations of the world.

Just because something has been taught by men for many years doesn’t make it true. The extra-biblical, Marian doctrines were developed long after the Apostolic age. None of the Apostles ever taught anything of the Queenship of Mary. The last we read of her in the Biblical records is in the Book of Acts, chapter one. And there we find absolutely no focus on her, just a passing mention of her as being one of the 120 in the upper room.

And nowhere in the Epistles is she ever exalted or paid homage to. She simply fades out of the picture. And why not? Her work was done, and at the Judgment Seat of Christ she’ll receive her reward with the rest of us who have believed in Christ’s work for us.

The Apostolic teachings found in the Episitles are all about Christ - as it should be. Not until several centuries later is Mary brought back into the picture - and that by mere men. And these men develop and present a much different Mary than the one revealed to us in the written Word of God.

 

[apophasis]

This comes from something I did recently:

As I said before, NW, there is nothing in those prophetic Scriptures that indicate that the prophet was speaking non-literally, or that his readers were to seek a non-literal interpretation. Jerusalem means Jerusalem, and water means water.

 

[NotWorthy]

You’re mixing two different analogies: The Church as a temple, in the Lord, now being built. And the Church as the Bride of Christ.Yes, I am very familiar with this teaching regarding Mary. And it, too, is extra-biblical.It’s not simply my opinion. ALL the extra-biblical, Marian doctrines are just that, extra-biblical. They have no Biblical support, no Divine origin. They themselves are, in fact, based on the “opinions” of mere men, eventually accepted, by men, as dogma. True Christianity, however, is based solely on Divine Revelation. Divine revelation is what separates true Christianity from all the man-made religions of the world. It’s what separated national Israel from all the other nations of the world.

Just because something has been taught by men for many years doesn’t make it true. The extra-biblical, Marian doctrines were developed long after the Apostolic age. None of the Apostles ever taught anything of the Queenship of Mary. The last we read of her in the Biblical records is in the Book of Acts, chapter one. And there we find absolutely no focus on her, just a passing mention of her as being one of the 120 in the upper room.

And nowhere in the Epistles is she ever exalted or paid homage to. She simply fades out of the picture. And why not? Her work was done, and at the Judgment Seat of Christ she’ll receive her reward with the rest of us who have believed in Christ’s work for us.

The Apostolic teachings found in the Episitles are all about Christ - as it should be. Not until several centuries later is Mary brought back into the picture - and that by mere men. And these men develop and present a much different Mary than the one revealed to us in the written Word of God.

What you’ve said boils down to two things:

You make the claim that our teachings are non-biblical. I take the time to show you that they are. Evidently, though, “Non-Scriptural” simply means “non-versed”, for if it doesn’t say “Mary is the Queen of Heaven”, then it simply isn’t so.

I can understand how these rules apply to your religion, but they don’t apply to the Catholic Church. We tend to look at the bible a little bit deeper than your church does, maybe.

But one thing that we do is we accept that our Church can come to a fuller understanding of some things as time goes by. Take for instance, Jesus. The Church spent four hundred or so years hashing out who Jesus actually is - Is he God, not man? Is he Man, not God? Is he God AND man? Once we came to the understanding (and yes, it is a limited understanding of a mystery) that Jesus is true God and true Man, only then could the church address the question of Mary. How could Mary be “Theotokos”, or Mother of God, unless we know that Jesus is God? How can Mary be “Queen of Heaven” if we don’t know Jesus is King of Heaven (Please allow this example only to prove my point. Not to continue this argument of whether Jesus is king or not).

Apophasis, you don’t believe that the Holy Spirit is guiding the Church into a better and deeper understanding of the truth. I do!!! So unless you can convince me that I’m wrong in that tenet of my faith, then you’re “just whistling dixie”.

 

[NotWorthy]

As I said before, NW, there is nothing in those prophetic Scriptures that indicate that the prophet was speaking non-literally, or that his readers were to seek a non-literal interpretation. Jerusalem means Jerusalem, and water means water.

I think I missed this post earlier, but I am stunned by this answer.

Jesus is sitting in the audience as the Jews read from Ezekiel, telling how the water is going to flow out of the Temple. Jesus stands and says, “If anyone should thirst, let them come to me”. THIS tells us that there is more to Ezekiel than the Jews realized. What is the temple? Jesus told us earlier in the Gospel of John when He said destroy this temple…

What does the water represent? Throughout Scriptures, the water is the symbol (or type) of the Holy Spirit, ever since the Spirit hovered over the waters in Genesis. Look at Noah, look at the Exodus of Egypt, look at the rock in the desert that must be struck for the water to flow and save Israel from thirst.

What happens at Jesus’ death when he is struck by the guard? Water flowed from His side. Again, Jesus had told the Apostles that he must die in order for the Holy Spirit to come to them. So the water (or Holy Spirit) flows from Jesus (Who is the Temple) and guides the Church into the rest of the world.

You don’t have to buy this description, but you’ve got to admit that Jesus reveals there is a lot more going on in Ezekiel than just the “stricly literal” interpretation.

 

[valient_Lucy]

And if He is not presently reigning as “King of Heaven,” certainly His mother is not reigning as its “Queen.” Scripture mentions only one “Queen of Heaven.”

Everyone pay attention to this. Apophasis’ problem is not with Mary as the Queen of Heaven, but rather with Jesus as the King of Heaven. Apophasis’ denies Jesus’ Kingship in heaven.