M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Spreading the word of God out into 3 different definitions to support our human traditions is what I would call stamping the life out of the chapter!
- Status
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Que?However, I am sure there are plenty of verses in chapter 12 that we probably would not agree on.For instance, I do not think the male child is Christ, I think the male child is a Pope and I do not think chapter twelve is in the past.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
I’ve got to stop you right there. From the earliest surviving writings on Revelation, I’m pretty sure the ECF have pointed out that all three are represented in the woman in 12. Of course, back then they didn’t have any “Marian Apparitions are the tools of the Devil” spouting Apologists questioning them either!!!
I see, first and foremost, that the woman is Mary, but accept that she also represents Israel and the Church. Again, the baby represents a single entity (Jesus). The dragon represents a single entity (Satan). The third person, following Apocalyptic traditions would then point the woman to a single entity, not a group. Hence, to me, that points to Mary.
Now, admittedly, I have trouble, reconciling this as Israel and the Church (I’m a simple kind of guy, and I don’t have the creative juices to do that), but since Mary is an arch-type of Israel and the Church, then I can accept that.
The NAB has some very good footnotes, and some extremely awful footnotes. As you well know, the New Testament may be inspired, but only in it’s original writing.
Translations and commentaries are not inspired.
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
I too was confused.
Though I don’t know what “Que” means is it like que pasa.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Simon, do you agree that Isaiah 7:14 had two fulfillments?
One was almost immediate when the young maiden had the child, and of course, the other one 100’s of years later when that whole stable thing went down?
N
NotWorthy
Guest
I believe the closest American equivalent would be a blank stare, followed by, “Huh”? (Actually, I’m pretty sure it simply mean’s “What”?)
BTW, are we done on “Fatima the work of Satan”? I know, I know, “So many threads, so little time”.
L
levi86
Guest
How could “the women” be Mary? The women depicted in revelations is seen as having child pains, which we all know Mary did not.
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
here,here.
6
6glargento
Guest
but like i said before, who says the birth pains can’t be symbolic birth pains which represent suffering.
M
Mintaka
Guest
I’m gonna have to do this summary thing in parts, 'cause it’s way too complicated. I still say you’d be better off with a catena, though.
When we last left Heaven, two prophets had just been taken up there and an earthquake had killed tons of people. (The Christian of the time would interpret this as saying that
Nero’s persecution had begun, and Peter and Paul had been martyred. The woe yet to come as seen then was Domitian and the whole destruction of Israel thing, since John was exiled to Patmos during Domitian’s reign.) The seventh trumpet blew, and the 24 presbyters announced that the kingdom of the world was now ownzed by Jesus Christ, and that the time
had come to reward His servants and destroy those who laid the earth waste.
God’s temple in Heaven opens, and the Ark of the Covenant can be seen. The Ark of the Covenant had disappeared or been hidden long ago; now here it is, visible (and not blasting anybody). Necessarily, this makes the early Christian think of: the now-destroyed Temple of Israel on earth; Jesus’ mother Mary, who carried the Word within her, was interpreted from very early as the Ark and the eternally-closed temple gate of Ezekiel, and was carried off to heaven mysteriously as everybody in the Church (particularly John who’d been there) knew; the Church, also given to being hidden and then suddenly bared in times of persecution; and the individual Christian, who is God’s temple, too.
There were flashes of lightning, thunder, earthquake, and a hailstorm, all mimicking what happened after the Crucifixion, and the natural disasters of Nero’s persecution time, and the signs of Christ’s coming that Christians had been told to watch for. So here comes Christ – look out!
Then a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed in the sun, the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.
The sun and the moon point us back to Genesis; but more importantly, they also point us, in the Fathers’ viewpoint, to the vision of God’s wrath in Habakkuk 3:11 – “The sun and the moon stood still in their habitation”, which points us to Joshua’s famous little battle. And Joshua is an obvious type of Yeshua, so we’re back to Jesus again. And Jesus is the Sun
of Justice, the Bridegroom who would come from the east as in the psalm. (This was one of the most popular early church images, and it’s why all Christians worshipped and were buried
facing east. “He has set his tabernacle (pitched his tent) in the sun: and he, as a bridegroom coming out of his bridechamber, has rejoiced as a giant to run the way.” St. Justin Martyr only quotes this verse about 5 zillion times in his explanation of the basics of Christianity.)
So what woman would totally put on the Sun of Justice? Israel, into which the Sun was born. Mary. The Church. And one hopes, the individual Christian, putting on Christ and carrying Him through the world. (The moon was interpreted as the Law, the changeable world, the Church reflecting the Sun of Justice’s light, etc. Endless fun there.)
However, the sun and moon also remind us of the Bride in the Song of Songs: “Who is she who comes forth like the dawn, bright as the sun, terrible as an army set in ranks?” And who is the Bride? An individual member of Israel. Israel. Mary. The Church. An individual Christian.
The sun and the moon remind us that we are to be obedient creatures like them (Baruch 6:59), and that if we love and obey God we will shine like them. Judges 5:31 – “So let all Your
enemies perish, O Lord, but let those that love You shine as the sun shines in his rising.”
Further, the sun and moon remind us of God’s throne: Psalm 88/89:38 – “His throne like the sun before me, and as the moon perfect for ever, and a faithful witness in heaven.” Witness? Here we are back at the martyrs and individual Christians! But also, here we are back at Mary, who served nine months as God’s throne, and witnessed to all the things she had seen and pondered. And the Church, who witnesses all, and Israel, who witnessed God’s wonders throughout history. Ecclesiasticus 50:7 – “And as the sun when it shines, so he shone in the temple of God.” Back to that temple again…
When we last left Heaven, two prophets had just been taken up there and an earthquake had killed tons of people. (The Christian of the time would interpret this as saying that
Nero’s persecution had begun, and Peter and Paul had been martyred. The woe yet to come as seen then was Domitian and the whole destruction of Israel thing, since John was exiled to Patmos during Domitian’s reign.) The seventh trumpet blew, and the 24 presbyters announced that the kingdom of the world was now ownzed by Jesus Christ, and that the time
had come to reward His servants and destroy those who laid the earth waste.
God’s temple in Heaven opens, and the Ark of the Covenant can be seen. The Ark of the Covenant had disappeared or been hidden long ago; now here it is, visible (and not blasting anybody). Necessarily, this makes the early Christian think of: the now-destroyed Temple of Israel on earth; Jesus’ mother Mary, who carried the Word within her, was interpreted from very early as the Ark and the eternally-closed temple gate of Ezekiel, and was carried off to heaven mysteriously as everybody in the Church (particularly John who’d been there) knew; the Church, also given to being hidden and then suddenly bared in times of persecution; and the individual Christian, who is God’s temple, too.
There were flashes of lightning, thunder, earthquake, and a hailstorm, all mimicking what happened after the Crucifixion, and the natural disasters of Nero’s persecution time, and the signs of Christ’s coming that Christians had been told to watch for. So here comes Christ – look out!
Then a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed in the sun, the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.
The sun and the moon point us back to Genesis; but more importantly, they also point us, in the Fathers’ viewpoint, to the vision of God’s wrath in Habakkuk 3:11 – “The sun and the moon stood still in their habitation”, which points us to Joshua’s famous little battle. And Joshua is an obvious type of Yeshua, so we’re back to Jesus again. And Jesus is the Sun
of Justice, the Bridegroom who would come from the east as in the psalm. (This was one of the most popular early church images, and it’s why all Christians worshipped and were buried
facing east. “He has set his tabernacle (pitched his tent) in the sun: and he, as a bridegroom coming out of his bridechamber, has rejoiced as a giant to run the way.” St. Justin Martyr only quotes this verse about 5 zillion times in his explanation of the basics of Christianity.)
So what woman would totally put on the Sun of Justice? Israel, into which the Sun was born. Mary. The Church. And one hopes, the individual Christian, putting on Christ and carrying Him through the world. (The moon was interpreted as the Law, the changeable world, the Church reflecting the Sun of Justice’s light, etc. Endless fun there.)
However, the sun and moon also remind us of the Bride in the Song of Songs: “Who is she who comes forth like the dawn, bright as the sun, terrible as an army set in ranks?” And who is the Bride? An individual member of Israel. Israel. Mary. The Church. An individual Christian.
The sun and the moon remind us that we are to be obedient creatures like them (Baruch 6:59), and that if we love and obey God we will shine like them. Judges 5:31 – “So let all Your
enemies perish, O Lord, but let those that love You shine as the sun shines in his rising.”
Further, the sun and moon remind us of God’s throne: Psalm 88/89:38 – “His throne like the sun before me, and as the moon perfect for ever, and a faithful witness in heaven.” Witness? Here we are back at the martyrs and individual Christians! But also, here we are back at Mary, who served nine months as God’s throne, and witnessed to all the things she had seen and pondered. And the Church, who witnesses all, and Israel, who witnessed God’s wonders throughout history. Ecclesiasticus 50:7 – “And as the sun when it shines, so he shone in the temple of God.” Back to that temple again…
M
Mintaka
Guest
But what the heck are we talking about here? Baruch 6:66 – “Neither do they show signs in heaven to the nations, nor shine as the sun, nor give light as the moon.” And back to
Genesis 37:9, maybe the most direct and important bit: “He also dreamed another dream, which he told his brethren, saying: I saw in a dream, as it were the sun, and the moon,
and eleven stars worshipping me.” This Woman is even more favored than Joseph; every tribe of Israel is crowning her. And don’t forget that stars also commonly stood for angels, and that the twelve tribes had angels, and the twelve apostles stood for the twelve tribes, and…
Finally, Isaiah 30: 26 – “And the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of seven days: in the day when the Lord shall bind up the wound of his people, and shall heal the stroke of their wound.” Oh, wait, maybe we’re foreshadowing something a bit later on in Revelation here…
So is there one interpretation of this image of the Woman? Or are there at least three or four or five things you’re supposed to be thinking about, even on the most literal level as intended by the original writer for the original audience? After all, John wasn’t writing for people who weren’t interested – nay, obsessed – with scripture’s interrelatedness to scripture, and with symbolism in everything.
Genesis 37:9, maybe the most direct and important bit: “He also dreamed another dream, which he told his brethren, saying: I saw in a dream, as it were the sun, and the moon,
and eleven stars worshipping me.” This Woman is even more favored than Joseph; every tribe of Israel is crowning her. And don’t forget that stars also commonly stood for angels, and that the twelve tribes had angels, and the twelve apostles stood for the twelve tribes, and…
Finally, Isaiah 30: 26 – “And the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of seven days: in the day when the Lord shall bind up the wound of his people, and shall heal the stroke of their wound.” Oh, wait, maybe we’re foreshadowing something a bit later on in Revelation here…
So is there one interpretation of this image of the Woman? Or are there at least three or four or five things you’re supposed to be thinking about, even on the most literal level as intended by the original writer for the original audience? After all, John wasn’t writing for people who weren’t interested – nay, obsessed – with scripture’s interrelatedness to scripture, and with symbolism in everything.
T
Tom317
Guest
???
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
John,
The one area you should have trouble reconciling is Mary, you truly can not unwrap it as both a literal and a symbolic statement at the same time, one or the other… which one?
N
NotWorthy
Guest
There are two answers to this:
- Find the verse in Genesis where God punishes the woman regarding pain in child-birth.
Or does it say “I will increase your pain” in childbirth?
To “increase” or “magnify” the pain in childbirth implies that there would have been pain to begin with, correct?
- And martin, you yourself have been preaching of all the symbolism of Revelation (which pretty much is the consensus on interpreting this book), and yet you take the pains of childbirth literally?
N
NotWorthy
Guest
This would be a good time to point out the fallacy in why I take take it first and foremost as Mary. I gave you one of my reasons on why it’s Mary, and now you sound like my teacher: “John, John, John, you’ve got to go deeper….” I’m like the Ethiopian Eunuch (Er, spiritually, that is, not physically
), I can’t go deeper if someone doesn’t tell me how!This also applies to your “birthpains” comment, “here, here” doesn’t it?
T
Tom317
Guest
The Scriptural text proves the woman cannot be Mary, nor can the child be Jesus. I think everyone would agree that Revelation uses symbolic language; therefore, the task is to figure out what that language means. However, we must recall as we read this book that the Church firmly teaches there are many senses within Scripture, with the literal sense being the dominant sense. The Church does not exclude Revelation from those basic points about sense, so we must assume that there is a proper literal interpretation of the book. Therefore, with those thoughts as a background, let me try to show why I feel that the child cannot be Christ, and why the woman cannot be Mary. As follows (Scripture passages in italics and bolded):
***And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; ***
==> If we take that passage alone it certainly seems to point to the woman being Mary. However, Catholics know they cannot text proof the Bible by yanking single passages out to help make their point. So, we must go further to make sure we properly understand the text.
…she was with child and she cried out in her pangs of birth, in anguish for delivery.
==> Some people think the pain would not be present for Mary since she was sinless, yet I do not agree, she still needed to be saved by Christ and I suspect her birth pains were real and the Genesis account seems to support this point. So, to this point it still looks like the woman is Mary.
continued
***And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; ***
==> If we take that passage alone it certainly seems to point to the woman being Mary. However, Catholics know they cannot text proof the Bible by yanking single passages out to help make their point. So, we must go further to make sure we properly understand the text.
…she was with child and she cried out in her pangs of birth, in anguish for delivery.
==> Some people think the pain would not be present for Mary since she was sinless, yet I do not agree, she still needed to be saved by Christ and I suspect her birth pains were real and the Genesis account seems to support this point. So, to this point it still looks like the woman is Mary.
continued
T
Tom317
Guest
***…And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to bear a child, that he might devour her child when she brought it forth; ***
==> Here we find more textual evidence of the child being Jesus and the woman being Mary. It would seem perfectly logical to think about Satan (the dragon) pursuing Jesus to devour Him. However, we are not done with the text. The verses to this point do paint a convincing picture of Jesus as the child and Mary as the woman, and that is how I saw it for many years, until I took a closer look at the following verse:
…she brought forth a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne,…
==> This is a critical verse and one that changes the view of all the verses that came before. As follows:
(1) Jesus did not go to Heaven after His birth. [the text says the child was caught up]
(2) Jesus did not go to Heaven during any of His years on earth. [the text says the child was caught up]
(3) Jesus did not even go immediately to Heaven after His death on the cross, because we know He went to the souls bound in prison and preached to them first. [so He could not be caught up before then]
(4) Jesus did not ascend into Heaven for forty days after His death. [so He could not be caught up before then]
(5) In all this, it is critical to realize that Jesus did not require being “caught up” as with Elijah and Enoch–they were human and God had to catch them up, Elijah was caught up in a whirlwind.
(6) Jesus ascended under His own power because He is God. [He would never require being “caught up”]
(7) The male child who is caught up is brought to the throne of God. Jesus is God and therefore cannot be brought before the throne of God by God. Reading the text we see that “some” male child is brought to Heaven and to the throne of God. That directly implies a willful act by God to bring that person to Heaven to stand before God at God’s throne. Jesus would not be valid in any of those circumstances because He ascended on His own power and would never have to stand before God (Himself).
continued
==> Here we find more textual evidence of the child being Jesus and the woman being Mary. It would seem perfectly logical to think about Satan (the dragon) pursuing Jesus to devour Him. However, we are not done with the text. The verses to this point do paint a convincing picture of Jesus as the child and Mary as the woman, and that is how I saw it for many years, until I took a closer look at the following verse:
…she brought forth a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne,…
==> This is a critical verse and one that changes the view of all the verses that came before. As follows:
(1) Jesus did not go to Heaven after His birth. [the text says the child was caught up]
(2) Jesus did not go to Heaven during any of His years on earth. [the text says the child was caught up]
(3) Jesus did not even go immediately to Heaven after His death on the cross, because we know He went to the souls bound in prison and preached to them first. [so He could not be caught up before then]
(4) Jesus did not ascend into Heaven for forty days after His death. [so He could not be caught up before then]
(5) In all this, it is critical to realize that Jesus did not require being “caught up” as with Elijah and Enoch–they were human and God had to catch them up, Elijah was caught up in a whirlwind.
(6) Jesus ascended under His own power because He is God. [He would never require being “caught up”]
(7) The male child who is caught up is brought to the throne of God. Jesus is God and therefore cannot be brought before the throne of God by God. Reading the text we see that “some” male child is brought to Heaven and to the throne of God. That directly implies a willful act by God to bring that person to Heaven to stand before God at God’s throne. Jesus would not be valid in any of those circumstances because He ascended on His own power and would never have to stand before God (Himself).
continued
T
Tom317
Guest
Therefore, if we take these points and apply them to the verse, we see that the child cannot be literally Jesus for reasons #1-7 I sighted here, and if the child is not literally Jesus, then the woman is not literally Mary because the child is someone other than Jesus.
If the child is not Jesus, and the woman is not Mary, then who are these characters in these verses? Let’s look at the next passage.
***…and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, in which to be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days. ***
Nearly all interpreters throughout history have seen the Church in the woman at least symbolically. The woman being the Church (imo) is the only logical conclusion once Mary is eliminated, and it fits the flow of the historical narrative approach.
This chapter is speaking of a time in the future when the Church is under great stress and the Church needs to flee into the wilderness, the wilderness is merely a symbolic word for a nation that befriends the Church, possibly a non-Catholic nation–but one that has many Catholics and will welcome the core Church into their country. The use of the “one thousand two hundred and sixty days” is a direct connection to the antichrist and his reign, so perhaps these events happen during the reign of antichrist.
I see the child in this passage as being a great future Pope, or perhaps a Great Pope that becomes a Saint, because I feel that Jesus’ Vicar is the only male on earth that leads Jesus’ Church and as thus the phrase “one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron” aptly applies because the Vicar of Christ rules for Christ, and yet one day that future Pope will be caught up to Heaven after he dies. Only Jesus and His Vicar can rule with a rod of iron.
In other words, a Pope in the future rules all nations (meaning Catholic peoples) with a rod of iron given to Him by Christ, and at the end of the Pope’s life he will be caught up to heaven because the Pope is merely human, not divine as Christ is (only people are caught up to Heaven).
I personally see Catholic clergy and Popes spread throughout the entire book of Revelation, which fits because the Bible is the most Catholic of all books. IMO, if an interpretation does not seem “Catholic,” then it is not correct.
Finally, imo, Revelation 4 establishes that all of the subsequent events of Revelation come after the events of the first 3 chapters.
If the child is not Jesus, and the woman is not Mary, then who are these characters in these verses? Let’s look at the next passage.
***…and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, in which to be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days. ***
Nearly all interpreters throughout history have seen the Church in the woman at least symbolically. The woman being the Church (imo) is the only logical conclusion once Mary is eliminated, and it fits the flow of the historical narrative approach.
This chapter is speaking of a time in the future when the Church is under great stress and the Church needs to flee into the wilderness, the wilderness is merely a symbolic word for a nation that befriends the Church, possibly a non-Catholic nation–but one that has many Catholics and will welcome the core Church into their country. The use of the “one thousand two hundred and sixty days” is a direct connection to the antichrist and his reign, so perhaps these events happen during the reign of antichrist.
I see the child in this passage as being a great future Pope, or perhaps a Great Pope that becomes a Saint, because I feel that Jesus’ Vicar is the only male on earth that leads Jesus’ Church and as thus the phrase “one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron” aptly applies because the Vicar of Christ rules for Christ, and yet one day that future Pope will be caught up to Heaven after he dies. Only Jesus and His Vicar can rule with a rod of iron.
In other words, a Pope in the future rules all nations (meaning Catholic peoples) with a rod of iron given to Him by Christ, and at the end of the Pope’s life he will be caught up to heaven because the Pope is merely human, not divine as Christ is (only people are caught up to Heaven).
I personally see Catholic clergy and Popes spread throughout the entire book of Revelation, which fits because the Bible is the most Catholic of all books. IMO, if an interpretation does not seem “Catholic,” then it is not correct.
Finally, imo, Revelation 4 establishes that all of the subsequent events of Revelation come after the events of the first 3 chapters.
T
Tom317
Guest
Summary:
The woman is the Church in a future time.
The male child is a Pope in a future time.
The woman is the Church in a future time.
The male child is a Pope in a future time.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
I, too, always had problems with the verbage here, “caught up”, for like you, it seems to imply the child did not ascend under his own power. But then I looked at the Gospels and at Acts and was struck with the terms they used for Jesus’ Ascension:
Mark 16:19, " So then the Lord Jesus, after he spoke to them, was taken up into heaven and took his seat at the right hand of God."
Luke 24:51, " As he blessed them he parted from them and was taken up to heaven."
Acts 1:9, “*** When he had said this, as they were looking on, he was lifted up**, and a cloud took him from their sight*.”
Acts 1:11, “***Men of Galilee, why are you standing there looking at the sky? This Jesus who has been taken up from you into heaven *will return in the same way as you have seen him going into heaven.”
In seems like the child’s ascent into heaven corresponds with the way Jesus’ Ascension is described.
- Status