Revelation 12

  • Thread starter Thread starter myfavoritmartin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
1st. The Woman of Revelation being Mary is the simple, literal reading of the text. If Protestant scholars have agreed on one thing it is that we must look for the clear, obvious interpretation of a bible text. Who is the woman who gave birth to Jesus? Jesus’s Mother. Simple.

**2nd **The figures that appear in Revelation 12 are the same as those that appear in the proto-gospel of Genesis. Genesis 3:15. “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.” Satan is both the Serpent of Genesis, and the Dragon of Revelation. Jesus is the “seed” who will crush the serpent in Genesis, and the child who will rule with a rod of iron in Revelation. In both, He and His mother, the Woman, are at permanent enmity with the serpent. The Woman of Genesis 3 and Revelation 12 is the same. However no one suggests that the woman of Genesis 3 is Israel.

3rd Verse 17 of Revelation 12 is a confirmation of Mary’s spiritual motherhood of all Christians. This motherhood is already made implicit through the fact that Christians share in Mary’s motherhood through Jesus, both by being part of Jesus’s body, and brethren of Jesus.

4th. The interpretation of the Woman as Israel is contextually wrong. For all the other figures in this passage represent individuals, not ideas or classes of people. The Child is clearly Jesus, the Dragon is clearly Satan, each star swept out of the sky is one of the rebel angels who followed Satan. Later in the passage, we find Michael and his angels, and also the Beast - the Antichrist. The Woman is the only figure in the passage who, according to some, is not the individual stated in the text, but a collective representation. This biased exegesis must be seen as the ‘anybody but Mary’ defense.

5th. Conversely, when Israel, Christians or the Church appear elsewhere in Revelation, they do not appear as personifications. They appear in literal form, as groups of individuals. See Rev 7.4: 144,000 from all the tribes of Israel; Rev 7.9: …a great multitude that no-one could count…; Rev 12.17: …the rest of her offspring - those who obey God’s commandments… Even where the Church appears as the Bride of Christ, and a female personification would be expected, we do not get one. Instead of appearing as a woman, the Church appears as a City - the new Jerusalem. Rev 21: 9-10.

6th. If there is any doubt as to what a symbolic personage in Revelation might represent, or if a veiled meaning is intended, that meaning is immediately explained in the text. The Lamb is defined as the Lord of Lords, the Dragon is Satan. The Heads of the Beast are Kings. However no such explanation is given with respect to the Woman, underlining that the obvious meaning is the one that is intended.

7th. If we look at the reference to the Sun, Moon and Stars in this passage, the Sun, Moon and stars can indeed be taken to represent Israel. BUT in Revelation the Sun, Moon and Stars are not the subjects of the Vision. They instead form the adornments of the woman. This indicates that although the Woman is linked with Israel, she is quite clearly NOT Israel.

8th. The Woman of Revelation 12 is introduced as a great sign in Heaven. Where else in the bible can we see a Woman announced as a great sign. Look at Isaiah 7:14 “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son.” We can see that this is exactly the same sign as in Revelation 12, confirming that the Woman in both occurences is Mary.

9th. Verse 17 shows the Christians, both as Children of the Woman, and as being persecuted. Who was persecuting the Christians after the ressurrection? The Jews! So how can the Woman represent the Jews, when She and her offspring are being persecuted by the Jews?

As far as the Woman “fleeing into the desert”, this is either referring to, the Flight into Egypt from Herod’s assassins, or else to the first persecution of Christians after Stephen’s death, when all Christians had to flee Jerusalem.Not at all. The interpretation of the Woman as Israel is a modern invention, with no ancient attestation whatsoever, and it is at variance with the symbolism of the chapter.

It is possible that there are subsidiary meanings to the figure of the Woman - as there are to some other figures in Revelation. But the obvious primary meaning - that the woman giving birth to Jesus is actually Jesus’s mother - must be accepted. The only reason that some fight so hard against it, is that it conflicts with their deep-seated anti-Mary bias.
See zech14:1-5 for confirmation of Israel fleeing to azal during tribulation.
 
Many early Catholic Christians fled to many places for personal safety. I guess if we knew where John “fled” to, we would know where Mary was too.
So you’re saying Mary fled to the desert after John wrote rev. in 95ad. I think at that time the blessed virgin was already past on.
 
So you’re saying Mary fled to the desert after John wrote rev. in 95ad. I think at that time the blessed virgin was already past on.
17 And the dragon was angry against the woman: and went to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. 18
I think the Book of the Apocalypse incorporates what was past to St. John when he was on Patmos as well as his present and his future.

5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod: and her son was taken up to God, and to his throne.

Who is this man-child?
 
17 And the dragon was angry against the woman: and went to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. 18
I think the Book of the Apocalypse incorporates what was past to St. John when he was on Patmos as well as his present and his future.

5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with an iron rod: and her son was taken up to God, and to his throne.

Who is this man-child?
The child is Jesus who was born out of the nation of Israel, Mary being a part of that nation as was paul and any other Israelite. The dragon will make war with the believing remnant of Israel in these last days. The chapter is not refering to the CC or Mary specifically. See zech14:1-5 for support on Israel fleeing during last days.
 
Relevent posts merged into this thread from the Fatima thread.

MF
 
So you’re saying Mary fled to the desert after John wrote rev. in 95ad. I think at that time the blessed virgin was already past on.
It’s a very simple and hardly ludicrous idea that John is speaking of past events as well as future in Revelation. I mean, if he could speak of events of his own time as well as the future (for example the letters to the seven churches) then why not the past as well?

Is there some kind of ‘road rules for Scripture writers’ somewhere where God tells would-be prophets that one cannot speak of the past if one is writing prophecy, yet one CAN speak of the present? Or do you think God is not truly beyond time and that a thousand years are not to him truly the same as a single day and a day as a thousand years and that therefore prophets can speak of any time period God chooses as well as the future???
 
Literally
Mary was Part of the Nation of Israel when she was alive. Now she is in heaven so the passage is not refering to her.
So literally Israel gave birth to Jesus?

I disagree. Literally speaking she is Mary. Israel is also correct but that is symbolic not literal.
 
Mary could not flee into desert AFTER our Lord went up to heaven as verse 5 and 6 states.
For further prophecy on Israel see zech14:1-5 it says almost the same thing as rev prophecy about fleeing during the trib.
This is all messed up Newb.

The fact is that not all of what John recounts in Revelation is prophecy and in this passage we have him telling of the Flight into Egypt.

John probably knew more about Mary than anyone except Our Lord, for obvious reasons.

The verses about being pregnant and bearing a male child and fleeing are parrallels to the Gospel accounts.
 
The woman in rev12 is the nation of Israel. twelve stars are the 12 tribes. the 1260 days are the 3 1/2 years of the beginning of the tribulation. Rev is a prophetic book written after the first coming of Jesus. The fleeing into egypt by mary was 1 ad. Rev was written in 95ad. This verse is not historical it is prophetic. So how could this verse be refering to something that happened 94yrs before it was written?
Soooooooo, Satan was kicked out of heaven after 95AD?

Look at the Child in 12:5. Who is this child?
 
In the literal sense, the woman is also Mary. Since she bore Jesus. Jesus was born out of the virgin Mary.
And the literal sense should not be ignored. It doesn’t make sense in Apocalyptic Literature to have two characters represent individuals (child = Jesus, dragon = Satan) and the third character represent a group (woman = Church or Israel).

The woman first and foremost points us to Mary. Since Mary is a Type of the Church and Israel (or are they types of Mary, I always forget), the woman can ALSO be interpreted as Israel and the Church.
 
So you’re saying Mary fled to the desert after John wrote rev. in 95ad. I think at that time the blessed virgin was already past on.
Many scholars feel that Revelation was written during the time of Nero (68 AD or so) and not the 90’s. Don’t accept at face value that it was written in the 90’s.

A lot of the prophecies in Revelation point to the fall of Jerusalem, as well as the end of times.
 
Perhaps we should have a “Berean Alert”, like the Troll alerts. Newbie and Myfavoritemartian are taking their cues from web sites like this one…

bereanbeacon.org/for_catholics.htm

One of them * mentioned that they only study Berean information in another thread. I have heard Richard Bennett speak and watched his Berean videos on Cable Access TV. When I read that post, I understood where the point of view and theology comes from…

They are here to “save us” from the errors of the Catholic Church. They can interpret Scriptures literally until they need to use a passage symbolically and vice verse, as has been pointed out. They can se passages from scripture to support their claims and ignore the passages a cathoic uses.

Valient effort, I have enjoyed reading the posts…*
 
OK, I hope this thread is still monitored by some.

I was reading Revelation, chapter 12 today, and I came across this interesting verse. I don’t know why it hasn’t been brought up before.

*** But the woman was given the two wings of the great eagle**, so that she could fly to her place in the desert, where, far from the serpent, she was taken care of for a year, two years, and a half-year.*

Mary was given to the Beloved Disciple, John, right? Tradition tells us that John is represented by the Eagle, right? Do you see the connection here? Huh? Huh?
 
OK, I hope this thread is still monitored by some.

I was reading Revelation, chapter 12 today, and I came across this interesting verse. I don’t know why it hasn’t been brought up before.

*** But the woman was given the two wings of the great eagle***, so that she could fly to her place in the desert, where, far from the serpent, she was taken care of for a year, two years, and a half-year.

Mary was given to the Beloved Disciple, John, right? Tradition tells us that John is represented by the Eagle, right? Do you see the connection here? Huh? Huh?
Wow, Deja vu
I was listening to the Book of Revelation last night when I was driving and the same thought came to me.

With two witnesses, it is proven true.
 
Reply to Objection 1: In the state of innocence child-bearing would have been painless: for Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xiv, 26): “Just as, in giving birth, the mother would then be relieved not by groans of pain, but by the instigations of maturity, so in bearing and conceiving the union of both sexes would be one not of lustful desire but of deliberate action” *Cf. FP, Question [98], Article [2]].
catholicprimer.org/summa/SS/SS164.html
 
Revelations 12 to me doesn’t refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary. It refers to Mother Church. The crown of twelve stars would stand for the 12 apostles upon which the Church was built. She experienced pain while giving birth (the Church teaches that Mary didn’t experience pain while giving birth.) So therefore the child that rules with an iron rod couldn’t then be Christ but the holy father perhaps?
 
Revelations 12 to me doesn’t refer to
the Blessed Virgin Mary. It refers to Mother Church.
Partly True. The woman can be referred to the Church, and she also represents Mary.

Because this woman gave birth to a male child who will rule all nations. This child was taken up to God and to his throne. This male child is Jesus.
The crown of twelve stars would stand for the 12 apostles upon which the Church was built. She experienced pain while giving birth (the Church teaches that Mary didn’t experience pain while giving birth.) So therefore the child that rules with an iron rod couldn’t then be Christ but the holy father perhaps?
Actually, the Catholic Church doesn’t teaches doesn’t say she experience pain, and the Church is also silent what the status was on her giving birth pains.

In fact in the Presentation at the Temple, Joseph and Mary brought the infant Jesus, a prophet Simeon said to Mary, “And your own heart shall be pierced as well also.”

Indeed, when Jesus was crucified, his Mother was suffering because she witness the death of her own only son.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top