The Ark of the Covenant in the New Testament

[MartinJordan]

PR, I will have to get back tomorrow, but if we all thought the same we’d be like robots, God in his infinate wisdom made us all individuals.

Im not just singling you out, because Ive heard this before, but

1 Corinthians 1: 10: Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms among you; but that you be perfect in the same mind, and in the same judgment.

Unity is of utmost importance, nothing to do with robots (considering there were no robots those days)

MJ

 

[LittleSoldier]

I never implied that Mary’s giving birth to the Savior was not important.
That is not the focus…

This statement about Mary’s role as mediatrix indicates far more than that…

… "our manner of praying to the Blessed Virgin has something in common with our worship of God so that the Church even addressed to her the words with which we pray to God: ‘Have mercy on sinners.’” Leo XIII: Encyclical, Augustissimae

I don’t see the problem that you are seeing. Jesus has such a loving relationship with His mother! When she told Him that the wedding guests had no wine He told her “Woman, My time has not yet come” but then he went right ahead and OBEYED her - the God made Man. He deferred to a human being and a woman at that! His love for her (and as we want to be as Christ-like as possible, OUR love for her) is evident in this Bible passage.

It’s still the same. Jesus is God and He deferred to a human being and a woman at that! We ask Mary to pray for us. Everything good comes from God - including Mary and her special role. And she DID help redeem us as she gave birth to Jesus, as the Theotokos. Nobody else on earth can ever make that claim. And she prays for us every time we say the Rosary or the Hail Mary on its own or any other prayer to her. The glory belongs to God *through *Mary.

It’s not saying that Mary is in any way equal to any member of the Trinity - that would make the Trinity a Quaternity, or something like that and to worship Mary as God is blasphemy and a violation of the First and Second Commandments (or First and Third, depending on how they are written in each church). :tsktsk: That is not what is being said. When we pray “Have mercy on sinners” or “Pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death” it is understood that Mary prays to God and if she protects us in any way it is only through the love and mercy of God that she is allowed to do so.

If Mary prays to God for us and if God has given her a special role, what in the world is wrong with asking her to help us? When we do so we show her honor - just as her Son, Jesus did. Nobody is saying Mary is a goddess or a god. She is only a human being but she is the most perfect human being ever created, with the exception of Jesus as God-Incarnate.

The saints in heaven present their prayers to God - that is in the Bible (I can find it if you wish me to but I don’t have time right now). It’s that part about bowls of incense which are the prayers of the saints. Mary is a saint. A lot of people forget that. She is the most blessed saint in Heaven and glorifies God constantly.

But what does this have to do with Mary being the Ark of the Covenant in the NT? That’s what this thread is about. Really - wouldn’t it be a good idea to start a new thread about Mary’s role as the Co-Mediatrix or Co-Redeemer or whatever? This is really starting to hijack this thread (sorry - no offense meant).

 

[LittleSoldier]

“God has committed to the Blessed Virgin Mary the treasury of all good things in order that everyone may know that through her are obtained every hope, every grace and all salvation.” …
Pius IX: Encycl., Ubi primum

Funny thing about that quote. The first word used is “God.” Did you notice that? You see, God is first. God is the one who gives grace, who creates good, who created Mary without Original Sin, who made her full of grace, who overshadowed her so that the Christ was conceived within her.

***“GOD ***has committed to the Blessed Virgin Mary the treasury of all good things in order that everyone may know that through her are obtained every hope, every grace and all salvation.”

Just in case you didn’t see it - it’s GOD!!!

 

[LittleSoldier]

So you’re ok with a Christian proclaiming that God elevates white people?

Or with someone stating that he can take as many wives as he wants?

I am certain that these folks can back up their views with some isolated Bible verses.

Are these not all “individuals” who are offering their opinions? You’re ok with this?

I am , too. I remember seeing a PBS program on the KKK (who uses *Amazing Grace *as their “theme song”, according to this program. They believe they are Christians, according to this program.

And I saw another program - one of those talk programs - where a black woman said there was a black God that hated white people (she also hated white people) and the Judao-Christian God hated black people.

I guess that’s all OK. I guess it’s all “Biblical Relativism.” It’s OK if one person takes the Word of God one way and another takes it another way. It’s cool; it’s kewl, it’s perfectly fine because we’re not robots. And the Word of God is a very personal thing. So it’s OK to add a word to the Bible (like “alone”) or form a new church so you can divorce your wife or believe in blood atonemnent.

Because the Word of God, as presented in the Bible, is “Biblical Relativism.”

BTW, I don’t watch TV anymore.

 

[LittleSoldier]

Im not just singling you out, because Ive heard this before, but

1 Corinthians 1: 10: Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms among you; but that you be perfect in the same mind, and in the same judgment.

Unity is of utmost importance, nothing to do with robots (considering there were no robots those days)

MJ

That kinda knocks down my (tongue-in-cheek but stated to make a point) “Biblical Relativism” theory, doesn’t it?

I guess the Word of God has one meaning and we need to understand and agree on what that meaning is. And that’s about as far from “Biblical Relativism” as you can get.

Which is fine with me!

 

[1voice]

And where in the Bible does explicitly state that “all grace DOES not flow” through Mary?

You can believe whatever you choose that is not in the Bible.
The burden of proof is with you. I have seen no convincing proof to support your claim.

 

[1voice]

You do know, 1voice, that Catholics begin their prayers with these most beautiful words, “In the NAME of the Father, and of THE SON, and of the Holy Spirit.”

Whose name do you think we’re praying in?

… and it’s perfectly Biblical! …

 

[1voice]

Originally Posted by 1voice
… "our manner of praying to the Blessed Virgin has something in common with our worship of God so that the Church even addressed to her the words with which we pray to God: ‘Have mercy on sinners.’” …Leo XIII: Encyclical, Augustissimae

“None, O Mother of God, obtains salvation except through thee, none receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through thee.” …Leo XIII: Adiutricem populi

“When we have recourse to Mary in prayer, we are having recourse to the Mother of Mercy, who is so well disposed towards us that, whatever the necessity that presses upon us, especially in attaining eternal life. …” Leo XIII: Encyclical, Magnae Dei Matris

---

This, then, is how you should pray: Our Father in heaven …
Matt 6:9

I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.
John14:13-14

Amen!

Beautiful quotes, all. Following in the spirits of Peter and Paul who HEALED and SAVED.

Well, I agree … with 2/5 or your statement …

 

[Luvtosew]

And yet it’s an assumption you’re making that the more you’re mentioned in the Bible the more important you are.

Not at all, I’m just not reading into things that is not there, because I want it to be.

This is especially egregious since you’ve just said you don’t like to make assumptions, yet here you are making a very big one!

I’m not assuming this or that or maybe this or that, or OH thy forgot to mention it,
I believe many assumptions were made about the BVM.

Incidentally, do you know that Jesus is not even mentioned in 3 John?

A tiny book, I didn’t go and read it, but 3 John wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for Jesus.
I bet there is reference to God or Jesus in it.

And yet this is part of the inspired Word of God.

Yes

And the ONLY way you know it is inspired, even if it doesn’t say Jesus in it, is because some MEN decided this for you./

No because one of the first apostle penned it, and I believe God had control over what went in the Bible.

 

[PRmerger]

1 Corinthians 1: 10: Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms among you; but that you be perfect in the same mind, and in the same judgment.

Unity is of utmost importance, nothing to do with robots (considering there were no robots those days)

MJ

Perfect!

 

[PRmerger]

You can believe whatever you choose that is not in the Bible.
The burden of proof is with you. I have seen no convincing proof to support your claim.

This is part of the problem with those who go by the Bible alone for their doctrines.

Sometimes they have the paradigm: if it’s not in the Bible then it’s forbidden (as you are saying here regarding Mary)

But!

Then they also have the paradigm: if it’s not in the Bible then it’s allowed (as many say regarding contraception.)

How do you decide when the Bible is silent if that indicates it’s permissible or if it’s forbidden?

 

[PRmerger]

… and it’s perfectly Biblical! …

'zactly.

After all, Catholics are the* first* Bible Christians.

 

[PRmerger]

Well, I agree … with 2/5 or your statement …

If you could just explain what part bothers you about the quotes regarding Mary, keeping in mind the fact that Scripture is filled with references to human beings

-giving laws (Moses)
-healing (Peter)
-giving grace (Paul)
-saving (ourselves, Paul)
-forgiving sins (apostles)
-binding and loosing (apostles)
-being mediators (the Body of Christ)

So whatever objection you offer, please keep in mind the above references, and offer objections that excludes all of the above while arguing against devotion to Mary.

 

[PRmerger]

No because one of the first apostle penned it, and I believe God had control over what went in the Bible.

Really? An apostle penned it?

Can you cite where the Scripture says that it was penned by an apostle?

And a verse in Scripture that says that for a book to be inspired it must be written by an apostle?

If you can’t (and you certainly can’t!) then it’s
-an ASSUMPTION on your part
-an acknowledgement that you have relied on the decisions of MEN to discern for you that 3 John is inspired, even if it doesn’t say the name of Jesus in a single sentence.

 

[Luvtosew]

Perfect!

I so agree with that verse, and it good to know what is in the Bible and what is not, so no one preaches a different Bible.

and that we know when things don’t line up with the word of God, we won’t be led astray,
by false interpretations.

 

[GaryTaylor]

You can believe whatever you choose .

The issue is the box of belief you decided to reside in.

All Grace flows through Mary is the simple understanding of the Incarnation. What exactly do you believe happened at that moment?

So the Trinity is not ALL GRACE, The Holy Spirit did not Overshadow Mary, Mary, a virgin chosen by God, did not bear the child named Jesus? Jesus is not the Christ?

Hail Mary, is how the Archangels who stand before the Throne of God greet Mary?

Did not ALL-GRACE flow through Mary at the Incarnation? When did the Bible state it stopped?

that is not in the Bible.

Neither is Trinity, theres a long list of “not in the Bible”

Also note how quickly our Bible only scholars draw from other verse’s to make their point. When a word/idea in not “specifically” mentioned.

You are confined to the Bible Box, not the Apostolic Churchs in real time

The burden of proof is with you. I have seen no convincing proof to support your claim.

Let me take you a wee bit deeper into this.

Because you limited yourself to the Bible only theology. What happened at the Incarnation…basic Christian teaching of the ecumenical councils which Christianity is based on. Same as the Trinity. There’s are real history here you refuse to acknowledge.

And that history and tradition came long before your Bible and continued alongside of it.

Case in point, the first writting of Isaiah is how old? I’ll save you the search, it came from the Dead Sea Scrolls discovery 1947 and dates 6-centuries “after” Isaiah lived. Now. I can assure you Judaism existed in oral orthodox tradition, long before the torah was inked. Moses and its authors would have written the Torah approximately 1220 BC. Fragments that have been found, date around 700 B.C. Course I could go on to the King David period but my point is made. The written torah is subject to oral “interpretation” because it was “preceeded” by oral tradition. King David wasn’t told to build the Holy Temple in Scripture. There are so many examples of this OT/NT.

Do you not see the reality of your Bible only Theology? The OT/NT are considered “infinate” because the Word of God is infinate. God does not go into the Box of Bible only, He doesn’t fit, there are Mysteries in the OT/NT we just continue through time to understand.

Christs understanding of Orthodox Jewish worship was so extensive He quotes oral tradition not even written in the OT. How in the world can the Bible only theology explain this? It can’t without resorting to Orthdox Judaism “tradition”.

So much for Bible only. Back to Mary and the “Garden to the Incarnation”.

 

[Luvtosew]

PRmerger;9177238]So you’re ok with a Christian proclaiming that God elevates white people?

No not in the Bible.

Or with someone stating that he can take as many wives as he wants?

I know better.

I am certain that these folks can back up their views with some isolated Bible verses

.

yes they do it all the time, read into the bible what they want.

Are these not all “individuals” who are offering their opinions? You’re ok with this?

I don’t follow anyones opinions about their interpretation of Scripture, I read it and mediatate on it myself. We all have the HS to lead us.

 

[Luvtosew]

Really? An apostle penned it?

Can you cite where the Scripture says that it was penned by an apostle?

And a verse in Scripture that says that for a book to be inspired it must be written by an apostle?

If you can’t (and you certainly can’t!) then it’s
-an ASSUMPTION on your part
-an acknowledgement that you have relied on the decisions of MEN to discern for you that 3 John is inspired, even if it doesn’t say the name of Jesus in a single sentence.

3 John 1:7

For they have gone out for the sake of the name, accepting nothing from the Gentiles.

in my Nab (a RC bible) they say the Name is Jesus,.

 

[PRmerger]

and that we know when things don’t line up with the word of God, we won’t be led astray,
by false interpretations.

'zactly.

And just to be clear, the Word of God is not ONLY Scripture. It’s Scripture AND Tradition.

Unless you have a verse in the Bible that says that God’s Word is to be found ONLY in the Scriptures.

(We are giving tacit acknowledgement here that we all accept that JESUS is the true Word of God.)

 

[Luvtosew]

'zactly.

After all, Catholics are the* first* Bible Christians.

Define Catholic.