The Ark of the Covenant in the New Testament

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wandile
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote:
There are multiple references to grace in the old as well as the new testament. Grace is always attributed directly to God.
Except when Paul says that he gives it. 😉
Your logic makes no sense to me.
When Peter prayed for people to be healed… It wasnt Peter that healed the person. In the same way we can have and operate in grace … but we are not the source. Paul gave grace … from God … according to God’s will … Just like Peter ministered healing … from God … according to God’s will. Peter was not the source and neither was Paul.
Jesus himself said that he only did what he was instructed to do by God the Father by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Without going into a long convoluted discussion where the point gets lost … I will simply say that Grace comes from one source (God) and is available to every person that God chooses to share it with. All who are Christians (Including Paul) live in and have the ability to share grace … Paul … in Colossians 4:6 tells them to “Let your conversation be always full of grace”. Grace is freely available to all of us … from and by God.
 
+JMJ+
Quote:
There are multiple references to grace in the old as well as the new testament. Grace is always attributed directly to God.

Your logic makes no sense to me.
When Peter prayed for people to be healed… It wasnt Peter that healed the person. In the same way we can have and operate in grace … but we are not the source. Paul gave grace … from God … according to God’s will … Just like Peter ministered healing … from God … according to God’s will. Peter was not the source and neither was Paul.
Jesus himself said that he only did what he was instructed to do by God the Father by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Without going into a long convoluted discussion where the point gets lost … I will simply say that Grace comes from one source (God) and is available to every person that God chooses to share it with. All who are Christians (Including Paul) live in and have the ability to share grace … Paul … in Colossians 4:6 tells them to “Let your conversation be always full of grace”. Grace is freely available to all of us … from and by God.
We all agree that there is only one source of grace, God Himself. And again I fail to see how all of this is relevant to Mary being the Ark of the Covenant.
 
When Peter prayed for people to be healed… It wasnt Peter that healed the person. In the same way we can have and operate in grace … but we are not the source. Paul gave grace … from God … according to God’s will … Just like Peter ministered healing … from God … according to God’s will. Peter was not the source and neither was Paul.
'zactly. 👍

When Christians say that Paul healed someone, we all understand that it was only through the power given to him from God, according to God’s will.

So I’m not sure why some Christians get their knickers in a knot when Catholics state that Mary is a source of grace. We all understand that it’s only through the power given to her from God, according to God’s will.

If you can say it about Peter, and you can say it about Paul, what’s the big deal about saying it about Mary? :confused:
 
+JMJ+

We all agree that there is only one source of grace, God Himself. And again I fail to see how all of this is relevant to Mary being the Ark of the Covenant.
What I am asking has everything to do with the topic.
Some of you understand exactly what the point is.
 
But the problem is that the Bible says things that are difficult to understand, that the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, right?
I pray for people like that… based on the fact that Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would bring all that Jesus taught to remembrance and lead us into all truth.
So what you really mean, 1voice, is that you don’t mind agreeing with Catholics when they agree with your own fallible, personal interpretation of the Bible, yes?
Love is patient…
with snide, gratuitous cheap shots… 😉
 
How long did it take the early church fathers to figure out Luke’s code?
About 200 or so years. Which, incidentally, is much shorter than the amount of time it took them to figure out that…

Baptism should not be applied to infants…

Baptism doesn’t save…

The Supper is not the true Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ…

God does not grant forgiveness through Holy Absolution…

So, if we go by a time frame for how long it took the Church to figure something out…the ark of the new covenant typology has a pretty good pedigree in comparison!
 
'zactly. 👍

When Christians say that Paul healed someone, we all understand that it was only through the power given to him from God, according to God’s will.

So I’m not sure why some Christians get their knickers in a knot when Catholics state that Mary is a source of grace. We all understand that it’s only through the power given to her from God, according to God’s will.

If you can say it about Peter, and you can say it about Paul, what’s the big deal about saying it about Mary? :confused:
Because of statements like this … that are not made about Peter or Paul or any other Christian:

“O Virgin most holy, none abounds in the knowledge of God except through thee; none, O Mother of God, obtains salvation except through thee, none receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through thee.” (Leo XIII: Encycl., Adiutricem populi, September 5, 1895.) — [p. 12, no. 13]

“Mary is all powerful with her divine Son who grants all graces to mankind through her …” (Benedict XV: Encyclical, Fausto appetente die, June 29, 1921.) [p. 59; no. 244]

“With equal truth it may be said that of the great treasury of all graces given to us by Our Lord—for grace and truth came by Jesus Christ—nothing comes to us except through Mary’s mediation, for such is God’s Will. Thus, as no man goes to the Father but by the Son, so no one goes to Christ except through his mother.” (Leo XIII, Encycl., Octobri mense, September 22, 1891.) — [pp. 13,14, no. 19]

“Are you hoping one day to reach Paradise through the grace of perseverance in the last moment of your lives? Are you trusting to die in the grace of God? This grace also will come to you, as those devoted to Mary, through a smile of hers, as a ray from that Sun.” (Pius XII: Radio message, December 8, 1953.) [p. 83; no. 383.]
 
Because of statements lmade about other Christian:
Wrong. You fail to acknowledge History. There are profound documents on the Apostles. You have to do “research”.

Basically we already concluded God “is” the Source of ALL Grace. Performing Miracles by Saints is not new.

We are talking about the Ark of the Covenant. REMEMBER?

You bring up a Martyred saint, that is relevant to the Ark of the Covenant, How? 🤷

Pope Leo XIII and Pius have what to do with a long line of History from within 30-years of Christ on the Cross? They are just two in that long line of links, which is so extensive you could read about Mary for years. Pope Leo XIII wrote 11-13 encyclicals himself on Mary. There are 2500 Biographys on her alone. Fact is no woman in History has been more written about, or appears more in the Arts, etc. NONE.

There was one who gave Birth to the Lord (Luke). Greeted by an Angel sent by God with a salutation to indicate how all the Heavens viewed Mary according to Gods will. 🤷

One women out of that entire OT was chosen while man was DEAD as Daniel and Elijah etc. were great Saints but not in heaven. Not one soul in the OT till the Redemption was in Heaven (Colossians 2:13). Which was preceeded by Marys faith/fiat. Christ through Mary became the plan in Gods mind. Out of all women, the Lord chose one, Mary. That alone ought to tell you what He thought about Her. He placed the Life of the Second person of the Trinity in Her arms along with the future of mankind. Then She spent 33 years in person Talking to God. A feat no-one in History has been so priviledged and so Blessed to have had such an honor to do.

Mary did not have sin for She could not have conceived God but in a state of pure Grace thus the Incarnation. Here Bible gives us a glimpse.

In the order of Grace, Mary is directly behind the Trinity. In the Mystical body of Christ, Christ is the Head, Mary is the neck. All Grace flows through Mary by Gods will “because” All Grace already flowed through Mary at the Incarnation as God the Father so willed it to be. And if the Lord so wills it to be? Far from me to interfer with His plan of salvation.

One individual gave Birth to Christ, Jesus… Mary, thus She became the New Ark of the Covenant at that moment. There is NO ARK on earth as we have concluded by Revelation. When did all Grace stop flowing through Mary. As we see, it hasn’t.

These works exist as I have showed you in “All” the Apostolic Churchs.

The Bible in not as old as the existing works we have, not as old as the oral tradition which is recorded in not one, but many of the Apostolic Churchs. As we see.

If you want to ignore history stick to strickly Bible. God Bless you, I find it horribly lacking to speak on what you refuse to research, which to this point indicates something very different than what History/Philosophy/Theology indicate, thus the Truth.

The Popes, Saints and Mystics are but another dimension through the entire History. I showed you the History dating back to “before” the Bible. We have nothing from the Bible from then, codex, chits of pottery with Matthews verse in parts etc. The Bible becomes a fact in 200-AD. There are more different Bible’s written, than words in it today. Theres one oral/written tradition which remains consistant in the Apostolic Churchs. And rightfully so they are GODS CHURCHS

In the Bible only philosophy/theology I’m sorry all the answers to History are not there. And the Bible “literally” tells you this 🤷 In many verse’s.

Thus from the 1st century till 1850 all is consistant with Mary and the Mystery continues to unfold. Thus the new “heretical” theory is of “today” with our Bible only Sola Scripture thinking. History in the Apostles Churchs runs parallel and is consistant on this topic.

NO-ONE woman but Mary was chosen as Isreal persevered the test of time for thousands of years. The Lords plan thus became Mary to conceive Christ Jesus in the Incarnation and fulfillment of Isaiah. There is no Saint, no Prophet, no Angel NOBODY who such an honor was bestowed upon.

Thus the Ark of the Covenant. I’ve yet to see anyone come along in these preceeding pages with a any valid arguement to the contrary, and frankly I don’t expect to see one. The simple fact is the Incarnation itself supports the theology.

Theres of mulitude of Catholic/Orthodox Fathers working on this today as we speak, which I linked the research on. At the moment everyone became silent on this since much research is required now.

As of this moment there is NO mistakes in Catholic Church teaching in regards to this topic. If fact documented History continues to confirm the teaching as of most recent. I see no change coming, in fact much to the contrary as Dr. Scott Hahn stated earlier in this thread.

The Church doesn’t state all Grace has to come through Mary, the fact is for those who cannot find a State of Grace and are subjected to perpetual sin, cannot approach the Lord for shame, decades of breaking the commandments, for whatever reason in their mind they may have conceived to seperate themselves from God, then Marys intercession in the order of Grace becomes your guide to Her Son. If you choose to seek Christ at all.

A fact affirmed in History by ALL the Saints, Popes, and Mystics, in the church.

Sorry in this area the Bible is simply lacking with information which is provided in other ways, the Bible provides a piece of the puzzle. Thats all. The Bible tells you this.

Granted not an easy topic to approach, did you listen to Scott Hahn, Stevie Ray, Patrick Madrid? I was “raised Catholic” and thought exactly as they did, Church was crazy with the Mary theology. The more you read, research, contemplate, the more it becomes self-evident the church was not wrong, we were.
 
Love is patient…
with snide, gratuitous cheap shots… 😉
Oh! I apologize. It was not meant to be a snide, gratuitous cheap shot.

I only meant, in truth, that you are fallible, yes?

Do you take offense to that?
 
I pray for people like that… based on the fact that Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would bring all that Jesus taught to remembrance and lead us into all truth.
And yet, by your paradigm of Sola Scriptura, there’s now thousands of different denominations, each proclaiming that their own interpretations of Scripture are the correct ones.

And without any final authority on the interpretation of Scripture Christians now we have the chaos and confusion of all of these issues below having MULTIPLE interpretations of what God apparently desires. :eek:

• Abortion
• Attend weekly services, don’t have to go to Church
• Baptism (sprinkling? Immersion? Infant? Adult? Sacrament? Ordinance? In Jesus’ name only? Using Trinitarian formula?)
• Charity or no charity (help one another or let them help themselves?)
• Church leadership, or no leadership
• Death/Soul Sleep
• Did Jesus use wine or grape juice at the Last Supper
• Divorce
• Drinking allowed, drinking not allowed
• Head coverings or no head coverings
• Health and wealth gospel
• Hell, or no hell
• Homosexuality
• Is God‘s Holy Name Jehovah
• Judge others, don’t judge others
• Lord’s day on Saturday or Sunday
• Music or no music (Singing or no singing)
• Once saved, always saved
• Ordination
• Predestination
• Rapture
• Sola scriptura/private interpretation
• The Eucharist (Communion)
• Tongues (some believe others are not saved if they don’t speak in tongues)
• Trinity vs. Unitarianism
• What’s a sin, what is not a sin
• When to celebrate the Lord’s Day
• Women pastors, no women pastors
 
Because of statements like this … that are not made about Peter or Paul or any other Christian:

“O Virgin most holy, none abounds in the knowledge of God except through thee; none, O Mother of God, obtains salvation except through thee, none receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through thee.” (Leo XIII: Encycl., Adiutricem populi, September 5, 1895.) — [p. 12, no. 13]

“Mary is all powerful with her divine Son who grants all graces to mankind through her …” (Benedict XV: Encyclical, Fausto appetente die, June 29, 1921.) [p. 59; no. 244]

“With equal truth it may be said that of the great treasury of all graces given to us by Our Lord—for grace and truth came by Jesus Christ—nothing comes to us except through Mary’s mediation, for such is God’s Will. Thus, as no man goes to the Father but by the Son, so no one goes to Christ except through his mother.” (Leo XIII, Encycl., Octobri mense, September 22, 1891.) — [pp. 13,14, no. 19]

“Are you hoping one day to reach Paradise through the grace of perseverance in the last moment of your lives? Are you trusting to die in the grace of God? This grace also will come to you, as those devoted to Mary, through a smile of hers, as a ray from that Sun.” (Pius XII: Radio message, December 8, 1953.) [p. 83; no. 383.]
As we stated earlier, all of this is only through Mary’s fiat and acknowledgement that it is only through the power of God and His authority.

If you don’t have a problem with Paul saying the HE SAVES US [SIGN](yes, non-Catholic folks, Paul really does say that HE SAVES US) [/SIGN]and you’re not indignant about that, then why get so aghast about Catholics saying the above things about Mary? Those things PALE in comparison to Paul saying that HE SAVES. 🤷
 
I agree with lets proceed in Charity.

In light of history we cannot overlook what has transpired from 1850 foward. Most I suspect for a simple lack of research or to promote ones own agenda in the world of religion today, in this case Christianity.

I don’t find Sola Scriptura to be a false path, I do find that it ignores a very real History in not only the CC but all the Apostolic Churchs. There’s no contesting the Bible is the very real Inspired Word of God. However as it clearly states all cannot be included within, nor was it ever intended to be. Nor is it with the history of the Churchs.

History doesn’t ignore this reality. Should one conclude they have no desire to research and would like to proceed with a Bible only sola scriptura theology. I say Amen.

I do take issue when one reachs this point and begins to view 2000 years of History in the battle of Good and evil as heresy.

These Apostolic Churchs, its Saints and martyrs are what withstood the assault of evil from day one, and continue to do so this very day…

St Paul is a topic within himself, for sure. Much debated over the centuries, he has to be read within context of the Gospels/Church. For that church Christ established is what He followed. No question about it.

.

Peace
 
Because of statements like this … that are not made about Peter or Paul or any other Christian:

“O Virgin most holy, none abounds in the knowledge of God except through thee; none, O Mother of God, obtains salvation except through thee, none receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through thee.” (Leo XIII: Encycl., Adiutricem populi, September 5, 1895.) — [p. 12, no. 13]

“Mary is all powerful with her divine Son who grants all graces to mankind through her …” (Benedict XV: Encyclical, Fausto appetente die, June 29, 1921.) [p. 59; no. 244]

“With equal truth it may be said that of the great treasury of all graces given to us by Our Lord—for grace and truth came by Jesus Christ—nothing comes to us except through Mary’s mediation, for such is God’s Will. Thus, as no man goes to the Father but by the Son, so no one goes to Christ except through his mother.” (Leo XIII, Encycl., Octobri mense, September 22, 1891.) — [pp. 13,14, no. 19]

“Are you hoping one day to reach Paradise through the grace of perseverance in the last moment of your lives? Are you trusting to die in the grace of God? This grace also will come to you, as those devoted to Mary, through a smile of hers, as a ray from that Sun.” (Pius XII: Radio message, December 8, 1953.) [p. 83; no. 383.]
1voice - you basically just cut & paste from this anti-Catholic website.

I don’t have time to go through each quote, but you are deliberately distorting the message. For example, the quote from Leo XIII’s encyclical omits the preceding sentence:
Since faith is the foundation, the source, of the gifts of God by which man is raised above the order of nature and is endowed with the dispositions requisite for life eternal, we are in justice bound to recognize the hidden influence of Mary in obtaining the gift of faith and its salutary cultivation-of Mary who brought the “author of faith” into this world and who, because of her own great faith, was called “blessed.”
Context is important. And when the truth is deliberately distorted to fit a narrative it’s dishonest. Dishonesty is the moral equivalent of lying. Satan is the father of lies. And, as we know…

[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 7:16[/BIBLEDRB]
 
1voice - you basically just cut & paste from this anti-Catholic website.

I don’t have time to go through each quote, but you are deliberately distorting the message. For example, the quote from Leo XIII’s encyclical omits the preceding sentence:

Context is important. And when the truth is deliberately distorted to fit a narrative it’s dishonest. Dishonesty is the moral equivalent of lying. Satan is the father of lies. And, as we know…

[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 7:16[/BIBLEDRB]
Oh boy. now we have to “actually” pay attention now? 😉
 
According to Radical, is it heresy for anyone to think of Mary as the ark of the new covenant?
it is reading into scripture an idea/belief that is not actually there…people do that sort of thing all the time. I wouldn’t call it a heresy. The problem is compounded when one utilizes that addition (to the meaning of scripture) to build doctrine/dogma. The problem is further compounded when such doctrine/dogms is declared to be a required belief.
 
About 200 or so years. Which, incidentally, is much shorter than the amount of time it took them to figure out that…

Baptism should not be applied to infants…

Baptism doesn’t save…

The Supper is not the true Body and Blood of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ…

God does not grant forgiveness through Holy Absolution…

So, if we go by a time frame for how long it took the Church to figure something out…the ark of the new covenant typology has a pretty good pedigree in comparison!
so the pedigree is that it is an earlier (rather than a later) addition to the original deposit of faith?

I don’t care if it was the first or the last thing to be added…what is important is that it was an addition (and I have no reason to believe that it was an inspired addition). As to your other points, I only care if those things were believed/done at the start…and if so, then they should be restored
 
  1. Actually in the typological sense, it is there.
  2. Not everything is in the New Testament. The New Testament did not exist first; the Church existed first, without the New Testament.
People should try to get their head’s around that fact and what that fact means for the Church and its beliefs. To do this, take away the New Testament out of your Bible and see what you get. **For one thing, without the New Testament a Catholic still retains the Mass and the seven Sacraments and the priest-leaders; they retain the Church because it existed w/o a “New Testament” existing. Jesus didn’t hand the Apostles a book to read, some kind of instruction manual. He taught them the Gospel and the sacraments and other duties, and He sent them out two by two to practice evangelizing that Gospel message once He was gone. And the Catholic Church has grown that way ever since. Most protestant services are structured around the New Testament - take that away and it seems there would be no protestant service. **The Church came first, then the New Testament, and not everything was written down in the New Testament because there was no need to write it all down - it is not and never was a catechism.

And things are not added to the deposit of the faith in that sense. Our understanding of what God placed in that deposit deepens with more and more study of the deep layers of the revelation of God to man.

God bless you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top