Was/Is Mary the Ark?

[Radical]

continuing…

The Ark remained in the house of Obed-edom for 3 months [2 Samuel 6:11]
Mary remained in the house of her cousin Elizabeth for 3 months [Luke 1:56].

editing is used to make the connection appear stronger. In Luke it is “about three months” vs “three months” in 2 Sam.

The house of Obed-edom was blessed by the presence of the Ark [2 Samuel 6:11]
The word “blessed” is used 3 times in Luke 1:39-45 concerning Mary at Elizabeth’s house.

Regarding those three uses, “blessed” is applied to Mary and to Jesus in (that part of) Luke and not the house of Elizabeth. The effort to establish a connection gets a little strained. One wonders why this isn’t proposed: When in the house of Obed-Edom the ark took up space and Mary would have certainly taken up space at Elizabeth’s house.

The Ark returned to its sanctuary and eventually ends up in Jerusalem where the presence and glory of God is revealed in the newly built Temple [2 Samuel 6:12; 1 Kings 8:9-11]
Mary returned home from visiting Elizabeth and eventually comes to Jerusalem, where she presents God the Son in the Temple [Luke 1:56; 2:21-22]

The ark’s “home” was at Jerusalem whereas Mary’s home was elsewhere. The ark was to sit permenantly in the Most Holy Place (with its contents) whereas Mary wasn’t allowed to come near (let alone enter) the Most Holy Place. Mary visits the outer area of the temple for but a short time and she only carried the Word for a mere nine months. On the hand hand, Jesus as the high priest and like the ark entered the Most Holy Place (Heb 9:12) and he permenantly carries the Word of God. So again, if a connection is to be made, the better connection with the ark is made with Jesus and not Mary

As for my point #4 made above, there seems to be a wide background of purported Marian types that seem to hold water,…

if the purported Marian types were being declared by non-venerators it sure would add to their likelihood of legitimacy

Anyway even though I can’t know with absolute certainty that any one Marian type is true, the fact that there are so many very strong cases to be made regarding very many types, makes me think that God really is behind them. If you want to read more about it, I usually recommend Scott Hahn’s Hail Holy Queen. I’ve also heard that Ignace De LA Potterie’s Mary in the Mystery of the Covenant is very good and goes quite a bit deeper.

thanks for the references

Well, I’ve really droned on and on… I hope this has been at least somewhat interesting for you

it was indeed interesting…your suggestion and use of the four criteria is actually the best argument/explanation that I have seen for the Mary/Ark connection…however, I don’t think that the alleged Mary/Ark connections are significantly stronger than my manufactured Stephen/Ark connections…PS I didn’t note any droning, but then I might just be a grave offender myself.

 

[Dokimas]

nicely said. The criteria that you list is useful, but I don’t think that it would allow one to be all that certain unless points 1 & 2 were extremely well met.
I would consider criterion #3 of lesser importance and I think #4 merely serves as a “God did it before, and so he might just have done it again” sort of argument. .

the problem with that example is that it is fudged. It is a comparison of Exodus 40:34-35 to Luke 1:35. In the one case a cloud covered the Tent of Meeting which housed the ark and in the other case Mary was overshadowed by the power of God. The ark doesn’t even get mentioned in the first instance. When the correspondence is cloud <=> Holy Spirit and unmentioned Ark (as opposed to the mentioned Tent) <=> Mary the correspondence strikes me as being more manufactured than unique or strong.
the grouping together doesn’t impress me much…

I’ve not seen where anyone, specifically our catholic friends told us if there are any more Arks mentioned in the Bible than the ones I’ve posted.

I believe some here believe, although I’m not sure because no one on this thread (that I’ve read) has verfied this, that Mary is the Ark in Heaven. They use Heb 9:4; Rev 11:19-12:1

If that’s the catholic position, here’s my problem with it…

Heb 8:

1 ¶ Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
3 For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.
4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou **make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee **in the mount.

Notice there are two Tabernacles mentioned here: the One True One that existed in Heaven which is the pattern that Moses was to copy when he made the one here on earth. Both Tabernacles contained AN ARK. They both, especially the One in Heaven predated the birth of Mary. Unless Mary existed before she was conceived, then she can NOT be the One TRUE Ark of Heaven.

 

[onenow1]

I’ve not seen where anyone, specifically our catholic friends told us if there are any more Arks mentioned in the Bible than the ones I’ve posted.QUOTE]

Hi Doki, Question: Why do you limit the concept of ark, to only one meaning ? Most dictionaries will describe ark, also as a place of sanctuaryMary seems a fitting sanctuary chosen by Jesus. Remember Jesus said to destroy this temple and I will rebuild it in three days. As to the question are there any more arks ?We will just have to read the bible a lot more,I guess its possible new insights abound in scripture.

God Bless

 

[MariaG]

I’ve not seen where anyone, specifically our catholic friends told us if there are any more Arks mentioned in the Bible than the ones I’ve posted.

I believe some here believe, although I’m not sure because no one on this thread (that I’ve read) has verfied this, that Mary is the Ark in Heaven. They use Heb 9:4; Rev 11:19-12:1

If that’s the catholic position, here’s my problem with it…

Heb 8:

1 ¶ Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
3 For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.
4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou **make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee **in the mount.

Notice there are two Tabernacles mentioned here: the One True One that existed in Heaven which is the pattern that Moses was to copy when he made the one here on earth. Both Tabernacles contained AN ARK. They both, especially the One in Heaven predated the birth of Mary. Unless Mary existed before she was conceived, then she can NOT be the One TRUE Ark of Heaven.

Let me make sure I understand the argument you are making. In that piece of scripture, there are two tabernacles mentioned, one in heaven and the one Moses was instructed to make to house the ark. And because this was way before the time of Mary, Mary cannot be the ark?

Is that your argument?

 

[eddy714]

I’ve not seen where anyone, specifically our catholic friends told us if there are any more Arks mentioned in the Bible than the ones I’ve posted.

I believe some here believe, although I’m not sure because no one on this thread (that I’ve read) has verfied this, that Mary is the Ark in Heaven. They use Heb 9:4; Rev 11:19-12:1

If that’s the catholic position, here’s my problem with it…

Heb 8:

1 ¶ Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
3 For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.
4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou **make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee **in the mount.

Notice there are two Tabernacles mentioned here: the One True One that existed in Heaven which is the pattern that Moses was to copy when he made the one here on earth. Both Tabernacles contained AN ARK. They both, especially the One in Heaven predated the birth of Mary. Unless Mary existed before she was conceived, then she can NOT be the One TRUE Ark of Heaven.

So then in Rev 12:1 who is it describing? If its not the Blessed Mother? Remember God operates outside of time he knows who we are before we are.

Thats the problem when you base everything on sola scriptura and your own interpretation of things because man is fallible.

God Bless

 

[GaryTaylor]

Thats the problem when you base everything on sola scriptura and your own interpretation of things because man is fallible.

God Bless

With respect to “all” this is the problem in the nutshell. Especially when you consider exactly what happened in the world with Mary through the 1700’s, 1800’s 1900’s and 2000’s.

Have you ever looked at the Apparitions, Miracles, of the Blessed Mother in Cairo Zeitoun, Egypt 1968-1970? Powerfull stuff, healings, visions, apparitions, observed by 1000’s of all faiths.

 

[Dokimas]

Let me make sure I understand the argument you are making. In that piece of scripture, there are two tabernacles mentioned, one in heaven and the one Moses was instructed to make to house the ark. And because this was way before the time of Mary, Mary cannot be the ark?

Is that your argument?

Unless there’s a third Ark, yes. (Or unless Mary pre-existed). Oh, that’s not my only reason, just one reason.

 

[Dokimas]

So then in Rev 12:1 who is it describing? If its not the Blessed Mother? Remember God operates outside of time he knows who we are before we are.

Thats the problem when you base everything on sola scriptura and your own interpretation of things because man is fallible.

God Bless

Seems you may be missing the crux of the point. If there was a pre-existing Ark in Heaven that Jesus took His Blood to and that Moses saw to make a copy of, how could it be Mary if she did not pre-exist Moses?

John knew Mary so he would have called her by name, would he not? He seemed to be speaking symbolically like much of Revelation. The woman could be symbolic of Israel.

 

[elvisman]

Seems you may be missing the crux of the point. If there was a pre-existing Ark in Heaven that Jesus took His Blood to and that Moses saw to make a copy of, how could it be Mary if she did not pre-exist Moses?

John knew Mary so he would have called her by name, would he not? He seemed to be speaking symbolically like much of Revelation. The woman could be symbolic of Israel.

WOW. You just don’t get it do you.

On this and several other threads, I have had to remind some of you that God is outside of time (2 Pet. 3:8). God seels ALL as an artist sees his finished painting. Mary didn’t pre-exist Moses in Gods eyes and Moses didn’t pre-exist Mary. God is in the eternal NOW. He sees neither past nor present. God sees both Arks simultaneously. He see ALL of the OT types AND their fulfillments SIMULTANEOUSLY.

Is that beginning to sink in now? Your failure to understand these things is preciesly what Jesus was talking about in John 6:63-65:

**"It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life. **But there are some of you who do not believe."
*Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him. *
And he said, "For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father."

**The reason you don’**t get it because it may not yet have been granted to you from above. That is the REAL crux of this discussion . . .

 

[elvisman]

Seems you may be missing the crux of the point. If there was a pre-existing Ark in Heaven that Jesus took His Blood to and that Moses saw to make a copy of, how could it be Mary if she did not pre-exist Moses?

John knew Mary so he would have called her by name, would he not? He seemed to be speaking symbolically like much of Revelation. The woman could be symbolic of Israel.

**Why would you make that assertion?
Read John’s Gospel. He doesn’t refer to Mary by name but by “WOMAN”. (John 2:4, 19:26).
In Revelation 12 - her again refers to her as “WOMAN”.

Can you see the parallel here or do I need to instruct you further?

 

[Dokimas]

**Why would you make *that ***assertion?
Read John’s Gospel. He doesn’t refer to Mary by name but by “WOMAN”. (John 2:4, 19:26).
In Revelation 12 - her again refers to her as “WOMAN”.

Can you see the parallel here or do I need to instruct you further?

If I’m not mistaken, John didn’t call Mary woman. John quoted Jesus calling her woman.

 

[MariaG]

Unless there’s a third Ark, yes. (Or unless Mary pre-existed). Oh, that’s not my only reason, just one reason.

Moses made the tabernacle for the Old Covenant. With Christ we have a New Covenant. And a New Ark.

Respectfully, your reason doesn’t hold up since God prepared a new ark to hold the new covenant.

Also resectfully, you did not answer why you believe the title of ark of the new covenant goes beyond her intended role.

I reposted it below in case you did not see it

 

[MariaG]

why do you think that title expands her role beyond what was intended? Maybe you could define what that title means and how that put it beyond her intended role? And what her intended role is?

By denying her that title, you diminish Christ. Do you deny that Christ was fully man but fully God? Do you deny that Christ is the word? Do you deny that Christ humbled Himself and became God incarnate and was not just born of a woman but carried inside the womb of Mary? Do you deny that it is through Christ we have the new covenant?

 

[Dokimas]

Moses made the tabernacle for the Old Covenant. With Christ we have a New Covenant. And a New Ark.

Respectfully, your reason doesn’t hold up since God prepared a new ark to hold the new covenant.

Also resectfully, you did not answer why you believe the title of ark of the new covenant goes beyond her intended role.

I reposted it below in case you did not see it

According to verses already quoted, it’s not a New Ark but The Original Ark in Heaven.

Wasn’t Jesus slain from before the foundation of the world? In God’s eyes it is New.

 

[Dokimas]

Originally Posted by MariaG
why do you think that title expands her role beyond what was intended? Maybe you could define what that title means and how that put it beyond her intended role? And what her intended role is?

To mother Jesus as all good mothers do for their children.

By denying her that title, you diminish Christ.

I disagree.

Do you deny that Christ was fully man but fully God?

I do not deny that Jesus was/is the God/Man.

Do you deny that Christ is the word?

I do not deny that Jesus is the Word. It’s recorded in the Bible that He is.

Do you deny that Christ humbled Himself and became God incarnate and was not just born of a woman but carried inside the womb of Mary?

I do not deny that Jesus humbled Himself, emptied Himself and was born to the virgin Mary who carried Him in her womb.

Do you deny that it is through Christ we have the new covenant?

Jesus said (1Co 11:25) In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”

 

[MariaG]

nicely said. The criteria that you list is useful, but I don’t think that it would allow one to be all that certain unless points 1 & 2 were extremely well met.
I would consider criterion #3 of lesser importance and I think #4 merely serves as a “God did it before, and so he might just have done it again” sort of argument. .

the problem with that example is that it is fudged. It is a comparison of Exodus 40:34-35 to Luke 1:35. In the one case a cloud covered the Tent of Meeting which housed the ark and in the other case Mary was overshadowed by the power of God. The ark doesn’t even get mentioned in the first instance. When the correspondence is cloud <=> Holy Spirit and unmentioned Ark (as opposed to the mentioned Tent) <=> Mary the correspondence strikes me as being more manufactured than unique or strong.
the grouping together doesn’t impress me much…as an example of how these sorts of connections could be manufactured, I produced this “proof” of Stephen being the New Ark on another thread (and one could claim the same tight grouping for it):

Sorry for the lack of formatting (cut and paste). I am using my phone and finally gave up trying to cut and paste. Eventually

One thing I would add to the 4 criteria posted that I found missing (yes I know, not your list), was that one also would need to have Tradition and writings from ECF that at least hint at a doctrine or typology.

With Mary we have much from the ECF on Mary as the New Eve and the ark.

Scripture clearly warns of those who will twist scripture for their own means, so it is no surprise that you could make a “type” out of Stephen and the ark. Only one big missing piece, who or what else in scripture carried the Word? The ark of the old covenant and Mary.

As for your claim that in Exodus the ark is not even mentioned, maybe if you were to backtrack a bit before those verses, it is ALL about the preparations Moses was to make to the tent because the tent or tabernacle was to contain the ark. And further, that when God overshadowed the tent, it was because it contained the ark.

Clearly, if one reads the whole of scripture, God overshadowed the tent (that contained the ark) as well as Mary.

I would say to you as well, that to deny Mary the title of ark of the New Covenant all you do is diminish the greatness of Christ, whom Mary like no other creation can say All she is or was is because of Christ.

Can’t you see this is ALL about CHRIST!?!?

God bless
Maria

 

[MariaG]

To mother Jesus as all good mothers do for their children.

I disagree.

I do not deny that Jesus was/is the God/Man.

I do not deny that Jesus is the Word. It’s recorded in the Bible that He is.

I do not deny that Jesus humbled Himself, emptied Himself and was born to the virgin Mary who carried Him in her womb.

Jesus said (1Co 11:25) In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”

Great!

Now see that by saying Mary is the vessel (ark) that carried Christ you are affirming the truth of all those statements?

The ark of the Old Covenant was constructed for one purpose, to carry the Word of God that had been touched by the finger of God.

Mary, by saying yes, and God knowing she would, was made by Him for one purpose, to carry the Word, the new covenant from His blood. Mary as the ark of the new covenant shows the geatness and wonder of Christ.

This is all about Christ and the truth that He is the Word, God incarnate! Amen!

 

[eddy714]

WOW. You just don’t get it do you.

On this and several other threads, I have had to remind some of you that God is outside of time (2 Pet. 3:8). God seels ALL as an artist sees his finished painting. Mary didn’t pre-exist Moses in Gods eyes and Moses didn’t pre-exist Mary. God is in the eternal NOW. He sees neither past nor present. God sees both Arks simultaneously. He see ALL of the OT types AND their fulfillments SIMULTANEOUSLY.

Is that beginning to sink in now? Your failure to understand these things is preciesly what Jesus was talking about in John 6:63-65:

"It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe."
Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him.
And he said, "For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father."

**The reason you don’**t get it because it may not yet have been granted to you from above. That is the REAL crux of this discussion . . .

Hey Elvis Man you are the man .

 

[MariaG]

I’ve not seen where anyone, specifically our catholic friends told us if there are any more Arks mentioned in the Bible than the ones I’ve posted.

I believe some here believe, although I’m not sure because no one on this thread (that I’ve read) has verfied this, that Mary is the Ark in Heaven. They use Heb 9:4; Rev 11:19-12:1

If that’s the catholic position, here’s my problem with it…

Heb 8:

1 ¶ Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
3 For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.
4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou **make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee **in the mount.

Notice there are two Tabernacles mentioned here: the One True One that existed in Heaven which is the pattern that Moses was to copy when he made the one here on earth. Both Tabernacles contained AN ARK. They both, especially the One in Heaven predated the birth of Mary. Unless Mary existed before she was conceived, then she can NOT be the One TRUE Ark of Heaven.

According to verses already quoted, it’s not a New Ark but The Original Ark in Heaven.

Wasn’t Jesus slain from before the foundation of the world? In God’s eyes it is New.

I have never said these verses are about Mary and the New ark nor do I understand why Mary would have to have existed before she was concieved since we clearly call her the ark of the NEW covenant that came through Christ.

Hebrews verse one: is referring back to psalm 110. Psalm 110 is a messianic psalm and how the messiah will be enthroned in heaven in the order of Melchizedek.

Verse 2: refers to the tabernacle in heaven

Verse 3: levitical priests offered blood of bulls and goats and of course in a superior way, Christ shed His blood in the final once for all sacrifice

Verse 4: Jesus was from the royal tribe of Judah.

Verse 5: they serve as a copy. Referring to both the tabernacle moses made and the priests before Christ were pale comparisons to the heavenly tarbernacle and Christ our high priest who brings the new covenant.

 

[elvisman]

If I’m not mistaken, John didn’t call Mary woman. John quoted Jesus calling her woman.

**Precisely. **
So, WHY would you think that John would refer to Mary as anything BUT “Woman” in Revelation when Jesus referred to her as “Woman” in his presence??