Was/Is Mary the Ark?

[Doxiemom]

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?

If not then Mary carried the Word, the New Covenant. In other words, Mary was the “ark” of the new covenant. Follow the dots laid out by God in scripture.

I have done nothing but refer to Mary by the same title her Son called her, as it is Written, no more, no less.

She was a virgin of the correct bloodline. She was a pious, obedient, servant of the Lord. That is a wonderful role of love, as Jesus Himself served.

I know you love Mary. You , and others, have used her to worship our God. Never is worship of God a wasted effort.

Our God is an Awesome God and He is capable of hearing prayer that is “good” and in keeping with the natural law written on the heart, no matter how dim the light (knowledge) of the True God is. And it is obvious that you have much “light” as the catholic church refers to it.

I too love to connect the points, as you put it. Word studies, types, shadows, for me, is a form of prayer also. Any time spend with the Written Word does not go unnoticed by our Lord.

Try to find it in your heart to accept that not all folks want to, need to, or think they should, for themelves anyways, to worship our Lord Jesus Christ through Mary.

I accept your sincerity.

And as always, I remain
your sister also in Christ

 

[MariaG]

I have done nothing but refer to Mary by the same title her Son called her, as it is Written, no more, no less.

She was a virgin of the correct bloodline. She was a pious, obedient, servant of the Lord. That is a wonderful role of love, as Jesus Himself served.

I know you love Mary. You , and others, have used her to worship our God. Never is worship of God a wasted effort.

Our God is an Awesome God and He is capable of hearing prayer that is “good” and in keeping with the natural law written on the heart, no matter how dim the light (knowledge) of the True God is. And it is obvious that you have much “light” as the catholic church refers to it.

I too love to connect the points, as you put it. Word studies, types, shadows, for me, is a form of prayer also. Any time spend with the Written Word does not go unnoticed by our Lord.

Try to find it in your heart to accept that not all folks want to, need to, or think they should, for themelves anyways, to worship our Lord Jesus Christ through Mary.

I accept your sincerity.

And as always, I remain
your sister also in Christ

And I completely understand and accept yours. Thank you for the refreshing honesty and charity.

As it is in these forums, we may meet up again and I pray we both remember the charity shown even when we disagree. Not agree to disagree for I think we both have too much passion for our Lord and what we believe scripture tells us, but charity nontheless.

Your sister in Christ,
Maria

I think I will now drop this thread leaving with a good measure of satisfaction:wave:

 

[benidict]

Originally posted by Jlhargus on “If Mary was the mother of God” thread.

Any more comments or questions?

As for me, I don’t think so. Looking at Hebrews 9 a little closer, I don’t think it’s possible unless there’s more than 2 arks.

hi dokimas. the first ark was a symbol of the ark to come. namely Mary. just as the symbology of the tabernacle, and the temple pointed to Christ. so i would say the answer is yes, she is the true ark of the covenant. not crafted from human hands, but flesh and blood. purified by the creator to carry our High Priest ( the staff of aaron. our bread from heaven ( the manna.) and the giver of the law.Christ.

 

[elvisman]

Oh I see you don’t like admitting you were corrected. You corrected yourself this time in the().

No - I just smashed your argument that John would have referred to Mary by name in Revelation to bits . . .

 

[Nicea325]

I’m not saying anything yet.

Okay. I am curious to know where you were headed by posting all those verses containing the word ark?

 

[Dokimas]

Okay. I am curious to know where you were headed by posting all those verses containing the word ark?

Keep reading through the thread.

 

[Dokimas]

Okay. I am curious to know where you were headed by posting all those verses containing the word ark?

Nicea, did you fing your answer yet?

 

[Dokimas]

Nicea, where are you?

 

[guanophore]

Originally posted by Jlhargus on “If Mary was the mother of God” thread.

Any more comments or questions?

As for me, I don’t think so. Looking at Hebrews 9 a little closer, I don’t think it’s possible unless there’s more than 2 arks.

The OT prefigures what is fulfilled in the New. There is only one High Priest, also, but He was prefigured in the OT.

 

[guanophore]

it seems that Irenaeus thought that the ark was a “type” of Christ’s body (Frag 49)…can you tell me when the novelty of Mary = New Ark was first suggested?

Maybe it was one of Paul’s lectures at the temple of Tyrannus?

All we know is that Luke wrote his gospel with these parallels, and he opens his gospel by saying that this is what had been taught (by the Apostles). John also places Mary with the Ark in heaven.

 

[Radical]

All we know is that Luke wrote his gospel with these parallels,…

…back at posts 78-80 I addressed the alleged parallels and it turns out that they are rather tenuous

… and he opens his gospel by saying that this is what had been taught (by the Apostles).

Luke doesn’t hesitate to identify the Baptist as coming in the spirit of Elijah…says it expressly…but we are to believe that with the Mary<=>Ark connection he resorted to some sort of cryptic code of parallels that moderns are inclined to fudge so that they look a little more significant?

John also places Mary with the Ark in heaven.

…and that wouldn’t be a rather questionable interpretation of Rev 11:19-12:2?

 

[guanophore]

good point….I don’t really have an objection if someone suggested that Mary could be viewed as a new ark…It is the “she was definitely the New Ark” assertion that I take exception to. From there the claims usually just get worse. Alleged parallels are produced with the claim that the parallels “prove” that Mary is the New Ark. The parallels are fudged, fabricated and/or forced and any discrepancy is forgiven. I don’t expect “types” to be precise, but one shouldn’t claim a proof with such “parallels”.

I agree, and the CC does not do so. What you are forgetting is that Catholic faith is not “bible based”. Our doctrines are not extrapolated from scripture as those do who are separated from the Sacred Tradition. Our doctrine comes from Christ, through the Apostles. It was whole and entire before a word of the NT was ever written. We see our faith reflected in the Scripture, but scripture is not the source. Jesus is the Source.

I also take issue with what is then claimed concerning the qualities of Mary. IIRC a typical one will assert that since pure gold was used to make the Ark, Mary then must also be pure and that means that she would have been both sinless and a perpetual virgin……it is that sort of practice that is just wrong (IMHO). I realize that you may not have partaken of this practice…you haven’t at least on this thread.

Yes, it would be wrong. But, can you see how we get ideas abour Mary by looking at the original Ark?

The fact that Mary was sinless and a perpetual virgin is what we received in the once for all deposit of faith. This is what the apostles believed and taught. We see our faith reflected in the Scripture.

Well I am describing my uneasiness with the assertions of Catholics I might as well add that this sort of adoration is over the top (IMHO).

Adoration is reserved for God alone. We revere Mary, but we do not worship her. She is a creature, and that would be idolatry.

I can’t help but note how hostile certain Catholics become when Mary isn’t given her due. This seems somewhat at odds with the common Catholic claim that their beliefs wrt to Mary all relate to the status of Christ/the incarnation. If such was truly the way the matter worked, then why do we see such hostility on this thread?

Do you not find the insult to ones mother a common source of defensiveness among humans?

Insulting His Mother indirectly insults Him, and all of us who have become her offspring by choosing to follow His commandments.

I would suggest that the concern here is not with any quality of Christ or with his status (as no one has even thought to check as to whether my view of Mary [not being the Ark] in any way results in me holding a lesser view of Christ). It seems to me that, the claims about Mary always pointing to Christ notwithstanding, the concerns of the excited Catholic on this thread seem to be all about Mary and not about Christ at all…and therein lies the problem.

I can understand why it would seem that way. I agree, if that were the case, I think it would be a problem.

I see their opinion, as to whether Mary was the new Ark or not, no more valuable than the opinion of any modern theologian.

And, if that were all it was, then you would be right, it would be no more valuable than any opinion. However, as a teaching of the Church, it is beyond human opinon.

 

[dcastlen50]

Perhaps you need to “cast off Rational Demonstration by Faith in the Savior?”

Edwin

What??

 

[CastingCrown]

I just got notified of this thread by email so I’m just catching up… I actually wrote a blog entry on this topic the other week:

thisrestlesspilgrim.wordpress.com/2010/07/14/ark-of-the-new-covenant/

It covers most of the material already covered in this thread, but is far from exhaustive. I just wanted to write a gentle introduction to this topic for non-Catholics.

 

[Dokimas]

I just got notified of this thread by email so I’m just catching up… I actually wrote a blog entry on this topic the other week:

thisrestlesspilgrim.wordpress.com/2010/07/14/ark-of-the-new-covenant/

It covers most of the material already covered in this thread, but is far from exhaustive. I just wanted to write a gentle introduction to this topic for non-Catholics.

I skimmed your blog. I couldn’t find any reference to how many Arks are there? It’s quite important in light of the Bible’s account of Arks.

 

[Radical]

What you are forgetting is that Catholic faith is not “bible based”…Our doctrine comes from Christ, through the Apostles.

I haven’t forgotten this claim. I don’t know how one could. It is where the arguments from Catholics (on this site) often start and end.

Yes, it would be wrong. But, can you see how we get ideas abour Mary by looking at the original Ark?

since I don’t think that either is apostolic in origin, I wonder which came first…was it the idea of Mary’s sinlessness and then a re-enforcement of that idea in the Mary/Ark connection or the Mary/Ark connection and then the extrapolation to sinlessness?

The fact that Mary was sinless and a perpetual virgin is what we received in the once for all deposit of faith. This is what the apostles believed and taught.

Right, they just failed to record this belief or any of the other Catholic Marian doctrines…and that any ECF didn’t bother to mention these two doctrines for a hundred more years or so should just be accepted as well…and that some ECFs didn’t endorse the full perpetual virginity is merely inconvenient and not at all suggestive that these are innovations, b/c after all, this is “what the apostles believed and taught.”

Adoration is reserved for God alone.

you have never told your spouse that you adore him/her? how unfortunate.

We revere Mary, but we do not worship her.

Understood. I tend to look at the substance of the act and not the label placed on it. In other words, I don’t equate worship and adoration.

Do you not find the insult to ones mother a common source of defensiveness among humans?

and pointing out that the scriptures do not establish the Mary <=> Ark connection is an insult?..

Insulting His Mother indirectly insults Him,…

fortunately we have Christ’s words clarifying who he views as his “brother and sister and mother” and dismissing the importance of Mary and the other blood relatives. Yet, rather than honoring that relationship valued by Christ (as regards to protestants), the CC denigrates that relationship.

…and all of us who have become her offspring by choosing to follow His commandments.

You know, you can actually demonstrate from scripture that we are Abraham’s children…do you see Catholics getting all worked up about what is said about our spiritual father in the same way that they get worked up about what is said about Mary?

And, if that were all it was, then you would be right, it would be no more valuable than any opinion. However, as a teaching of the Church, it is beyond human opinon.

I know that is matter of your faith, but from over here it appears to be entirely a matter of opinion…and not a good one at that.

 

[Doxiemom]

I have to say this…

catholicism is not bible based!!!

That is just…well…horrible…

Scripture is The Word

Jesus is the Word made flesh

Quanophore…I do not doubt your sincerity about your faith, but that statement is just so shocking because it is the truth about the catholic church

and very very sad

it is precisely what is wrong with this church

it has become so bogged down with tradition and long winded explanations that almost defy understanding

and doctrines that have come only from man’s mind and too far away from God’s Mind

If only we could just go back to the simple Truth of Scripture and celebrate Mass

Confess sin and forget all about penence and indulgences and wearing scapulars

and pray ONLY to God, the Triune God ( Father, Son , And holy Spirit)

 

[CastingCrown]

I skimmed your blog. I couldn’t find any reference to how many Arks are there? It’s quite important in light of the Bible’s account of Arks.

In what way? The typology that’s at work here is in relation to the Ark of the Covenant that Moses brought through the desert and the one David leapt and danced before.

 

[CastingCrown]

Scripture is The Word
Jesus is the Word made flesh

That covers “graphe” and “logos”, what about “rhema”? Or was everything Jesus said written down? Was all of Paul’s teaching captured in his letters?

it has become so bogged down with tradition and long winded explanations that almost defy understanding

Bogged down…or immensely enriched from 2,000 years worth of contemplation by some of the world’s greatest minds and holiest saints?

and doctrines that have come only from man’s mind and too far away from God’s Mind

…in your opinion.

If only we could just go back to the simple Truth of Scripture and celebrate Mass

…and this “simple Truth of Scripture” would be your interpretation of it?

Also, would you like to go back prior to all the Christological councils where the nature of Christ and the Trinity were defined?

 

[Dokimas]

Originally Posted by Dokimas
I skimmed your blog. I couldn’t find any reference to how many Arks are there? It’s quite important in light of the Bible’s account of Arks.

In what way? The typology that’s at work here is in relation to the Ark of the Covenant that Moses brought through the desert and the one David leapt and danced before.

I’m sure you are not saying Mary IS the Ark Moses built. Therefore, there must be at least one other Ark. From the Bible, how many other Arks are there? I have found One. Am I correct? If so, is that Mary?