Who is the lady in Revelation 12:1?

[kujo313]

I kinda agree about the “overshadowing” part but the Ark was where God had dwelt. It was placed in the “Holy of Holies” and only one man was able to enter it. The Ark, itself, was not worshipped but God was.

When Jesus died on the cross, the curtain to the Holy of Holies was torn from top to bottom. God had torn it!

In the Old Testiment, the blood of the lamb was sprinkled on the altar. In the New Testiment, the blood of the Lamb was sprinkled on the earth. The whole earth!

No longer do we need to enter into any special places in hope to approach God at the Ark within the Holy of Holies.
Because of God’s chosen Lamb, we can approach God anywhere! We don’t have to go through anything as long as we’re covered with the Blood of the Lamb.

We don’t have to take any detours.

 

[jamannor]

There is no written evidence from the aspostles, in the RCC’s Bible that Mary was “lifted up”/ admired, etc.

What about these bible versus from

Luke 1:48 “From now on all generations will call me blessed, for the Mighty One has done great things for me…”

and

Luke 1:42 In a loud voice she exclaimed: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”

It could be just me but she looks pretty admired to me.

Though the RCC “claims” that it was verbally handed down and therefore accepted as truth, I could easliy tell you stories about my own bioligical father and you’d accept THAT as truth, too.

I have no reason to doubt you that your stories of your biological father will be truth.

Writings from the late 1st Century and so on cannot be trusted and accepted as “truth” if they contradict the very actions of the apostles themselves.

Please enlighten me on how they contradict the apostles? I would truly like to know?

HOW can Peter, Paul, James and John not mention Mary in their written letters in the RCC, or any other Bible, the same way the RCC treats her today?

Well she is in the Act of the apostles, she is in all four gospels, mentioned in Revelation, Genesis, Exodus, 1 Samuel, , just to name a few… I would agree with part of your statement but I would take out John. John seems to like Mary. Which isn’t all that surprising since Jesus did entrust him and all of us to take her into our lives as mother. Jn 19:26

  How is it that if Mary was to be concidered so important to the Spiritual lives of every person that ever lived that she's not even concidered so in the Gospels and letters?

The RCC tried so hard to get their “leaders” to say SOMETHING about Mary that they spent (and are currently spending) too much of their focus on her and not where 100% percent of it SHOULD be: on Jesus Christ!

huh? Mary isn’t the central figure of salvation history, Jesus is. I agree with you. But our understanding of Mary reveals everything about how we understand Jesus and His saving work. I like how Scott Hahn puts it…

We live our sonship best by listening to Mary and loving as she loves. Listening means responding when she says: “Do whatever He tells you.” Loving means standing by Christ, even to the cross. Loving means choosing Him, in every instance, over sin.

     Jesus' answer for "who is my mother and who are my brothers?" is purposely overlooked by an "infallible" man who was elected to that office by "fallible" men.  (Paul says that NOBODY on earth is "infallible").

read that passage in context. Jesus isn’t denouncing his mother… Look at what he does at the wedding feast. As a Jewish man he obeyed all of the commandments, he obeyed his mother and his father. Do you know who Mark was written for. The gentiles, those people who were being tortured, and disowned by their own families. Jesus tells them not to worry that they now have a family with him. Jesus is calling you too into a intimate relationship with him.

Scripture is enough. You shut the door on Mormons who have a “sequal” to the Bible but you say nothing about any additions or changes to the very Bible your religion claims to believe in.

There are thousands of different denominations out there because some of the biggest ones once said “there’s something wrong here” in your “traditions”.

Once again sacred tradition does not go against the bible, the book of Mormon does contradict the bible. And who says it is enough? At one time the bible was passed down orally…

2 Thes 2:15, “So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.”

1 Cor 11:2, “I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you.”

2 Tim 2:2: “and what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.”

1 Thes 2:13, “And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the Word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the Word of God, which is at work in you believers.”

And once again sacred tradition does not contradict scripture. Peace to you.

 

[Michael_Howard]

Just what I knew what would happen!

The Jews would see the woman as Israel while the Catholics would see her as Mary. Wonder what the Muslims see her as?

To reply in the “tradition” of the RCC is to look at the “tradition” of the 1st century church during the lives of the apostles.

There is no written evidence from the aspostles, in the RCC’s Bible that Mary was “lifted up”/ admired, etc.

Though the RCC “claims” that it was verbally handed down and therefore accepted as truth, I could easliy tell you stories about my own bioligical father and you’d accept THAT as truth, too.

Writings from the late 1st Century and so on cannot be trusted and accepted as “truth” if they contradict the very actions of the apostles themselves.

HOW can Peter, Paul, James and John not mention Mary in their written letters in the RCC, or any other Bible, the same way the RCC treats her today?

How is it that if Mary was to be concidered so important to the Spiritual lives of every person that ever lived that she’s not even concidered so in the Gospels and letters?

The RCC tried so hard to get their “leaders” to say SOMETHING about Mary that they spent (and are currently spending) too much of their focus on her and not where 100% percent of it SHOULD be: on Jesus Christ!

Jesus’ answer for “who is my mother and who are my brothers?” is purposely overlooked by an “infallible” man who was elected to that office by “fallible” men. (Paul says that NOBODY on earth is “infallible”).

Scripture is enough. You shut the door on Mormons who have a “sequal” to the Bible but you say nothing about any additions or changes to the very Bible your religion claims to believe in.

There are thousands of different denominations out there because some of the biggest ones once said “there’s something wrong here” in your “traditions”.

This approach never works well friend, I would suggest studying the lives of the Jewish converts to the RCC including some famous Rabbis and prominant Jewish figures, and then perhaps come back with a fresh perspective and a bit more “charitable” disposition. These were brilliant Jewish men who found the complete fulfillment of Judaism in the RCC.

I myself spent years in Messianic/Jewish congregations and I’m ever so grateful as it brought me one step further to the fullness of truth in the RCC and I also gained extensive knowledge of the Hebraic roots of the faith. BTW when WWII ended and after Israel became a nation again in 1948 there were 80,000 trees planted there and dedicated to a certain Pope, any guesses?

 

[colliric]

I’d like to hear from a Catholic please.

I agree with my Douay Rheims notes on this chapter that say it is not Israel.

The narratative of this chapter is sadly seperated by the introduced chapter breaks. It really begins with Chapter 11:19, when John saw the Ark of The Covernant in God’s temple in heaven. What follows is an earthquake and thunder and lightening, then “And I saw in heaven a Great Sign, A Woman”.

Who ever this woman is, she is clearly “the Ark of the covernant” in a new incarnation. It is not Israel because how can Israel forfil that role? it did not protect Jesus like the old ark protected the ten commandments… That does not make sense to me, so I follow my DR’s comments which are:

It is either the Church which fostered and protected the commandments of Jesus, or more likely the Woman refered to is a physical woman who agreed with god to literally birth and protect the new agreement between man and god, and then once that agreement had been “taken” into heaven, this woman was given wings like an eagle, and protected by God.

In that sense it is either only Mary or the new Church.

 

[HailMary]

There are FOUR SENSES OF SCRIPTURE

It took Scoot Hahn years to realize this

Literal sense: what the HUMAN author intended

Anagogical sense: the sense that pertains to the Church / End times

Allegorical sense: the sense that pertains to Christ and Mary

Moral sense: what the bible is telling me today

so, the literal sense is simply that John saw a woman CROWNED. If you look at the preceding versus, we see that the Sacred Writing JUST got done speaking of the Ark of the Covenant.

on the Ark:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1643785&postcount=16

From that post, its pretty clear that the Ark was a prefiguration of Mary, ever Virgin. Therefore, in the primary sense of the Allegorical sense, it must be Mary. There is nothing wrong with saying it is the Church/Israel because that does not contradict anything (to my knowledge). But every interpretation must be based off the literal sense otherwise you end up way off the boat.

If you don’t know the connection between the Ark and Mary, you really have a very large chunk of information missing to interpret correctly.

 

[christopherfair]

Back when I was a Pentacostal way before I was “infected” with Catholicism I saw this passage as referring directly to Mary. Certainly I understood it could also have metaphorical and allegorical meanings but it has always been my understanding that there must be a primary literal interpretation for a passage. Even in cases where the Apocalypse refers to Christ and paints him as “lamb of God” it is clear that the literal sense is a “lamb”. How can any other sense of Scripture be intelligible without a primary literal sense first?

 

[kujo313]

I agree with my Douay Rheims notes on this chapter that say it is not Israel.

The narratative of this chapter is sadly seperated by the introduced chapter breaks. It really begins with Chapter 11:19, when John saw the Ark of The Covernant in God’s temple in heaven. What follows is an earthquake and thunder and lightening, then “And I saw in heaven a Great Sign, A Woman”.

Who ever this woman is, she is clearly “the Ark of the covernant” in a new incarnation. It is not Israel because how can Israel forfil that role? it did not protect Jesus like the old ark protected the ten commandments… That does not make sense to me, so I follow my DR’s comments which are:

It is either the Church which fostered and protected the commandments of Jesus, or more likely the Woman refered to is a physical woman who agreed with god to literally birth and protect the new agreement between man and god, and then once that agreement had been “taken” into heaven, this woman was given wings like an eagle, and protected by God.

In that sense it is either only Mary or the new Church.

Joseph protected Mary and Jesus by taking them to Egypt. Joseph took Mary as his wife and Jesus as his son. Joseph taught Jesus about carpentry. “Like father, like son”, actually.
Both Joseph and Mary lost Jesus - left him behind in Jerusalem and had to go back to find him.
Later, Mary could do nothing to protect Jesus from being beaten and crucified. It was God who protected Jesus the three years before then.

Today, we ARE the temply of the Holy Spirit! Simply accepting Jesus as your Savior allows the Holy Spirit to live in you! Jesus was with His disciples when they was all together. The Holy Spirit (the other Comforter that Jesus sent) is with all of us even when we are not together.
Peter, representing the Church and not just one man, picked up a sword and faced the soldiers, thus protecting Jesus. We can ALL do the same!
Are you willing to defend Jesus?
The woman in Revelation… you want so bad for her to be Mary that you take your focus off of where it should be: God. Jesus said that He, and He alone, is the door. He is the gate. He is the ONLY WAY.

Non-Catholics don’t want to pray to the “prepetual saint of” this and that. Instead of going to the “saints”, just GO to where THEY went to: Jesus!

No medallion on a necklace hoping for a saint’s protection. No statue in your car for protection. No nothing. Just God.

 

[NotWorthy]

Kujo, you are so funny! You kill me! :clapping:

 

[colliric]

Joseph protected Mary and Jesus by taking them to Egypt. Joseph took Mary as his wife and Jesus as his son. Joseph taught Jesus about carpentry. “Like father, like son”, actually.
Both Joseph and Mary lost Jesus - left him behind in Jerusalem and had to go back to find him.
Later, Mary could do nothing to protect Jesus from being beaten and crucified. It was God who protected Jesus the three years before then.

Today, we ARE the temply of the Holy Spirit! Simply accepting Jesus as your Savior allows the Holy Spirit to live in you! Jesus was with His disciples when they was all together. The Holy Spirit (the other Comforter that Jesus sent) is with all of us even when we are not together.
Peter, representing the Church and not just one man, picked up a sword and faced the soldiers, thus protecting Jesus. We can ALL do the same!
Are you willing to defend Jesus?
The woman in Revelation… you want so bad for her to be Mary that you take your focus off of where it should be: God. Jesus said that He, and He alone, is the door. He is the gate. He is the ONLY WAY.

Non-Catholics don’t want to pray to the “prepetual saint of” this and that. Instead of going to the “saints”, just GO to where THEY went to: Jesus!

No medallion on a necklace hoping for a saint’s protection. No statue in your car for protection. No nothing. Just God.

I compleatly disagree. Firstly I don’t like how Protestants tend to show utter contempt for Mary, I don’t think this was a teaching of Jesus who cared and looked after her.

Secondly please explain how this passage and the catholic interpretation of it takes away from God? that is a lie. It is simply defining the role of Mary, who was protected by God… and given a Crown in heaven. That does not in any way take away from God at all.

 

[lak611]

I’d like to hear from a Catholic please.

My post #9 was from a Catholic Bible commentary, and I am a Catholic.

 

[jamannor]

My post #9 was from a Catholic Bible commentary, and I am a Catholic.

I hardly doubt that he was speaking to you. I am curious thought abou the catholic bible commentary. Do you have the ISBN # for it. I’m looking for a good one, myself. Thanks.

 

[Mary3]

Catholic Answers apologist Jimmy Akin discusses this at some length here. He says that the woman of Revelation 12:1 actually has 4 meanings: Israel, the Church, Eve, and Mary.

Personally, I think the principal meaning of the woman in Revelation 12:1 is Mary.

Even when I was a Protestant, I agreed with you.

 

[lak611]

I hardly doubt that he was speaking to you. I am curious thought abou the catholic bible commentary. Do you have the ISBN # for it. I’m looking for a good one, myself. Thanks.

It’s online. Here’s the link. haydock1859.tripod.com/index.html. The New Testament is complete. The Old Testament is about 45% complete.

 

[kujo313]

I compleatly disagree. Firstly I don’t like how Protestants tend to show utter contempt for Mary, I don’t think this was a teaching of Jesus who cared and looked after her.

Secondly please explain how this passage and the catholic interpretation of it takes away from God? that is a lie. It is simply defining the role of Mary, who was protected by God… and given a Crown in heaven. That does not in any way take away from God at all.

“Role of Mary”.

When it’s all done… everything in the Bible has been fulfilled…
there is only one thing that will matter…:

Is Jesus your Judge or your Savior?
Nowhere is it written what happens if Mary as your “mother” or not.
Did you accept God’s Sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins? Instead of providing a first-born lamb as in the Old Testament, God, Himself, provided His own Lamb. As in the days of Old, God’s Lamb was sacrificed for our sins.

Did you accept Him?

Matthew 5:37

But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.

 

[NotWorthy]

“Role of Mary”.

When it’s all done… everything in the Bible has been fulfilled…
there is only one thing that will matter…:

Is Jesus your Judge or your Savior?
Nowhere is it written what happens if Mary as your “mother” or not.
Did you accept God’s Sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins? Instead of providing a first-born lamb as in the Old Testament, God, Himself, provided His own Lamb. As in the days of Old, God’s Lamb was sacrificed for our sins.

Did you accept Him?

Matthew 5:37

But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.

Apologetics through Obfuscation!

 

[kujo313]

Apologetics through Obfuscation!

Actually, it’s that easy. “yes” or “no” ?

Sounds to me like you said “no”.

 

[NotWorthy]

Actually, it’s that easy. “yes” or “no” ?

Sounds to me like you said “no”.

I just assumed that your last post, in which you showed someone else’s question, and then proceded to not answer the question, was the style of Apologetics you were using.

BTW, kujo, I’m Catholic, you already know the answer!!!

 

[jamannor]

“Role of Mary”.

When it’s all done… everything in the Bible has been fulfilled…
there is only one thing that will matter…:

Is Jesus your Judge or your Savior?
Nowhere is it written what happens if Mary as your “mother” or not.
Did you accept God’s Sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins? Instead of providing a first-born lamb as in the Old Testament, God, Himself, provided His own Lamb. As in the days of Old, God’s Lamb was sacrificed for our sins.

Did you accept Him?

Matthew 5:37

But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.

I’m not following your logic, please clarify… If Jesus is our judge** or** our savior, this answers our question of Mary being our mother? I think Jesus is our judge and our savior, so I guess my answer is yes, to your question. And for scripture, read John 19: 25-27. And as a disciple that Jesus loves, you too should welcome Mary into your own home. Why quote from Matthew 5:37? None on this board are swearing an oath, as in I swear to God, or heaven, or Marry, or anything like that. Why use this simple yes or no quote? I also warn you not to judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. I also agree with you how God provided his own lamb, the perfect sacrifice. Isn’t amazing how much God loves us to give us his own Son. Amazing!

 

[colliric]

I’m not following your logic, please clarify… If Jesus is our judge** or** our savior, this answers our question of Mary being our mother? I think Jesus is our judge and our savior, so I guess my answer is yes, to your question. And for scripture, read John 19: 25-27. And as a disciple that Jesus loves, you too should welcome Mary into your own home. Why quote from Matthew 5:37? None on this board are swearing an oath, as in I swear to God, or heaven, or Marry, or anything like that. Why use this simple yes or no quote? I also warn you not to judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. I also agree with you how God provided his own lamb, the perfect sacrifice. Isn’t amazing how much God loves us to give us his own Son. Amazing!

yep I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[Axion]

Some points.

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.

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.