The New Eve

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by SolaScriptura in 2003, Jun 7, 2003.

  1. SolaScriptura in 2003

    SolaScriptura in 2003
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    0
    The New Eve is the Church

    (1) In Eph 5:29-31 Paul speaks of the members of the church as being "members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones" which corresponds to Eve's being bone of Adam's bone and flesh of his flesh, and verse 31 he even quotes Gen 2:24
    thus refering to the type of Eve "For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh."

    (2) Just as God put a deep sleep on Adam and took a rib from his side and "built" him a wife, so God put the deep sleep of death on Christ and took blood & water from his side and built him a wife. Those who are baptized in water (validly) are washed in the blood, and are thus made part of the church.

    (3) Paul refers to the church as "the mother of us all" [refering only to Christians, obviously] {Gal 4:26}, which corresponds to Eve being the mother of all the living. (Gen 3:20)

    (4) Christ constantly refers to the kingdom of God (the church) as being like a wedding.

    (5) Rev 21:2, John refers to the church as being "prepared as a bride adorned for her husband."

    (6) Eve was made for Adam - the church was made for Christ.

    (7) Christ's love for the church is seen as the very model of love in marriage, thus we see the very establishment of marriage as looking forward to the marriage supper of the Lamb.

    Enough with the positive; now for the negative:

    I don't know about anyone else, but I'm getting sick of Catholics saying that Mary is the "New Eve." It's enough to make you puke! I mean, can you twist typology any further? "Let's take a man's mother and try to make her his wife - oh wait, that's incest - but who cares, we're the RCC and we're infalible!" Making Mary into the "New Eve" completely destroys the type

    (1) No New Testament writer make the connection between Mary & Eve but they DO MAKE THAT CONNECTION BETWEEN THE CHURCH & EVE
    (2) Mary was NOT taken from Christ's side, NOR was she "built"
    (3) No New Testament writer calls Mary "the mother of us all" but Paul does call THE CHURCH by that very name
    (5) John refers to THE CHURCH as being "prepared as a bride for her husband" not to Mary as "an incestuous bride prepared for a sinful husband."
    (4 & 6 & 7) Here is where it must be pointed out that all the 7 points necessary to make the New Eve typology fit can be applied to Mary ONLY IN THE SENSE that she is part of the church, but cannot be separated from the church and applied to Mary alone. All 7 are just as applicable to Peter, Paul, John, etc. as to Mary, because it is THE CHURCH HERSELF that is the New Eve.

    [ June 07, 2003, 03:01 AM: Message edited by: SolaScriptura in 2003 ]
     
  2. MikeS

    MikeS
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    873
    Likes Received:
    0
    You sure got them wascally Catholics on your mind tonight! [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  3. Chrift

    Chrift
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2002
    Messages:
    139
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG] ahem sorry. [​IMG]
     
  4. SolaScriptura in 2003

    SolaScriptura in 2003
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    0
    When I wrote that, I was afraid someone might take it that way.
     
  5. Kathryn

    Kathryn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    0
    Out of respect for Jesus' mother, you could have changed your words.

    God Bless
     
  6. Yelsew

    Yelsew
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    How do you know she wasn't "built", after all she is called the "blessed virgin". She was probably a very attractive young woman, and attractiveness with all of its attributes are factors of build.

    Evenso, I understood your statement in reference to Jesus building his church upon the Rock that man can recognize him and that He alone is the Son of God, the Messiah. Jesus did not build his church upon his human mother.
     
  7. GraceSaves

    GraceSaves
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2002
    Messages:
    2,631
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just thought this might be of interest...

    Jesus, on the cross, was pierced in his side.

    Luke 3:35 [To Mary]
    "(and you yourself a sword will pierce)"

    God bless,

    Grant
     
  8. Kathryn

    Kathryn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wonder how this prophecy is explained by Protestants. I wonder if they even believe it.
     
  9. Ps104_33

    Ps104_33
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2001
    Messages:
    4,005
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually it is Luke 2:35. And the KJV says her soul shall be pierced.
     
  10. GraceSaves

    GraceSaves
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2002
    Messages:
    2,631
    Likes Received:
    0
    I apologize for putting down the wrong chapter. Thank you for the correction.

    And I never said she was physically pierced, but that does not take away the link between two piercings, one a spiritual suffering and one a physical suffering.

    God bless,

    Grant
     
  11. Kathryn

    Kathryn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    0
    And Simeon blessed them and said to Mary His mother, "Behold, this Child is appointed for the fall and rise of many in Israel, and for a sign to be opposed--and a sword will pierce even your own soul--to the end that thoughts from many hearts may be revealed."Luke 2:34-35
     
  12. Yelsew

    Yelsew
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Ask any mother how she feels when her child is killed and she will reply that it is a deep wound in her soul, though she her self is not physically wounded, her body responds to her wounded soul, and she mourns more deeply than even brothers, sisters and fathers.

    In the case of Mary, She received the Angel's message that she would conceive the Son of God in her womb, She carried and birthed the Son of God and raised him to manhood. She knew who he was all the time, and throughout her time with him living she worshipped and adored him. She could not lord it over him in any way shape or fashion. Now, at the foot of the cross, she watched the life slip out of him, and the Centurian use his sword to pierce the side of her son.

    How would you feel? You'd feel that sword penetrate your very soul, but at that moment in time, you would not know or understand why it had to happen. Later, when you saw him living, though Him showing his wounds, and you feeling great joy, you would begin to grasp that His death was not the tragedy of mankind, but the saving grace of mankind. You would understand that by His death "the thoughts of many hearts would be revealed".

    Mary's experience is that of a mother, and not that of a Savior. She should never be thought of as more than a blessed human mother, blessed by being the mother of the human manifestation of the Son of God!
     
  13. Kathryn

    Kathryn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,252
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mary is not the Savior. She is a human mother and is “blessed among woman”. God has done great things for her. And He gave her to His church as our mother.

    As a "disciple" of His, our brother and Savior Jesus Christ tells us: “Behold your mother!”

    God Bless
     
  14. SolaScriptura in 2003

    SolaScriptura in 2003
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    0
    When I said "built" I wasn't refering to looks, but I was afraid some would take it that way. I mean that in the Hebrew of the OT, the text says God took a rib and "built" Eve (in the sense of constructing her) and of course, the church was "built" (constructed out of many individuals) - Mary was not "built" in such a manner but born whole or entire.
     
  15. Yelsew

    Yelsew
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Thanks for the clarification, but I think we understood your first post. It was simply the 'Imp' in each of us that responded to the other meaning of "built".

    Still, there is no evidence that says she wasn't "built". In fact, the imagery given down through time by the Catholic church illustrates the point. Every statue of Mary eludes to a beautifully shaped female figure, and every picture painted shows her face to be one of serene beauty, a "well built" woman. I have never seen an image of a fat virgin or a grotesquely formed woman that was intended to depict the mother of God.

    Did she have to be Miss Israel of 0000? No, but then we wouldn't have much to talk about if she were anything but "perfect" in every way. Afterall it would be scandelous to have God come to us in anything but the best, sleekest, limousine available, parked in the best manger in Bethlehem, born among the finest livestock ever to have lived, visited by the most modern sheep hearders, and the wisest of the wise. Pursued by the most jealous of rulers,...well you can figure out the rest.
     
  16. SolaScriptura in 2003

    SolaScriptura in 2003
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    0
    That brings up a point: Have you ever seen an image of her that looked Jewish? In fact, have you ever seen an image of Jesus that had the blue fringe on his coat? (I know you've never seen an image of either that wasn't idolatrous, but that's beside the point [​IMG]
     
  17. CatholicConvert

    CatholicConvert
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2001
    Messages:
    1,958
    Likes Received:
    0
    I admire the nice exegetical work you have done. I just think that you have left a couple of pieces out of the puzzle.

    There are clues which lead us to certain conclusions. For instance, Jesus is called both the Son of Man and the Son of God. The Son of Man identifies him with humanity, that is, He was not a "ghost" or some sort of spiritual being as the early heretics insisted. He really had flesh and blood, just as do all men.

    Now this should lead us to another question: WHY? Why did God have to enflesh Himself and become a man to rescue man? Couldn't He have done it by divine fiat, by the saying of a single word? I think the answer is yes.

    It strikes me that the covenant being broken by a man, it had to be reinstated by a man. God therefore goes back to the promise of the Protoevangelium:

    Ge 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

    The enmity is not between an organization or a spiritual essence and the wicked one. It is between A WOMAN -- flesh and blood -- and the wicked one. Yet Eve would be long dead and buried. There must be another flesh and blood woman to fulfill this prophecy.

    Secondly, since Jesus is a physical human being as the Last Adam, His Eve cannot be a spiritual and corporate being. Breaks the typological fulfillment VERY BADLY!

    Thirdly, the Church is called the Bride of CHRIST. Perhaps I am out on left field on this one, but Jesus is the man, Christ is the divine Son of God from eternity past. (I am open to correction on this one). Remember, TWO NATURES in one person. Different natures. Different roles. Not co-mingled. In eternity, the Church is the Bride of Christ, Eve is helpmeet to Jesus.

    As for the "marriage" between the Blessed Virgin and the Lord Jesus Christ...well, since He IS God, and it was God Who put the seed of His own life in Her womb, I guess there is a way you could infer that.

    However, to make this more chaste, let us understand that marriage is about more than physical union. It is the union of two people in all that they have: their wills, futures, dreams, ideas, and love for one another. Sexuality is merely the way that this union brings forth life.

    In Heaven, the Blessed Virgin and the Son of God have union. It is not a physical union. In Heaven, it does not need to be. The union of the flesh here is due to our imperfect state in which we cannot fully union with each other as we can in Heaven. The union they share is their perfect and complete obedience to the Father. They are one in their love of God and that love and unity brings forth life -- called Christians. That would be why we call the Blessed Virgin the Mother of all the Living now.

    Finally, the restitution of the human male called Adam cannot be complete without a human female who is the New Eve. If you complete the typological work you started, you will see that.

    Cordially in Christ,


    Brother Ed
     
  18. SolaScriptura in 2003

    SolaScriptura in 2003
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    0
    Only a Catholic would say so, and this corresponds to those Protestants who can never see the word Jerusalem in OT prophecy as refering to the church because "Jerusalem is a place" - this is not good interpretation. Please notice these points again, and note that #1 is the most important - Old Testament prophecy and typology should always be primarily interpreted by New Testament application of that very prophecy or typology. If there are two competing interpretations of an Old Testament passage, the one that is specifically used in the New Testament is the one that is correct - always!

    (1) NT Scripture specifically states that this type is fulfilled by the church in Ephesians 5, even going so far as to quote Genesis!
    (2) In the deep sleep, God built Eve from Adam's side. In the deep sleep of death, what was built out of Christ's side? MAry? CERTAINLY NOT! The church was!!!!!!!
    (3) The church, not Mary is called the mother of us all in Gal 4:26, corresponding to Gen 3:20.

    This is the distinction that was made by many of the Arians (and/or semi-Arians) that persecuted the Catholic Church in Athansius' time! They said that Christ was the Divine Son and Jesus just a man, and that there was a non-personal union between them. They also said that Christ left Jesus just before the cross, so that Jesus the man died and Christ as God did not. Of course, Athanasius did not accept such foolishness as this but defended the concept of a personal union between the Word (the Divine Son) and Jesus (the man) which constituted one Christ who was ONE PERSON in two distinct but inseparable natures. Thus, he said that when Christ died on the cross, both man and God died on it. You might want to go read some of Athanasius' writings at www.ccel.org

    [ June 09, 2003, 01:45 AM: Message edited by: SolaScriptura in 2003 ]
     
  19. SolaScriptura in 2003

    SolaScriptura in 2003
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    0
  20. Carson Weber

    Carson Weber
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.boerne.com/temp/bb_pic2.jpg">

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sola,

    You are setting up the false assumption that the New Eve must be either Mary or the Church.

    Mary is the archetype of the Church; she is the exemplar of what the Church is, and this is the underlying purpose of Revelation, Chapter 12. "The woman" is shown - all at once - to be (1) the New Ark of the New Covenant, (2) the New Eve, and (3) the Queen Mother adorned with the moon, sun, and a crown, brining in imagery from the Song of Solomon 6:9-10 -

    My dove, my perfect one, is only one, the darling of her mother, flawless to her that bore her. The maidens saw her and called her happy; the queens and concubines also, and they praised her. "Who is this that looks forth like the dawn, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terrible as an army with banners?"

    And yet, the woman is - simultaneously - shown to be Israel, or, rather, the New Israel, the Church, the exemplar of which is Mary who gave birth to Christ.

    As Mary gave birth to Christ as Virgin Mother in time, so the Church gives birth to Christians as Virgin (unstained by sin and immaculate) Mother -

    that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish (Eph 5:27)

    But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother (Gal 4:26)

    Most especially, Mary is shown to be the New Eve at the Wedding at Cana in the Gospel of John, Chapter 2. Perhaps some time, I'll take the time out of my schedule to demonstrate this for you. It's quite amazing what John does in Chapter 1, which leads up to the Wedding. His theological history is divine!
     

Share This Page

Loading...