Could someone explain?

thessalonian,

What passage in Luke do you want to review?

'Numbers 7:89 says, 'The voice from off the mercy-seat' was of masculine gender. 'He spoke unto him. {Moses} 8:1 says, 'And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, . . . '

In Joshua 3:13 the rectangular box was called, ' . . . the Ark of the Lord, ' not the Ark of Mary.

In verse fifteen of chapter three, it was the Lord on the mercy-seat Who's Presence was focused there that produced the miracle of the Jordan stopping its flow which was the deepest during harvest time.

The priests with the trumpets went before the entourage as they moved from place to place. Behind the trumpeters was the Ark of the Lord Who guided the Israelite people toward the Promised Land.

Joshua 6:11 it is called the Ark of the Lord.

I Samuel 3:3 speaks of the rectangular box as ' . . . the Ark of God.'

Only the wrenching of the Scripture would place the mother of God in the Ark of the Covenant and on the mercy-seat. If you keep coming up with these ideas you are going to work God out of His sovereignty and ministry among the redeemed of humankind.

 

Hi Dallas,

One tradition that Luke draws upon is from 2 Samuel. He intentionally sets up the subtle but significant parallels between Mary's Visitation with Elizabeth and David's effort to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem na in 2 Samuel 6. When Luke tells us that Mary "arose and went" into the Judean hill country to visit her kinswoman (Lk 1:39), he reminds us of how David "arose and went" into the same region centuries earlier to retrieve the Ark (2 Sam 6:2). Upon Mary's arrival, Elizabeth is struck by the same sense of awe and unworthiness before Mary (Lk 1:43) that David felt standing before the Ark of the Covenant (2 Sam 6:9). Parallels continue as the joy surrounding this great encounter causes the infant John to leap with excitement (Lk 1:41), much as David danced with excitement before the Ark (2 Sam 6:16). Finally, Luke adds that Mary stayed in the "house of Zechariah" for "three months" (Lk 1:40, 56), recalling how the Ark of the Covenant was temporarily stationed in the "house of Obed-edom" for a waiting period of "three months" (2 Sam 6:11). Taken together, these parallels show us that Mary now assumes a role in salvation history that was once played by the Ark of the Covenant. Like this golden chest, she is a sacred vessel where the Lord's presence dwells intimately with his people.

Luke also draws upon a second tradition from the Books of Chronicles. This time he brings into his story a highly significant expression once connected with the Ark. The term shows up in Lk 1:42, where Elizabeth bursts out with an exuberant cry at the arrival of Mary and her Child. Although the Greek verb translated as "exclaimed" seems ordinary enough, it is hardly ever used in the Bible. In fact, it is found only here in the entire New Testament. Its presence in the Greek OT is likewise sparse, appearing only five times. Why is this important? Because every time the expression is used in the Old Testament, it forms part of the stories surrounding the Ark of the Covenant. In particular, it refers to the melodic sounds made by Levitical singers and musicians when they glorify the Lord in song. It thus describes the "exulting" voice of instruments that were played before the Ark as David carried it in procession to Jerusalem (1 Chron 15:28; 16:4-5) and as Solomon transferred the Ark to its final resting place in the Temple (2 Chron 5:13). Alluding to these episodes, Luke connects this same expression with the melodic cry of another Levitical descendant, the aged Elizabeth (Lk 1:5). She too lifts up her voice in liturgical praise, not before the golden chest, but before Mary. Luke's remarkable familiarity with these ancient stories enables him to select even a single word that while whisper to his readers that this young Mother of the Messiah is the new Ark of the Covenant.

(Adapted from the Ignatius Study Bible: The Gospel of Luke, published by Ignatius Press, 2001)

 

I don't think you get it. We never said anything about the Ark of Mary. Mary IS the Ark of the Lord. Mary is the ark, and she houses the Lord in her womb. The box was the ark, and it housed the presence of the Lord in its confines.

The ark of the new covenant IS Mary; there is no "ark of Mary."

 

Carson,
You are attempting to repair the rent veil. Why would you want to do this? Why was the veil rent Carson?

Bro. Dallas

 

Hi Dallas,

Mary's role in salvation history as the New Ark of the Covenant has nothing to do with the rending of the veil in the Second Temple.

You're changing subjects.

The rending of the veil in the Jerusalem Temple means that the Temple is no longer a Temple. At that event, the Temple gave way to the New Temple, which is the Church and individually every Christian who is a member of that Church. What defined the Temple (hieron) was that it had a sanctuary (naos) where God dwelt, and when the veil was rent, that distinguishing feature of the sanctuary was no more, thus altering the Temple from a Temple into simply another building. Now, the presence of God indwells the new Temple, which is made not with human hands but with baptized Christians.

 

Frogman,

Do you get the feeling by reading the last few posts that we are dealing with a cult rather than a Christian Church? I don't believe these people chase an errant theology deep into Old Covenant religion. Even back to the Book of Samuel. One layer of error stacked on just one more misrepresentation. They see Mary in everything. What about the sovereign Lord who was born of the virgin Mary, Who died for our sins and was raised from the tomb for our justification? This same Lord is the Creator of the universe and our world and all who see the Cross, the suffering Servant and His atoning blood can be saved forever by believing in His Divine spirituality. Am I right about this?

 

Yeah, I do Ray.

Carson, what does scripture plainly say the rending of the veil signifies?

Hint: It has nothing to do with the virgin mother, but much to do with our direct access to the mercy seat.

BTW, the synagogue is more nearly related to the 'church', but not really, the church has nothing to do with buildings.

The church is a living organism, made up of scripturally immersed believers only.

Bro. Dallas

Hope your test went well today.

 

Hi Dallas,

Do you acknowledge the possibility that Luke presents Mary as the Ark of the Covenant? It seems to me that you're trying to avoid this issue by changing subjects.

what does scripture plainly say the rending of the veil signifies? Hint: It has nothing to do with the virgin mother, but much to do with our direct access to the mercy seat.

I never said the veil has anything to do with Mary nor do I think it does.

the synagogue is more nearly related to the 'church', but not really, the church has nothing to do with buildings. The church is a living organism, made up of scripturally immersed believers only.

Did you read my previous post? Nowhere did I say that the New Testament Church has anything to do with buildings. I said the opposite: that the Church is now a living organism, that the Temple is no longer a building but a living composite of Trinity-indwelt-people.

Hope your test went well today.

Thank you!

 

*sigh*

Wrong again.

It has to do with the ending of the covenant with the Jews. The Holiest of All was the place where the NATIONAL COVENANT was ratified once a year between God and the Jews. It has nothing to do with a single individual going into speak with God, for if he did, he would be immediately struck dead.

The rending of the veil was the visible and outward sign that the prophesy of Matthew 21: 33 -46, in which Jesus prophesied that the kingdom would be taken from the Jews and given to "a nation bringing forth fruits in due season" had been accomplished. It showed that there would be no more YOM KIPPUR because the hand of God had destroyed the sanctity of the Holiest of All and exposed it for the world to see. And if there was no more YOM KIPPUR, then there was no more covenant between the Jews as a nation and God., which also, BTW, thoroughly trashes the idea of Premillenialism.

But the high priests, sons of the devil who were blinded by their pride, sewed it back together and continued to offer a once a year sacrifice that was basically worthless as a pork barbecue stand at a meeting of kosher rabbis.

And then they sealed their doom by persecuting the Church.

Frogman, this again shows that you need to more closely study and apply OT typology and rites to the NT. You cannot make the "Holiest of All" which was reserved for corporate sacrifice, become a "Mercy Seat" for individual sacrifice. God does not work that way.

Brother Ed

[ October 14, 2003, 07:49 PM: Message edited by: CatholicConvert ]

 

Brother Dallas,

Correct me if I am wrong.

C.C said, 'It has to do with the ending of the covenant with the Jews. The Holiest of All was the place where the NATIONAL COVENANT was ratified once a year . . . ' It has nothing to do with a single individual going into speak with God, for if he did, he would be immediately struck dead.'

While Yom Kippur was the annual and national renewal of the covenant there were also family and individual responsibilities in producing their own animal sacrifice for the many priests to kill on the altar of sacrifice. Some may doubt this so I will quote from "The Bible Almanac" written by Drs. J.I. Packer, Merill C. Tenney and William White, Jr.

'The high priest's most important function was to preside at the annual Day of Atonement. On that day, the high priest could enter the holy of holies of the tabernacle and sprinkle the mercy seat with the blood of sin offering. By doing this, he atoned for his wrongs, for those of his family, and those of all the people of Israel. [Lev. 16:1-25]'

If only one lamb was necessary for a national ceremony we would not find in the N.T. where people brought their flawless lamb or dove to the priests in the Temple. The head of each family was responsible to produce a sacrifice for all of the members of his household.

C.C. said, 'The rending of the veil was the visible and outward sign that the prophesy
of Matthew 21: 33 -46, in which Jesus prophesied that the kingdom would
be taken from the Jews and given to "a nation bringing forth fruits in due
season" had been accomplished.'

The truth is that the veil was severed from the top to the bottom because it was this veil that separated the Jewish and Gentile worshippers from the Holy of Holies where the mercy-seat was housed. The mercy-seat is a typeology of Christ. Almighty God ripped the veil in twain to show that no longer must the laity go through a priest to have access to the Lord. Reformation leaders called this the "Priesthood of all Believers." [Revelation 1:6a] Could we not have guessed that Catholicism would place their own spin on this exegetical truth?

C.C. said, 'It showed that there would be no more YOM KIPPUR, then there was no more covenant between the Jews as a nation . . . .'

Ray is saying, 'Although Ed is right about Yom Kippur being over for all time, he is wrong in saying that the Israelites cannot find Christ today just as Gentile sinners can do. God has not damned all Israelites just because they are Jewish. Romans 11:25 indicates that their ' . . . blindness is only partial.' Anyone, Jew or Gentile can open their heart and life to Jesus in personal salvation. [John 3:16]

C.C. said, ' . . . thoroughly trashes the idea of Premillenialism.'

Ray is saying, 'Premillenialism is another unrelated issue, which is Biblical truth; no wonder Catholics cannot see it as being God's truth.'

C.C. said, 'And then they sealed their doom by persecuting the Church.'

Ray is saying, 'Not any more than the Roman Catholic Church did when they persecuted the Waldensians and any other believers who disagreed with Catholicism. I think all or most Catholics are still trying to get to Heaven. Fortunately, the Lord deals with sinners, Jews and Gentiles, on a personal basis. His love reaches out to all people.

C.C. said, 'Frogman, this again shows that you need to more closely study and apply
OT typology and rites to the NT. You cannot make the "Holiest of All" which
was reserved for corporate sacrifice, become a "Mercy Seat" for individual
sacrifice. God does not work that way.'

Ray is saying, 'You could not be more wrong if you tried. Yom Kippur was a day for all Israelites to come to Jerusalem as families and individuals in offering their sacrifice before Jehovah Lord. May it is you who needs to link up with a Messianic Christian to explain more of this to you, from both the Old and New Testaments. Actually, most of these Baptists can enlighten you if you are still open to the complete truth.

 

The sinless like Christ...Reedemer like Christ...All powerful like Christ...

Mythologies of the RC regarding Mary find no support in scripture.

Another classic case of man-made-tradition being touted - without a single word of scripture in support of it.

Why would you take such a position on an open board where compelling objective logic and exegetical proofs are the only way to carry a doctrinal point?

I don't understand your thinking there.

Do you think that if you "say it" they will come?

In Christ,

Bob

 

Sheeeeesh!!

 

The sinless like Christ...Reedemer like Christ...All powerful like Christ...

Bob --

Try thinking along these lines regarding the Blessed Virgin:

A husband and wife are united and become one flesh in a covenantal relationship.

In scripture, we as believers are called "The Bride of Christ". God uses earthly realities to teach heavenly truths. The union of man and wife constitutes them into "one flesh". St. Paul expounds upon this in his speaking against adultery. There is a union in which the husband and wife both gain from each other, however, the wife as the lesser is blessed with power and authority from her husband over the lesser ones in the family -- the children. She can also bear his authority outside the home and may make transactions in his name...providing she has been given by him that power.

That is the nature of that union.

We are united with Christ, and one day we shall be like Him in glory and power. We will not be IN ESSENCE equal to God, but will be like Him, sharing in His glory and in His authority.

The Blessed Virgin is there now. She is in that place of honor and authority and is bearing the authority of God as the particular Bride of Christ. She is called "The Spouse of the Holy Spirit". In this intimate union with Him, she bears all His authority and power because she merges into a "one flesh" relationship with Him. Therefore, Her will, being one with His, is perfect, and when She speaks, it is Him speaking through Her.

This will be the same experience for us when we are perfected, for we shall judge angels, and of course, will only do so by virtue of our union with God and our becoming "one" with Him.

I know that you don't agree....just ponder the idea for a bit over a nice glass of wine. It'll make ya all warm inside.

Brother Ed

 

It gets worse! The blessed Virgin is now "all holy" Mother of God. Granted that Mary is the mother of God and that she prays for the Church, she remains a woman subject to original sin and the limitations of time and space.

The church has always confessed this, in the words of the sixth century Gloria in Excelsis, Jesus alone is holy. Jesus alone in the hypostatic union transcends the human limitations of time and space.

[ October 15, 2003, 08:07 AM: Message edited by: John Gilmore ]

 

Hi John,

You wrote, "The blessed Virgin is now "all holy" Mother of God."

"Chaire, kecharitomene, o kyrios meta sou" (Luke 1:28).

"Rejoice, you who have been fully graced, the Lord is with you" (Luke 1:28).

kecharitomene is a perfect, passive participle, which means it designates an action that has been fully completed in the past. If we see grace as our participation in the divine life of God - a pure gift that is an action upon us - then Mary has, at the time of the Anunciation, a full share in this.

The Byzantines, from very ancient times, have referred to Mary as the Panagia or "All Holy", which does not mean that she is the "All Holy God" but that she has been fully graced by the All Holy God, partaking in his divine nature fully. See 2 Peter 1:4: "you may ... become partakers of the divine nature". This is a gift, a grace, something we could never merit and is given to us freely by the all-beneficient and merciful Father God through his only begotton Son in the Holy Spirit.

 

It gets worse! The blessed Virgin is now "all holy" Mother of God. Granted that Mary is the mother of God and that she prays for the Church, she remains a woman subject to original sin and the limitations of time and space.

The church has always confessed this, in the words of the sixth century Gloria in Excelsis, Jesus alone is holy. Jesus alone in the hypostatic union transcends the human limitations of time and space. </font>[/QUOTE]Why would this bother you ("all holy"). Holy by the definition we are using means dedicated to God. Of course this dedication requires some sort of rejection of sin. To be "all holy" would mean total rejection of sin. Seems like the angels would be "all holy" so this is not idolatry even if it were not true of Mary (which it is). Everything in heaven is "all holy". For there can be nothing in heaven that is not holy. "nothing unclean shall enter". Many things are called holy in the OT. Garmets, people, nations, the holy one (aaron), holy water, holy temple, I could easily list 30 more. God could easily make his own mother "all holy" even on this earth as we must become "all holy" before we enter the kingdom of heaven. No dung pile covered with snow is going to be there. Just don't see the big deal here. Sorry.

Blessings

 

Mary mothered Jesus. She cannot be the mother of GOD simply because GOD had no beginning. Christ created everything that exists this would include Mary in all reality.

There is not even proof that Mary even knows or hears the cries of living people here on earth.

 

Luke 1:42 "How is it that THE MOTHER OF MY LORD should come to me."

Does it say mother of the humanity of my Lord? Or mother of part of my lord? Did God not enter Jesus until he was born? God became man at conception. We do not create our own souls yet in bearing them, intimitely intertwined with our bodies, our mothers are the mothers of our souls as well as our bodies. For a body without a soul is nothing more than a pile or organic material. Jesus divinity was contained in his body, though that was not the start of it (as we know that he is infinite). But Mary bore the infinite from her womb. Jesus was God from conception, became man. Mary gave birth to him through her natural means of doing so, becoming his mother. The scriptures don't lie. Why do you reject this simple truth that has complex implications on who Jesus was. God incarnate (made man), fully God, fully man.

As for Mary hearing us from heaven, you cannot say that she doesn't for no scripture says such a thing either. And I would contend that Heb 12:1 indicates that she does know what is going on. "we are surrounded by a cloud of witnesses". Also the angels in heaven rejoice over a repentant sinner. So apparently they know what is going on here. I have heard that heaven is more knowing than actual hearing using the limitations of the human body. So one might not have to hear everything said to know what is going on.

Blessings.

 

Catholic Convert,

CC said, 'It is profoundly sad to see you and the men you quote not
only making fools of yourselves, but denying the very
words of the Bible as you do so:

Heb 9:6 Now when these things were thus ordained, the
priests went always into the first tabernacle,
accomplishing the service of God.

7 But into the second went the high priest alone once
every year, not without blood, which he offered for
himself, and for the errors of the people:

CC. said, 'Do you understand what you just read there, or do I have
to get the crayons and paper with the big block letters. Do
you understand that there were two entirely separate
areas, the first where the general sacrifices were made
through the year, the second which, according to
SCRIPTURE, only the high priest ALONE went into once a
year.

Ray, for a seminary trained chap like you....that display of
scriptural ignorance is PATHETIC!!! I dont' want to EVER
hear you bashing Catholics about twisting scripture or
ignoring "clear Bible passages!!"

Ray said, 'The truth is that the veil was severed from the top to the
bottom because it was this veil that separated the Jewish and
Gentile worshippers from the Holy of Holies where the
mercy-seat was housed. The mercy-seat is a typeology of
Christ. Almighty God ripped the veil in twain to show that no
longer must the laity go through a priest to have access to the
Lord. Reformation leaders called this the "Priesthood of all
Believers." [Revelation 1:6a] Could we not have guessed that
Catholicism would place their own spin on this exegetical truth?

CC saod. 'Furthermore, the Gentiles were NEVER allowed into the
Inner Court, but were afforded an "OUTER COURT OF THE
GENTILES" from which they could watch. Gentiles were
unclean dogs in the eyes of the Jews and the idea that
they would be allowed anywhere near the Temple is an
idea repugnant to Jewish thought of that time.

Ray is saying, 'I did not speak about the Court of the Gentiles but you are correct in your above paragraph.


CC said, 'Premillenialism is based on the faulty premise that the
covenantal relationship of God with the Jews will be
restored. It posits the Church as an interruption in God's
plan with the Jews. That is not so.

Ray is saying, 'Sorry, Ed your Catholicism rejects Romans 11:23, 24c ' . . . how much moreshall these, which be the natural branches be grafted into their own Olive tree.' 25,26. In fact Paul says during the Great Tribulation and Kingdom Age of 1,000 years 'ALL ISRAEL SHALL BE SAVED.'

Ray is saying, 'Not any more than the Roman Catholic Church did when they persecuted the Waldensians and any other believers who disagreed with Catholicism. Just today on the news Pope John Paul admitted to the atrocities and the commentator said that the church, through him, apologized for the murdering.'

CC said, 'The Waldensians were a particularly nasty breed of
heretics with practices which, if done today in an
Anabaptist or Protestant assembly, would get them
disciplined or excommunicated from that assembly. Their
pestilent doctrines were sending boatloads of people to
hell, and the Church, as the guardian of souls, had every
right to nip this cancer in the bud.

Ray is saying, 'I am sure you remember where Jesus said in effect 'Don't try to root out the tares from the wheat; let them grow until Judgment Day. The Catholic Church was not give by Christ the license or right to murder other human beings even if they were in deep an error as Jehovah's Witnesses.'

CC said, 'The Jews, on the other hand, were receiving the
covenantal curses found in Deut. 29.

Ray is saying, 'I too know and agree with you that with the Fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. that this was a curse on the Israelite nation because of their rejection of the Messiah, our Christ of God.'


Ray is saying, 'Yom Kippur was a day for all Israelites to come to Jerusalem as
families and individuals in offering their sacrifice before Jehovah
Lord. Check out LEVITICUS 16:17!

CC said, 'The YOM KIPPUR
sacrifice was done by one man only on one day only. And it
was for the nation as a whole, not for individuals.

Ray is saying, Check out LEVITICUS 16:17 ' . . . AND FOR ALL THE CONGREGATION OF ISRAEL.' I hope you are not trying to say that the individual Jews did not need to have their sins atoned. I looked up Dr. Matthew Henry's interpretation of the atonement for all Jews who brought their sacrifice and he agrees with me. Better check you Catholic commentaries; they may disagree with you.

CC said, 'Messianic Christians, who observe a corrupt form of
Christianity which incorporates Old Covenant worship
forms which are passed into the New Covenant,

Ray is saying, 'I agree with you in your above statement.

Ray is saying, 'Correct me if I am misreading you. You seem to think there were two sanctuaries in which the priests ministered and then one for the high priest. The was but one sanctuary the priests ministered in the outer area, and once a year the high priest went into to the Holy of Holiest to bring the atonement to the mercy-seat not only for his sins and his families sins, but for every Israelite who brought their lamb or dove to the perhaps hundreds of priests who slaughtered the sacrifices in the outer chamber of the sanctuary or later in the Temple.' A new High Priest was elected every year for the Day of Atonement.

Best wishes . . .

 

Hi A_Christian,

Mary gave the Son of God his human nature, and therefore, she is the mother of God. No one is saying that she gave Jesus his divine nature, of course. In the same way, God died on the cross. Jesus didn't die with regard to his divine nature but with regard to his human nature, for the divine nature can't die. That's why it was hypostatically united to the human nature. The same is true w/ Jesus' birth. God in his divine nature can't be born, but due to the hypostatic nature, we can say that God was born of a woman. This is what we call the "communication of idioms".