QUOTE(thomasthai @ Feb 22 2019, 07:24 AM)
When we study how to interpret scriptures, one of the most important principle is scripture is the only interpreter of scriptures.
The objective truths in scripture cannot be drawn externally.
Besides the church fathers, you can't really find anything in scriptures that suggest that the woman is really Mary.
Even if you are talking about type prophecies, Jesus said the all scriptures predicted Him, not Mary.
All the epistles mentioned (almost, if any) nothing about Mary. The RC doctrines about Mariology were really drawn from really obscure texts, and built on error upon errors from church fathers.
If we interpret scriptures like that, you can really make scriptures say whatever you wanna say.
But of course, the RC church just make their interpretation infallible to avoid any scrutiny.
That's the main problem. To say the scripture interprets scripture. Even between all of us here differ when reading scripture. That's why many see contradictions, and not harmony in scripture. No, says 2 Peter 3:16. Christ gave teaching authority to His Apostles and their successors (Matt 16:19, 18:18, Mark 16:15, Luke 10:16). “Authority” does not mean “power” but “right”—“author’s rights.” The Church has authority only because she is under authority, the authority of her Author and Lord. “No one can give himself the mandate and the mission to proclaim the Gospel. The one sent by the Lord does not speak and act on his own authority, but by virtue of Christ’s authority” (CCC 875).
The authority of the Church has been necessary, for example, for us to know the truth of the Trinity. This most distinctively Christian doctrine of all, the one that reveals the nature of God himself, the nature of ultimate reality, was revealed by God clearly only to the Church. It was not clearly revealed to his chosen people, the Jews. It is not clearly defined in the New Testament. God waited to reveal it to the Church.
"Even if you are talking about type prophecies, Jesus said the all scriptures predicted Him, not Mary."
The role of Mary is dependent on Christ in much the same manner as the role of Eve was dependent on Adam. God, who was no feminist, made salvation dependent on the action of a Man, just as He punished our race because of the sin of a man. Here we need to repeat what many are probably unaware of, namely, that it was Adam’s sin, not Eve’s , which is the original sin. Saint Paul reminds us that, in the order of time, the woman sinned first: “For Adam was first formed; then Eve. And Adam was not seduced; but the woman, being seduced, was in the transgression” (1 Tim. 2:13-14). But he also lets us know that Adam’s fall was the fall of the entire race: “For by a man came death: and by a man the resurrection of the dead. And as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive” (1 Cor. 15:21-22). For Catholics, Adam’s exclusive role in the original sin is dogma. The same is true for many Protestants.
Now, while God was no feminist, He did give woman a special place. Eve was, for Adam, a “helpmate like unto himself” (Gen. 2:18). When she sinned and encouraged him to sin, she failed in that role. All this goes to show, that while Adam’s was the original sin, Eve had a real, active, and causal role. Invert that in the case of the New Adam. The work of redemption was the work of Christ. But He had a helpmate.
The concept of the New Eve taught by the Church Fathers is a case in point because it is a summary and natural extension of Paul’s doctrine of Christ as the New Adam. Irenaeus based his teaching on Ephesians 1:10, where Paul says that God sent Christ "as a plan [oikonomia] for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth." For Paul and Irenaeus, God arranged salvation history in such a way that all reality would be incarnated in his Son, Jesus Christ. Everything was put under Christ’s headship (thus re-capitulate). This divine arrangement meant not only that Christ by his obedience reversed the effects of Adam’s sin but also that Mary by her obedience reversed the effects of Eve’s rebellion. The only difference is that Mary’s obedience was derived from her Son’s obedience. She was made a part of his saving plan because Christ made her "full of grace" (Luke 1:28). In Adam and Eve, the human race lost its sonship, and part of Christ’s mission was to restore that filial relationship with the Father. By saying that Christ was born "from the woman," Paul is linking both the Son and the woman with Adam and Eve. Christ the Son is obviously linked to Adam. The only woman who could be linked with Eve is Mary. So, Paul is saying that Mary participated in the Redemption by giving birth to Jesus in the opposite but parallel way that Eve participated in the Fall of man into sin. In our view, the Church Fathers were simply drawing out the implications of what Paul was teaching.
The early Church Fathers are the most direct link to what the early Christians did and believed in. It is haughty and prideful indeed to think that we are closer to the earlier Christians that the early Church Fathers who have the Apostles as their direct teachers after Christ's ascension. OK since you won't accept the Church Fathers, let's have St John the Apostle to tell in the Gospel:
John begins his Gospel in words familiar to first-century Jewish ears: “In the beginning” (John 1:1). In the exact words the author of the creation story used (Gen 1:1), He brought his readers back to the creation, where God created the universe in six days. On the seventh God rested. His work was perfect (at least until Adam and Eve happened).
And if we look carefully, we see John continue his creation story. In verses 29, 35, and 43 of John 1, “The next day” this happened; “The next day” that happened; “The next day”… you get the point. These three verses count from the first day to the fourth day. And then chapter 2 begins, “on the third day” (John 2:1).
by the “third day”, John, “cannot mean the third day from the beginning, since he has already proceeded past that point in his narrative. He must mean the third day from the fourth day, which brings us to the seventh day – and then John stops counting.” So chapter 2 of John’s Gospel brings readers back to that day of perfection and rest. You might imagine that first century Jews would be eager to see what happens on this day.
“On the third day there was a marriage at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there” (John 2:1). But when they run out of wine, Mary prompts Jesus: “They have no wine” (v. 3), to which Jesus replies, “O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come” (v. 4). Then Mary turns to the servants, saying, “Do whatever he tells you” (v. 5). And at Mary’s request, Jesus turned the water into wine, his first public miracle.
Now some people will read this and question if Jesus being rude to his mom when he called her woman. After all, it wouldn’t be very respectful if I were to address my mother as “woman.”
First of all, Jesus addressed Mary as “woman” when he hung, dying on the cross (John 19:26). Could he possibly have meant to disrespect his mother in his final moments? I think not. And secondly, if Jesus were to disrespect his mother, he would be breaking the commandment to honor his mother (Ex 20:12), which would be sinful.4
Why then on the seventh day does John refer to Mary as “woman” when the other Gospels address her as “Mary” or “Jesus’ mother”? With the striking parallels to the creation story, we may suspect that John is associating Mary with Eve, who was first “woman”.
But let’s not stop here. Our step takes us to the foot of the cross.
John tells us that standing by Jesus on the cross “were his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Mag′dalene,” (John 19:25), as well as the beloved apostle.
Now some might find it interesting that St. Paul draws a connection between Christ hanging on the cross, and a quote from the Old Testament: “Cursed be every one who hangs on a tree” (Gal 3:13, also see Deut 21:23). In its proper sense, the “tree” isn’t a direct reference to the tree in the Garden. Though in Paul’s mind, Jesus is the new Adam who undid the consequences of the first Adam’s sin (Rom 5:14). Prompted by the serpent, the fall of mankind took place around the tree in the garden. Standing around the new tree (the cross), the new Adam, the woman’s seed, defeated sin and death, and ultimately crushed the head of the ancient serpent (Gen 3:15).
Though I’ll point out that Adam was not alone at the first tree. There, as under the cross, stood the woman, Eve. And John was sure to include this, a detail that no other Gospel writer included: “when Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, ‘Woman, behold, your son!’ Then he said to the disciple, ‘Behold, your mother!’” (John 19:26-27, emphasis added). Again, woman stood with the new Adam as he battled sin and death. And just as around the tree woman was made mother of all the living (Gen 3:20), we see the new woman become mother of the beloved apostle (John 19:27).
Then John tells us that Jesus, “bowed his head and gave up his spirit” (John 19:30). As Eve watched as Adam ate of the tree, bringing death to the whole world, now Mary watched as her beloved son died on the tree that he might bring life (1 Cor 15:21).
As we wrap up our search, we find ourselves at the end. Literally. We end up in the book of Revelation. In the heavenly display, John sees an image of a woman clothed with the sun, standing upon the moon, with a crown of 12 stars (Rev 12:1). She is with child, and labors in anguish as she gives birth (v. 2). But another character enters the picture: a great dragon with seven heads, ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads (v. 3). The story continues:
Then the dragon stood before the woman who was about to bear a child, so that he might devour her child as soon as it was born. And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron. But her child was snatched away and taken to God and to his throne; and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God. (Rev 12:4-5).
Michael the Archangel and his angels fought and defeated the dragon and his angels. “The great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world” (Rev 12:9). Once on earth, the dragon pursued the woman, but when his attempts were thwarted, he “went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus” (Rev 12:17).
Okay, there’s a lot to unpack here. But we should first recall God’s words to the serpent in the garden: “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” (Gen 3:15).
With that in mind, who are the characters in Revelation 12? The text tells us who the dragon is: “ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world.” The woman’s child is Jesus, the “male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron,” (Rev 12:5). Then there is the woman. While the woman can represent the faithful of Israel who brought forth the Messiah, much more directly, she is Mary, the mother of Jesus. For Jesus is most directly the seed of Mary.
The enmity between the serpent and Eve was present between the new Eve and the dragon, as was foretold. But while the serpent had his way in the garden, it wasn’t so with the woman, Mary. Mary cooperated with God in bringing the Saviour into the world. Unlike in the garden, the serpent ultimately loses. The new Adam crushed the serpent’s head as he gave up his life on the tree.
Not only is Mary the new Eve, but she is superior to the first Eve. She isn’t just the mother of all the living, but the mother of those who have supernatural life in Jesus. Though she lived in a world tainted by sin, she was there to see the new Adam defeat sin and death. And as is fitting for the fulfillment of Eve, she was born into and remained in a state of innocence. As St. Irenaeus put it, “the knot of Eve’s disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary.”7 And through his obedience the new Adam, Jesus Christ, defeated sin and death.
It's fine if you don't accept such typology. But it’s my hope that some will see the biblical evidence for Mary as the new Eve, just as the Church has for centuries, long before anyone did so. The connections are subtle, yet they cannot be denied. And the implications are great.
Even Martin Luther believed in the Immaculate Conception of Mary.
"It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary’s soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God’s gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin"
- Martin Luther's Sermon "On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God," 1527.
"She is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin—something exceedingly great. For God’s grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil.
- Martin Luther's Little Prayer Book, 1522.
Both quotations derive from Luther's writings after his break from Rome.
Mary’s portrayal as the new Eve is only one of many reasons why the Catholic Church believes that Mary was sinless. There are many other reasons. I hope that this might help us see one more reason why all generations will call her blessed (Luke 1:48).
This post has been edited by yeeck: Feb 22 2019, 11:44 AM 
Feb 15 2019, 02:27 PM
Quote
0.0318sec
0.77
6 queries
GZIP Disabled