oman 
atholic
bserver
oman atholic
bserverRevised 11/29/1999
On this page: | Rev. 12+17 on Mary | Infancy Gospel of James | Mary in Gospel of Luke |
Preparatory Observations
The Catholic Church's view of eschatology (end-times prophecy) is amillennial .See Definition Below. This places the Church in the unenviable position of having to take that prophecy seriously, but not literally. I see this as a problem for the Church because of the known track record of Messianic Prophecy.
Taken together, the OT prophecies reveal two kinds of Messiah: a suffering Messiah and a Conquering Messiah. All OT prophecies pertaining to the suffering Messiah were fulfilled literally - to the finest detail - in Christ. The second stream, pointing to the conquering Messiah, remains to be fulfilled at His Second Coming. So the question arises, "If all the prophecies about the first coming of Christ (Messiah) have been proven to be literal, what reason do we have to think that the prophecies that remain to be fulfilled at His second coming are not also literal?
| Amillennialism. Spiritualizes all references relative to Christ's return and reign, and applies
them to His "spiritual rule over the hearts of believers." Even the OT prophecies of Jesus
ruling on the throne of David are spiritualized and then applied to the Catholic Church. All
promises to Israel are likewise spiritualized, and applied to the Church. In this view, the nation
of Israel has no unique destiny in God's plans - He has abandoned Israel for good and Israel
has 'become' the Church. -Also referred to as "Replacement Theology."
Compare, Post-millennialism (Millennium occurs before Christ Returns, is brought about by the gradual perfection of the Church and elimination of evil in the world, etc.), and Pre-Millennialism (Literal eschatology, accepts future events as literal, such as Tribulation, Rapture, etc.; says that God will keep his covenant with Israel as a nation.). |
Revelation 12
1"And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: 2And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered."
WOMAN: At this early point, Could represent Mary, Could be Israel, with the 12 stars representing the 12 tribes; Could represent an apostate religion; Could also represent the city of Rome (compare: Rev. 17). Context will show which it is. There is little doubt that the Woman here is the same as the Woman of Revelation 17.
3"And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. 4And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth:"
THE DRAGON/BEAST WITH 7 HEADS, 10 HORNS. This dragon is defined and explained in Revelation 17, and shown to be a political/military system to arise at the time of the end. Also equated with Satan, or the Antichrist.
"and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born. 5And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne."
CHILD BORN - TAKEN TO HEAVEN. Jesus Christ. Born 2000 years ago and now in Heaven.
CHILD BORN - Could also refer to Christ at his Second Coming, not by virgin birth, but directly to the nation of Israel. Historically, Satan has done everything possible to keep Jesus (messiah) from coming by destroying the Jewish people and the state of Israel, through which he knows Messiah will come.
6"And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days."
WOMAN: FLED TO WILDERNESS FOR 1260 DAYS. Since no such event happened to Mary, we must conclude that the Mary is out of the running. Equally true, the City of Rome must be discarded because a city cannot "flee to the wilderness." Thus we are left with two options: that woman represents either Israel or apostate Christianity. Continued evaluation of Scriptural context should reveal the truth here.
7"And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, 8And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 9And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. 10And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night. 11And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death. 12Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time."
TIMING OF THESE EVENTS: John, author of Revelation, is told three times that the events he was about to be shown were future events (Rev. 1:19; 4:1; 9:12). Thus, this battle, appearance of the beast and of the Woman remain in our future.
13"And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child. 14And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent. 15And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood. 16And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth. 17And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ."
WOMAN: PERSECUTED BY DRAGON, FLEES TO WILDERNESS FOR 1260 DAYS. DRAGON MAKES WAR WITH WOMAN'S SEED. Again, this did not happen to Mary, and could not happen to a physical city: so again, the woman is either Israel or apostate Christianity. Also, no woman has 'seed:' this term applies only to males, to nations, or to a religious system: further proof that the woman is either the nation Israel or an apostate Christianity.
WOMAN: AN ENIGMA? In Rev. 17 she is seen as "riding on the Beast/Dragon," showing a unity between church and state, or between an apostate church and a worldwide political/military system.
1"And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will show unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters: 2With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication. 3So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. 4And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: 5And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. 6And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration."
MYSTERY BABYLON: There is general consensus among theologians that this is a reference to Rome.
WOMAN DRUNK: Certainly not Mary! And not a physical city, either, as a physical city cannot be drunk. BLOOD OF THE SAINTS: who, or what, could be identified as being responsible for shedding the blood of Christ's saints? Not Mary. Not a physical city. But certainly an apostate religion, which has, or will murder the saints in the name of 'religion' could fit the bill.
7"And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns. 8The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is. 9And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. 10And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. 11And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. 12And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. 13These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast.
14These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful. 15And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. 16And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. 17For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled. 18And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth."
1. Is a great whore (certainly not Mary!)
2. Is dressed in purple and scarlet (colors of the cardinals)
3. Is drunk with the blood of the saints (religious persecution)
4. Rides, or works with/controls the beast (political system, Satan, Antichrist).
5. Sits, or controls things from a city of seven hills (Rome)(1).
6. Is a great city (Rome) (a religious system identified with a physical city).
7. Is called "Mystery Babylon" (indicating a religious system;)(2).
8. "Fornicates with the kings of the earth" (religious-Political alliance).
9. Is called "Mother of Harlots" (Scripture uses "Harlot" to denote apostate religion).
10. Rules over many peoples, nations and tongues (A worldwide apostate religion).
Conclusions
The only logical, reasonable, rational, scripturally-supportable conclusion is that the woman of Rev. 12 and Rev. 17 represents an apostate religious system strongly identified with the city of Rome, and having worldwide power over millions (billions?) of people. She is a system that will be allied with the political/military power of 'the beast,' whom we recognize as Satan, or the Antichrist.
As we examine our Roman Catholic Church today, it is easy to see John Paul II's efforts to bring all religions, including pagan ones, under Church control. What could be the long-range goal - if not to arrive at a one-world (Catholic) religion in which sound doctrine will be irrelevant? (It would have to be to get a buy-in from so many disparate religions.) There are already strong voices in the Church crying out against this 'ecumenical suicide.' We can also see his political ambitions quite clearly (see The Keys of This Blood by Malachi Martin.)
Are we seeing a dumbing-down of traditional Roman Catholic doctrine in favor of a 'feel good' ecumenical 'oneness?" Is it possible that we are watching the transformation of our Church from solid, sound doctrine into an apostate church with less than spiritual aims? Will our Church one day become heretical? Indeed, many sincere Catholics are asking "Is the Pope a Catholic?" Some even claim he is a heretic, and offer evidence thereof. It would not be the first time a pope fell into heresy: several past popes were condemned as heretics by their successors, or by councils convened during their reign. Could it happen again?
Finally, we have a dramatic, widespread, 3-pronged schism in full swing:
Novus Ordo Mass vs Tridentine Mass. (Separate bishops, priest, nuns, seminaries, etc.)
Widespread rebellion of Catholics regarding birth control issue.
Tens of thousands of priests marrying, yet continuing their priestly functions.
Our Church is coming apart at the seams, yet all too many Catholic people don't even know it is happening! Is this a wake-up call? Are Rev. 12 and Rev. 17 giving us a message to heed? Only time will tell for certain. Meanwhile, I think we all need to stay alert, and be prepared to hunker down and practice the "Faith of our fathers."
As to the impact on Mariology, I see none in these chapters.
Since this is the final topic and yet to be discussed in this class, I have to assume reasons for its introduction under the main topic: Mary and the Millennium. I may be disavowed when the next class occurs. My assumption is based on the main topic, and the content of the Infancy Gospel of James. I surmise that it is being used as support for two central Marian doctrines -- that of the Immaculate Conception of Mary, and that of her perpetual virginity. A secondary possibility is that it is being used to 'prove' that Mary is a descendant of David. The reason for these assumptions is that the main thrust of this document is the supposed Immaculate Conception.
SUMMARY: Analysis of the Infancy Gospel of James
While reading the Infancy Gospel of James, I was torn between the need to laugh, to cry, or to scream in outrage. In the light of the Canonical Gospels (and the rest of Scripture as well), this document has numerous errors, and includes some pagan ideas. Its authorship is unknown, and is falsely attributed to James, the brother of Jesus. Internal evidence, however, indicates that it was written in approximately 150 A.D. -- long after James was dead. Some of its content is contradicted by early Fathers of the Church. Finally, the fictional nature of this document is attested by a number of theologians.
The Problem of Authorship
Whoever wrote this 'gospel' lied about it. He (she?) Falsely attributed it to James, the brother of Jesus. Why such deception? To attract an audience perhaps? Unfortunately (for him/her), the internal evidence of this 'gospel' prove it to have been written long after James was dead. Another problem is in the introduction of Joseph, Mary's husband, as narrator in the midst of the 'gospel.' We know that James did not write it, and it is unlikely that Joseph did either. Finally, it is evident that whoever wrote it was not familiar with Jewish life and customs.
The Problem of Authenticity
This 'gospel' introduces the supposed Immaculate Conception of Mary to her parents Anna and
Joachim. The angelic appearances of an angel to Mary's mother and Father is a mirror-image of
the angelic appearances to Mary and Joseph some fifteen years later. Anna is told by an 'angel'
that she is to be divinely impregnated (by the Holy Spirit no doubt, as in the case of Mary).
Jewish Priests and Virgin Births
The unbelievability of this narrative arises first from the actions of the Jewish priests, as compared with the actions of the same body fifteen years later when Mary's case comes before them. In the case of Anna, we see the priests testing both Anna and Joachim using mystical means, and then accepting the 'immaculate conception' of Mary, and going to great lengths to promote it. Just fifteen years later, the same body of priests totally rejected the same phenomenon (sic., the Immaculate conception of Jesus)... and went to great lengths to denounce it, even to the killing of Jesus by the hand of the Romans.
The question arises: "Is it reasonable to believe that the same body of priests, that may even have included some of the same men, would completely reverse its theology in fifteen years or less?" I think not. The actions of the priests of Jesus' time is fully consistent with their history and tradition, while those of the priests of Anna's time is a marked deviation.
Pagan Practice Promoted
Another reason to reject the authenticity of this document is the presence of a non-Jewish practice that can be found in the pagan religions of old. Here we have Joachim staring at some sort of "golden plate" to see if there was any sin in him. Naturally, he didn't see any; how convenient.
The Problem of Event Timing
Zacharias's Dumbness. The Infancy Gospel of James says that the priest, Zacharias, was dumb at the time when 'Joseph accepted her (Mary) as his ward (i.e., it was not a betrothal yet), when Mary was only 12 years of age, and had not yet begun her menstrual periods, and her body was unready to conceive. Her conception of Jesus would not occur for at least one year, and most probably for three years in the future. According to the canonical Gospels, Zacharias was struck dumb when an angel told him his wife Elizabeth was about to conceive--an event that occurred several months before Mary herself conceived. The timing is completely wrong.
Zacharias's Death. The cause of Zacharias's death in The Infancy Gospel of James. It says that Zacharias was murdered in the Temple by King Herod, for refusing to reveal the location of his son, John (to become John the Baptist). This is contradicted by several early Fathers of the Church (sic., ante-Nicene, post-Nicene Fathers), including Origin, who said Zacharias was killed because he had allowed Mary to be among the virgins in the Temple. This contradiction detracts from the credibility of this document.
The Problem of Mary Lying
In The Infancy Gospel of James, we see Mary lying to Joseph. When he confronts her about being pregnant (knowing he was not the father), Mary said, "I do not know whence it came to me." Well, Mary did know! She had been told by an angel of God, and she had both believed and accepted it. If, indeed, the Immaculate Conception of Mary herself is a fact, and if we are constrained to believe that she was a sinless woman, this introduces a major problem for Catholic apologetics! A sinless woman cannot sin. Mary lied. Lying is a sin. See the contradiction? Thus this event also detracts from the authenticity, from the credibility of this document.
The Problem of an Inconsistent Report on Zacharias's Murder
In The Infancy Gospel of James, we are told, first, that "the children of Israel did not know how
he (Zacharias) was murdered." Yet later in the same document, we are told that the priests "went
out and reported that Zacharias had been murdered. All the tribes of the people heard it, and
they mourned and lamented him for three days and three nights." This apparent inconsistency
further detracts from the credibility of this document.
The Problem of Genealogy
This 'gospel' has the high priest calling Mary a descendant of David. This is not hinted at in the canonical Gospels. Both Matthew and Luke's genealogies trace Jesus back to David through Joseph. This is consistent with Jewish law, because under that law, the right of ascendency to the throne of Israel was always proven, or traced through the male line - never through the female line. To establish Jesus' right to the throne, Matthew and Luke therefore supplied the proper lineage, with Joseph as the supposed father of Jesus. Not all Jews believed that, of course, but it did fulfill the letter of Jewish law. While it is true that one's biological identity as a Jew is matrilineal (traced through the mother), one's right to royalty had always been patrilineal. Therefore, trying to prove Jesus's linkage back to David through Mary would be a waste of effort, as no Jew would accept such evidence anyhow.
The Problem of Salome's Virginal Test
Here we have what amounts to a legend, and a strange one at that. Supposedly, a midwife named Salome, tests Mary's virginity after the birth of Jesus. No such event is even hinted at in the canonical Gospels. Indeed, why should such a test be made? Even if Jesus was immaculately conceived, Mary's hymen was most assuredly broken during His birth! Thus we have found the source of a myth designed to foster the idea of Mary's perpetual virginity -- an idea unknown to many early Fathers of the Church, and directly contradicted by some of them.(3) Yet a hymen broken by birth, would never prove that Mary had never had intercourse! Rather would it serve to prove something else: that no child had been born of Mary. Another problem that detracts from this documents credibility.
Some Conclusions
Timing. The current Mariological doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is, first of all, a very recent event. It was not promulgated until Pope Pius IX in 1854. Prior to that date, it was a debated issue, not an accepted fact within the Church. I can only wonder why, if it really is factual, it took nineteen centuries for the Church to declare it? Lack of evidence, perhaps? Yet that lack has not changed: it still exists.
The Canonical Gospels. The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception finds no basis at all in the canonical Gospels, nor in the epistles either. In this class we considered what the canonical Gospels have to say about Mary, and we found that they say very little. Rather do we find Jesus rebuking Mary whenever she approaches Him to intercede for others. Nowhere do we see even a hint that Mary was immaculately conceived, or that she remained a perpetual virgin.
Why Did Mary Die? Fathers of the Church, such as the famous Augustine, specifically state that Mary died because of her sins, just like any other person. My research shows that the Church admits that Mary died, and that she was buried either in Ephesus (more legend than fact) or near Jerusalem. The question that arises here is: "Why did Mary have to die?" According to the canonical Gospels and the Epistles, death is the price we pay for our sins. If, in fact, Mary had been sinless, she did not need to die! But she did die. How can we resolve this dilemma?
Source of the Doctrine. It appears that the only source for the Marian doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is this Protoevangelium, the apocryphal, non-canonical The Infancy Gospel of James. As show above, this document is known to be fictional, and to contain a number of internal errors and inconsistencies. The questions here are:
1. "How reliable is a doctrine based solely on a document admitted to be false, of unknown authorship and questionable authenticity, and which is contradicted in a number of points either by the canonical Gospels or the early Fathers of the Church.?
2. "How can we take seriously a doctrine so based?"
3. "Does this not come dangerously close to falling under the censure of Jesus, when he told the
Pharisees that they worshiped in vain because they taught as doctrine the precepts of men." If
nothing else, the "gospel" of James is nothing more that the precepts of an unknown author
whose work contains errors, and parts of which are contradicted either by the canonical Gospels
and/or the early Fathers of the Church.
The Inherent Logic of This Marian Doctrine
Study of many approved (sic., bearing the Imprimatur/Nihil Obstat) writings reveals the basic logic that underpins the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception: for Mary to have immaculately conceived Jesus demands that Mary herself have had an immaculate conception. Otherwise, how could a perfect Messiah issue from a normal, sinful woman?
This logic falls apart when you take it to its own logical conclusion. If it is valid logic, then we are forced to conclude that, for Mary to have been born a sinless person, her mother, too, must have been immaculately conceived. After all, how can a perfect, sinless Mary issue from a normal woman (Anna)? This is precisely the same logic, without the minutest change. If it applies in one case, it must apply in the other.
It gets worse. If we follow this logic faithfully, we must conclude that Mary's grandmother, and her mother, and so on, all had to have had immaculate conceptions all the way back to Noah's wife. This is what reason and logic tell us. I see no escape from it. The only possible escape would be to postulate that, at some point in that long chain of mothers, God decided to intervene a bit differently, and allow a perfect, sinless mother be born of an imperfect, sinful mother.
Yet this postulation brings up yet another conundrum: if God could do that, why not just do it once-with Mary's conception of Jesus? As the King of Siam said, "Is a puzzlement!"
Yes, I know that by this time you will be tempted to ask, "Where is this guy coming from?!" I am coming from that place within me that is more interested in truth than fictionally-based tradition. I am no theologian; just a man who takes his faith very seriously, and is willing to ask questions--even if they are very hard questions. God has blessed me with time to study, with reason, with a logical mind, with access to canonical and historical data. I want to use that time, that data as best possible. And I cannot abandon my mind, my reason, in the doing.
This class on Mary and the Millennium has made much use of Scripture, reason and logic. If my observations and conclusions seem to border on heresy, just know that, after considering the available facts, I have no choice when the obvious questions arise. To ignore or suppress them would be to deny the very gifts God has given to me--and to you. To ignore the questions, to accept doctrines that might well be the precepts of a man (and therefore false doctrines) is to commit a form of intellectual suicide and prevent yourself from the simple truth of the canonical Gospels.
Determine what Luke tells us about Mary.
LEGEND
What this Scripture Says About Mary
What this Scripture says of Mariology
SOME DEFINITIONS
MARIOLOGY: The study of the theology of Mary that focuses on her person, her prerogatives, her mission and her role in salvation history. [The Essential Mary Handbook, Liguori Publications, ©1999 by Judith A. Bauer]
B. STATEMENTS OF FACT: Luke tells us the following about Mary:
1. Angel says she was "highly favored" (not "full of grace" which is quite different).
2. Angel predicts immaculate conception of Jesus.
3. Mary is told to name the child "Jesus."
4. Mary is given information about the destiny of Jesus.
5. Mary admits to not having had sexual intercourse up to that time.
6. Mary Accepts mission to become mother of the Messiah.
7. Mary visits cousin Elizabeth.
8. Cousin Elizabeth confirms Mary to be mother of Messiah.
9. Mary says God is her savior, proving she is in need of salvation.
10. Mary, with Joseph, offer proscribed sacrifice for firstborn at circumcision of Jesus.
11. Mary told by prophet Simeon that Jesus is Messiah.
12. Mary told by prophet Simeon some of Jesus' destiny.
13. Mary told by prophet Simeon she will endure pain because of Jesus.
14. Mary attends a Passover feast when Jesus is twelve years old.
15. Mary worries when Jesus appears lost after that Passover.
16. Mary finds Jesus teaching in the temple.
17. Mary is rebuked by Jesus.
| Highly Favored (Luke 1:28)
G5485 charis khar'-ece From G5463; graciousness (as gratifying), of manner or act (abstract or concrete; literal, figurative or spiritual; especially the divine influence upon the heart, and its reflection in the life; including gratitude):--acceptable, benefit, favour, gift, grace (-ious), joy liberality, pleasure, thank (-s, -worthy). |
See Above
Her Prerogatives - Nothing in evidence
Her Mission
Her Role In Salvation History - Nothing in evidence
30"And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. 31And,
behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
32He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto
him the throne of his father David: 33And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of
his kingdom there shall be no end."
What This Scripture Says About Mary
Mary told to name child Jesus
Mary told she has found favor with God
Mary told of immaculate conception of Jesus
Mary told of destiny of Jesus
What This Scripture Says of Mariology
Her Person
See Above
Her Prerogatives Nothing in evidence
Her Mission Nothing in Evidence
Her Role In Salvation History Nothing in evidence.
34"Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. 36And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. 37For with God nothing shall be impossible. 38And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her."
What This Scripture Says of Mary
Mary, up to the point of the annunciation, had not had sexual intercourse, nor, presumably, did she plan to do so until the finalization of her marriage to Joseph in the future.
Mary accepts the mission to become mother of Messiah.
What This Scripture Says of Mariology
Her Person
See Above
Her Prerogatives Nothing in evidence.
Her Mission Nothing in evidence.
Her Role In Salvation History Nothing in evidence.
39"And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda; 40And entered into the house of Zacharias, and saluted Elisabeth. 41And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: 42And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. 43And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? 44For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy. 45And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord."
What This Scripture Says of Mary
Elizabeth acknowledges that Mary is to be the mother of Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ.
What This Scripture Says of Mariology
Her Person
See Above
Her Prerogatives Nothing in evidence.
Her Mission Nothing in evidence.
Her Role In Salvation History Nothing in evidence.
What This Scripture Says of Mary
Mary says that God is her saviour, thereby admitting that she is a sinner who needs salvation.
Mary glorifies God.
What This Scripture Says of Mariology
Her Person
See Above
Her Prerogatives Nothing in evidence.
Her Mission Nothing in evidence.
Her Role In Salvation History Nothing in evidence.
What This Scripture Says of Mary
Mary goes to Bethlehem, where Jesus is born.
What This Scripture Says of Mariology
Her Person See Above
Her Prerogatives Nothing in evidence.
Her Mission Nothing in evidence.
Her Role In Salvation History Nothing in evidence.
What This Scripture Says of Mary
Mary is with Jesus and Joseph, and is visited by shepherds.
Mary pondered the visit of the shepherds, etc.
What This Scripture Says of Mariology
Her Person See Above
Her Prerogatives Nothing in evidence.
Her Mission Nothing in evidence.
Her Role In Salvation History Nothing in evidence.
What This Scripture Says of Mary
Mary and Joseph offer prescribed sacrifice.
What This Scripture Says of Mariology
Her Person See Above
Her Prerogatives Nothing in evidence.
Her Mission Nothing in evidence.
Her Role In Salvation History Nothing in evidence.
What This Scripture Says of Mary
Mary marvels at prophecy by Simeon.
Mary told by Simeon to expect to suffer
What This Scripture Says of Mariology
Her Person See Above
Her Prerogatives Nothing in evidence.
Her Mission Nothing in evidence.
Her Role In Salvation History Nothing in evidence.
What This Scripture Says of Mary
Mary wories that Jesus is lost
Mary finds Jesus in the temple
Mary is rebuked by Jesus
Mary adds to list of things about Jesus to ponder in her heart
What This Scripture Says of Mariology
Her Person See above
Her Prerogatives Nothing in evidence.
Her Mission Nothing in evidence.
Her Role In Salvation History Nothing in evidence.
Click this box to view or sign our Message Board. See what others have
to say! Enter your own comments about this site, or the information you
find here. If your comments are of general interest, they may be included
in an update to this site.
2.
Babylon, built by Nimrod on the plains of Shinar (Iraq) was the original site of the first apostate religion a "mystery" religion at that. Thus the use of "Babylon" supports the idea that the WOMAN is, in fact, an apostate, 'mystery' type religion. This would appear to be a reference to the Roman Catholic Church! At least that church at the time of the end.3.
Augustine: see De Peccatorum Meritis, ii, c. 24:"Mary, springing from Adam, died because of sin; and the flesh of our Lord, derived from Mary, died to take away sin." (De Peccatorum Meritis, ii, c. 24).