Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant

[stovebolts]

Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant
This is where it gets interesting. The same Greek word for the Glory of the Lord “covering” or “overshadowing” the Ark of the Old Testament is used by Luke at the start of his gospel, where he relates the words of the Archangel Gabriel to Mary. In Luke 1:35 we read: “And the angel answering, said to her: The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee. And therefore also the Holy which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”

The same rarely used Greek word (ἐπισκιάζω or episkiazo), the same idea of God’s overshadowing (the Ark in the Old Testament and Mary in the New Testament), and the same result of God’s presence (the Shekinah Glory in the Old Testament and Jesus, God Incarnate inside Mary’s womb in the New Testament).

I do have a question on this.
i was taught that good theology always comes out of good exegesis. I am sure you are aware that when doing exegesis, there are numerous disciplines one can incorporate. The discipline I see being used for the above redaction is textual. That is, finding common words and their usage. I am assuming you are familiar with this discipline.

As your aware, there were two versions of the Bible when Luke wrote his epistle and there is more evidence that Luke was Jewish and not a gentile. In order to juxtapose the texts of Luke with the text from the Septuagint, you would have to show that Luke quoted from the Septuagint and not the Hebrew.

By way of example, the writer of Hebrews clearly quotes from the Septuagint as there is a clear distinction between the Septuagint and the Mesoretic texts which is indisputable as the quotes are verbatim from the Septuagint. I am assuming you are aware of these. If not, I can provide the texts.

I have not done any textual exegesis on your redactions. The only textual exegesis I have done on Luke’s writings has been confined to Luke and Acts. Can you provide the textual exegesis that shows Luke was referencing the Septuagint and not the Mesoretic? I would assume it would be as simple as finding a quote of the OT from any of Luke’s writings and comparing it with the Mesoretic and Septuagint to find its origins.

If Luke quotes from the Mesoretic, it would be difficult to sustain your redactions from a textual perspective. If however, you can show Luke referenced the Septuagint, it would add validity to your theology.

thanks! And I look forward to your reply.

 

[GodsGrace]

When I read these words in Luke's account, I am reminded what Luke also wrote in Luke 2:19 as Mary heard the words of Jesus, and kept them as treasures.
If we go back to Luke 1:38, Mary had a choice. She heard the word of the Lord, and she kept it, even though she risked being stoned.

For me, when I read Jesus reply in Luke 11, we cannot dismiss Mary. Matthews account is also very similar in this same way.

Where it gets dangerous IMHO is when we take away from Mary what is due to Mary.

That being said, I do not believe we are to pray to Mary, but I do believe she, like others in Scripture are elevated.

I see myself as less than Moses, less than David, less than John the Baptist and certainly less than Mary.

.02

I haven't had time to really follow along, but if we compare what was in the Ark of the Covenant and how Mary is THOUGHT of as being the New Ark of the Covenant, it does turn out to sound like a type of.


The Ark was overshadowed by the Shekinah glory of §God. Ex 40:34
Mary was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit. Luke 1:35

The Ark was the dwelling place of God's presence. Ex 40:34
Mary was the dwelling place of God incarnate. Luke 1:35

The Ark travelled to the hill country of Judea. 2 Samuel 6:1-11
Mary travelled to the hill country of Judea to visit Elizabeth. Luke 1:39

King David lept for joy as the Ark approached. 2 Samuel 6:14-16
John lept for joy as Mary approached carrying Jesus. Luke 1:41

David shouted for joy in the presence of the Ark. 2 Samuel 6:15
Elizabeth shouted for joy in the presence of Mary. Luke 1:42

David asks how the Ark of the Lord could come to him. 2 Samuel 6:9
Elizabeth asks how the mother of her Lord could go to her. Luke 1:43

The Ark remained in the house of Obed-edom for 3 months and his house
was greatly blessed. 2 Samuel 6:11
Mary remained in the house of Elizabeth and Zechariah 3 months. Luke 1:39-56

The Ark returns home to Jerusalem where God's glory is revealed in the temple. 1 Kings 8:9-11
Mary returns home and eventually ends up in Jerusalem where she presents God incarnate in the Temple. Luke 2.21-22

The Ark contained:
The 10 Commandments
Manna
The Priestly Rod


Mary, as the New Ark, held within her:
The Word of God
The Bread of Life
The eternal Priestly King

Just as Jesus is foreshadowed in the O.T., so was Mary.
We either believe that the N.T. is totally contrived to create these foreshadowings...
or we have to accept that the above is more than a coincidence.


Source for the comparisons: https://d2y1pz2y630308.cloudfront.net/6347/documents/2014/10/Mary_Ark_of_The_New_Covenant.pdf

 

[Tradidi]

I do have a question on this. .. Can you provide the textual exegesis that shows Luke was referencing the Septuagint and not the Mesoretic? I would assume it would be as simple as finding a quote of the OT from any of Luke’s writings and comparing it with the Mesoretic and Septuagint to find its origins. If Luke quotes from the Mesoretic, it would be difficult to sustain your redactions from a textual perspective. If however, you can show Luke referenced the Septuagint, it would add validity to your theology.

thanks! And I look forward to your reply.

I don't think it would be that simple. As KJV Today remarked, there are arguments for and against both sides :

"The fact of the matter is that Luke 4:18 matches neither the LXX nor the Hebrew text exactly. The LXX has one clause that the Hebrew text does not have, but the Hebrew text has one clause that the LXX does not have." — KJV Today

And while one scholar can bring up arguments in support of Luke quoting mainly (although not exclusively) from the Hebrew text..

"Luke quotes from the Old Testament scriptures some 30 times in the 24 chapters of his book. He had saturated his mind with sacred literature. He cites from eight different Old Testament books; three times he is quoting from the Septuagint, and the balance is from the Hebrew text." — Christian Courier

..another scholar can argue that Luke's language and style is "modelled on the basis of the language of the Septuagint":

"Luke uses a good literary style of the Hellenistic Age in terms of syntax. His language has a “biblical” ring already in its own time because of his use of the Septuagint style; he is a Greek familiar with the Septuagint, which was written for Greeks; he seldom uses loanwords and repeatedly improves Mark’s wording. The hymns of chapters 1 and 2 (the Magnificat, beginning “My soul magnifies the Lord”; the Benedictus, beginning “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel”; the Nunc Dimittis, beginning “Now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace”) and the birth narratives of John the Baptist and Jesus either came from some early oral tradition or were consciously modelled on the basis of the language of the Septuagint." — Encyclopedia Britannica

Notice also that this last author mentions that the Magnificat in Luke's first chapter is "styled on the Septuagint", which I think would support the idea that the surrounding verses are likewise styled on the Septuagint, if not based on direct quotes.

But I don't think we need to go too far down this road, as the main point is that the argument that Luke is drawing a parallel between the Shekinah Glory cloud overshadowing the Ark in the Old Testament and the Holy Spirit overshadowing the Ark in the New Testament is not based on Luke quoting the Old Testament, but on him drawing the parallel. Drawing a parallel can be done by quoting, but it can also be done by using specific imagery that is not used for anything else. And whether Luke chose ἐπισκιάζω because he quoted the Septuagint, or because it was the best word to describe the idea behind it, ultimately, he chose this particular word and imagery under inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Also note that Catholic theologians are not the only ones who have noticed this parallel. Joseph Thayer, who wrote Thayer's Greek Lexicon which has been lauded as one of the best New Testament lexicons available for any student of New Testament Greek, says this about the word ἐπισκιάζω:

"Tropically, of the Holy Spirit exerting creative energy upon the womb of the virgin Mary and impregnating it (a use of the word which seems to have been drawn from the familiar O. T. idea of a cloud as symbolizing the immediate presence and power of God): with the dative Luke 1:35." — Strong's Concordance

Thanks by the way for your honesty in the other post, in saying that we should give credit where credit is due, and that Mary certainly obeyed the Word of God and deserves credit for it, more so than you and me. The obvious conclusion then is that those who obey the Word of God cannot possibly be more blessed than Mary. All we can do is try to imitate Her.

I wasn't going to post here anymore, but since you asked, and since I see your are honest, I feel obliged to reconsider. I hope to soon finish my next article on the issue of "praying to dead saints". With your permission I will post and discuss it here as well, in it's own thread.

 

[JLB]

I haven't had time to really follow along, but if we compare what was in the Ark of the Covenant and how Mary is THOUGHT of as being the New Ark of the Covenant, it does turn out to sound like a type of.

The ARK contained the sin of rejecting :

The word of God

The high priest chosen by God

The manna which came down from heaven.


These things were a testimony against the children of Israel and foreshadowed how Christ would be rejected.


The Ark and it’s contents were types of Christ, not Mary.


All this does is fortify the position that Mary is Co-Mediatrix with Christ, which is blatant heresy.


Second Vatican Council —

Given this basis, the Vatican Council II here again repeated the titles of Mary as Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix (#62). In its basic definition, a mediator is one who serves as an intermediary between two other parties. Oftentimes, the mediator assists in reconciling differences and bringing the parties to an understanding.

https://catholicstraightanswers.com/why-is-mary-referred-to-as-the-mediatrix/



JLB

 

[stovebolts]

I don't think it would be that simple. As KJV Today remarked, there are arguments for and against both sides :

Hmmm, that's too bad. Now that we know this through the scriptures, either view could be correct or incorrect. Without solid footing in the scriptures, it is my personal preference to not take a position to far in support of this theology. However, we can keep portions that are solid, and there are a few.

Notice also that this last author mentions that the Magnificat in Luke's first chapter is "styled on the Septuagint",

Yes, but this author also claims Luke is a gentile when I find more support for Luke being a Hellenistic Jew. Also, this author attributes the Septuigent for the Greek. This is also not my historical understanding. Perhaps I misunderstood something in my past studies, but the Septuigent was written for Jews who didn't speak Hebrew. These Jews were the Jews who did not return to Israel when Cyrus made his decree.

But I don't think we need to go too far down this road, as the main point is that the argument that Luke is drawing a parallel between the Shekinah Glory cloud overshadowing the Ark in the Old Testament and the Holy Spirit overshadowing the Ark in the New Testament is not based on Luke quoting the Old Testament, but on him drawing the parallel. Drawing a parallel can be done by quoting, but it can also be done by using specific imagery that is not used for anything else. And whether Luke chose ἐπισκιάζω because he quoted the Septuagint, or because it was the best word to describe the idea behind it, ultimately, he chose this particular word and imagery u

I don't take any issue with this.

Thanks by the way for your honesty in the other post, in saying that we should give credit where credit is due, and that Mary certainly obeyed the Word of God and deserves credit for it, more so than you and me. The obvious conclusion then is that those who obey the Word of God cannot possibly be more blessed than Mary. All we can do is try to imitate Her.

I try to be as transparent as possible. I'm not out to win an argument. We all have something to bring to the table.

In the since that Mary carried our Savior for 9 months and raised him from childhood is a blessing not exceeded by anyone. In this way, Mary was blessed more than any other.

As far as imitating her, Paul also encourages us to immitate him, and in Hebrews 10, we have the great cloud to draw encouragement from that we might imitate them as well.

But we only imitate as far as we see them imitate Jesus. First and foremost, we follow Jesus because we are his disciples. We are to be like Jesus, not Mary and not Paul not any of the Apostles. Yes, our faith can be built off the others as examples of those who followed Christ, but only because they point to Christ.

As far as praying to Mary, I don't see any apostolic example of this. By way of Example, I only see Jesus praying to the Father. Even in the Old Testament, I don't see any example of anyone praying to God via proxy.

In short, Mary was blessed more than others, but we don't give her the glory that is due God. (I'm thinking of Moses striking the rock)

 

[Tradidi]

The ARK contained the sin of rejecting :

The word of God

The high priest chosen by God

The manna which came down from heaven.

Unbelievable that you can say the Holy of Holies of the Old Testament can "contain the sin of rejecting," when the Bible teaches us it contained the presence of God Himself.

As far as praying to Mary, I don't see any apostolic example of this. By way of Example, I only see Jesus praying to the Father. Even in the Old Testament, I don't see any example of anyone praying to God via proxy.

The examples are there, and the underlying doctrines are there.

In short, Mary was blessed more than others, but we don't give her the glory that is due God. (I'm thinking of Moses striking the rock)

Honoring the Saints is a different topic which I am happy to deal with, but you may already want to think about John 17:22 where Jesus prays to the Father saying: "And the glory which thou hast given me, I have given to them: that, they may be one, as we also are one."

The honor that Catholics give to Mary and the Saints does not compete with the honor we give to God, but it reflects this honor. Just as the light that is reflected by the moon does not make the sun look less bright, but more bright. God is honored in His saints.

 

[stovebolts]

The examples are there, and the underlying doctrines are there.

Know that I appreciate your voice at the table brother.
I would be open to discussing the examples. The Bible is a pretty big accumulation and I'll be the first to admit there are things written that Ive yet to discover.

Honoring the Saints is a different topic which I am happy to deal with, but you may already want to think about John 17:22 where Jesus prays to the Father saying: "And the glory which thou hast given me, I have given to them: that, they may be one, as we also are one."

I put more emphasis on theology than most church doctrines. One of the theologies that resonates with me is New Exodus theology, and John's epistle helps to solidify that theology.

In Exodus 33, Moses cares for the people and is concerned for their safety once he is gone. The entire chapter is an amazing testimony how Moses intercedes for the people. This is summed up when Moses says, "Show me your Glory". In other words, Moses is saying, "who will you send to save your people". It is at this point God reveals the Messiah to Moses. This interpretation is almost universally accepted in Jewish thought and is supported by the Sages.

Salvation comes through Christ, but Christ empowers us to expand the Church. His glory, is our glory and it all goes back to God's glory.

 

[Tradidi]

Know that I appreciate your voice at the table brother.
I would be open to discussing the examples. The Bible is a pretty big accumulation and I'll be the first to admit there are things written that Ive yet to discover.

Same with me, the more I study the Bible, the more I realise how much depth there is and how little I know.

Can I assume that I have your permission to start a new thread on this topic of praying to Mary and the Saints? I think it's too much to slap onto the back of this thread.

 

[stovebolts]

Can I assume that I have your permission to start a new thread on this topic of praying to Mary and the Saints? I think it's too much to slap onto the back of this thread.

That's really up to JLB. This is his section and I try to be more of a reader than a participant.

I can tell that you are seasoned, and I appreciate your patience and endurance. You already know that I'm not going to go along with praying to Mary, but it's always good to understand the reasoning of others. I try to be tolerant and respectful to my Brothers in Christ, but I am sure you understand that not everyone shares that with me. Looking back as a child, some of the worst fights I've ever had (including stitches) came from my own siblings lol. Somewhat ironic in a way.

Take care.
Jeff

 

[JLB]

Same with me, the more I study the Bible, the more I realise how much depth there is and how little I know.

Can I assume that I have your permission to start a new thread on this topic of praying to Mary and the Saints? I think it's too much to slap onto the back of this thread.

You can start a thread about praying to Mary.

Please use scripture.

Please don’t accuse people of being deceitful if they push back and use scripture.


God bless you.


JLB