Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Dramatic Biblical Moment that almost Every one Missed
Archdiocese of Washington ^ | 2/2/2014 | Msgr. Charles Pope

Posted on 02/03/2014 1:36:37 AM PST by markomalley

The Feast Yesterday of the Presentation of Jesus was a rich fare. In my homily I did not have time to cover all I wanted to. Frankly, the moment of the Presentation was one of the most dramatic in Biblical history, and yet almost no one noticed. Lets consider this astonishing moment.

The first part of this post is review for those of you who read regularly. To skip to the newer insights goo down to the red line.

Joseph and Mary have ascended to Jerusalem to fulfill two ancient mandates: the Rite of Purification for a woman after childbirth and the Rite of Presentation of their firstborn male child, Jesus. These rites set the stage for a dramatic moment in Biblical history, a moment missed by almost everyone. We shall explore this dramatic moment shortly but first a little background.

Jewish law considered that, after a woman gave birth she became ritually impure for a period. While this seems unjust to us, the Jewish notion was rooted in the flow of blood that occurred in childbirth and just about anyone who came in contact with blood incurred a ritual uncleanness for a period of time. The Book of Leviticus has this to say regarding a woman who has given birth:

The LORD said to Moses, “Say to the Israelites: ‘A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period. On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised. Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding. She must not touch anything sacred or go to the sanctuary until the days of her purification are over. If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding. ” ‘When the days of her purification for a son or daughter are over, she is to bring to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting a year-old lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a dove for a sin offering. He shall offer them before the LORD to make atonement for her, and then she will be ceremonially clean from her flow of blood.” ‘These are the regulations for the woman who gives birth to a boy or a girl. If she cannot afford a lamb, she is to bring two doves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for her, and she will be clean.’ ” (Lev 12:1-8).

As you can see, there is a fairly negative concept at work here from a modern viewpoint. A woman becomes ritually unclean by giving birth. This was due not to birth per se but to the flow of blood and/or other fluids at birth. Even more distressing to modern notions is that a woman who gave birth to a daughter was considered ritually unclean for even longer! Alas, it is well that the power of the Church to bind and loose has freed us from this thinking. Keep in mind that this was ceremonial law, not moral law and, hence, the Church is not setting aside immutable moral law in abrogating such notions of ritual impurity.

Obedient to the Law – Nevertheless Joseph and Mary, obedient to law make the dramatic ascent to the Temple, the Son of God carried in Mary’s arms. It is forty days since the birth of the Lord in fulfillment of the Law.

As they ascend the glorious steps to the Temple Mount they also fulfil another requirement of the Law:

You are to give over to the LORD the first offspring of every womb. All the firstborn males of your livestock belong to the LORD. Redeem with a lamb every firstborn donkey, but if you do not redeem it, break its neck. Redeem every firstborn among your sons. “In days to come, when your son asks you, ‘What does this mean?’ say to him, ‘With a mighty hand the LORD brought us out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. When Pharaoh stubbornly refused to let us go, the LORD killed the firstborn of both people and animals in Egypt. This is why I sacrifice to the LORD the first male offspring of every womb and redeem each of my firstborn sons.’ (Ex 13:12-15)

But something even more dramatic takes place here. To understand what it is, let’s look back to 587 BC.

The Babylonians had invaded Jerusalem and the unthinkable had happened. The Holy City was destroyed and, along with it, the Temple of God. Inside the Temple something even more precious than the building had been housed: the Ark of the Covenant.

Recall what the Ark of Covenant was in the Old Testament. It was a box of Acacia wood, covered in gold. Inside it were placed: the two tablets on which God inscribed the Ten Commandments. Also in it was the staff of Aaron, and a vile of the Manna. More importantly, in this box, this ark, dwelt the very Presence of God in Israel. God mysteriously dwelt within, much as is the case today in our understanding of the tabernacle in our Catholic Churches.

The Lost Ark – Incredibly however, the Ark was lost when the Babylonians destroyed the temple and Jerusalem in 587 BC. It was never found again. Some thought Jeremiah had hid it in the Mountains, others that the priests had hastily hid it in the maze of caves beneath the Temple Mount. Others argue it was taken to Ethiopia. But in the end, the Ark had gone missing.

Empty Temple – When the Temple was rebuilt some eighty years later, the Holy of Holies was restored but the Ark was missing. The High Priest still performed the yearly ritual and entered the Holy of Holies, but the room was empty. Some argued for a spiritual presence in the Temple, but in fact the Ark and the certain presence of God were missing in the Temple after 587 BC. The Ark was never found and returned there. Something, someone, was missing. The very Holy of Holies was an empty room, the Ark, and the presence of God it carried were missing: the Ark, the mercy seat, gone. Would it ever be found? Would it ever be returned to the Temple? Would the Holy Presence of God ever find its way to the Temple again?

The ascent to Jerusalem is a steep one. The mountains surround Jerusalem and the City sits up at a higher altitude than the area around it. As the ancient Jews made the climb they sang the psalms of ascent: Psalms 120-134. As Joseph and Mary ascended they too sang the words that instilled joy: I Lift up mine eye to the mountains from whence cometh my help (121)…..I rejoiced when they said to me let us go up to the House of the Lord (122)…..To you O Lord I have lifted my eyes (123)….Like Mount Zion are those who trust in the Lord (125)….Out of the depths I call unto you O Lord! (130)…..Let us enter God’s dwelling, let us worship at the Lord’s footstool. Arise O Lord and enter your dwelling place, You and the Ark of your strength! (132)….Come and bless the Lord, You who stand in the House of the Lord Lift your hands to the Sanctuary and bless the Lord. The Lord bless you from Zion (134).

Singing these songs, Mary carried Jesus. The climb was even more difficult carrying a newborn babe. But the burden was sweet. A final ascent up the stairs to the Temple Mount. Likely they entered on the southern side through the Huldah gates. Going up the steep stairs, through the tunnel in the walls and emerging on to the bright Temple platform above.

God had returned to His Temple. He, and the Ark who carried him, were found. Mary the Ark, carrying Jesus in her arms. Jesus, very God, true God from True God. Yes, God and the Ark had been found and God was once again present among His people on the Temple Mount. Scripture says:

And the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his Temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts. But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? (Mal 3:1-2)

What a dramatic moment. And yet what a remarkable understatement by God! If I were to direct the moment I would have called for trumpet blasts, peals of thunder and multitudes of angels! And everyone would fall to their knees in recognition of the great fulfillment and the great return of God to his Temple.

Yet, it would seem only an elderly Man and woman took any note at all: Simeon and Anna. They alone understood they were in the presence of greatness and beheld the drama of the moment:

Now there was a man in Jerusalem called Simeon, who was righteous and devout. He was waiting for the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. It had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not die before he had seen the Lord’s Christ. Moved by the Spirit, he went into the temple courts. When the parents brought in the child Jesus to do for him what the custom of the Law required, Simeon took him in his arms and praised God, saying: “Sovereign Lord, as you have promised, you now dismiss your servant in peace. For my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared in the sight of all people, a light for revelation to the Gentiles and for glory to your people Israel.” The child’s father and mother marveled at what was said about him. Then Simeon blessed them and said to Mary, his mother: “This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against, so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. And a sword will pierce your own soul too.” There was also a prophetess, Anna…Coming up to them at that very moment, she gave thanks to God and spoke about the child to all who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem. (Luke 2)

Yes, here was the dramatic moment awaited for centuries. The ark of God was found (Mary), and God (Jesus) returned to his temple. But only a few noticed. Just a few understood and celebrated.

And what of us? At every Mass Jesus, God himself is present. Yet how many notice? Do they really see him? Or do they see only the human priest and the human elements of the Mass. Do you see? Do you notice? Are you Simeon? Anna? Mary? Joseph? Or are you just among those on the Temple Mount who miss the dramatic moment of God with us?


TOPICS: Catholic
KEYWORDS: msgrcharlespope
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-67 next last

1 posted on 02/03/2014 1:36:37 AM PST by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Biggirl; ConorMacNessa; Heart-Rest; Mercat; Mrs. Don-o; Nervous Tick; RoadGumby; Salvation; NYer; ..

Msgr Pope ping


2 posted on 02/03/2014 1:37:27 AM PST by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: markomalley; Tax-chick; GregB; Berlin_Freeper; SumProVita; narses; bboop; SevenofNine; ...

Ping!


4 posted on 02/03/2014 3:08:44 AM PST by NYer ("The wise man is the one who can save his soul. - St. Nimatullah Al-Hardini)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #5 Removed by Moderator

To: markomalley

We still do it. It is magnificent.

http://www.goarch.org/chapel/liturgical_texts/churching


6 posted on 02/03/2014 3:55:22 AM PST by Kolokotronis (Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Brilliant!! Many Thanks for this!! This also will greatly enhance meditating on the Presentation during the Joyful mysteries.


7 posted on 02/03/2014 4:04:11 AM PST by stonehouse01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Great post!

At the presentation the Ark and the living God at last returned to the Temple.

Simeon stood there as the representative of those thousands before him who had patiently awaited the return of God. He spoke these words.

Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace according to thy word. For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; to be a light to lighten the Gentiles and to be the glory of thy people Israel.

It's as if Simeon was the representative of the Old Covenant: and this was the moment when the Old Covenant graciously recognized and gave way to the New.

8 posted on 02/03/2014 4:12:09 AM PST by agere_contra (I once saw a movie where only the police and military had guns. It was called 'Schindler's List'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Alas, it is well that the power of the Church to bind and loose has freed us from this thinking.

Hmm. So the Church has the power to override God's commands.

Good to know.

9 posted on 02/03/2014 4:16:00 AM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
Say rather that Christ gave His Church the power to bind and loose.
And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

and also:

But when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will teach you all truth.

These are Christ's words. He gives His Church both sacramental and doctrinal power.

In this case the Church has indeed recognized that ritual impurity (including female impurity after birth) belonged to the old order. We live under the New Covenant.

Hope this was helpful.

10 posted on 02/03/2014 4:30:48 AM PST by agere_contra (I once saw a movie where only the police and military had guns. It was called 'Schindler's List'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Using the text from Opening the Word (a great app which I recommend) he left out the phrase after the line about the sword, “and you yourself a sword will pierce so that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.” I’ve been meditating on that phrase all weekend. I’m open to suggestions from you as to what it means.

Also, climbing up a steep mountain after giving birth would be difficult. Seems reasonable to wait several weeks to go. Perhaps the length of time was longer with girls because the Lord knew that they were going to have a harder time in the world and needed more time to bond with mom.


11 posted on 02/03/2014 4:58:30 AM PST by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

bookmarked


12 posted on 02/03/2014 5:02:10 AM PST by babygene ( .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

>Sort of neat how everything fits together.

According to Rev. 11:19, the ‘Ark of the Covenant’ is in Heaven. It must have been taken up from the Earth at some point.

-Frank


13 posted on 02/03/2014 5:09:43 AM PST by thepoodlebites (and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: thepoodlebites
The meaning of Revelation is cryptic, of course - but the part about the Ark in heaven seems to be after a lot of events that haven't happened yet (wormwood, a third of the stars disappearing etc).

At some point doubtless the Ark will be taken up to Heaven.

14 posted on 02/03/2014 5:28:18 AM PST by agere_contra (I once saw a movie where only the police and military had guns. It was called 'Schindler's List'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra

” At some point doubtless the Ark will be taken up to Heaven.”

She’s already there.

” 29. Among the holy writers who at that time employed statements and various images and analogies of Sacred Scripture to Illustrate and to confirm the doctrine of the Assumption, which was piously believed, the Evangelical Doctor, St. Anthony of Padua, holds a special place. On the feast day of the Assumption, while explaining the prophet’s words: “I will glorify the place of my feet,”[27] he stated it as certain that the divine Redeemer had bedecked with supreme glory his most beloved Mother from whom he had received human flesh. He asserts that “you have here a clear statement that the Blessed Virgin has been assumed in her body, where was the place of the Lord’s feet. Hence it is that the holy Psalmist writes: ‘Arise, O Lord, into your resting place: you and the ark which you have sanctified.”’ And he asserts that, just as Jesus Christ has risen from the death over which he triumphed and has ascended to the right hand of the Father, so likewise the ark of his sanctification “has risen up, since on this day the Virgin Mother has been taken up to her heavenly dwelling.”[28]”

Pius XII, Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus.


15 posted on 02/03/2014 5:50:19 AM PST by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
That's right Mark, and well said.

For the thread: Mary is truly regarded as the Ark of the New Covenant. She literally carried God within her. She is the sanctified Ark of God.

I remember that one Greek title for Mary is Theotokos - the "God-bearer". Very right and proper.

At the presentation in the temple she carried God back to the Temple, from which the presence of God had long been absent.

The gentleman that I was replying to was - I believe - referring to the Ark of the Old Covenant. This seems likely to be the Ark referred to in the passage that he cited, as Mary appears elsewhere in Revelation (clothed with the sun and with the moon beneath her feet).

16 posted on 02/03/2014 6:18:30 AM PST by agere_contra (I once saw a movie where only the police and military had guns. It was called 'Schindler's List'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra

” The gentleman that I was replying to was - I believe - referring to the Ark of the Old Covenant.”

We always need to keep Hebrews in mind, e.g., Heb 8:5 (” They worship in a copy and shadow of the heavenly sanctuary, as Moses was warned when he was about to erect the tabernacle. For he says, “See that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.””), Heb 10:1 (” Since the law has only a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of them...”), etc.

Since the heavenly ark has been made manifest, the prefigurement is not going to be of any great significance.


17 posted on 02/03/2014 6:43:36 AM PST by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Nice. Thanks for posting.


18 posted on 02/03/2014 6:56:30 AM PST by tioga (Every knee shall bend, every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

You know, that is a really good point.

There exists in heaven a real sacrifice - offered by Jesus our true High Priest - of which the service in the Jewish sanctuary (with its rules against impurity, the use of animal blood and the ‘old’ Ark) was only a faint shadow or outline.

The Mosaic Ark and the old sacrifice have now been fulfilled by the Blood of the Lamb and the sacrifice of the Mass.

I daresay that the Mosaic Ark will be brought safe into heaven and given a place of honor. It carried God’s presence and was the type or shadow of our salvation.

But now God gives His very self to us in the Mass. We ourselves become Arks of the Covenant every time we receive Him.


19 posted on 02/03/2014 7:15:33 AM PST by agere_contra (I once saw a movie where only the police and military had guns. It was called 'Schindler's List'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce; agere_contra; markomalley; metmom; boatbums; caww; presently no screen name; ...
Alas, it is well that the power of the Church to bind and loose has freed us from this thinking.

Hmm. So the Church has the power to override God's commands.

RCs are indeed not to objectively examine the Scriptures in order to ascertain the veracity of RC doctrines, as she presumes to exalt herself above that which is written.. (cf. 1Cor. 4:6)

"The intolerance of the Church toward error, the natural position of one who is the custodian of truth, her only reasonable attitude makes her forbid her children to read or to listen to heretical controversy, or to endeavor to discover religious truths by examining both sides of the question. This places the Catholic in a position whereby he must stand aloof from all manner of doctrinal teaching other than that delivered by his Church through her accredited ministers." — (John H. Stapleton, Explanation of Catholic Morals, Chapters XIX, XXIII. the consistent believer (1904); Nihil Obstat. Remy Lafort, Censor Librorum. Imprimatur, John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York ; http://www.gutenberg.org/files/18438/18438-h/18438-h.htm)

..having once found the true Church, private judgment of this kind ceases; having discovered the authority established by God, you must submit to it at once. There is no need of further search for the doctrines contained in the Christian Gospel, for the Church brings them all with her and will teach you them all. You have sought for the Teacher sent by God, and you have secured him; what need of further speculation?

“All that we do [as must be patent enough now] is to submit our judgment and conform our beliefs to the authority Almighty God has set up on earth to teach us; this, and nothing else.”

He willingly submits his judgment on questions the most momentous that can occupy the mind of man-----questions of religion-----to an authority located in Rome.”

Absolute, immediate, and unfaltering submission to the teaching of God's Church on matters of faith and morals-----this is what all must give..”

The Vicar of Christ is the Vicar of God; to us the voice of the Pope is the voice of God. This, too, is why Catholics would never dream of calling in question the utterance of a priest in expounding Christian doctrine according to the teaching of the Church;”

He is as sure of a truth when declared by the Catholic Church as he would be if he saw Jesus Christ standing before him and heard Him declaring it with His Own Divine lips.” - Henry G. Graham, "What Faith Really Means", (Nihil Obstat:C. SCHUT, S. T.D., Censor Deputatus, Imprimatur: EDM. CANONICUS SURMONT, D.D.,Vicarius Generalis. WESTMONASTERII, Die 30 Septembris, 1914 ); http://www.catholictradition.org/Tradition/faith2-10.htm]

The following statement by Roman Catholic apologist Karl Keating regarding the teaching of the Assumption of Mary is an illustration of this very point.

Still, fundamentalists ask, where is the proof from Scripture? Strictly, there is none. It was the Catholic Church that was commissioned by Christ to teach all nations and to teach them infallibly. The mere fact that the Church teaches the doctrine of the Assumption as definitely true is a guarantee that it is true.” — Karl Keating, Catholicism and Fundamentalism (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1988), p. 275.

Yet not only does Scripture not teach record this of Mary much her being crowned already, and made the Queen of Heaven besides others things said of the Mary of Rome , but the Assumption even lacks evidence from the earliest church "fathers."

"...the notion of Mary's assumption into heaven has left no trace in the literature of the third, much less of the second century. M. Jugie, the foremost authority on this question, concluded in his monumental study: 'The patristic tradition prior to the Council of Nicaea does not furnish us with any witness about the Assumption.'" (Raymond Brown [Sulpician Father; S.S.], "Mary In The New Testament" [Mahwah: Paulist Press, 1978], p. 266)

But Rome has presumed to infallibly declare she is and will be perpetually infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and subject-based) formula, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares.

And Rome's presumption extends even to her priests. As Ligouri, whose writings were declared free from anything meriting censure by Pope Gregory XVL (1839) in the bull of his canonization) asserts,

With regard to the mystic body of Christ, that is, all the faithful, the priest has the power of the keys, or the power of delivering sinners from hell, of making them worthy of paradise, and of changing them from the slaves of Satan into the children of God. And God himself is obliged to abide by the judgment of his priests, and either not to pardon or to pardon, according as they refuse or give absolution, provided the penitent is capable of it. " Such is," says St. Maximus of Turin, " this judiciary power ascribed to Peter that its decision carries with it the decision of God." 2 The sentence of the priest precedes, and God subscribes to it. .” – Dignity and Duties of the Priest, St. Alphonsus Ligouri, Vol. 12, p. 2

The supreme power of the priestly office is the power of consecrating...Indeed, it is equal to that of Jesus Christ...The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows his head in humble obedience to the priest's command...For the priest is and should be another Christ. — O'Brien, The Faith of Millions, 255-256.

Besides more than the apostles being present when these words about binding and loosing were spoken, (cf. Lk. 24:13ff) "Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning," (Rm. 15:4) and Mt. 18:15-18 follows the OT model of judgment, in which Moses took "wise men, and understanding," and charged them as judges, "Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him." (see Deuteronomy 1:13-18) Matters too hard for them went to the “supreme court.” (Dt. 17:8-13) And it also was mandated that the king be given a copy of the Law to live and judge by. (Dt. 18:18.19)

And thus in the New Testament we see apostolic instruction for the local church to choose wise men from among themselves to judge temporal matters, (1Cor. 6:1-6) and wise men full of the Holy Spirit as deacons, (Acts 6:3) and the ecumenical council for larger issues. (Acts 15)

However, as regards Acts 15, the veracity of the ruling therein rested upon scriptural warrant, (Is. 11:10; Amos 9:11,12; Joel. 2:28; Gen. 22:18; Is. 41:22; cf. Acts 11:18); (Gen. 34:2,27; 35:2; Ex. 20:3-5; Gen. 9:4; Lev. 3:17; Rm. 15:8-12,19; Num. 23:19 Amos 9:11-12) and neither the Old Testament for the New Testament magisterial examples required or inferred perpetual assured (conditional) infallibility of office, which Rome claims. And as this is a critical aspect of Rome, she therefore cannot be the one true church.

In addition, what the power of binding and loosing is also manifest to be in the New Testament is that of exercising discipline such as in 1 Corinthians 5, and special cases of intercession such as James chapter 5. Men such as the apostles had more veracity and power than they, as we see in acts chapter 5 with two dead people.

However, the power of binding and loosing does not constitute Roman Catholic confession in which the people regularly have to come to pastors to find forgiveness of sins. Nowhere do we see disciples coming to NT pastors to have sins forgiven. And when a New Testament pastor did confess that he was guilty, he told the man himself to pray to God that perhaps the thought of his heart would be forgiven him. Upon which the man asked for intercessory prayer, which is scriptural, but there is nothing there about Peter granting absolution. (Acts 8:22-24)

Confession itself is good and right, the only confession commanded in Scripture, is that which is exhorted in James 5, which is a general expectation to confess in this one to another, not simply to pastors. “Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” (James 5:16) And they are promised, If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (1 John 1:9)

20 posted on 02/03/2014 7:25:59 AM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212
as she presumes to exalt herself above that which is written

Unless you believe in the gnostic Gospels, you have already accepted that the Church has the authority to ratify scripture - to say what should be regarded as scripture and what should not.

For those who haven't investigated them - the stuff in some of those Gnostic gospels is pretty whacked out. It's 'scripture' - of a sort. But (oh boy) what scripture.

We must either accept that the Church indeed has authority to declare what is scripture and what is not - or we have no consistent basis for ruling out-of-bounds those weird 'Gospels' that depict Christ baking his friends in an oven, turning bread into birds or being suspended over Jerusalem by his hair.

21 posted on 02/03/2014 7:40:55 AM PST by agere_contra (I once saw a movie where only the police and military had guns. It was called 'Schindler's List'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra

So does that mean that the Quran is the spiritual equivalent of the Bible?


22 posted on 02/03/2014 7:41:16 AM PST by bramps (Go West America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: bramps

Well, no. The Bible is ratified by the Church. The Quran has no scriptural standing whatsoever.

Pope John Paul II famously kissed the Quran in an act of diplomacy. Misguided in my opinion, though it is my pious hope that perhaps that act helped bridge an emotional divide and brought some muslims to Christ.

But neither he nor any Catholic believes what Moslems believe. Our one shared concept is Monotheism, and they vehemently deny the Trinity and the divinity of Christ.


23 posted on 02/03/2014 7:56:23 AM PST by agere_contra (I once saw a movie where only the police and military had guns. It was called 'Schindler's List'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra

But neither he nor any Catholic believes what Moslems believe.
.........................................................
The Pope seems to believe that the Bible and the Quran will both lead you to the same place:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlqgL-hAC-M#t=89
“Sharing our experience in carrying that cross, to expel the illness within our hearts, which embitters our life: it is important that you do this in your meetings. Those that are Christian, with the Bible, and those that are Muslim, with the Quran. The faith that your parents instilled in you will always help you move on.”


24 posted on 02/03/2014 8:15:08 AM PST by bramps (Go West America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra

>This seems likely to be the Ark referred to in the passage
>that he cited, as Mary appears elsewhere in Revelation
>(clothed with the sun and with the moon beneath her feet).

Now this gets interesting. There is a theory that I have come to believe is true, that the Conception occurred on June 17, 2 BC (Venus and Jupiter merged in the constellation Leo), an amazing conjunction. Virgo the Virgin follows Leo and just after the Conception, the Sun was near the head of Virgo while the crecent moon was at her feet, Aug. 27, 2 BC. Rick Larson has a great video about these astronomical events. I think that the Birth may have occured on April 3, 1 BC, ~nine months later, and the Magi visited later that year (my speculations). There is recent evidence that Herod died in 1 BC, not 4 BC, specifically Dec. 29, 1 BC (lunar ecplipse that night).

Another amazing sign was that on Friday, April 3, 33 AD (Passover), the moon rose that evening engulfed in a total lunar eclipse and appeared blood red. The moon was in the constellation Aries (the Ram), the perfect sacrifice. I find these events to be extremely interesting.


25 posted on 02/03/2014 8:22:50 AM PST by thepoodlebites (and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212

I have no expectation of changing minds who have been programmed to boast they are responsible for the Bible. And then to completely ignore what they claim they own. Why the need for God or His only Begotten Son when the whole doctrine is warped around Mary?

The conception of Christ was in December not the birth, so this date is way off base and Mary went dirty for several months.


26 posted on 02/03/2014 8:29:55 AM PST by Just mythoughts (Jesus said Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: bramps

That excerpt is rather encouraging.

You can’t see that he was exhorting Muslims to carry their cross and expel the illness within their hearts?

Islam is a rabid death cult. As we know: its members risk death if they become Christians. John-Paul’s message almost reads like a coded message to those many people trapped inside Islam.

It’s pretty obvious what their cross is. I thank God I’ve been spared from it.


27 posted on 02/03/2014 8:31:09 AM PST by agere_contra (I once saw a movie where only the police and military had guns. It was called 'Schindler's List'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: thepoodlebites

>This seems likely to be the Ark referred to in the passage
>that he cited, as Mary appears elsewhere in Revelation
>(clothed with the sun and with the moon beneath her feet).

Oops, need to correct an error.

Now this gets interesting. There is a theory that I have come to believe is true, that the Conception occurred on June 17, 2 BC (Venus and Jupiter merged in the constellation Leo), an amazing conjunction. Virgo the Virgin follows Leo and just after the Conception, the Sun was near the head of Virgo while the crecent moon was at her feet, Aug. 27, 2 BC. Rick Larson has a great video about these astronomical events. I think that the Birth may have occured on April 3, 1 BC, ~nine months later, and the Magi visited later that year (my speculations). There is recent evidence that Herod died in 1 BC, not 4 BC, specifically Dec. 29, 1 BC (lunar ecplipse that night).

Another amazing sign was that on Friday, April 3, 33 AD (Passover), the moon rose that evening engulfed in a total lunar eclipse and appeared blood red. The sun (not moon) was in the constellation Aries (the Ram), the perfect sacrifice. I find these events to be extremely interesting. Larson says something about the alignment, don’t remember the details, sun in Aries, full moon opposite, in Virgo?, the moon blood red and full (it is finished), while the (Conception or Birth) was during a crescent moon (life begins). Pretty neat.


28 posted on 02/03/2014 8:33:08 AM PST by thepoodlebites (and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Nothing in Scripture teaches Mary as an ark.
The exaltation of Mary continually exceeds even what God says about her.
In the process, glory is stolen from God.


29 posted on 02/03/2014 8:37:28 AM PST by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thepoodlebites

John the Baptist’s conception took place in June. And John was 6 months in the womb when Mary visited his mother, her cousin Elizabeth. It makes total and complete sense that the ‘light for this world’ would be sent to this earth on the shortest day of sunlight in the Northern Hemisphere.

Taxes and censuses were collected after the harvest, which would make the birth at the end of our September.


30 posted on 02/03/2014 8:37:51 AM PST by Just mythoughts (Jesus said Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

**God had returned to His Temple. He, and the Ark who carried him, were found. Mary the Ark, carrying Jesus in her arms. Jesus, very God, true God from True God. Yes, God and the Ark had been found and God was once again present among His people on the Temple Mount. Scripture says:

And the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his Temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts. But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? (Mal 3:1-2)**

Very moving!


31 posted on 02/03/2014 9:00:20 AM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
Nothing in Scripture teaches Mary as an ark.

That's odd. Most copies of the Bible mention who Jesus's mother was. Have a look in the New Testament. It should be there somewhere.

Mary is the Mother of God. She had a pivotal role in our salvation, just as Eve had a pivotal role in our near-destruction.

In perfect submission to God's word she brought God into the world.

Mary carried God for nine months in her womb and for many years in her arms.

She could indeed be called the Ark: carrying God across the weary desert of pre-Christian history. In that sense the Mosaic Ark pre-figured her, just as the Mosaic sacrifice prefigured Christ's holy and living sacrifice.

Mary is not God. Confused onlookers notwithstanding, no Catholic believes that she is God.

But she is greater than any other created being - above all angels and archangels. The titles we give to her - Ark of the Covenant, Virgin of Virgins, Theotokos and so forth - these all come from her God-given status as Mother of God.

The archangel Gabriel called Mary "Full of Grace". She is depicted in Revelation clothed in the Sun with the Moon beneath her feet. Clearly God wishes her to be treated with respect!

Hope this was helpful.

32 posted on 02/03/2014 9:06:29 AM PST by agere_contra (I once saw a movie where only the police and military had guns. It was called 'Schindler's List'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra

Clients need me. Good evening, and may God bless us all.


33 posted on 02/03/2014 9:21:27 AM PST by agere_contra (I once saw a movie where only the police and military had guns. It was called 'Schindler's List'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

Good point. The Ark of the Covenant is, as the name implies, a vessel carrying the Covenant.

It’s contents were
1) Aaron’s Rod that budded,
2) A Pot of Manna, and
3) The Broken Tablets from Mt Sinai.

On top of the Ark is the Mercy Seat, upon which the blood is shed to atone for sin.

Atop the Ark of the Covenant, facing one another, are the 2 Cherubim, representing God’s Perfect Judgment and His Perfect Righteousness, both which comprise His Perfect Holiness.

His Perfect Righteousness, when faced with anything unrighteous (such as sin), demands Perfect Justice in Judgment of that before it. His Perfect Justice, demands Perfect Righteousness in the Judgment before them. They keep each other in check, always comprising His Perfect Holiness.

Those items in the Ark represent three cases of disobedience to His Plan. The Pot of Manna represents the rejection of His Providence. The rod that budded represents man’s disobedience to legitimate authority. The tablets represent man’s disobedience to His Law.

His Shed Blood atones for these items.

Mary doesn’t fulfill these elements, even if she is righteous.


34 posted on 02/03/2014 9:22:50 AM PST by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
Why the need for God or His only Begotten Son when the whole doctrine is warped around Mary?

Indeed. After all according her devotees of her, she shed her blood for our sins as well, and they have quicker recourse to Mary than to the Lord, whose power is all but unlimited, and whose prayers are like commands to Him. Etc .

35 posted on 02/03/2014 9:37:39 AM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra

Good evening? Where art thou?


36 posted on 02/03/2014 9:39:15 AM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra; bramps; aMorePerfectUnion; Just mythoughts; redleghunter
Unless you believe in the gnostic Gospels, you have already accepted that the Church has the authority to ratify scripture - to say what should be regarded as scripture and what should not.

We must either accept that the Church indeed has authority to declare what is scripture and what is not - or we have no consistent basis for ruling out-of-bounds those weird 'Gospels' that depict Christ baking his friends in an oven, turning bread into birds or being suspended over Jerusalem by his ha

I see: then let us examine your RC compelled logic.

1. So concurring with an entity on some of its judgments means you depend on and must affirm its authority and claims?

2. Presuming you hold Rome is that entity, thus you hold that an infallible magisterium is necessary to authoritatively recognize and establish what is of God and what is not, and so that what it rejects or affirms must be rejected or affirmed by the faithful, if they will be faithful?

37 posted on 02/03/2014 9:40:58 AM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion; Cvengr
If the Mary of Rome is the Ark, then she is in the hands of the Philistines. But making Mary the Ark is at best an argument from silence, but so is such things as prayer to departed saints in Heaven, as in fact RC doctrine is not dependent on Scriptural warrant for its veracity, and which RCs are not to search the Scripture for in order to ascertain its truthfulness.

And as with how Rome looks toward toward Mary (see above link), Israel looked more to the Ark than what is contained, and the Ark was later captured by the Philistines. (1Sam. 4-6)

And above the Ark was the mercy seat, representing Heaven, upon which two cherubim with raised wings and facing each other, covered the ark. From this place between the two cherubim God would to speak to Moses. (Ex. 25:17-22)

And thus rather than Mary, the Ark best represents Christ, gold representing His glory, as Christ is the brightness of God's glory, and the express image of His person, (Heb. 1:3) and who contained the law and the words of life, and the rod of God as did the Ark. (Heb. 9:4) And by whom God spoke to man, as the word was made flesh, taking on the common “wooden” body of man, but as John said, “we have beheld his glory His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” (Jn. 1:14)

But being judged according to outward appearance, He was taken by the enemy and crowned with thorns, only to return to His own, and will return, crowned as Lord and Savior. (Rv. 19:12)

And it is in Christ that believers have direct access to commune with God. Heb. 10:19) The fact that Christ came through Mary does not justify the focus being on her with its aforementioned type of exaltation any more than on Israel, of whom Christ came. (Rm. 9:5)

In addition, as for a place of gold, the Ark can be said to represent the New Jerusalem, which city will be pure gold, and is decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls. (Rv. 18:16; 21:8,21)

As for a women so bestowed with gold, the only women in the N.T. covered with gold is “the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth:” "And 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: " (Revelation 17:4)

38 posted on 02/03/2014 9:49:06 AM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr

“Good point. The Ark of the Covenant is, as the name implies, a vessel carrying the Covenant.

It’s contents were
1) Aaron’s Rod that budded,
2) A Pot of Manna, and
3) The Broken Tablets from Mt Sinai.

.................

EXCELLENT explanation why the simplistic and false adoration of Mary is wrong in this context. You did a great job in few words.


39 posted on 02/03/2014 10:55:37 AM PST by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: agere_contra

It was not only not helpful, it is false.

First I commend to you the simple explanation here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3118659/posts?page=34#34 as to what the Ark was and why Mary was not those things.

Mary was not the “mother of God”. Mary provided the human dna for the Son of God.
Mary did not “bring God into the world”. God has always been everywhere by nature. God the Father brought His Son into the world. He used Mary.

“She could indeed be called the Ark:” - you could call her a garage too, but that would not make her a garage.

“In that sense the Mosaic Ark pre-figured her, just as the Mosaic sacrifice prefigured Christ’s holy and living sacrifice. “ - No where does Scripture call her a pre-figurement or type. You can look at clouds and see a horsey, but the cloud is not a horsey.

“But she is greater than any other created being - above all angels and archangels. The titles we give to her - Ark of the Covenant, Virgin of Virgins, Theotokos and so forth - these all come from her God-given status as Mother of God. “

1. She is not greater than any other created being. God does not say so.
2. You spoke correctly when you wrote, “The titles we give to her” because humans have perverted what God said to make it say more. God never gave her those titles.
3. God never even called her Mother of God.

“The archangel Gabriel called Mary “Full of Grace”. She is depicted in Revelation clothed in the Sun with the Moon beneath her feet. Clearly God wishes her to be treated with respect! “

He didn’t call her “Full of Grace” as a title. He stated she was highly favored as a recipient of God’s grace.

Revelation does not reveal Mary as clothed with the Sun and the Moon beneath her feet. This is not Mary.

God treated Mary with Grace.

Catholics and Orthodox make too much of what God said. Protestants often make too little.


40 posted on 02/03/2014 11:05:39 AM PST by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr
It’s contents were 1) Aaron’s Rod that budded, 2) A Pot of Manna, and 3) The Broken Tablets from Mt Sinai.

Good overview, but i cannot recall where it says that the broken tablets were what was placed in there.

Also of note is the postulation here on reconciling 1 Kings 8:9 with Heb. 9:4.

41 posted on 02/03/2014 1:41:42 PM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr; agere_contra; Salvation; Ann Archy; stonehouse01; tioga
1) Aaron’s Rod that budded.

The rod is a symbol of authority.

Christ, the Good Shepherd.

Christ, the Judge.

2) A Pot of Manna, and

The bread from heaven that kept God's people alive.

John 6:31ff Our fathers did eat manna in the desert, as it is written: He gave them bread from heaven to eat…I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall not hunger: and he that believeth in me shall never thirst.

3) The Broken Tablets from Mt Sinai.

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us

Those items in the Ark represent three cases of disobedience to His Plan.

You are critically incorrect here. The items in the ark are prefigurements of Christ.

And God, the Holy Spirit overshadowed the ark and filled it (cf. Exodus 25).

Now we could run through more prefigurement. How the ark traveled on the way to Jerusalem and stopped at a small town in the hill country outside Jerusalem (and then how Mary traveled to Elizabeth...in the hill country outside Jerusalem). How David leaped for joy (how John the Baptist leaped for joy).

But I don't want to bother with it, as it wouldn't change your thinking in the least bit.

After all, Catholicism has nothing to do with the Bible and no amount of quoting the Bible by Catholics will change some folks' minds about it.

42 posted on 02/03/2014 2:16:43 PM PST by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

“no amount of quoting the Bible by Catholics “

Anyone can quote. Quoting to support something not taught is called taking it out of context... Regardless of denomination.


43 posted on 02/03/2014 2:25:51 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
Anyone can quote. Quoting to support something not taught is called taking it out of context

True, and that is one of my chief complaints against anti-Catholic antagonists

... Regardless of denomination.

Having said that, if you can show where I cited something that would change its meaning "in context," I'd like to read that.

44 posted on 02/03/2014 2:35:43 PM PST by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

“Having said that, if you can show where I cited something that would change its meaning “in context,” I’d like to read that.”

You opined out interesting things that are not taught. You use it to make Mary into something God didn’t teach. A “type” that isn’t revealed as a type, is an interesting observation and no more.

You can see a horse in the clouds, but it isn’t a horse. It remains just a horse-shaped cloud. When you insist it is sky horse and teach horses have power over the sky, you’re just making up things that go far beyond reality.


45 posted on 02/03/2014 4:34:46 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
After all, Catholicism has nothing to do with the Bible and no amount of quoting the Bible by Catholics will change some folks' minds about it.

Both are false statements, and the issue for me relative to your statement is not simply whether the golden ark prefigured Mary - and i do not disallow you can make a case for that, but i do reject that as helping warrant the demigodess stature ascribed in manifold ways to the Mary of Rome - but the issue now it is that while you appeal to Scripture for your interpretation, you cannot claim full assurance upon that basis, lest you be as an evangelical, and your goal in using Scripture must be to convince us to submit to Rome in order to find real assurance of Truth.

Moreover, as the veracity of RC doctrine is not dependent upon the weight of Scriptural substantiation, nor do they even need any actual evidence thereby, then your interpretation carries no real weight even for Catholics, unless Rome officially teaches it.

Furthermore, as RCs have great liberty to interpret Scripture in order to support Rome, then unless Rome officially teaches it another RC could interpret the Ark differently.

46 posted on 02/03/2014 5:10:50 PM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
You opined out interesting things that are not taught. You use it to make Mary into something God didn’t teach.

Really?

The problem I have with the statement is that you haven't shown me that God has taught otherwise. In essence, my interpretation of what you wrote is that although I have cited Scripture and cited it in context, I've applied an improper interpretation to the passages I've cited.

Yet this has been the orthodox belief since the beginning of Christianity. To demonstrate that,

At that time, then, the Saviour appeared and showed His own body to the world, (born) of the Virgin, who was the “ark overlaid with pure gold,” with the Word within and the Holy Spirit without; so that the truth is demonstrated, and the “ark” made manifest. Hippolytus, in Daniel 6 (From around 200 AD)

Or, from a few decades later:

Most of the holy fathers, and patriarchs, and prophets desired to see Him, and to be eye-witnesses of Him, but did not attaint hereto. And some of them by visions beheld Him in type, and darkly; others, again, were privileged to hear the divine voice through the medium of the cloud, and were favoured with sights of holy angels; but to Mary the pure virgin alone did the archangel Gabriel manifest himself luminously, bringing her the glad address, "Hail, thou that art highly favoured!" And thus she received the word, and in the due time of the fulfilment according to the body's course she brought forth the priceless pearl. Come, then, you too, dearly beloved, and let us chant the melody which has been taught us by the inspired harp of David, and say, "Arise, O Lord, into Your rest; You, and the ark of Your sanctuary." For the holy Virgin is in truth an ark, wrought with gold both within and without, that has received the whole treasury of the sanctuary. St. Gregory Thaumaturgus, Homily 1 On the Annunciation (from c. 260 AD)

Again, I have no interest in posting all of the respective quotes. Nor am I trying to assert that the above two that I did quote are Divinely Inspired and on a par with the Scriptures...so don't go there. The reason I did quote those two is to show that this is no new idea. It is not a product of the medieval Church (in fact, both those quotes pre-dated the First Council of Nicea and even the Edict of Milan. So they would both be from a period before Constantine went and "paganized" the Church (an Alexander Hislop allusion with the last). I also don't believe that either Hippolytus or Gregory created that belief out of whole cloth and, considering one was in Rome and the other in Asia Minor, it's doubtful that they were horribly close collaborators.

The point is that the interpretation I offer is one that is consistent with the vast majority of Christian thought for the Church's first 1,500 years (the only Patristic writer that I can think of who said anything contrary was Irenaeus, who thought of the Ark as Christ's body...and I can see some major issues with that thought -- on the surface, it sounds almost Nestorian). But you say "you're wrong" without showing where I'm wrong.

So where am I wrong?

47 posted on 02/03/2014 7:02:03 PM PST by markomalley (Nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good -- Leo XIII)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212

Good point. Deut 10:2 points out that God remade 2 tablets from stock made by Moses and gave them to Moses and Moses came down and placed them in the Ark.

Other studies observe that when a contract or covenant is made, one copy is given to both parties to keep as the original agreement. One set being those given to Moses for Israel and the other retained by God in the Ark. I don;t know if that teaching is consistent, but I had been taught that perspective.

It appears Hebrew tradition holds the broken and whole pieces were both placed in the Ark, but Deut 10 clearly states nothing else was in that ark than the two remade tablets.


48 posted on 02/03/2014 7:19:05 PM PST by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

The Ark may be a prefigurement of Jesus Christ, with the wood representing His humanity and the gold His Diety. It doesn’t seem consistent to make a blood offering on the Mercy seat which covers the Ark, unless the offering covers all sin, so unless they represent the sin imputed to Christ, I don’t find the contents to represent Christ. I agree He is given all authority, He provides, and He fulfills the Law, but that is consistent with those pieces representing our sin in those areas.


49 posted on 02/03/2014 7:22:27 PM PST by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Thanks for posting this outstandingly illuminating article by Msgr. Charles Pope, markomalley!    There is a lot to unpack here, and this article is definitely a keeper.

Almighty God established a very special, real "God Presence" in the tiny "Ark of the Covenant", then later, Almighty God established a very special, real "God Presence" inside the tiny body of the Blessed Mary, and Almighty God also establishes a very special, real "God Presence" in the tiny Sacred Hosts of His Holy Eucharist today, just as He solemnly proclaimed He would as recorded in numerous texts in the Bible.

It is amazing how so few people there in the Temple back then at the "Presentation" (two -- Simeon and Anna) actually recognized God's Salvation in the form of that little baby Jesus, and also how few ever recognized God in Jesus throughout His entire life here on earth -- even to His death on Calvary, when most human beings there were just too ignorant and foolish and blind to recognize who He really was, and yelled evil, insulting things at Him, and grievously attacked and killed the "Son of God".

That same kind of blindness continues to this very day, with these "know-it-all", stubborn, willfully ignorant, self-appointed-authority types who simply cannot/will not permit the Holy Spirit to open their eyes to the Real Presence of Jesus Christ today in the Holy Eucharist which God Himself instituted.    In their foolish pride, they sadly "prefer the darkness to the light", as Jesus said many would.

Just as some saw just a human baby in the Temple, or saw just a strange human man telling them to "eat His flesh and drink His blood" (as recorded in John 6) and promptly abandoned Him, or saw just a mocked and severely beaten human man hanging and dying on cross on Calvary, some today see just bread and wine, not the Real Presence of our Lord and our God in His Holy Eucharist, as He solemnly proclaimed in numerous biblical citations.    In their stubbornly foolish ignorance, and prideful, self-inposed blindness, they all thought/think they knew/know better than God.

I believe the fate of those who mocked and rejected the Real Presence of God back then (in His humanity) will be the same fate as those who stubbornly and willfully mock and reject the Real Presence of God today in His Holy Eucharistic Presence.

Thanks again, markomalley, and have a great evening!

50 posted on 02/03/2014 8:14:28 PM PST by Heart-Rest (Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. Gal 6:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-67 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson