Who is the woman in Revelations 12?

[Major1]

Of course John has nothing to do with the Immaculate Conceptions. The point is if John can be sanctified in his mother womb, Mary can certainly be sanctified at conception.

Sanctified does not mean sinless my friend.

 

[Major1]

Major: Neither. It is the nation of Israel.

JL: Was natural Israel even a virgin when Christ came? Judgement was brought on natural Israel in 70AD.

Because of unbelief, rejecting Christ, natural Israel was cut off from the one and only Olive Tree=spiritual Israel=Church, see Romans11:1-36. Born again Gentiles have been grafted into that Olive Tree and now Abrahams seed along with all those Jews who accepted and continue to accept Christ in every age. In the last days all natural Israel will be saved as a nation, Rms11:25-26, grafted back into the Olive Tree=the Israel of God, Rms11:1-36.

[Rms2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.]k

[Rms11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. 26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:]k

This is not replacement of Israel but a continuation of Abraham’s seed, spiritual Israel, the Israel of God=Church.

[Gal3:26 For ye are all children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. 27 for as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 and if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise[/b].]k

[1Cor12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or gentiles[/b] , whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.]

Major1: Now, stay close and follow along...... Genesis 3:16...... "Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; in sorrow you shall bring forth children; and your desire shall be to your husband, and he shall rule over you." So, lets connect the "dots" ...

PAIN in childbirth is Gods CURSE upon women, for ORIGINAL SIN ... before that, no pain, after that, PAIN IN CHILDBIRTH...now is that Biblically correct right? Please take your time and read the Bible Scriptures and then do a google search on this to see if I am correct. I am correct but there is safty in numbers. Now We know that the woman in Revelation delivered IN TRAIL AND PAIN = the woman carries the CURSE of PAIN.

JL: Gn3:6 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.]k

God said he would greatly multiply sorrow for birth. Which by implication indicates there could have been some sorrow=pain before the fall. The immaculate conception is a dogma, but whether Mary had pain or not is still open to theological speculation. Most seem to believe Mary suffered no birth pain. Either way it would not change the dogma of her immaculate conception. If there was any pain it would not have to be literal birth pain. It could be concern for what Joseph would do when he found her with child or the pain of having to travel a week in the cold to register in Bethlehem and finding no room in the Inn, giving birth in a cave, etc.

[Gal4:19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,]k

[Rms8:22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.]k

AGAIN...........

Consider the CONTEXT of the Scriptures in Rev. 12:1-2..........
"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."

Which one of the Apostles was a "woman"?
Which one of the Apostles was pregnant?
Which one of the Apostles delivered a child?

Now consider Rev. 12:6
"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."

Which Apostle fled into the wilderness for 3 and 1/2 years?

The "Woman" can not be from the church because the church did not bring forth the child.
The child who is the Christ was the ONE who brought forth the church which means that the woman can not be Mary either.

 

[bbbbbbb]

NO where in Revelation 12 is there any mention of a "VIRGIN".

The real, literal words are......."WOMAN".

1. "A woman clothed with the sun".

This woman has been associated with many different religious ideas. Roman Catholics claim this woman is Mary, pictured as the “Queen of Heaven.”
Are you aware that Mary Baker Eddy (the founder of Christian Science) said she was this woman.

It is common in Roman Catholic art to represent Mary as standing on a crescent moon with twelve stars around her head.

A woman clothed with the sun.........
Scripturally, which is the only way I operate says that this woman clothed with the sun should be identified with Israel, according to Joseph’s dream in Genesis 37:9-11.

In that dream, the sun represented Jacob, the moon represented Joseph’s mother Rachel, and the eleven stars were the sons of Israel which bowed down to Joseph. In this sign with twelve stars, Joseph is now among the other tribes of Israel.

But there is more Scriptures In other Old Testament passages, where Israel (or Zion or Jerusalem) is represented as a woman (Isaiah 54:1-6, Jeremiah 3:20, Ezekiel 16:8-14, and Hosea 2:19-20).

2. (2) The woman gives birth.
Then being with child, she cried out in labor and in pain to give birth.

Being with child:
Later in the chapter, it is clear that this child born of Israel is Jesus (She bore a male Child who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron, Rev. 12:5.

She cried out in labor and in pain to give birth:
The pain described refers to the travail of Israel at the time of Jesus’ birth (under Roman occupation and oppression).

I did not know that about Mary Baker Eddy, although it hardly surprises me. Thanks!

 

[Major1]

I did not know that about Mary Baker Eddy, although it hardly surprises me. Thanks!

Anytime brother!

 

[JLHargus]

JL: Was natural Israel even a virgin when Christ came? Judgement was brought on natural Israel in 70AD.

Major1: NO where is Revelation 12 is there any mention of a “VIRGIN”.

JL: True but the sign God gave rules out a non-virgin Israel conceiving the man child=Christ.

[Isa7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.]k

[Lk1:6 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, 27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.]k

If the dragon is a literal person=Satan and the child is a literal person=Christ, that literal child must have a literal mother=Mary. In Rev the woman is both a person=Mary and symbolic of the Church=spiritual Israel.

Major1: But there is more Scriptures In other Old Testament passages, where Israel (or Zion or Jerusalem) is represented as a woman (Isaiah 54:1-6, Jeremiah 3:20, Ezekiel 16:8-14, and Hosea 2:19-20).

JL: [Hb12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, 23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.]k

I see no problem with those scriptures. It is true OT natural, un-regenerated Israel was represented as a woman or God’s wife. But OT Israel was unfaithful, not a virgin and cut off from the olive tree, with Gentiles being grafted in, Abraham's seed, Rms11:1-36. In Revelation 12 the woman is symbolic of the Israel of God on mount Zion, regenerated spiritual Israel=the Church=bride of Christ=heavenly Jerusalem.

[Rv21: And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.]k

 

[Major1]

JL: Was natural Israel even a virgin when Christ came? Judgement was brought on natural Israel in 70AD.

Major1: NO where is Revelation 12 is there any mention of a “VIRGIN”.

JL: True but the sign God gave rules out a non-virgin Israel conceiving the man child=Christ.

[Isa7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.]k

[Lk1:6 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, 27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.]k

If the dragon is a literal person=Satan and the child is a literal person=Christ, that literal child must have a literal mother=Mary. In Rev the woman is both a person=Mary and symbolic of the Church=spiritual Israel.

Major1: But there is more Scriptures In other Old Testament passages, where Israel (or Zion or Jerusalem) is represented as a woman (Isaiah 54:1-6, Jeremiah 3:20, Ezekiel 16:8-14, and Hosea 2:19-20).

JL: [Hb12:22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, 23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.]k

I see no problem with those scriptures. It is true OT natural, un-regenerated Israel was represented as a woman or God’s wife. But OT Israel was unfaithful, not a virgin and cut off from the olive tree, with Gentiles being grafted in, Abraham's seed, Rms11:1-36. In Revelation 12 the woman is symbolic of the Israel of God on mount Zion, regenerated spiritual Israel=the Church=bride of Christ=heavenly Jerusalem.

[Rv21: And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.]k

Jl, I am sorry to LOL.............But What would classify a nation (Israel) as a "virgin"?????

I know you mean well but the comment pretty much tells us all that your theology is incorrect.

The nation of Israel is the "Woman" in Rev. 12 and can not be Mary.

Again.....this is really not that hard. The "woman" in Rev. 12 delivered in PAIN.
Right?
Now WHY does the woman suffer PAIN when delivering a baby?

PAIN in childbirth is Gods CURSE upon women, for ORIGINAL SIN ... before that, no pain, after that, PAIN IN CHILDBIRTH.

We know the woman in Revelation delivered IN TRAIL AND PAIN = the woman carries the CURSE of PAIN. That is what the Scripture SAYS in Rev. 12.

Now the question must be...

Does Catholicism have as DOGMA, that Mary was SINLESS? Yes, she does, in a brand new Dogma the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION,The RCC says that Mary was without SIN from Conception.

SO THEN......she did NOT carry the CURSE from the Garden, right?
No curse = NO PAIN.
So, EITHER...........
The "woman" in Revelation is NOT Mary { and "she is not" she is the nation of Israel } OR she IS MARY, but the PAIN showed that the DOGMA of the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION IS IN ERROR.
Pick one.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Jl, I am sorry to LOL.............But What would classify a nation (Israel) as a "virgin"?????

I know you mean well but the comment pretty much tells us all that your theology is incorrect.

The nation of Israel is the "Woman" in Rev. 12 and can not be Mary.

Again.....this is really not that hard. The "woman" in Rev. 12 delivered in PAIN.
Right?
Now WHY does the woman suffer PAIN when delivering a baby?

PAIN in childbirth is Gods CURSE upon women, for ORIGINAL SIN ... before that, no pain, after that, PAIN IN CHILDBIRTH.

We know the woman in Revelation delivered IN TRAIL AND PAIN = the woman carries the CURSE of PAIN. That is what the Scripture SAYS in Rev. 12.

Now the question must be...

Does Catholicism have as DOGMA, that Mary was SINLESS? Yes, she does, in a brand new Dogma the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION,The RCC says that Mary was without SIN from Conception.

SO THEN......she did NOT carry the CURSE from the Garden, right?
No curse = NO PAIN.
So, EITHER...........
The "woman" in Revelation is NOT Mary { and "she is not" she is the nation of Israel } OR she IS MARY, but the PAIN showed that the DOGMA of the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION IS IN ERROR.
Pick one.

The rock and the hard place here. The Catholic Church has (as is frequently the case) set up a complete conundrum. Either their dogma of the Immaculate Conception is true or the woman in Romans 12 is Mary who suffered great pain (contrary to the IC) in giving birth to Jesus Christ.

 

[Major1]

The rock and the hard place here. The Catholic Church has (as is frequently the case) set up a complete conundrum. Either their dogma of the Immaculate Conception is true or the woman in Romans 12 is Mary who suffered great pain (contrary to the IC) in giving birth to Jesus Christ.

That was exactly my point brother and that is why there are NO Catholic believers debating such a clear conundrum.!

 

[bbbbbbb]

Isn't that surprising? NOT!

 

[narnia59]

Jl, I am sorry to LOL.............But What would classify a nation (Israel) as a "virgin"?????

I know you mean well but the comment pretty much tells us all that your theology is incorrect.

The nation of Israel is the "Woman" in Rev. 12 and can not be Mary.

Again.....this is really not that hard. The "woman" in Rev. 12 delivered in PAIN.
Right?
Now WHY does the woman suffer PAIN when delivering a baby?

PAIN in childbirth is Gods CURSE upon women, for ORIGINAL SIN ... before that, no pain, after that, PAIN IN CHILDBIRTH.

We know the woman in Revelation delivered IN TRAIL AND PAIN = the woman carries the CURSE of PAIN. That is what the Scripture SAYS in Rev. 12.

Now the question must be...

Does Catholicism have as DOGMA, that Mary was SINLESS? Yes, she does, in a brand new Dogma the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION,The RCC says that Mary was without SIN from Conception.

SO THEN......she did NOT carry the CURSE from the Garden, right?
No curse = NO PAIN.
So, EITHER...........
The "woman" in Revelation is NOT Mary { and "she is not" she is the nation of Israel } OR she IS MARY, but the PAIN showed that the DOGMA of the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION IS IN ERROR.
Pick one.

There are multiple explanations for your proposed "dilemma" which are not mutually exclusive.

One is that if you carefully read Genesis what was told to the woman was "I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing...." which implies birth was never intended to be completely pain free even before sin entered the world.

Second, this is not a "literal" depiction of the birth of Christ. For example, Mary did not give birth to Christ while standing on the moon....

Third is the usage of metaphorical birth pangs within Scripture. (Romans 8:22, Galatians 4:19, Jeremiah 13:21, Hosea 13:12-13, Micah 4:9-10). These pangs can certainly be seen to be metaphorical in a non-literal depiction of the birth of Christ. Many see them to represent the pain that Mary will endure in her role as the mother of Jesus.

The reality is the most reasonable interpretation of the woman in Revelation 12 giving birth to the Savior is Mary, and you've done nothing to create the "you much choose" scenario you believe you have. For what it's worth, Catholic scholars would not disagree she can also represent the nation of Israel (it's not an either/or with such imagery). Christ does come forth from the nation of Israel. But he more specifically comes forth from the person of Mary.

 

[JLHargus]

Major1: AGAIN........... Consider the CONTEXT of the Scriptures in Rev. 12:1-2.......... "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: 2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered."
Which one of the Apostles was a "woman"? Which one of the Apostles was pregnant?
Which one of the Apostles delivered a child?

JL: None, I don’t know anyone who has ever taught such a thing. Rv12:1-2 refers to Jesus’ literal mother and is symbolic of the Church=body of Christ=regenerated Kingdom of David, spiritual Israel.

Major1: Now consider Rev. 12:6 "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." Which Apostle fled into the wilderness for 3 and 1/2 years?

JL: Do you really believe Rv12:1-2 is referring to a man? Rv12:1-2 is referring to a woman. Mary, Christ’s literal mother who literally fled into Egypt, but Rv12:6 would be referring to the symbolic meaning of the woman, the Church who will flee into the wilderness in antichrist’s time.

Major1: The "Woman" cannot be from the church because the church did not bring forth the child. The child who is the Christ was the ONE who brought forth the church which means that the woman cannot be Mary either.

JL: Mary the New Eve and mother of the living brought forth the Church=Body of Christ. In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: 22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit, Eph2:21.

[Eph5:30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. 31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. 32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.]k

Major1: But there is more Scriptures In other Old Testament passages, where Israel (or Zion or Jerusalem) is represented as a woman (Isaiah 54:1-6, Jeremiah 3:20, Ezekiel 16:8-14, and Hosea 2:19-20).

JL: While It is true OT natural Israel is represented as a woman and God’s wife. But OT Israel was unfaithful, not a virgin and cut off from the olive tree. Now those born again by water and of the spirit, Gentiles and Jews are grafted into that same olive tree. Which is now the regenerated restored Davidic Kingdom of Israel with the Son David Christ the King and Mary Queen Mother. In Revelation 12 the woman is symbolic of the Israel of God on mount Zion, regenerated spiritual Israel=the Church=bride of Christ=heavenly Jerusalem.

 

[JLHargus]

Isaiah was sanctified (set apart) as well.

JL: Could you post that verse in Isaiah and I will check it out? I am aware Jeremiah was sanctified before his birth.

[Jer1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.]k

Jer1:5 sanctified=Strong’s=H6942=Hebrew=qadash=sanctify: To consecrate, sanctify, prepare, dedicate, be hallowed, be holy, be sanctified, be separate.

In actual fact, nobody who is born is not set apart for some purpose by God, unless you happen to believe in a God who is not omnipotent.

JL: God is omnipotent but not a tyrant who creates robots, some created to go to hell and some created to be saved. Again, post scripture in support of your statement. I’m not aware of everyone being sanctified before birth or filled with the Holy Spirit before birth except John the Baptist and possibly Jeremiah.

 

[JLHargus]

We have absolutely no indication in any of the writings of the first three centuries of Christianity of the notion of God having purposely created Mary entirely without sin, without any free will, and completely programmed by God.

JL: God persevered Mary from original sin at conception. John the Baptist was fill with the Holy Spirit in his mother’s womb. Mary had free will to choose life or death as does every human being.

[Duet30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:]k

Can you post writings in the first three centuries telling us there are three persons in the one being of God? Or Christ has two natures, human and divine. Or baptism is a symbol only. The Trinity was not defined till 325AD. There was no set canon of the bible till around 380AD.

[Gn3:14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.]

Mary would be at enmity, opposed, to Satan from conception=Immaculate conception. God said, he would put enmity [hostility, opposition] between thee=Satan and the woman=Mary. Her seed (Christ) would be after her. Yet God put enmity between Satan and Mary before Christ was born. Had Mary at any time been under sin, even original sin, she would not have been at enmity with Satan but of Satan’s seed.

[Ex25:8 And let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them. 9 according to all that I shew thee, after the pattern of the tabernacle, and the pattern of all the instruments thereof, even so shall ye make it. 10 And they shall make an ark of [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]tim wood: two cubits and a half shall be the length thereof, and a cubit and a half the breadth thereof, and a cubit and a half the height thereof. 11 And thou shalt overlay it with pure gold, within and without shalt thou overlay it, and shalt make upon it a crown of gold round about.]k

If the Lord commanded the ark of the old covenant, made by hands, to be made to perfect specifications and detail. Covered inside and out with pure gold, that He might dwell among His people. How much more would he cover, in pure holiness, the body and soul of the living ark of the new covenan, not made by hands with the purity of the Holy Spirit inside and out. The ark in which God himself would be made flesh and bodily dwell in order to meet with His people.

[Lk1:46 And Mary said,my soul doth magnify the Lord, 47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. 48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. 49 For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name.]k

What do you say are some of the great things God has done to Mary? Do you call her blessed as all generations of God’s people will do per scripture, or do you just call her dead and gone?

Do you baptize infants, if not do you consider them born without sin? If you say they are born with sin then you are grossly negligent in not baptizing children. Most Protestants do baptize infants.

 

[JLHargus]

Major1, post: 75318700, member: 391026"]Jl, I am sorry to LOL.............But What would classify a nation (Israel) as a "virgin"?????
I know you mean well but the comment pretty much tells us all that your theology is incorrect.

JL: Being a faithful wife which natural Israel was not. I notice you posted no specifics where my theology is incorrect. I would say yours is totally incorrect claiming a non-virgin conceived and gave birth to Christ.

Major1: The nation of Israel is the "Woman" in Rev. 12 and can not be Mary.

JL: Rev1 the woman is symbolic of the New regenerated spiritual Israel.

Major1: Again.....this is really not that hard. The "woman" in Rev. 12 delivered in PAIN. Right? Now WHY does the woman suffer PAIN when delivering a baby?

JL: Did Mary give birth on earth or was Christ born in heaven?
[Rv12:5 And 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. 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.]k
Mary did literally flee into Egypt.

Marjor1: PAIN in childbirth is Gods CURSE upon women, for ORIGINAL SIN ... before that, no pain, after that, PAIN IN CHILDBIRTH.
We know the woman in Revelation delivered IN TRAIL AND PAIN = the woman carries the CURSE of PAIN. That is what the Scripture SAYS in Rev. 12

JL: Where is the woman who travails in pain, on earth or in heaven?
[Rv12:1 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: 2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.]

The woman is symbolic of the Church travailing in prayer to bring forth born again children by water and of the spirit in baptism.

Major1: Now the question must be... Does Catholicism have as DOGMA, that Mary was SINLESS? Yes, she does, in a brand new Dogma the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION,The RCC says that Mary was without SIN from Conception.
SO THEN......she did NOT carry the CURSE from the Garden, right? No curse = NO PAIN.
So, EITHER........... The "woman" in Revelation is NOT Mary { and "she is not" she is the nation of Israel } OR she IS MARY, but the PAIN showed that the DOGMA of the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION IS IN ERROR. Pick one.

JL: You are repeating yourself so I will basically repeat what I posted the first time.

[Gn3:6 Unto the woman he said, I will multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.]k

God said he would greatly multiply sorrow for birth. Which by implication indicates there could have been some sorrow=pain before the fall. The immaculate conception is a dogma, but whether Mary had pain or not is still open to theological speculation. Most seem to believe Mary suffered no birth pain. Either way it would not change the dogma of her immaculate conception. If there was any pain it would not have to be literal birth pain. It could be concern for what Joseph would do when he found her with child plus the pain of traveling a week in the cold to register in Bethlehem and finding, not only, no room in the Inn but no room in the entire town, giving birth in a cave etc.

[Gal4:19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,]k

[Rms8:22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.]k

Major1: So,1. The "woman" in Revelation is NOT Mary {and "she is not" she is the nation of Israel). 2. or she is Mary, but the pain showed that the dogma of the immaculate conception is in error.

JL: Have you evidence Israel was a faithful wife and a virgin?

[Isa7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.]k

[Lk1:13 But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John. 14 And thou shalt have joy and gladness; and many shall rejoice at his birth. 15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb.]

John the Baptist while not conceived without sin was born without sin. He was sanctified in his mother’s womb. There is no reason to believe Elizabeth didn’t have birth pains. With your theory, with pain, John could not have been born sanctified=without sin. Nothing is impossible with God. God become man was formed in the sinless ark of the New Covenant=Mary. It would not be fitting for God become flesh to be formed and carried for nine months in a sinful vessel. Even the ark of the old testament was holy.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Major1, post: 75318700, member: 391026"]Jl, I am sorry to LOL.............But What would classify a nation (Israel) as a "virgin"?????
I know you mean well but the comment pretty much tells us all that your theology is incorrect.

JL: Being a faithful wife which natural Israel was not. I notice you posted no specifics where my theology is incorrect. I would say yours is totally incorrect claiming a non-virgin conceived and gave birth to Christ.

Major1: The nation of Israel is the "Woman" in Rev. 12 and can not be Mary.

JL: Rev1 the woman is symbolic of the New regenerated spiritual Israel.

Major1: Again.....this is really not that hard. The "woman" in Rev. 12 delivered in PAIN. Right? Now WHY does the woman suffer PAIN when delivering a baby?

JL: Did Mary give birth on earth or was Christ born in heaven?
[Rv12:5 And 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. 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.]k
Mary did literally flee into Egypt.

Marjor1: PAIN in childbirth is Gods CURSE upon women, for ORIGINAL SIN ... before that, no pain, after that, PAIN IN CHILDBIRTH.
We know the woman in Revelation delivered IN TRAIL AND PAIN = the woman carries the CURSE of PAIN. That is what the Scripture SAYS in Rev. 12

JL: Where is the woman who travails in pain, on earth or in heaven?
[Rv12:1 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: 2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.]

The woman is symbolic of the Church travailing in prayer to bring forth born again children by water and of the spirit in baptism.

Major1: Now the question must be... Does Catholicism have as DOGMA, that Mary was SINLESS? Yes, she does, in a brand new Dogma the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION,The RCC says that Mary was without SIN from Conception.
SO THEN......she did NOT carry the CURSE from the Garden, right? No curse = NO PAIN.
So, EITHER........... The "woman" in Revelation is NOT Mary { and "she is not" she is the nation of Israel } OR she IS MARY, but the PAIN showed that the DOGMA of the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION IS IN ERROR. Pick one.

JL: You are repeating yourself so I will basically repeat what I posted the first time.

[Gn3:6 Unto the woman he said, I will multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.]k

God said he would greatly multiply sorrow for birth. Which by implication indicates there could have been some sorrow=pain before the fall. The immaculate conception is a dogma, but whether Mary had pain or not is still open to theological speculation. Most seem to believe Mary suffered no birth pain. Either way it would not change the dogma of her immaculate conception. If there was any pain it would not have to be literal birth pain. It could be concern for what Joseph would do when he found her with child plus the pain of traveling a week in the cold to register in Bethlehem and finding, not only, no room in the Inn but no room in the entire town, giving birth in a cave etc.

[Gal4:19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,]k

[Rms8:22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.]k

Major1: So,1. The "woman" in Revelation is NOT Mary {and "she is not" she is the nation of Israel). 2. or she is Mary, but the pain showed that the dogma of the immaculate conception is in error.

JL: Have you evidence Israel was a faithful wife and a virgin?

[Isa7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.]k

[Lk1:13 But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John. 14 And thou shalt have joy and gladness; and many shall rejoice at his birth. 15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb.]

John the Baptist while not conceived without sin was born without sin. He was sanctified in his mother’s womb. There is no reason to believe Elizabeth didn’t have birth pains. With your theory, with pain, John could not have been born sanctified=without sin. Nothing is impossible with God. God become man was formed in the sinless ark of the New Covenant=Mary. It would not be fitting for God become flesh to be formed and carried for nine months in a sinful vessel. Even the ark of the old testament was holy.

It would help folks such as myself immensely if you would kindly click on the "quote" prompt at the bottom right corner beneath the post to which you are replying. Then you can insert your own replies and his post will be set apart neatly in quotes.

In case you are averse to using the "quote" prompt, you could also set your discussion off in contrasting colours, like this -

Marjor1: PAIN in childbirth is Gods CURSE upon women, for ORIGINAL SIN ... before that, no pain, after that, PAIN IN CHILDBIRTH.
We know the woman in Revelation delivered IN TRAIL AND PAIN = the woman carries the CURSE of PAIN. That is what the Scripture SAYS in Rev. 12

JL: Where is the woman who travails in pain, on earth or in heaven?
[Rv12:1 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: 2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.]

 

[Major1]

There are multiple explanations for your proposed "dilemma" which are not mutually exclusive.

One is that if you carefully read Genesis what was told to the woman was "I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing...." which implies birth was never intended to be completely pain free even before sin entered the world.

Second, this is not a "literal" depiction of the birth of Christ. For example, Mary did not give birth to Christ while standing on the moon....

Third is the usage of metaphorical birth pangs within Scripture. (Romans 8:22, Galatians 4:19, Jeremiah 13:21, Hosea 13:12-13, Micah 4:9-10). These pangs can certainly be seen to be metaphorical in a non-literal depiction of the birth of Christ. Many see them to represent the pain that Mary will endure in her role as the mother of Jesus.

The reality is the most reasonable interpretation of the woman in Revelation 12 giving birth to the Savior is Mary, and you've done nothing to create the "you much choose" scenario you believe you have. For what it's worth, Catholic scholars would not disagree she can also represent the nation of Israel (it's not an either/or with such imagery). Christ does come forth from the nation of Israel. But he more specifically comes forth from the person of Mary.

IMO.....The fact is that it does not matter what is proven to you.......as a Catholic believer you will accept whatever you are told to believe by the RCC. Please take the time to to do the BIBLE work on this subject.

#1. To "Increase" the pains of childbirth was a judgment. An INCREASE is still a valid reason and to think that an INCREASE would somehow effect the outcome is just not acceptable.

#2. Mary gave birth to Jesus in Bethlehem which is in ISRAEL. Mary was a JEW. Therefore as a JEW she represented ISRAEL. Therefore, it was her nation which she was in that would be in view.
You may be interested in knowing that in NO WAY is the mother of Christ Biblically symbolized as a woman in a wilderness.

In studying the Old Testament it is apparent that the “woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars” is a direct reference to Joseph’s dream recorded in the Book of Genesis. Here is Joseph’s dream in Genesis 37:9-10.......

"[Joseph] dreamed still another dream and told it to his brothers, and said, 'Look, I have dreamed another dream. And this time, the sun, the moon, and the eleven stars bowed down to me.' So he told it to his father (Israel) and his brothers; and his father rebuked him and said to him, 'What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall your mother and I and your brothers indeed come to bow down to the earth before you?'”.

Joseph was one of the twelve sons of Israel. From his dream we are shown that the sun, the moon, and the twelve stars represent Israel and his family. Israel -- formerly called Jacob -- had twelve sons from which emerge the twelve tribes of Israel.

#3. I do not agree.

"To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."

There is NO VALID reason to "assume" that God did not say exactly what He meant to say.

Deut. 4:2.....
"Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you."

 

[Major1]

Major1, post: 75318700, member: 391026"]Jl, I am sorry to LOL.............But What would classify a nation (Israel) as a "virgin"?????
I know you mean well but the comment pretty much tells us all that your theology is incorrect.

JL: Being a faithful wife which natural Israel was not. I notice you posted no specifics where my theology is incorrect. I would say yours is totally incorrect claiming a non-virgin conceived and gave birth to Christ.

Major1: The nation of Israel is the "Woman" in Rev. 12 and can not be Mary.

JL: Rev1 the woman is symbolic of the New regenerated spiritual Israel.

Major1: Again.....this is really not that hard. The "woman" in Rev. 12 delivered in PAIN. Right? Now WHY does the woman suffer PAIN when delivering a baby?

JL: Did Mary give birth on earth or was Christ born in heaven?
[Rv12:5 And 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. 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.]k
Mary did literally flee into Egypt.

Marjor1: PAIN in childbirth is Gods CURSE upon women, for ORIGINAL SIN ... before that, no pain, after that, PAIN IN CHILDBIRTH.
We know the woman in Revelation delivered IN TRAIL AND PAIN = the woman carries the CURSE of PAIN. That is what the Scripture SAYS in Rev. 12

JL: Where is the woman who travails in pain, on earth or in heaven?
[Rv12:1 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: 2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.]

The woman is symbolic of the Church travailing in prayer to bring forth born again children by water and of the spirit in baptism.

Major1: Now the question must be... Does Catholicism have as DOGMA, that Mary was SINLESS? Yes, she does, in a brand new Dogma the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION,The RCC says that Mary was without SIN from Conception.
SO THEN......she did NOT carry the CURSE from the Garden, right? No curse = NO PAIN.
So, EITHER........... The "woman" in Revelation is NOT Mary { and "she is not" she is the nation of Israel } OR she IS MARY, but the PAIN showed that the DOGMA of the IMMACULATE CONCEPTION IS IN ERROR. Pick one.

JL: You are repeating yourself so I will basically repeat what I posted the first time.

[Gn3:6 Unto the woman he said, I will multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.]k

God said he would greatly multiply sorrow for birth. Which by implication indicates there could have been some sorrow=pain before the fall. The immaculate conception is a dogma, but whether Mary had pain or not is still open to theological speculation. Most seem to believe Mary suffered no birth pain. Either way it would not change the dogma of her immaculate conception. If there was any pain it would not have to be literal birth pain. It could be concern for what Joseph would do when he found her with child plus the pain of traveling a week in the cold to register in Bethlehem and finding, not only, no room in the Inn but no room in the entire town, giving birth in a cave etc.

[Gal4:19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,]k

[Rms8:22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.]k

Major1: So,1. The "woman" in Revelation is NOT Mary {and "she is not" she is the nation of Israel). 2. or she is Mary, but the pain showed that the dogma of the immaculate conception is in error.

JL: Have you evidence Israel was a faithful wife and a virgin?

[Isa7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.]k

[Lk1:13 But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John. 14 And thou shalt have joy and gladness; and many shall rejoice at his birth. 15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb.]

John the Baptist while not conceived without sin was born without sin. He was sanctified in his mother’s womb. There is no reason to believe Elizabeth didn’t have birth pains. With your theory, with pain, John could not have been born sanctified=without sin. Nothing is impossible with God. God become man was formed in the sinless ark of the New Covenant=Mary. It would not be fitting for God become flesh to be formed and carried for nine months in a sinful vessel. Even the ark of the old testament was holy.

It is impossible to follow your presentations and how you post!

 

[bbbbbbb]

IMO.....The fact is that it does not matter what is proven to you.......as a Catholic believer you will accept whatever you are told to believe by the RCC. Please take the time to to do the BIBLE work on this subject.

#1. To "Increase" the pains of childbirth was a judgment. An INCREASE is still a valid reason and to think that an INCREASE would somehow effect the outcome is just not acceptable.

#2. Mary gave birth to Jesus in Bethlehem which is in ISRAEL. Mary was a JEW. Therefore as a JEW she represented ISRAEL. Therefore, it was her nation which she was in that would be in view.
You may be interested in knowing that in NO WAY is the mother of Christ Biblically symbolized as a woman in a wilderness.

In studying the Old Testament it is apparent that the “woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars” is a direct reference to Joseph’s dream recorded in the Book of Genesis. Here is Joseph’s dream in Genesis 37:9-10.......

"[Joseph] dreamed still another dream and told it to his brothers, and said, 'Look, I have dreamed another dream. And this time, the sun, the moon, and the eleven stars bowed down to me.' So he told it to his father (Israel) and his brothers; and his father rebuked him and said to him, 'What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall your mother and I and your brothers indeed come to bow down to the earth before you?'”.

Joseph was one of the twelve sons of Israel. From his dream we are shown that the sun, the moon, and the twelve stars represent Israel and his family. Israel -- formerly called Jacob -- had twelve sons from which emerge the twelve tribes of Israel.

#3. I do not agree.

"To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."

There is NO VALID reason to "assume" that God did not say exactly what He meant to say.

Deut. 4:2.....
"Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you."

That is the glory of Catholicism. Catholics believe anything and everything that comes out of Rome, even if it is completely contradictory. One is never encouraged to think about, much less to question, the dictates of Rome.

 

[narnia59]

IMO.....The fact is that it does not matter what is proven to you.......as a Catholic believer you will accept whatever you are told to believe by the RCC. Please take the time to to do the BIBLE work on this subject.

I have done extensive Bible work on this and other subjects, to include Biblical authority. Based upon that study, I will indeed accept the teaching of the Catholic Church, especially over that of a random internet poster.

#1. To "Increase" the pains of childbirth was a judgment. An INCREASE is still a valid reason and to think that an INCREASE would somehow effect the outcome is just not acceptable.

I really am not following what your point is here. I am simply pointing out that it is apparent that pain was to be part of childbirth even before the fall and after the fall was to be increased. So why would you contend that if Mary had pain during childbirth that means she was not Immaculately conceived?

#2. Mary gave birth to Jesus in Bethlehem which is in ISRAEL. Mary was a JEW. Therefore as a JEW she represented ISRAEL. Therefore, it was her nation which she was in that would be in view.
You may be interested in knowing that in NO WAY is the mother of Christ Biblically symbolized as a woman in a wilderness.



In studying the Old Testament it is apparent that the “woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars” is a direct reference to Joseph’s dream recorded in the Book of Genesis. Here is Joseph’s dream in Genesis 37:9-10.......

"[Joseph] dreamed still another dream and told it to his brothers, and said, 'Look, I have dreamed another dream. And this time, the sun, the moon, and the eleven stars bowed down to me.' So he told it to his father (Israel) and his brothers; and his father rebuked him and said to him, 'What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall your mother and I and your brothers indeed come to bow down to the earth before you?'”.

Joseph was one of the twelve sons of Israel. From his dream we are shown that the sun, the moon, and the twelve stars represent Israel and his family. Israel -- formerly called Jacob -- had twelve sons from which emerge the twelve tribes of Israel.

“You may be interested in knowing that in NO WAY is the mother of Christ Biblically symbolized as a woman in a wilderness.”

No, she simply had to flee into the wilderness after she gave birth when Herod is trying to kill her son.

I do not have any disagreement with the idea that the image can represent Israel. I’m not sure where you have the idea that a Biblical image represents only “one” thing. Christ comes forth from Israel. He most specifically comes forth from the person of Mary. The appearance of the Ark of the Covenant in this scene (which had been lost for hundreds of years) points specifically to Mary and I’m sure if you’ve taken the time to do the BIBLE work on that subject, you will recognize that the Ark is an archetype of Mary.

#3. I do not agree.

"To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."

There is NO VALID reason to "assume" that God did not say exactly what He meant to say.

You do not agree that metaphorical birth pangs are found in Scripture? You do not agree that this is not a literal depiction of the birth of Christ? You do not agree that it would make sense that in a non-literal depiction of the birth of Christ, something like birth pain would be non-literal? Maybe some more specifics would be helpful.

Deut. 4:2.....
"Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you."

So I assume you would reject anything that was added to Scripture after the Torah when this command was issued by God to not “add” anything additional.

 

[narnia59]

That is the glory of Catholicism. Catholics believe anything and everything that comes out of Rome, even if it is completely contradictory. One is never encouraged to think about, much less to question, the dictates of Rome.

Let's just say I've studied Reformed doctrine, Evangelical doctrine, Lutheran doctrine, Anglican doctrine, Seventh Day Adventists, Baptists, Church of Christ, Methodists, Calvinists, Arminians, and the list could go on and on.... and all of their Biblical reasoning.

The differences are not minor, espcially in matters of salvation and all claim their beliefs are based on Scripture.

That is the glory of sola-Scriptura.