The Immaculate Conception by Francisco Zurbara, c. 1628-30
-
thanks father!
Presently.. I have research regarding the WOMAN in the said chapter of Revelation..
now im onfused if the WOman is ISRAEL..CHURCH..MARY.or EVE..
I am also confused regarding the man child..since some information from John does not fit to Jesus Christ.
i will just asked you again when i have finished my research..
thanks for the time po..
- Fr. Abe, CRS said...
-
Please don't confuse ISRAEL, CHURCH AND MARY the Woman Clothed with the Sun refers to them all and to each of them.
THE DESCRIPTION OF THE MAN-CHILD FITS JESUS VERY WELL:
* The Man-Child is King of Nations
* The Man-Child belongs to Heaven, He has a throne in Heaven.
THIS IS JESUS.
-
[Please don't confuse ISRAEL, CHURCH AND MARY the Woman Clothed with the Sun refers to them all and to each of them.]
yung BABAE sa revelations 12 ay nakadenote ng definite arcticlke and specified na ISA..
if i will consider it as multiple representations, it will results to bias thinking..how about the man child..is it pertaining to one person?
how about the dragon?
these subjects i think are consistently pointing to one person or iisang katuparan ng hula or vision ni San Juan.
I feel upon reading the chapter and the other na nakita ni San Juan hindi maaring maging subjective sa paginterpret..WOMAN.MAN CHILD.DRAGON.are definite..other Subjects in revelations, if taken within context..should also be taken consistently..
if we will argue that Woman is sometimes MAry, because it has similarities with MAry..But some words are not pertaining Mary then we Will Assume the woman is Israel because may katangian na prang Israel..at minsan nmn IGlesia..
I think that is bias and subjective reading and understanding of the Revelations of St. John..
- Fr. Abe, CRS said...
-
[yung BABAE sa revelations 12 ay nakadenote ng definite arcticlke and specified na ISA..]
THE DEFINITIVE ARTICLE DENOTES NUMERICAL UNIQUENESS. ON THE OTHER HAND HOWEVER, IT DOES NOT ELIMINATE MULTIPLE SIGNIFICATION AND INTERPRETATION OF THE SUBJECT. FOR INSTANCE, THE WORD "THE MOTHER". IT REFERS NUMERICALLY TO ONE BUT IT DOES NOT NEGATE MULTIPLE INTERPRETATIONS: IT COULD BE BIOLOGICAL MOTHER, IT COULD BE LEGALLY REFERRING TO THE ADOPTIVE MOTHER, OR ANALOGICALLY TO THE NATION AS 'INANG BAYAN" OR MOTHER COUNTRY.
ALMOST ALL CHRISTIAN INTERPRETERS OF THE BIBLE RECOGNIZE THAT THE BIBLE HAS A LITERAL SENSE, SPIRITUAL SENSE, MORAL SENSE, ANALOGICAL SENSE, HISTORICAL SENSE, SYMBOLIC SENSE, ETC. SO DESPITE THE DEFINITIVE ARTICLE IT DOES NOT REMOVE THE FACT THAT THE TEXT CAN BE CORRECTLY INTERPRETED IN DIFFERENT MANNERS.
[if i will consider it as multiple representations, it will results to bias thinking..]
WHERE IS THE BIAS THERE? IF YOU WILL NOT ACCEPT THE MULTIPLE REPRESENTATIONS YOU WILL FALL INTO NARROW-MINDEDNESS BECAUSE THE TEXT DOES NOT NARROW THE INTERPRETATIONS INTO ONE.
-
[how about the man child..is it pertaining to one person?]
THE CHILD IS UNIVERSALLY ACCLAIMED AS PERTAINING TO ONE PERSON BECAUSE THERE IS ONLY ONE CANDIDATE FOR IT. LITERALLY AND SYMBOLICALLY, SPIRITUALLY AND ANALOGICALLY THERE IS ONLY ONE REFERRED TO AS A MAN-CHILD WHO BECAME KING OF ALL NATIONS AND THAT IS THE LORD JESUS.
[how about the dragon?]
THE DRAGON IS NAMED IN REV 12:9 IT REFERS TO THE ANCIENT SERPENT WHOSE NAME IS SATAN. SYMBOLICALLY IT ALSO REFERS TO SIN, DEATH OR EVIL FORCES IN GENERAL.
[these subjects i think are consistently pointing to one person or iisang katuparan ng hula or vision ni San Juan.]
IF YOU ARE REFERRING TO ONE PERSON THE WOMAN CLOTHE WITH THE SUN IS NO OTHER THAN BUT MARY. BECAUSE ISRAEL IS A NATION NOT A PERSON. THEN THE CHURCH IS AN INSTITUTION NOT A PERSON. SO IF IT IS NOT MARY THEN WHO IS IT FOR YOU?
[I feel upon reading the chapter and the other na nakita ni San Juan hindi maaring maging subjective sa paginterpret..WOMAN.MAN CHILD.DRAGON.are definite..other Subjects in revelations, if taken within context..should also be taken consistently..]
THE PROBLEM WITH YOU IS THAT THE TERM WOMAN ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE IS NOT ONLY REFERRING TO A PERSON BUT ALSO TO ISRAEL AND TO THE CHURCH. THE PHRASE 'A WOMAN IN LABOR' IS ALSO USED FOR ISRAEL WHO IS REFERRED TO AS THE MOTHER ZION OR THE DAUGHTER ZION.
THE WORD WOMAN IS USED FOR MARY IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN WHEREIN JESUS CONTINUOUSLY CALLED HER 'WOMAN' BUT GOD ALSO LIKENED THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL TO THAT WOMAN:
Is 26:17 Like as a woman with child, that draweth near the time of her delivery, is in pain, and crieth out in her pangs; so have we been in thy sight, O LORD.
Jer 4:31 For I have heard a voice as of a woman in travail, and the anguish as of her that bringeth forth her first child, the voice of the daughter of Zion, that bewaileth herself, that spreadeth her hands, saying, Woe is me now! for my soul is wearied because of murderers.
[if we will argue that Woman is sometimes MAry, because it has similarities with MAry..]
I DIDN'T SAY THAT 'THE WOMAN CLOTHE WITH THE SUN' SOMETIMES REFERS TO MARY. IT REFERS TO MARY LITERALLY ALWAYS AND AT ALL TIMES BECAUSE SHE IS THE MOTHER OF THE KING OF ALL NATIONS. BUT AT THE SAME TIME ALLEGORICALLY IT REFERS ALSO TO ISRAEL WHICH IS THE 'DAUGHTER ZION' REFERRED TO BY GOD IN ISAIAH AND JEREMIAH.
[But some words are not pertaining Mary then we Will Assume the woman is Israel because may katangian na prang Israel..at minsan nmn IGlesia..]
WHAT ARE THE WORDS THAT DOES NOT PERTAIN TO MARY? WILL YOU PLEASE CITE THEM?
[I think that is bias and subjective reading and understanding of the Revelations of St. John..]
IT IS YOU WHO IS BIAS AND SUBJECTIVE. YOU ARE THE ONE WHO PUT BIASES IN YOUR WAY OF THINKING. I WAS TEACHING YOU THE MULTIPLE SENSES OF SCRIPTURES AND THEN YOU ERRONEOUSLY USED NUMERICAL STANDARD TO THE BIBLICAL TEXT. YOU ALSO ERRONEOUSLY INTERPRETED IT AS SOMETIMES MARY AND SOMETIMES ISRAEL OR CHURCH. IT IS NOT SOMETIMES. THE MULTIPLE INTERPRETATION IS EXISTING ALL AT ONCE. IT IS APPLYING TO THE TEXT A SCIENTIFIC METHOD OF INTERPRETING IT USING CRITICAL METHOD. IN EVERY SENTENCES WE MUST FIND THE LITERAL MEANING, ALLEGORICAL MEANING OR SYMBOLIC MEANING, ETC. FAILURE TO APPLY THESE THINGS WILL MAKE YOUR INTERPRETATION OF THE TEXT NARROW AND SUPERFICIAL.
.jpg)
![ST. JEROME EMILIANI [1486-1537]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_6dKQTchkJaA/R0lo013dyBI/AAAAAAAAB_4/XzUAPDESwwQ/s1600/St.+Jerome+in+prayer,+small_1.jpg)
Decoding the Woman of the Apocalypse
ReplyDeleteby Edward P. Sri
Who Is the Woman in Revelation 12? Decoding the woman in 12 is not an easy task. [1] Although a strong Catholic tradition sees Mary in this woman who appears in heaven "clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet" and wearing "a crown of twelve stars," most Biblical scholars today rule out a Marian interpretation. Instead, they hold that the woman is a symbol for a collective group of people, either Israel or the Church.
Let’s consider this passage. Three main characters emerge in this scene: the woman, her male child, and the dragon. The woman gives birth to the male child, who is attacked by the dragon. The child is caught up to God and enthroned, while the dragon is defeated and cast down (Rev. 12:1–9).
Two of the three characters are easily identifiable. The dragon is explicitly identified as "that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan" (12:9). The male child is Jesus, for he is described as destined to "rule all the nations with a rod of iron" (Rev. 12:5)—a reference to the description of the messianic king in Psalm 2:9. Furthermore, since the child is caught up to God and sits on His throne, most scholars identify the child as Christ.
However, the identity of the woman is not as explicit. We must first consider five key facts we learn about the woman in Revelation 12.
The Third Character
ReplyDeleteFirst, the woman has a crown of 12 stars, which recalls the 12 Apostles and the 12 tribes of Israel.
Second, she delivers her child with birth pains.[2] This recalls the Daughter Zion prophecies of the Old Testament. Zion was the mountain of Jerusalem that was personified as a mother figure who endured labor pains before giving birth to a child. This image of Lady Zion giving birth became a powerful symbol for how the faithful Jewish people would endure many sufferings in the period leading up to the messianic age (cf. Is. 26:17; 66:7–8).
Third, the woman gives birth to the Messiah, the one who "rules all nations with a rod of iron" (Rev. 12:5; cf. Ps. 2:9).
Fourth, the woman’s son fulfills Genesis 3:15, which foretold how the woman would have a descendant who would defeat the devil. Revelation 12:5–10 dramatically depicts the fulfillment of this prophecy as the dragon (Satan) is cast down to earth and defeated while the woman’s male child emerges enthroned in heaven.
Fifth, the woman experiences the blessings of a new exodus. After her son’s victory over the devil, the woman flees to the wilderness, where she is protected by eagle’s wings and nourished by God (12:6, 13–16)—images that recall the Exodus story in which Israel was brought out into the wilderness, protected by eagle’s wings (Ex. 19:4) and nourished with manna.
The Same Woman: Mary in John 19
ReplyDeleteBut there is still one stronger argument that makes the Marian interpretation of the woman in Revelation 12 even clearer. Here, we will consider 12 in light of another passage in the Johannine tradition: Mary at the Cross in John 19:25–27. In John 19, we see from an earthly perspective what happens on Calvary: Jesus is crucified by the Romans while His mother and the beloved disciple stand at the foot of the Cross. Revelation 12 portrays the same scene, but from a heavenly perspective, so we can see with the eyes of angels what really happens on Good Friday: Calvary is the climactic cosmic showdown between God and the devil, and the real force behind Christ’s crucifixion is not the Romans, but Satan.
While John 19 presents soldiers nailing Jesus to a cross, Revelation 12 shows us the dragon waiting to devour the male child and fiercely battling the forces of heaven (Rev. 12:4–5, 7) and the son emerging victorious, enthroned in heaven, while the devil is defeated and cast down (12:5–9).
In the midst of this ultimate battle stands the "woman" in both scenes. In fact, there are four key parallels between the way the woman in Revelation 12 is portrayed and the way Mary at the in John 19 is described, highlighting how the Book of portrays the woman in ways that bring to mind Mary.
1. "Woman." Just as 12:1 presents a figure who is called a "woman" and is the mother of the Messiah (12:5), so Mary in John 19:25–27 is called "woman" and stands at the as the mother of the Messiah.
2. Birth Pains. Both women are portrayed in scenes involving the Daughter Zion birth pains theme. This is explicit with the woman in Revelation 12:1–2, but the scene of Mary at the Cross in John 19 also has birth pains imagery in the background when the passage is read in light of something Jesus says earlier, in John 16:20–21. While discussing His imminent Passion and death, Jesus tells an allegory of a woman who experiences the pains of labor and the joy of finally giving birth to her child. This allegory foreshadows what Jesus’ disciples will soon experience: pain when they see Him crucified and great joy when they see risen from the dead.
Since this birth pains allegory foreshadows Calvary, its mention of a "woman" in her "hour" symbolizing Christ’s Passion and death clearly stands in the background of the scene of Mary at the Cross—a scene which similarly involves Mary being called "woman" (19:26) at the very hour of Christ’s Passion (cf. Jn. 12:27–31). With this birth pains imagery in the background of Jesus’ crucifixion in John 19, we find further connections between Mary at the and the woman in birth pains in Revelation 12.
3. Satan’s Defeat. Just as the woman in 12 gives birth to a male child who is victoriously taken up to a throne in heaven while the devil is conquered and thrown out (12:5–9), so Mary in John 19 stands at the Cross with her messianic Son in His "hour"—which John’s Gospel portrays as the victorious hour when the devil is cast down (Jn. 12:27–31).
4. Two-Fold Maternity. Both women are described as the mother of Jesus and as having a special motherly relationship with all of Christ’s faithful followers. Just as the woman in 12 is the mother not only of the individual Messiah (Rev. 12:5), but also of who "keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus" (12:17), so Mary at the Cross is presented not only as Jesus’ mother (Jn. 19:25–26), but also as the mother of the beloved disciple—a figure who represents all faithful disciples.[4]
All these parallels—"woman," birth pains, Satan’s defeat, the mother of Christ, and the mother of Christ’s followers—show a unity of thought about the woman figure in John’s writings. Therefore, if the woman in John 19 is clearly understood to be Mary, the woman in 12 also should be seen as Mary.
ReplyDelete[1] For a more in-depth treatment of this complex passage, see my book Queen Mother: A Biblical Theology of Mary’s Queenship (Emmaus Road, 2004), pp. 88–103.
[2] If such a depiction is related to Mary, it would not necessarily be opposed to the Catholic teaching about Mary remaining a virgin while giving birth to Jesus, and thus not experiencing birth pains. In the New Testament, John’s Gospel uses birth pain imagery not to describe a physical birth, but death and Resurrection (Jn. 16:20–21). Similarly, the Book of Revelation itself uses birth imagery to portray (Rev. 1:5). Thus, 12 is likely presenting not Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem, but the metaphorical birth of His death and Resurrection.
[3] A. Feuillet, Jesus and His Mother (Still River, Massachusetts: St. Bede’s Publications, 1984), p. 23.
[4] See my reflection in "Mary’s Last Words: The Spousal Meaning of ‘Do Whatever He Tells You’" (September/October ’07 issue of Lay Witness). lw
Source: http://www.holyspiritinteractive.net/columns/edwardpsri/knowingmary/08.asp
ReplyDeleteSee also my blog:
ReplyDeletehttp://bromarwilnllasos.blogspot.com/2010/08/woman-in-revelation-12-part-ii.html
http://bromarwilnllasos.blogspot.com/2010/07/woman-in-revelation-12-part-i.html
THANK YOU SO BRO. MARS.
ReplyDeleteFRANKLIN LI and GERRY SOLIMAN'S LIES REFUTED HERE:
ReplyDeletehttp://luxloquitur.blogspot.com/2011/01/papal-buster-busted-anti-catholics.html