Veneration of Mary and Luke 11:27-28

[hawkeye125646]

There is many scriptures, via Typlogy, that Mary - the Immaculate Ark of the New Covenant, Ever Virgin and Mother of God... This is my particular method to show about Mary is the New Ark of the covenant!

Read Exodus 25:11-21 the ark of the Old Covenant was made of the purest gold for God's Word. Mary is the ark of the New Covenant and is the purest vessel for the Word of God made flesh

Exodus 40:34 Then a cloud covered the tent of the congregation, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle. 35 And Moses was not able to enter into the tent of the congregation, because the cloud abode thereon, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle. Luke 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. This is a form of Typology, in regards to the Holy Spirit dwelling!

Read Deuteronomy 10:3-5 Hebrew 9:4 and Luke 1:35 The womb of the Virgin contained Jesus: the living Word of God enfleshed, the living bread from heaven, "the Branch" (Messianic title) who would die but come back to life [Luke 1:35].

1 Chron. 13:9 And when they came unto the threshingfloor of Chidon, Uzza put forth his hand to hold the ark; for the oxen stumbled. 10 And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzza, and he smote him, because he put his hand to the ark: and there he died before God. this is an account of Uzzah and the Ark. For God to dwell within Mary the Ark, Mary had to be conceived without sin. For Protestants to argue otherwise would be to say that God would let the finger of Satan touch His Son made flesh. This is incomprehensible.

1 Chron. 15 and 1 Chron 16 these verses show the awesome reverence the Jews had for the Ark - veneration, vestments, songs, harps, lyres, cymbals, trumpets.

2 Sam. 6:7 And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzzah; and God smote him there for [his] error; and there he died by the ark of God. the Ark is so holy and pure that when Uzzah touched it, the Lord slew him. This shows us that the Ark is undefiled. Mary the Ark of the New Covenant is even more immaculate and undefiled, spared by God from original sin so that she could bear His eternal Word in her womb.


2 Sam. 6:2 And David arose, and went with all the people that [were] with him from Baale of Judah, to bring up from thence the ark of God, whose name is called by the name of the LORD of hosts that dwelleth [between] the cherubims. Luke 1:39 And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda;
Luke's conspicuous comparison's between Mary and the Ark described by Samuel underscores the reality of Mary as the undefiled and immaculate Ark of the New Covenant. In these verses, Mary (the Ark) arose and went / David arose and went to the Ark. There is a clear parallel between the Ark of the Old and the Ark of the New Covenant.

2 Sam. 6:9 And David was afraid of the LORD that day, and said, How shall the ark of the LORD come to me? Luke 1:43 And whence [is] this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? How can the Mother / Ark of the Lord come to me? It is a holy privilege. Our Mother wants to come to us and lead us to Jesus. 2 Sam. 6:11 And the ark of the LORD continued in the house of Obededom the Gittite three months: and the LORD blessed Obededom, and all his household. Luke 1:56 And Mary abode with her about three months, and returned to her own house. Mary / the Ark remained in the house for about three months 2 Sam 6:14 And David danced before the LORD with all [his] might; and David [was] girded with a linen ephod. Luke 1:44 For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy. Continuation! 2 Sam 6:15 So David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of the LORD with shouting, and with the sound of the trumpet. Luke 1:42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed [art] thou among women, and blessed [is] the fruit of thy womb.

2 Sam 6:12 And it was told king David, saying, The LORD hath blessed the house of Obededom, and all that [pertaineth] unto him, because of the ark of God. So David went and brought up the ark of God from the house of Obededom into the city of David with gladness. 1 Kings 8:9 There was] nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone, which Moses put there at Horeb, when the LORD made [a covenant] with the children of Israel, when they came out of the land of Egypt.10 And it came to pass, when the priests were come out of the holy [place], that the cloud filled the house of the LORD, 11 So that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud: for the glory of the LORD had filled the house of the LORD. Is correlated with Luke 1:56 And Mary abode with her about three months, and returned to her own house. Luke 2:21 And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.22 And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present [him] to the Lord;

Numbers 17:8 And it came to pass, that on the morrow Moses went into the tabernacle of witness; and, behold, the rod of Aaron for the house of Levi was budded, and brought forth buds, and bloomed blossoms, and yielded almonds.

Hebrews 4:14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast [our] profession. Mary is our Mother and

[ChristianBrothe]

I don't understand why you non-catholic are trying to find ways to make us think we are doing something we are not...With your definition of veneration..or any other little insignivicant detail..you can try and find anyway you want to say that we are worshiping her...but that doesn't change the fact that we arn't...no matter what definition you come up with or no matter what bible versus you find....it will not change that fact that we do not worship mary....so rant and rave about idolitry all you want...because you are literarly wasting your time...we are all past the fact that catholics do not worship mary...soo why continue to find insignificant little details to try and convinces us that we do? Because even if you can find some little tiny itty bitty detail saying we do...it won't change the fact that any catholic does not see it that way...soo why bother looking?

[Mystophilus]

Originally Posted by NHInsider

Well, not really. "On the contrary" is faulty but so is "yes and additionally." The Greek is "rather."

The Greek is tricky: had a simple adversative been wanted, αντι would have sufficed, as in James 4:15.

The term in question in Luke 11:28 is μενουνγε, a tripartite compound. By itself, μεν is generally used for emphatic agreement[/url]. In conjunction (see section B.II.2 of same) with the intensive/resultative but occasionally contrastive ουν , it can be either affirmative or adversative. Meanwhile, γε is primarily intensive. While "on the contrary" expresses a disagreement not justified by the passage in question or the usage of the terms in general, "rather" expresses the adversative function alone, and neglects the rest. I would go, therefore, with Tantum ergo's rendering for naturalness, or for "Yes but particularly" for a more complete sense of all of what is expressed through that term.

In any case, it does not at all say in Greek that Mary is not blessed, and this is the same Gospel which uses κεχαριτωμενη for her (1:28).

[Mystophilus]

Originally Posted by Namaskar

I stumbled upon Luke 11:27-28 some time ago and to me it seems to challenge the veneration of Mary. I've done some research and haven't come up with any solid answers thus far. Any thoughts?

Sorry, I posted my response about the Greek before thinking to check your church affiliation.

One thing that might be useful to point out is that the veneration of Mary is not (contrary to some of the propaganda that goes around Protestant circles) a late addition. We have very clear evidence of it in the second century, in the Protoevangelium of James, one of our most important historical sources for Mary's life but also for the esteem in which she was held. It then continues through the early centuries of the Church.

Remember that, at this time, not only were outstanding literary scholars like Origen and Jerome studying the Scriptures in minute detail, most of the Church were studying the NT untranslated in a language which they themselves used on a daily basis. Even the church in Rome was originally Greek-speaking. They all understood these Scriptures far better than we do now, and this was the period in which Mary was celebrated as Theotokos, 'God-bearer', i.e. Mother of God. That veneration is in no way contrary to Scripture; had it been so, they would never have accepted it.

Something which we Protestants need to learn is how to get past all of the sixteenth and seventeenth century propaganda, so as to recover the baby which the "Reformers" threw out with the bathwater.

[mgoforth]

Originally Posted by Mystophilus

Something which we Protestants need to learn is how to get past all of the sixteenth and seventeenth century propaganda, so as to recover the baby which the "Reformers" threw out with the bathwater.

Or just come back to the Catholic Church...much easier than trying to fix the unfixable.

[ConstantineTG]

Originally Posted by Mystophilus

Something which we Protestants need to learn is how to get past all of the sixteenth and seventeenth century propaganda, so as to recover the baby which the "Reformers" threw out with the bathwater.

That is easy. There is a Church that thrives on preserving the ancient faith, the faith as it is taught by the Apostles and Church Fathers of the First Millennium

[Mystophilus]

Originally Posted by ConstantineTG

That is easy. There is a Church that thrives on preserving the ancient faith, the faith as it is taught by the Apostles and Church Fathers of the First Millennium

There are a great many things which I appreciate about Orthodox theology, hence the fact that I have spent more than a year so far working my way through the Philokalia, but there are far too many things which I appreciate about Anglicanism to consider leaving. Still, if we can have Anglo-Catholics, maybe Anglo-Orthodox would be a good idea.

[pablope]

Originally Posted by Mystophilus

Sorry, I posted my response about the Greek before thinking to check your church affiliation.

Something which we Protestants need to learn is how to get past all of the sixteenth and seventeenth century propaganda, so as to recover the baby which the "Reformers" threw out with the bathwater.

You seem to be well versed in history....you can start writing papers about such things.....why not start.....

[Mystophilus]

Originally Posted by pablope

You seem to be well versed in history....you can start writing papers about such things.....why not start.....

You are very kind, but there are actually plenty of good works on this topic by specialists in the field, and I am afraid that the public images of such things are not formed on the basis of truth.

[joegonz]

And Mary said, "My soul magnifies the Lord, 47* and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, 48 for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden. For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed; 49 for he who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is his name.


I thought Mary was Sinless why then did she need a Savior?

[po18guy]

Originally Posted by joegonz

And Mary said, "My soul magnifies the Lord, 47* and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, 48 for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden. For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed; 49 for he who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is his name.


I thought Mary was Sinless why then did she need a Savior?

Salvation occurred at the moment of her conception. Thus, she was still saved by the grace of God. That same God would ultimately save her even form the oppression of the Romans. Adam and Eve were created after evil existed, yet were also "saved" by the grace of God at the moment of their creation. Both of them fell, while neither Jesus nor Mary did. Actually, Mary could sin, but chose not to, whereas her Divine Son could not sin.