In thje Old Testament, what did the Ark contain?
1) The Word of God in stone tablets
2) The Manna; bread from God
3) Aarons rod, symbol of the High Priesthood
In the New Testament, what did the Blessed Virgin carry within her?
1) The Word of God made flesh
2) The Manna which came from heaven (John 6)
3) The True High Priest
This is why we call Mary the "Ark of the New Covenant", and this is based on an interpretive principal called "Typology". Learn how to read the Old Testament in a typological manner, and you will learn how to interpret the Scriptures as the first Christains did, and you will how all of Catholic theology is based on the interpretive principals used by the apostles.
2007-12-21
02:51:49
·
15 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
http://www.catholic.com/audio/1998/mp3/ca980706.mp3
2007-12-21
02:52:06 ·
update #1
Oops, I forgot to ask a question:
QUESTION: Who has listened to Scott Hahn talk about "Typology" ?
2007-12-21
02:55:33 ·
update #2
TO "upyr1": GREAT ANSWER
2007-12-21
02:56:38 ·
update #3
I think humans were the only animals to come out of her, so she couldn't be the ark.. the ark had two of EVERY kind of animal...
OK, it was a joke. I believe that the real ark actually contains (contained) the Emerald Tablet, along with other symbols. But, that's just MHO
2007-12-21 02:58:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by Katie Short, Atheati Princess 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
Great class on Biblical interpretation and typological, allergorical references. It is wonderful to see theological issues brought to light, there are so many other references and inferences made from the Old Testament into the New Testament. Moses and Jesus, Jonah and the risen Christ, etc.. they are a beautiful way to understand the writings of the Bible through the light of a post-resurrection view point.
But it must be made clear that the Old Testament also stands on its own, it has its own message and it was written for its own people.
Love your short class on Typology, God bless and have a great day.
By the way the reference between Mary and the Ark is true. It was a beautiful way for the first Christian during their Eucharisitic celebration to spread the Gospel in a meaningful way to those who had no understanding of the Old Testament and how Christ fulfilled every prophecy, and those who understood the Old Testament to be the only source of truth.
Origen made this clear and even though as I mentioned before everything cannot only be seen in the light of the Risen Christ, it is a great way to tie in history and the present with those who had no New Testament put together yet for them.
2007-12-21 03:10:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by Perhaps I love you more 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes!
"The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.(Luke 1:35)"Compare this with Exodus 40:34 Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle. The language obviously is not the same, but the meaning certainly is. If you can picture what is happening in both scenes, the imagery is identical. Just as the glory of the Lord overshadowed and dwelt in the Ark, so does the glory of the Lord overshadow and dwell in the Blessed Virgin Mary.
And David was afraid of the LORD that day; and he said, "How can the ark of the LORD come to me?" 2 Sam 6:9 (RSV)
And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? Luke 1:43 (RSV)
The similarities here are obvious. both passages repeat the same message, i.e. "How can I be so graced as to be the presence of Holiness". David is referring to the Ark, and Elizabeth to Mary. The Ark was the holiest created thing in the Old Testament, likewise Mary is the holiest created being of the New Testament!
And the ark of the LORD remained in the house of O'bed-e'dom the Gittite three months; and the LORD blessed O'bed-e'dom and all his household. 2 Sam 6:11
And Mary remained with her about three months, and returned to her home. Luke 1:56
Again you see unmistakable parallels drawn. Both the Ark and Mary stayed in the hill country for three months. You could also say that just as O'bed-e'dom and all his household was blessed by the presence of the Ark, so too, was Elizabeth and her household blessed by the presence of 'the mother of the Lord'.
15 So David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of the LORD with shouting, and with the sound of the horn. 2 Sam 6:15
44 For behold, when the voice of your greeting came to my ears, the babe in my womb leaped for joy. Luke 1:44
According to respected scholar James Akin, the greek word used here is "anafametzen" which means 'shouts of joy'. The word is rarely used, and only in connection with a liturgical celebration, and then only when the Ark of the Covenant is present. It literally means "to cry aloud, to proclaim, or to intone" This is a very powerful witness then, to Luke use of this word. If it is only used in liturgy, and only when the Ark is present, then what else could it mean except that Mary truly is the Ark of the New Covenant!!
First, Mary is the holiest created being in the New Covenant! Second, when the new 'Ark' is present, so too will the blessings be present! Third, I'd say that as the Israelites had the old Ark lead them into thier battles, so too, are we to have the new 'Ark' lead us into all our spiritual battles. And lastly, when for nine months Mary carries Jesus in womb, what did she carry but the true Shepherd, "who will rule the nations with a rod of iron"(Rev 12:5), the True Law of God, and the real Bread from Heaven of which "if a man eats he will not die, but live forever(John 6:58).
Yes, Mary is indeed the "Ark of the New Covenant"!! And because she is explains some of the Marian doctrines. Just as the old Ark was made perfect as a dwelling place for the Most High, so too, was the new Ark made perfect (Immaculate Conception) as a dwelling place for God.
As we see in Rev 11:19-12:1 "Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple; and there were flashes of lightning, voices, peals of thunder, an earthquake, and heavy hail. 1 And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars; " That's right, the ark of the New Covenant in all her splendor in Heaven (the Assumption)
2007-12-21 02:59:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by SpiritRoaming 7
·
3⤊
2⤋
Yes she is a metaphore. Early Gnostic Christians understood this as did the Essenes when they were writing New Testament stories 100 years before the proposed birth of Christ, as we would later find in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Take a look at the Scrolls CC you seem to be the type of person that enjoys research....
A cow didn't kick over a lantern in the library in Alexandria.
2007-12-21 02:59:38
·
answer #4
·
answered by ɹɐǝɟsuɐs Blessed Cheese Maker 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
You're preaching to the choir here. In addition, King David danced before the Ark of the Covenant. John the Baptist leaped for joy at the visitation.
2007-12-21 02:57:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by Adoptive Father 6
·
4⤊
0⤋
I see now why they say this.
The typology I knew of was that the Ark was a sign of Christ, and that we are to be IN Him.
2007-12-21 02:58:42
·
answer #6
·
answered by Jed 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Of course she is.... I still wonder what happend to the old Ark though...
2007-12-21 02:54:18
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
She is refered to as the new Ark in Revelation-
the old one is in ethopia.
2007-12-21 02:55:38
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
You know, I love my Roman brothers and sisters. I just have one question. Is it hard to keep up with all of the extra-biblical myths that you have to contort scripture to support?
Why not let go of the extra layers of tradition that have no basis in the early church or the Bible and simply cling to the word of God as it was given to us?
It must be tiring trying to do it your way. All those works... *sigh*
2007-12-21 03:05:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by δοῦλος Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ 5
·
3⤊
4⤋
Interpretive + Theology = Hypocrisy Sorry---your correct on how the Christians stretched meaning in the OT to suit the needs of their nascent belief system. Lest they forget the fundamental flaw in their logic...They're Savior Jesus failed on 85% of the criteria laid out in the OT to qualify as Messiah...yet their interpretive logic dictates that his is in fact not only that but God's (assuming there is one) son. Logic truly dictates that God needs no intermediary to forgive or be reached hence the great Christian hypocrisy of reaching God via Jesus. PEACE!
2007-12-21 02:58:30
·
answer #10
·
answered by thebigm57 7
·
0⤊
6⤋