The woman in Revelation 12:1

[smellycat]

This is the Catholic church again raising Mary to a position she does not deserve

she is the mother of the son of God in flesh.
she is very highly honoured.
a Goodly vessel.
God enough for God,she Good enough for me.

[DeaconDan]

Rev 12:2 She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth.
The writer said here that Mary suffered no pain at child birth

It is Catholic doctrine that Mary did not suffer labor pain because Jesus practically teleported from the womb to the manger. The argument of "polyvalent symbolism" becomes less compelling when the traits attached to the symbols contradict your doctrine.

Even though there is no biblical evidence of Mary s assumption

If there were biblical evidence, it would not be an assumption.

Every thing points to Israel as the women This again is the Catholic church elevating Mary to a position that is contrary to scripture

Catholics use circular reasoning here. They use this passage to elevate their view of Mary and they use their elevated view of Mary to interpret this passage to be about Mary.

[Lily]

Thankyou for you're opinions everyone, I've read each one carefully but still, for me, the parallel between this verse and Genesis 37:9-11 are to close for me, for this " woman " to be Mary.

In my opinion, to say the woman is Mary, is saying that God only has a plan for us ( Christians ), that it's only us that are going to take part in the tribulation.
Unless I have Ezekiel 36:26-27 and Romans 11:26 very wrong, didn't God promise that he would reestablish his relationship with this nation ?

That is what I meant Steve in the other thread by " believing Israel ", that I take this verse and the woman, to be believing Israel, that the woman is symbolic of Israel to which the Messiah would enter.

[Steveg]

There are several reasons to identify Mary as the woman of Revelation 12. But that does not exclude other valid interpretations since Revelation is a complex and symbolic book with layers of meaning. None of the suggestions (Mary/Eve/The Church/Israel) fit all the criteria which suggests multiple interpretations.

Firstly two of the characters in the drama are identified individuals.
The dragon is identified in the text as Satan.
The child can be identified as Jesus as he is the one who will rule with a rod of iron (ref Psalm 2:9)
Therefore it is reasonable that the third character is an individual.

Secondly the woman is identified as the mother of Jesus (the child who is to rule with a rod of iron). This is Mary.

Thirdly the woman is identified as the mother of all those who keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus. This is the Church, and Mary is the mother of the Church – on two counts, firstly John 19:26-27), secondly she is the mother of Jesus who is the head of the Church of which we are the body. So again this identifies the woman as Mary

Fourthly John prepares for this scene (the woman) with a great drama of the sighting of the ark of the covenant with lightning, thunder , an earthquake and hailstorm. Then this ark is revealed to be a woman. Now Mary is the ark of the new Covenant (I won’t go into all the details of that now). But again this points to Mary.

Fifthly the woman is identifies as a queen with a crown on her head – the Queen of Heaven, which is Mary.

Now what about the symbolism of the Church in Rev 12. Well Mary is the mother of the Church and can therefore represent the Church in this passage as well.

And the symbolism of Israel? As Abraham is the father of Israel so Sarah is the mother of Israel
Sarah is a foreshadowing or type of Mary, so again Mary can stand for Israel.

This is not exalting Mary by Catholics, but a recognition of the exalted position God has given her.

[DeaconDan]

Firstly two of the characters in the drama are identified individuals.
The dragon is identified in the text as Satan.
The child can be identified as Jesus as he is the one who will rule with a rod of iron (ref Psalm 2:9)
Therefore it is reasonable that the third character is an individual.

The dragon is identified as Satan, but the dragon's heads and horns shows that the dragon is not an individual. The dragon is various kings acting as agents of Satan.

Revelation itself has a reference to the saints themselves ruling with a rod of iron. The woman is identified as the mother of the saints, not as the mother of Jesus. The saints rule as agents of Christ.

Thirdly the woman is identified as the mother of all those who keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus. This is the Church, and Mary is the mother of the Church – on two counts, firstly John 19:26-27), secondly she is the mother of Jesus who is the head of the Church of which we are the body. So again this identifies the woman as Mary

In all the Bible, Mary is never identified as the mother of the church, the mother of the saints, or the ark of the covenant, or any other thing Catholics assign to her beyond the physical/surrogate mother of the incarnation. You confuse your interpretation (or Catholic doctrine) with the evidence (aka begging the question). You accept Catholic teachings as fact, teachings that carry no weight with Protestants.

Heavenly Jerusalem is explicitly identified as "our mother" by the Apostle Paul. Heavenly Jerusalem is compared to a bride in Revelation. How many mothers do we have?

[Steveg]

The dragon is identified as Satan, but the dragons heads and horns shows that the dragon is not an individual. The dragon is various kings acting as agents of Satan.

Revelation itself has a reference to the saints themselves ruling with a rod of iron. The woman is identified as the mother of the saints, not as the mother of Jesus. The saints rule as agents of Christ.

She only gave birth to one child, the one who is to rule with a rod of iron. That child is Jesus.
And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: (Rev 19:11-15)


The reference is perfectly clear.

In all the Bible, Mary is never identified as the mother of the church, the mother of the saints, or the ark of the covenant, or any other thing Catholics assign to her beyond the physical/surrogate mother of the incarnation. You confuse your interpretation (or Catholic doctrine) with the evidence (aka begging the question). You accept Catholic teachings as fact, teachings that carry no weight with Protestants.

Heavenly Jerusalem is explicitly identified as "our mother" by the Apostle Paul. Heavenly Jerusalem is compared to a bride in Revelation. How many mothers do we have?

(RCC teaching is not permitted on the main board )

[ProphecyKid]

Thankyou for you're opinions everyone, I've read each one carefully but still, for me, the parallel between this verse and Genesis 37:9-11 are to close for me, for this " woman " to be Mary.

In my opinion, to say the woman is Mary, is saying that God only has a plan for us ( Christians ), that it's only us that are going to take part in the tribulation.
Unless I have Ezekiel 36:26-27 and Romans 11:26 very wrong, didn't God promise that he would reestablish his relationship with this nation ?

That is what I meant Steve in the other thread by " believing Israel ", that I take this verse and the woman, to be believing Israel, that the woman is symbolic of Israel to which the Messiah would enter.

I know you might think it is Mary and there might be a few reasons to believe such. But the passage itself shows how this cannot be Mary.

1. Mary didn't go into the wilderness for 1260 prophetic days.

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.

2. Mary was not persecuted by the dragon.

Rev 12:13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.

3. The Dragon never turned on any of Mary's children (which I dont even think she had) after Christ ascended. Neither did he turn on Mary after Christ ascended.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

But proving it is not Mary is not enough. The correct interpretation is needed. The majority of the symbolic language in Revelation is taken from the rest of the bible. A woman was used to represent Israel in the Old testament and the church in the New Testament. This woman therefore as used in the bible many times represents Israel or the church. Mary plays a part in this development because she gave literal birth to Jesus but Mary was apart of the church. The same thing can be said for the dragon and Herod. The dragon used Rome to try to destroy Jesus but Herod was the Roman who played the biggest role in that happening. But yet the dragon does not represent Herod just as the woman does not represent Mary. They were both apart of the broader symbolic representation.

The church after being in persecution by the dragon through the Romans, through the descendants of the Romans still had a remnant. And these people are said to still keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus. Understand as well that Revelation 12 and 13 has a bit of intersection. The 42 months is the same as the 1260 days for as the dragon persecuted the early church through Rome, they would use the Beast to persecute the church through the 1260, 42 month period.

Oh and Hello to you all. This place has really improved since I last was here. Much more members now.