The Goddess Man Has Made

[Mungo]

Isaiah 8:16, 20 - Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples. To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

You seem to be missing something. It says if they speak not according to this word, there is no light in them. Does not scripture proclaim the law and the testimony? Yes. So, how can anything contradicting those testimonies have light within them? Whether they are enchanters, demons, or supposed leaders. Like the Pharisees? They clearly contradicted the Word of God with their traditions, and they claimed to be authority. Does, Isaiah 8:20 not apply to them all of a sudden because they are church leaders?

Now let’s put this comment you made also back into context:

Matthew 23:3 - All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

He is saying, do as they bid you to observe. Feast days, etc, but not after their works. For Jesus showed that the Pharisees loved to be called Rabbi, they loved the highest seats in the innermost chambers, and greeting in the market place. He shows that the Pharisees are hypocrites, they profess to follow and believe the oracles of God, but Jesus shows they are liars. They bid people to observe traditions, but Jesus showed that their tradition was in place of God’s commandment. Were the people really to break the commandments of God? Of course not.

Absolute evidence is not always found in one verse, and that’s the point I’m trying to make. You can get absolute evidence in scripture of a doctrine, by following the precepts of Isaiah 8:20. I don’t know how to say that any plainer, sorry if I’m being incredibly confusing.

Is your study finished? If not, continue please.

You keep ignoring my point that Isaiah is referring to his oracles not to all of scripture.

I know Jesus said the Pharisees were hypocrytes but he also said to listen to them and do what they tell you. He didn't say read the scriptures yourselves and ignore the Pharisees. They sat in the seat of Moses. In other words they had the authority to interpret scripture and teach.

You cannot make it plain by following the prexepts of Isaiah 8:20 because it does not say what you claiming it says.

No my study hasn't finished but I'm asking for any comments so far. If you agree with everything I have said so far I will continue. Otherwise let us discuss it before continuing.

 

[Raeneske]

You keep ignoring my point that Isaiah is referring to his oracles not to all of scripture.

I know Jesus said the Pharisees were hypocrytes but he also said to listen to them and do what they tell you. He didn't say read the scriptures yourselves and ignore the Pharisees. They sat in the seat of Moses. In other words they had the authority to interpret scripture and teach.

You cannot make it plain by following the prexepts of Isaiah 8:20 because it does not say what you claiming it says.

No my study hasn't finished but I'm asking for any comments so far. If you agree with everything I have said so far I will continue. Otherwise let us discuss it before continuing.

Sorry, I mean no offense, but I want the full study. I will not agree to what you have put thus far, to lead myself into agreeing with the rest. I will not answer in this matter before I hear it. I would like to see the full study before I make another comment regarding what I believe. Please present the full study.

Please also review Isaiah 8 in it's totality to realize that it's not just what Isaiah is saying, and that Isaiah speaks the testimony, and the law of God, not of his own.

 

[Rex]

I know Jesus said the Pharisees were hypocrytes but he also said to listen to them and do what they tell you. He didn't say read the scriptures yourselves and ignore the Pharisees. They sat in the seat of Moses. In other words they had the authority to interpret scripture and teach.

This cracks me up, that's quite an interpretation, one the pope likes very much.
So tell me if your reading is correct then why didn't Jesus do as they said?
Their seat was short lived, coming to an end, Jesus Dumped them out of Mosses seat right on their back side.

And I leave unto you your house desolate, Matthew 23:38 ---->> no more authority

But of course the RCC is all about placing everyone back under the weakness of mens doctrines.

 

[Mungo]

This cracks me up, that's quite an interpretation, one the pope likes very much.
So tell me if your reading is correct then why didn't Jesus do as they said?
Their seat was short lived, coming to an end, Jesus Dumped them out of Mosses seat right on their back side.

And I leave unto you your house desolate, Matthew 23:38 ---->> no more authority

But of course the RCC is all about placing everyone back under the weakness of mens doctrines.

Jesus was speaking about the future after his death when Jerusalem will be destroyed by the Romans.

By then Jesus had given his authority to his Church.

Please also review Isaiah 8 in it's totality to realize that it's not just what Isaiah is saying, and that Isaiah speaks the testimony, and the law of God, not of his own.

I have and I disagree with you.

However let us proceeed.



The Queen Mother was known as the gebirah (literally 'mistress'). According to one source this was equivalent to the feminine of adon (Lord) of which the feminine is not used in Hebrew.

This role of queen mother was an established role in the kingdom. When Asa took the throne he dismissed his grandmother Maacah from being the gebirah (presumably his own mother had died as there is no mention of her) - (1Kg 15:13)



There is one particularly interesting woman Athalia, who was the mother of Ahazier the sixth king of Judah. After her son was killed, she killed all the royal family (except one baby who was hidden from her) and assumed power in her own right. She ruled as Queen for six years until she was killed and her grandson Joash installed as king at the age of seven. She would not have been able to do that if she was not in a recognised position of authority to start with.


Jesus is the true Davidic king with an eternal kingdom. That kingdom is based in Heaven.
“Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom does not belong to this world.’” (Jn 18:36)

“Then I saw the heavens opened, and there was a white horse; its rider was (called) “Faithful and True.” He judges and wages war in righteousness…….. He has a name written on his cloak and on his thigh, “King of kings and Lord of lords.” (Rev 19:11-16)

Mary is the mother of Jesus As the mother of the King of Heaven, Mary has the right to the title Queen of Heaven.



We also read in Revelation:

"A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars." (Rev 12:1).

This can taken to be a reference to Mary – “and she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron” (Rev 12:5), which is Jesus. She has on her head a crown – as do queens.



Psalm 45 is a prophecy of the Messiah’s reign and is addressed to the king and line 9 says: at you right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir. We have seen that in the Davidic kingdom the queen sits, or stands, at the king’s right hand (1Kg 2:19).
[Also in Rev 21:1 the woman is clothed with the sun (i.e golden coloured) just as the queen here is clothed in gold of Ophir.]

[There is another interesting line a little later, verse 17:
"I will cause your name to be celebrated in all generations; therefore the peoples will praise you for ever and ever."

Compare that to Lk 1:48 when Mary said: For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed.]



Finally there is a hint of Mary being the gebirah in Lk 1:43 when Elizabeth filled with the Holy Spirit exclaims “And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” Elizabeth has recognised that the child in Mary’s womb is God, the promised Messiah, the Son of David and that Mary is therefore the gebirah. She is astonished that such an important person should come to her.

 

[Selene]

Jesus was speaking about the future after his death when Jerusalem will be destroyed by the Romans.

By then Jesus had given his authority to his Church.


I have and I disagree with you.

However let us proceeed.



The Queen Mother was known as the gebirah (literally 'mistress'). According to one source this was equivalent to the feminine of adon (Lord) of which the feminine is not used in Hebrew.

This role of queen mother was an established role in the kingdom. When Asa took the throne he dismissed his grandmother Maacah from being the gebirah (presumably his own mother had died as there is no mention of her) - (1Kg 15:13)



There is one particularly interesting woman Athalia, who was the mother of Ahazier the sixth king of Judah. After her son was killed, she killed all the royal family (except one baby who was hidden from her) and assumed power in her own right. She ruled as Queen for six years until she was killed and her grandson Joash installed as king at the age of seven. She would not have been able to do that if she was not in a recognised position of authority to start with.


Jesus is the true Davidic king with an eternal kingdom. That kingdom is based in Heaven.
“Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom does not belong to this world.’” (Jn 18:36)

“Then I saw the heavens opened, and there was a white horse; its rider was (called) “Faithful and True.” He judges and wages war in righteousness…….. He has a name written on his cloak and on his thigh, “King of kings and Lord of lords.” (Rev 19:11-16)

Mary is the mother of Jesus As the mother of the King of Heaven, Mary has the right to the title Queen of Heaven.



We also read in Revelation:

"A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars." (Rev 12:1).

This can taken to be a reference to Mary – “and she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron” (Rev 12:5), which is Jesus. She has on her head a crown – as do queens.



Psalm 45 is a prophecy of the Messiah’s reign and is addressed to the king and line 9 says: at you right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir. We have seen that in the Davidic kingdom the queen sits, or stands, at the king’s right hand (1Kg 2:19).
[Also in Rev 21:1 the woman is clothed with the sun (i.e golden coloured) just as the queen here is clothed in gold of Ophir.]

[There is another interesting line a little later, verse 17:
"I will cause your name to be celebrated in all generations; therefore the peoples will praise you for ever and ever."

Compare that to Lk 1:48 when Mary said: For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed.]



Finally there is a hint of Mary being the gebirah in Lk 1:43 when Elizabeth filled with the Holy Spirit exclaims “And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” Elizabeth has recognised that the child in Mary’s womb is God, the promised Messiah, the Son of David and that Mary is therefore the gebirah. She is astonished that such an important person should come to her.

Excellent post! And we Catholics fulfilled this prophecy of calling Mary "blessed" for all generations.

 

[Raeneske]

Jesus was speaking about the future after his death when Jerusalem will be destroyed by the Romans.

By then Jesus had given his authority to his Church.


I have and I disagree with you.

However let us proceeed.



The Queen Mother was known as the gebirah (literally 'mistress'). According to one source this was equivalent to the feminine of adon (Lord) of which the feminine is not used in Hebrew.

This role of queen mother was an established role in the kingdom. When Asa took the throne he dismissed his grandmother Maacah from being the gebirah (presumably his own mother had died as there is no mention of her) - (1Kg 15:13)



There is one particularly interesting woman Athalia, who was the mother of Ahazier the sixth king of Judah. After her son was killed, she killed all the royal family (except one baby who was hidden from her) and assumed power in her own right. She ruled as Queen for six years until she was killed and her grandson Joash installed as king at the age of seven. She would not have been able to do that if she was not in a recognised position of authority to start with.


Jesus is the true Davidic king with an eternal kingdom. That kingdom is based in Heaven.
“Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom does not belong to this world.’” (Jn 18:36)

“Then I saw the heavens opened, and there was a white horse; its rider was (called) “Faithful and True.” He judges and wages war in righteousness…….. He has a name written on his cloak and on his thigh, “King of kings and Lord of lords.” (Rev 19:11-16)

Mary is the mother of Jesus As the mother of the King of Heaven, Mary has the right to the title Queen of Heaven.



We also read in Revelation:

"A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars." (Rev 12:1).

This can taken to be a reference to Mary – “and she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron” (Rev 12:5), which is Jesus. She has on her head a crown – as do queens.



Psalm 45 is a prophecy of the Messiah’s reign and is addressed to the king and line 9 says: at you right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir. We have seen that in the Davidic kingdom the queen sits, or stands, at the king’s right hand (1Kg 2:19).
[Also in Rev 21:1 the woman is clothed with the sun (i.e golden coloured) just as the queen here is clothed in gold of Ophir.]

[There is another interesting line a little later, verse 17:
"I will cause your name to be celebrated in all generations; therefore the peoples will praise you for ever and ever."

Compare that to Lk 1:48 when Mary said: For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed.]



Finally there is a hint of Mary being the gebirah in Lk 1:43 when Elizabeth filled with the Holy Spirit exclaims “And why is this granted me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” Elizabeth has recognised that the child in Mary’s womb is God, the promised Messiah, the Son of David and that Mary is therefore the gebirah. She is astonished that such an important person should come to her.

Okay, combining the two posts and giving you an answer as a whole.

While it is an argument based around Mary being the Queen of Heaven, some things are omitted.

First, Jesus willhave a wife. The marriage has not yet happened. The church of God has the privilege of reigning as kings with the King, priests with the Priest, and lords with the Lord. The church of God is also explained many times throughout scripture as being the bride of Christ. However, the Bible is specific that they will not reign over Him, in that stating while reigning with Him, we are still to be subject to Him (Revelation 19:16). They shall become married to Him which is in Heaven, and in so doing becoming kings and priests with Him.

2 Corinthians 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

Revelation 14:4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.

While Mary was the mother who birthed Jesus, she will not be a ruler over the entire church, nor will she be “Queen of Heaven”. Mary is a woman, part of that very same church, which we are part of. She, and all the rest of us, will become married to the Lord and Saviour, the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords.

Now it’s interesting you also use Revelation 12 to refer to Mary. This is a reference to the church of Christ. Even the statements Catholics may find objectionable are in there. For example, Mary the “Eternal Virgin” has a remnant of her seed (Revelation 12:17)? Mary has no other seed, says Catholics, if she was indeed a virgin for eternity. But, I would rather not twist the Word, and handle it deceitfully. I’m just showing you, that there is something wrong with that theology. The woman here refers to the Church of Jesus Christ.

Psalm 45:17 seems to be talking about daughters, not queens. And I have no problems with Psalm 45:7 being used to recognize the queen. However, I have a problem with the interpretation that this means Mary. As I’m sure you can tell by my post, I have valid reason to be against such an interpretation.

Luke 1:43 shows the proper excitement, and the proper blessing that Mary received. What I mean is, it is not overly done. There are no rosaries, there are no prayers, there is no kneeling, etc, I think you catch what I’m saying. She was standing in the presence of one whom the Lord greatly blessed, Mary. For us today, this is like meeting John the Baptist, or David. Humble servants of the Lord, are greatly blessed, and honoured by Him. Mary is no exception to that. She is also greatly blessed among woman. But she is not someone we pray to, etc, you know the rest.

 

[dragonfly]

He didn't say read the scriptures yourselves and ignore the Pharisees. They sat in the seat of Moses. In other words they had the authority to interpret scripture and teach.

But now individual believers are expected to read the word of God for themselves to check whether the teaching is true or not, and, to listen to the Holy Spirit who only testifies of things pertaining to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Truth and the Life and the Way.

 

[Selene]

But now individual believers are expected to read the word of God for themselves to check whether the teaching is true or not, and, to listen to the Holy Spirit who only testifies of things pertaining to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Truth and the Life and the Way.

Actually, the Holy Bible tells you to obey your Church leaders.

Hebrews 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you.

 

[Raeneske]

Actually, the Holy Bible tells you to obey your Church leaders.

Hebrews 13:17 Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you.

Not if your church leaders are infidels. Then it tells you to come out from that apostasy. If you know it's in apostasy, and you choose to remain in there, that is upon your own head. That is not the fault of others.

The doctrine preached within the Word is not unquestionable submission. If you search the scriptures, and find an error, you bring it to the leaders, and show them. You are to search the scriptures, and if your church leaders are infact infidels, leave the church.

 

[Selene]

Not if your church leaders are infidels. Then it tells you to come out from that apostasy. If you know it's in apostasy, and you choose to remain in there, that is upon your own head. That is not the fault of others.

The doctrine preached within the Word is not unquestionable submission. If you search the scriptures, and find an error, you bring it to the leaders, and show them. You are to search the scriptures, and if your church leaders are infact infidels, leave the church.

I thought only the Muslim radicals use the word "infidels."

 

[Foreigner]

I thought only the Muslim radicals use the word "infidels."

American Heritage Dictionary:

NOUN: 1. An unbeliever with respect to a particular religion, especially Christianity or Islam. 2. One who has no religious beliefs. 3. One who doubts or rejects a particular doctrine, system, or principle.

ETYMOLOGY: Origin, Mid-15th Century. Middle English infidele, from Old French, from Latin nfidlis, disloyal : in-, not;

The origin of the word and use of the word did not begin with the Muslim faith.


And technically that word can be used to describe:

- People who do not accept certain Catholic doctrine
- Catholics who do not accept certain Christian doctrine
- Muslims who refuse to accept certain Muslim doctrine
- Muslims who refuse to accept certain Jewish doctrine
- Muslims who refuse to accept certain Christian doctrine
- Christians who do not accept Muslim doctrine
- Jews who do not accept Muslim doctrine
- Atheists and other who refuse to accept any specific religious doctrine
- etc.
- etc.
- etc.

 

[Rex]

Jesus was speaking about the future after his death when Jerusalem will be destroyed by the Romans.

By then Jesus had given his authority to his Church.

I know Jesus said the Pharisees were hypocrytes but he also said to listen to them and do what they tell you. He didn't say read the scriptures yourselves and ignore the Pharisees. They sat in the seat of Moses. In other words they had the authority to interpret scripture and teach.

It still begs the question why didn't Jesus do as the Pharisees say?

 

[epostle1]

But now individual believers are expected to read the word of God for themselves to check whether the teaching is true or not, and, to listen to the Holy Spirit who only testifies of things pertaining to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Truth and the Life and the Way.

Sorry dragonfly, there is NOTHING in scripture that says any individual believer has authority to teach. Your whole system rests on this pillar of sand.

 

[Selene]

American Heritage Dictionary:

NOUN: 1. An unbeliever with respect to a particular religion, especially Christianity or Islam. 2. One who has no religious beliefs. 3. One who doubts or rejects a particular doctrine, system, or principle.

ETYMOLOGY: Origin, Mid-15th Century. Middle English infidele, from Old French, from Latin nfidlis, disloyal : in-, not;

The origin of the word and use of the word did not begin with the Muslim faith.


And technically that word can be used to describe:

- People who do not accept certain Catholic doctrine
- Catholics who do not accept certain Christian doctrine
- Muslims who refuse to accept certain Muslim doctrine
- Muslims who refuse to accept certain Jewish doctrine
- Muslims who refuse to accept certain Christian doctrine
- Christians who do not accept Muslim doctrine
- Jews who do not accept Muslim doctrine
- Atheists and other who refuse to accept any specific religious doctrine
- etc.
- etc.
- etc.

Nevertheless, I would not call a fellow Christian an "infidel" regardless of what religious denomination they are in. I would also not call a non-Christian an "infidel." I believe in God, but I also believe in "freedom of religion." That is one thing I like about democracy. If a person wishes to follow a certain religion, that is his/her choice and no one should be forced into any religion.

 

[Mungo]

Okay, combining the two posts and giving you an answer as a whole.

While it is an argument based around Mary being the Queen of Heaven, some things are omitted.

First, Jesus willhave a wife. The marriage has not yet happened. The church of God has the privilege of reigning as kings with the King, priests with the Priest, and lords with the Lord. The church of God is also explained many times throughout scripture as being the bride of Christ. However, the Bible is specific that they will not reign over Him, in that stating while reigning with Him, we are still to be subject to Him (Revelation 19:16). They shall become married to Him which is in Heaven, and in so doing becoming kings and priests with Him.

2 Corinthians 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

Revelation 14:4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.

I do not see what you are arguing about here.

Yes Jesus will have a wife in a spiritual sense.

The Kings of Judah had wives but they were not Queens. The King’s mother was the Queen (Mother) as I have already explained.

Mary is in heaven now. She is the Kings mother and is therefore the Queen (Mother)

While Mary was the mother who birthed Jesus, she will not be a ruler over the entire church, nor will she be “Queen of Heaven”.

She is already Queen of Heaven as I have explained with numerous scriptures to support that view.

Did I say she would be ruler over all the Church? Where did that come from?

Mary is a woman, part of that very same church, which we are part of. She, and all the rest of us, will become married to the Lord and Saviour, the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords.

Yes, she is part of the “bride of Christ” but she is also Jesus’ mother and therefore Queen already because she is his mother.

Now it’s interesting you also use Revelation 12 to refer to Mary. This is a reference to the church of Christ. Even the statements Catholics may find objectionable are in there. For example, Mary the “Eternal Virgin” has a remnant of her seed (Revelation 12:17)? Mary has no other seed, says Catholics, if she was indeed a virgin for eternity. But, I would rather not twist the Word, and handle it deceitfully. I’m just showing you, that there is something wrong with that theology. The woman here refers to the Church of Jesus Christ.

John’s symbolism can have many meanings and one meaning does not always explain all. The woman is Mary, but also represents the Church (and some argue also represents Israel).

There are three entities described in Rev 12 – The woman, the child and the dragon.

The child is Jesus – a real being

The dragon is Satan – a real being

It would be odd if the third being were not also a real being, in this case Mary.

That does not preclude the woman representing the Church.

Rev 12:17 does not mention seed.

“Then the dragon became angry with the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring, those who keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus.”

We believe that Mary is our spiritual mother based on Jn 19:26-27. We are therefore her offspring in a spiritual sense not a physical one.

Psalm 45:17 seems to be talking about daughters, not queens. And I have no problems with Psalm 45:7 being used to recognize the queen. However, I have a problem with the interpretation that this means Mary. As I’m sure you can tell by my post, I have valid reason to be against such an interpretation.

I think it can be read in the ways I suggested

Vs 9 “daughters of kings are among your ladies of honour; at your right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir”

vs 10-14 is referring to a princess who is being led to marry the king.

 

[Raeneske]

I do not see what you are arguing about here.

Yes Jesus will have a wife in a spiritual sense.

The Kings of Judah had wives but they were not Queens. The King’s mother was the Queen (Mother) as I have already explained.

Mary is in heaven now. She is the Kings mother and is therefore the Queen (Mother)

She is already Queen of Heaven as I have explained with numerous scriptures to support that view.

Did I say she would be ruler over all the Church? Where did that come from?

The point I was showing you, was who was the bride of Christ, and who was already to have "Queen-like" privaleges. Not Mary, but the followers of the Lamb, the Church. Although, Mary is part of that church, she is not "Queen of Heaven". The followers are the ones granted to sit on the throne.

While you provided numerous scriptures, nowhere does it imply it must be the mother of the King. And I have provided scriptures which show you the lambs wife, and how the lambs wife gets the priveledges of reigning with Christ. We get the privaleges of ruling with Christ. Mary is not implied throughout scripture, we are.

 

[Mungo]

Luke 1:43 shows the proper excitement, and the proper blessing that Mary received. What I mean is, it is not overly done. There are no rosaries, there are no prayers, there is no kneeling, etc, I think you catch what I’m saying. She was standing in the presence of one whom the Lord greatly blessed, Mary. For us today, this is like meeting John the Baptist, or David. Humble servants of the Lord, are greatly blessed, and honoured by Him. Mary is no exception to that. She is also greatly blessed among woman. But she is not someone we pray to, etc, you know the rest.

All that is not relevant to the point I was making about Elizabeth’s greeting and Mary being Queen of Heaven

The point I was showing you, was who was the bride of Christ, and who was already to have "Queen-like" privaleges. Not Mary, but the followers of the Lamb, the Church. Although, Mary is part of that church, she is not "Queen of Heaven". The followers are the ones granted to sit on the throne.

While you provided numerous scriptures, nowhere does it imply it must be the mother of the King. And I have provided scriptures which show you the lambs wife, and how the lambs wife gets the priveledges of reigning with Christ. We get the privaleges of ruling with Christ. Mary is not implied throughout scripture, we are.

In the Davidic kingdom it is the King's mother who is the Queen. That is what scripture shows.

The Queen Mother rules with, but under, the King.

Where does scripture say that Jesus abrogated that?

Where does scripture say his bride will be queen?

 

[Foreigner]

I thought only the Muslim radicals use the word "infidels."

Nevertheless, I would not call a fellow Christian an "infidel" regardless of what religious denomination they are in. I would also not call a non-Christian an "infidel." I believe in God, but I also believe in "freedom of religion." That is one thing I like about democracy. If a person wishes to follow a certain religion, that is his/her choice and no one should be forced into any religion.

-- I wasn't commenting on what you would do or say.

I was commenting on your statement, "I thought only the Muslim radicals use the word "infidels."

 

[Raeneske]

All that is not relevant to the point I was making about Elizabeth’s greeting and Mary being Queen of Heaven





In the Davidic kingdom it is the King's mother who is the Queen. That is what scripture shows.

The Queen Mother rules with, but under, the King.

Where does scripture say that Jesus abrogated that?

Where does scripture say his bride will be queen?

Okay, you said this installment was set up by King Solomon, and you would like to know when Jesus abrogated that. Well, first, I would like to point out that it was set up by Solomon, not David. So, if it’s to be as David, then such an installment does not have to be recognized. I would also like to point out that you said that installment was because of the many wives they had. So, is Jesus going to have many wives and concubines as well, since it’s apparently after the Davidic kingdom? Is every single feature from David’s Kingdom going to be carried over into the new world? Of course not.

Nowhere does it say Jesus abrogated the Kingdoms laws in David’s time. But nowhere does it imply that every single rule of that earthly kingdom was going to be made rule in the heavenly kingdom either. Like you said, it may have things like the Davidic Kingdom, but nowhere does it imply that the king’s mother is an absolute feature that must be applied. As I will show you, although there is truth of the Queens importance in the past, as per the role of the mother, scripture does not say so much like that about the heavenly Kingdom.

Revelation 3:21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

Revelation 1:5-6 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

Ephesians 5:31-32 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. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

2 Corinthians 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

If the position of honor is the one received by the Queen, I must ask, does it not appear that the church of Christ is receiving that honor? We see that first we are espoused to our one husband, that husband being Christ. We are told that a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall join himself with his wife. Those two shall then become one flesh. They become joined together in marriage, the same way that joins together us with Christ. Now, if the position of honor is received by the queen, then take a look at the blessings the bride of Christ is to receive. To those that are faithful, we are granted to sit with Him at His throne. Is this not the same honor you spoke of that the Queen in Solomon’s day received? It does not imply only Mary, just Mary, but it implies the honor upon us, the bride of Christ. We are made to be kings with God and his Father.

Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not denying the importance of the Queens in David’s day, anymore than I’m denying that Mary is blessed above all women. But I must say, while you build your argument, scripture shows that the case is otherwise. Scripture shows the bride of Christ, receiving such special honors, not just, only, Mary. There are facts in your argument about David’s Kingdom, and the role of the mother, but you are attributing that as a must within the Kingdom of God. As I have shown, such is not a must, because scripture points out otherwise.

Your logic is such that scripture shows that there was a Queen, the Queen was the mother of many kings, and therefore the Queen must be the mother of Jesus as well. But what it does not take into consideration is that nowhere does it imply that the Queen of the King must be his mother, though the Kingdom is like David, we have enough knowledge not to know it’s a full replica, in every aspect to everything David and Solomon did. It also does not take into consideration the fact that the honors you have spoken to have been bestowed upon the Queen, have been bestowed upon the church of Christ, and not just, only, His mother.

 

[Mungo]

Hi Raeneske,

I'm having problems with my broadband connection. It keeps going up and down. Sometimes does that at the weekend.

I tried to send some more comments earlier but couldn't get them through so I'm going to leave any more replies until tomorrow when it should be stable.

Mungo