Jeremiah 29:13 “And you shall seek me, and find me,
when you shall search for me with all your heart.”

Thursday, May 8, 2008

Hail Mary & Ark of the New Covenant

Although I can see how the Ark of the Covenant could shadow Mary
being the vessel who gave birth to Christ, I have not found that the requirement of her to be “without” sin @ the conception a valid point.
It is true that the details to build the Ark of the Covenant were painstakingly detailed but did this also have to infer than Mary had to be perfect and without sin?
From what I have found Biblically the answer is no.

Let me preface this as I have taken on this challenge very seriously. I have been in constant prayer and have read every word and every scripture on the two articles. My reliance is solely upon the Holy Spirit leading me to the truth. I am no theologian and reading these theories written by I’m sure well respected and highly educated men is initially a daunting task. But the one thing I have learned is to be sensitive to the Spirit as He’s our guide and counselor leading us into all truths. He will never fail us. (Although we may fail ourselves by not listening or trying to persuade the outcome to our own desires)

So as you have requested me to look at the information posted and see if I can find scripture which would refute these claims I ask that you in turn try to be objective and keep and open mind and heart as you read on.

So this is where I begin as it is where I was first led.

In the Spirit.

This is some information taken from “Understanding the Anointing” by Kenneth Hagin. Nothing struck me relating to Mary until I almost read it to the end.

The Sprit without Measure. (The Anointing gifts from the Father)

The reason Jesus could have the Spirit without measure is because his body was not mortal.

He could be tempted in all points like we are, because he was human, but he was like Adam before he sinned. Adam could be tempted-but before Adam sinned; his body was neither mortal nor immortal. (He did have to sustain his body by eating)

If Adam’s body had been mortal, it would have been subject to death-but Adam originally was not subject to death. The Word of God says that death affects you when you sin. “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin; so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” (Romans 5:12) Death didn’t pass on mankind until Adam sinned.

That is the reason why Jesus couldn’t be killed until He was made sin for us. Jesus said, “No man taketh it (his life) from me, but I lay it down of myself” (John 10:18)

One time an angry mob wanted to kill him but he slipped through their midst and disappeared (Luke 4:29,30)

Then, in the garden of Gethsemane, when He took upon His spirit nature our sins and our diseases, His body became mortal, and they could kill him. (Luke 22:44)

Jesus had the Holy Spirit without measure all through his ministry and it did not bother or affect him.

(If you have felt or had the indwelling of the presence of the Holy Spirit it’s a feeling of “energy”.) Some people have a particular anointing and can be given this anointing to a greater or lesser degree. The anointing comes upon you when you need it as the Holy Spirit wills. Not at your beckon call. People who have had the anointing of Preaching,Teaching,Healing, sometimes have so much power flow through them they can hardly stand it. They beg the Holy Spirit to have it cease. (This is a great study as well if you haven’t already)

This anointing can be passed on from one to another as they did in the early Church.

So the bottom line of all of this is that Mary was not transformed into a sinless being as the “Ark of the New Covenant” and died. If she did not die then why does the Bible not mention she was “caught away” into heaven like Elijah? So if we are to assume something it should be on the conservative side and believe she died like the rest of sinful humans.

Catholics have adopted the aspect of the Assumption which sways the omission of her final outcome into “Assuming” she didn’t die at all. Well, that’s just why it is correctly named” Assumption.” An assumption does not meant it to be truth. And if you start “assuming” too much in the Bible then the “actual” meaning becomes perverted.

As in evolution today we are taught this theory as truth. When it really is just an assumption. The truth still stands in God's Word of Creation.

Such as the Catholic interpretation of Rev 12. The woman is Israel and the promised seed(Jesus)trying to be devoured by Satan. The "New Eve" just doesn’t hold water. Yes Jesus does call her woman in John 2:4 and 19:26. What does that prove? It proves to me that he did not want her to be held in special esteem. Or he would have called her “Blessed Mother” or the many other terms available in Catholic terminology. Could it be a type of “shadow” of the Birth of Jesus. Yes, but it does not allude to anything more. Revelation 12:6 mentions that this “woman” fled into the wilderness. That’s definitely the saved Jewish Christians in the Tribulation period.

Another way Mary did not have to be “perfect” to be used as the vessel to birth Jesus. She did not have to be free of “original sin.”

Exodus 20:5.”There the Lord speaks of visiting the sins of the fathers on the children. I believe this is a hint that our sin nature is inherited from our earthly father, not from our mother. If so then even though all mothers have a sin nature, theirs is not passed to their children, only the father's. That means that Jesus, while born of a human mother, did not inherit Mary's sin nature. And since His Father was without sin, so was He.” By GracethruFaith

Read the Song of Mary. Luke 1:46-55. note “ For He has regarded the lowly state of His maidservant; For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed.”

She admits to having a “lowly state”. Only because she’s poor or can this include sinful? And yes everyone will call her blessed. She was the woman chosen out of all women to be used for the birth of the Messiah. She was definitely blessed. But she was not meant to be anything more.

The name says it all? Hail, full or grace the Lord is with you. Blessed art thou among women.

Hail in this text means to “be joyful.” Not as in Hail Caesar or Hitler.

John chapter 1 clearly tells us that Jesus Christ is the one that is full of grace. Mary is never said to be full of grace in the scripture. John goes on to tell us in verse 16 that we are all full of His grace and truth, because all believers have Jesus dwelling within them. Only in this sense could Mary have been full of grace.

The Greek word “koine” or “blessed" when speaking of Mary is not the same
word used when referring to our Lord. The word used for Mary means to pronounce fortunate, and indeed she was. On the other hand the word used for blessed when referring to our Lord means to be adored.

So one might ask WHY is there so much attention placed upon Mary?

Just stand back and look at the entire Bible. It’s not about Mary at all. It’s all about the redemption of mankind through the coming Messiah and beyond His death and resurrection.

You really have to stretch the scriptures and begin to assume things to place Mary in that light. The other religion that also lifts her up is Islam.

Why do you think many of the Christian denominations rebel against that ideology?

The Spirit of Truth is the same Holy Spirit of the Father available to all of His children. Available to all His Churches which make up the Body of Christ.

Does the Catholic Church think anyone can be saved outside of it? In Revelation we have the greeting to the Seven Churches which is a model for us today. The last 4 have meaning for Churches today. The following would relate to the Body of Christ in todays time as well.

The church of Pergamum (meaning mixed marriage)

The church of the 4th century. When pagan and Christian practices mixed in the Roman Empire & became the official religion.
The mother/child idea started in Babylon and moved to Pergamum.(You can look up the traditions of Semeramis & Tammuz.)

The church of Thyatira (continual sacrifice) is close to the Catholic Church today. Note some are saved out of it. She has mercy, compassion, and Gospel. Her sins are sexual immorality and idolatry.
**They add to the Gospel.

The church of Sardis (Remnant) is close to the Protestant Church today. Note some are saved out of it. They broke away from the some of the pagan doctrines but rejected the Holy Spirit and lost the truth.
**They subtract from the Gospel.

The church of Philadelphia. (City of Brotherly love)
Has little strength, kept his Word, and has not denied His name. These are just the Bible believing Christians not tied up and burdened with tradition and false doctrine. Note: They are all saved and are kept from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world…..
**They try to stay true to the Gospel.

The church of Laodiceans (The People Rule or People’s opinions)
is close to the New Age Church Today. Note they are not saved unless they open the door and get out and into Jesus.
**They ignore the Gospel.

It would be wise to take heed of these examples given in the Book of Revelation as we are in the Last Days. They are for our instruction and examination. We are to test which “Church” we are influenced by.

There was an argument w/the Catholics about Revelation 22:18

It was stated that that passage about adding to or taking away from
God’s word only applied to Revelation its self and not the entire Bible
since it was not yet put together at the time Revelation was written.

If you see Deuteronomy 12:32 what God commanded to the Israelites
Regarding the law.

“Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to or take away from it.”

Jeremiah 26:2-The Lord told Jeremiah to speak to all the people, all the words, don’t diminish a word. (Don’t tone down the message.)

Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Do not be carried about with various and strange doctrines.”

So what was true in the past about Christ is true in the future about Christ and we don’t need new doctrines.

The Catholics seem to pride themselves as being from the Original Universal Church. We started it so we must have it right attitude.

Personally, I don’t think any denomination has is 100% right. Some more than others perhaps. Obviously the church of Philadelphia is favored in God’s eyes compared to the others. And why? Because they are simplistic and follow the basic message and commandments of the Bible. They don’t add to it, take away from it, or ignore it. They accept the Word as is.

Luke 10:21 In that hour Jesus rejoiced in the Spirit and said, “I thank you Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and revealed them to babes. Even so, Father for it seemed good in Your sight.”

These were just simple guys out sharing the gospel. They weren’t scholars or seminary students. All you need is a call from God and the power of the Holy Spirit.

When I think of going up against the theologians of the Catholic Church I imagine running myself into a brick wall. That is probably why most people try to avoid confrontations on such matters.

I’ve been praying for you to find your calling as I think you’ve been called. I was not praying for you to switch your faith. Just that you would be sensitive to the Holy Spirit, fully submit and follow where He is leading you.

That’s what I have done and it’s been more of a blessing than I could have ever imagined and I was led right into a Holy Spirit filled Church. Full of the Presence and Glory of God. I now feel His presense both coporately in Church during Worship and at times individually. My personal relationship is with Yahweh though my Lord Jesus Christ with the help of the Holy Spirit and no one else.

I wish you all the Blessings the Lord has to give you.

Your humble sister in Christ,



Jen said...

Hey Lisa,
Good info...looks like you spent a lot of time sifting through alot of material. Thanks for sharing it!
A couple of questions from a personal perspective....what church are you going to now? I've mentioned that hubby and I feel like it's time to start looking around. I know he'd like to go back to something more familiar which means a cathedral-like Presby with a choir in robes and everyone in their Sunday best. I'm not worried about his theology, but I am dismayed that he isn't interested in growth and that he's not aware of the things happening in the church at large. I drop tidbits of info here and there, but he doesn't get too excited about anything. However, I do feel that his interest in looking around is Spirit-inspired as I've been praying for more unity in our marriage and faith. I personally would like to check out a Full Gospel church down the road, but I know he'll balk, so I'll have to do it alone for now. They have an early morning prayer meeting once a week which might be a good compromise for me. Anyway, just wondering what your new church is.
And what book of Hagin's are you reading now? I'm just finishing the one I recommended to you, but am already chomping for the next one. I know I have so much to learn and bias to overcome. Earlier this week I felt a real spiritual attack after I read some critiques of Hagin, etc. and I began to doubt everything I've come to know over the last few months. Sorta like, "This is too much to assimilate" and "I can't do this alone, without hubby's support and he'll never come around to any of this." But I fought back in prayer and I have peace again about the direction I'm headed. But still too many questions and not enough time to dig up the answers!


jim.carroll said...

Lisa, Shalom.

I haven't finished reading your comment because I've come across two incorrect items that may change your posting.

First, your contention that Jesus was not mortal would be opposed to the teaching that Jesus is both "True God and True Man." He could not be true man if He were not mortal throughout His life (since He is like us in all things but sin.) While death may not have been part of the human condition until after Adam sinned, after that being human meant (at some point) dying, regardless of your state of sin. It's why at our bodily resurrection we will be given Glorified Bodies. Mary's preservation from Original Sin did not change her human nature nor give her a Glorified Body, so at some point she suffered a normal, human death.

I'm worried because the idea that Jesus did not become fully human until Gethsemane almost sounds like a variation of the Arianism heresy.

Second is that Mary's death is not recorded in scripture because she died after the Gospels were written. Therefore we only have extra-Scriptural accounts of her death and burial. The doctrine of the Assumption is not that she was assumed into heaven while she was alive; it's that after her death her body was assumed into heaven before it could undergo the corruption of death. In heaven she now has the glorified body we all will receive at the end of time.

Finally, I'm not sure you read both of the web pages I linked to, since that would have covered the Greek meaning of the "Hail, Full of Grace" of Gabriel's greeting. In particular, how do you justify defining "Hail" as being joyful, when the word in Greek (Kaire) does not carry that connotation?

I will write more as I get a chance to read your reply, although I will be delayed, as I will (unexpectedly) have my daughters this weekend.

Yours in Christ,


Late Night Lisa said...


I guess we have to define what "True Man" is. Was the first Adam not a "True Man"? Or are you saying that you have to have sin and a body cursed with death in order to be a "True Man?"

I think Jesus the 2nd Adam would also be as the first Adam before the fall in terms of his physical body. (I think we can agree that the soul is immortal sinful or not)

Jesus physical body was without the sin curse just as the 1st Adam was before the fall. Was the 1st Adam mortal before he sinned? No.
It was the sin and the curse than made him mortal.

When Jesus was in the Garden is the time when he took upon all of our sins. Read the story. That's why it was so painful. His Father could not be with him at that point until he physically died and conqured sin and death for all mankind.

So my take on your view point would have to be that the 1st Adam was not "fully human" until he was cursed with death.

So what do you consider the 1st Adam to be before sin? He was not human? What was he?

I have no idea what the "Arianism heresy" is so I'll have to look that up.

Anyway, this is a great discussion and I look forward to continuing it.

As far as the "Asumption" of Mary I had that wrong as you pointed out.

" it's that after her death her body was assumed into heaven before it could undergo the corruption of death."

OK-I stand corrected. But the the same thought process still applies. It's truly just an "Asumption."

There is no mention of that in the Bible so we should not "Assume" it to be true.

Your Comment:

Hail, Full of Grace" of Gabriel's greeting. In particular, how do you justify defining "Hail" as being joyful, when the word in Greek (Kaire) does not carry that connotation?"

Actually I did read it and researched the meaning further. Where I actually found the meaning as being "joyful" was from a Catholic website in which a priest had defined the same(Kaire) word. He brought up that same passage but in his discussion it was about "Christmas" and the miraculous birth. He said it meant "joyful." And how joyful we should be at Christmas about the birth of our savior Jesus.

Seems like we should look into that a little futher? We know these words can have several meanings in the origional text.
I just love the research and find this truly facinating.

Your diligence in pointing these things out for discussion proves your sincerety and respect for what I had taken the time to research and not discounting everything at first glance.

It's truly a blessing to debate and challange one another on these topics as we can learn from one another and grow in Spiritual Maturity and brotherly affection.


Late Night Lisa said...


Understanding the Anointing, By Kenneth E. Hagin.

The book was published in 1983-I guess it could be considered "old" but the information is still good and applies. What can compare with someone's lifelong journey in the Ministry?

Some of these spiritual concepts do take an entire human life to experience and understand.

From what I've read in it sounds Biblically accurate and can relate to some of it from personal experience.

You can always find negative comments on just about every Minister of the Lord who ever lived.

There is even something on Billy Graham he did later in life that I find unsettling. I don't know how true it but people can change and go down a wrong path over time. That's why we have to "endure" until the end.

As you know even our Churches which were once good can start to wander off. So that's why we always have to be on guard.

But from what I've read so far I have not seen any "red flags" jump out at me.

Late Night Lisa said...


I'm in exactly the same boat with you as far as husbands are concerned. His attitude is identical to your husbands.

And that point runs right into the subject of Spiritual Maturity.

From what I have gathered so far-it seems as if the wives are usually drawn into Spiritual Maturity faster than the husbands.
It's many times through the wives that the husbands also become saved.

This is not something I've "self discovered". It's been mentioned to me through reading and by pastors.

I'm sure you can relate as to how frustrating it is to be "head" of the Spiritual household.That is not what we are intended to be. The husband is to be the head of us as Christ is the head of the husband. I hate it with a passion.

I wish I could take a hot prod and stick it you know where. But this is where I'm being taught patience,perseverance and self control. How can I really judge him since I myself spent so many years wondering lost?

So I just gather my strengh from the Lord and try to be encouraging.

Grany is a wise mentor and has helped me calm down.

As far as the Holy Spirit and being led to a Spirit filled church. It is so much easier to see how your being molded and led by the Sprit 'after' the fact than during the process.

During the process after I experienced the presence of the Lord I almost flipped out. I had mentioned it on the blog at the time.

And His presense definately decends upon the congregation during worship.(As it also did in the temple in Biblical days. Read about the worship and the musicians-great study)

I am open and sensitive to it. My husband on the other hand does not particularly enjoy the music and stands there with his arms folded and a sour look on his face. He has felt it "at times" a very limited amount. He is guarded and closed to the experience. I have been trying to explain what the "deal" is but it all boils down to Spiritual Maturity and submission.

I don't particularly like all the music myself. But who am I to judge that as well? If the Lord is pleased and shows His presense then that's all that matters to me.
There is a special annointing for the musicians as well.(That's another entire subject)

The pastor is definately annointed and his passion is off the charts. So my husband and I both at least agree on that.

My daughter has felt His presence in her "Kids Chapel" during worship. She had explained what it felt like beautifully.

So with my husband I'm not against trying a different Church. I did attend a Baptist one a couple of weeks ago. The pastor was good but the worship was weak and I didn't feel God's presense.

Grace Chapel is the name of the Church here. It's an affiliated with Calvery Chapel. I think it is here where I had the infilling of the Holy Spirit. My last Church Maranatha was also affiliated with Calvery Chapel but I didn't really feel His presense very strongly there. Great Pastor though. He mentioned in January that he felt this would be the year of "God's Glory" or presense in his congregation so I don't know if it's changed or not.

The Full Gospel churches are known for the presense of the Lord. I think you just have to be sure like with any Church that they teach the Word and don't get so carried away with the Spirit that they wander off and end up getting into the wrong spirit.

I just had a meeting with a senior pastor at Grace Chapel a couple of days ago. We talked for about an hour. I told him about how I was led to speak in tongues and was not sure what the scoop was at Grace since it had never really been mentioned in a congregational setting.

Who I was speaking with just so happend to lead a "Transformation" class which deals with that very issue and leading people into spiritual maturity. He was a Catholic, who had been involved in a Full Gospel Church, who now is a senior pastor at Grace.

Their main focus at this Church is "Equipping people to be passionate servers of Jesus Christ." This congregation is very large and the range of Spiritual Maturity is also very large. So when it comes down to speaking in tongues and other gifts of the Spirit it is taught in a much smaller group setting.

So I was very relieved to find I was not the "lone duck" at my Church. I thought that others had gifts of the Spirit just by my experience there but I did not want to assume it. I had requested the meeting to find out and I'm so glad I did.

Meanwhile all I can do is press on in my personal relationship with Jesus Christ and move ahead while I encourage my husband.

Hopefully my example will inspire him to continue to pursue his own relationship with the Lord.


JCChick23 said...

Lisa--just out of curiousity---what has inspired you to research this particular area?


Late Night Lisa said...

My only inspiration was Jim Caroll. He had asked a few of us if we would take a look at a couple of particular articles on this subject to see if we thought the statements were accurate.


jim.carroll said...

Lisa, Shalom! Sorry it's taken so long to reply to you. Apparently some of these questions are the stuff of PhD dissertations.

What I'm getting from my sources is that death was always part of being human. Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden because the Garden held the Tree of Life. Several translations don't say that "sin = death", but that "sin = corruption". After introducing corruption into the Garden, G_D did not want them to eat of the Tree of Life and live forever. So at some point, if they had not sinned, G_D would have allowed Adam and Eve to die, bringing them into heaven.

So Jesus could have died without "becoming sin"; however, His body would have been incorrupt. Likewise, though she was sinless, Mary also would have died, since she was human. Except... there's no evidence that she actually died.

Now, here's where the story gets interesting. You said that There is no mention of that in the Bible so we should not "Assume" it to be true. Well, by that reasoning, there is no mention of Benjamin Franklin in the Bible either, so we should not assume that he existed. We would have to go by contemporary accounts to say that yes, Benjamin Franklin existed. As it so happens, there are two sources describing what happened at the death of Mary.

In one, the apostles gathered at Mary's bedside when she was dying, except for Thomas, who was in India preaching, converting, and establishing churches. He was late (seems to have been a habit of his) and by the time he got there, she was already dead and buried by a few days. They opened up her tomb so he could look at the Mother of Our Savior one last time. When they did, they found that her body was gone, and the tomb was filled with roses. So this account says she was assumed into Heaven like Moses shortly after her death.

The second account is a little more fanciful. In this one, Thomas is still late, being in India. However, he is transported by angels to be by Her side. As he approaches, he meets Mary in the air. She is not dead, because at the moment just before death the angels came to take her to heaven like Eliza, so she would not experience physical death. So in this version she is spared physical death, which would fit in with your thesis that "if she was without sin, she would not have died." Given that there are two accounts that both have precedents in the Bible, the Church has never officially said whether or not she died, just that she was assumed bodily into Heaven.

What lends credence to the idea of bodily assumption is that there is no grave for Mary. I don't mean that we don't know where she is buried, I mean there is no grave. There is a house in Ephesus where tradition has that Mary lived the last years of her life. It's a shrine that is holy both to the Christians and to the Muslim women or the region. However, there is no place in the area that says by tradition or legend that this spot was the tomb of Mary. In a case like this, we could expect two or three different places to lay claim to the burial spot of Mary. We have two different possibilities for the original tomb of Jesus, and there are two different spots on the Jordan river that lay claim to be the place where John the Baptist did his baptizing. However, no place says that "this is where tradition says Mary was buried before being assumed into heaven."

BTW, "Arianism" is a heresy that taught that Jesus wasn't True G_D and True Man; rather, that He was a "created being", not of the same "substance" as the Father. This was resolved at the Council of Nicea, which condemned Arianism and spelled things out in the Nicene Creed:

... We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father;
through him all things were made.


Late Night Lisa said...

Ok Jim,

I just wanted to make sure your rebuttal was posted for anyone interested.

"Arianism" is a heresy that taught that Jesus wasn't True G_D and True Man; rather, that He was a "created being", not of the same "substance" as the Father.

I certainly don't believe in "Arainism". That's what the JW's believe-Jesus was a created being seperate from God the Father.

When He says the "Father and I are one"- I take that literally & believe it.