Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: stpio
So, this literature provides us multiple meanings, but there is generally a PRINCIPLE meaning and a SECONDARY meaning; in this case, the woman is the Blessed Virgin Mary, the same “woman” who God said would crush the head of the serpent in Gen. 3:15. Because she is such a danger to satan, satan tried to kill her even after the Savior was born (Rev. 12:13).

You expect everyone to bow down to what "John Salza" says is the truth? Is he part of the hierarchy of the Magesterium? Is he a Bishop? Does he have the authority to criticize the American Bishops who approved the NAB? How is John Salza any more an authority on what is the truth than any other Christian? How is what John Salza says about Revelation 12 any more true than church Fathers Hippolytus, Methodius, Victorinus and others? They did not agree with John Salza.

Have you forgotten that the Old Testament and especially Genesis was originally written in HEBREW? Jerome was NOT fluent in Hebrew when he began his translation into Latin. Shouldn't the Hebrew version of Genesis 3:15 be correct? You have already been shown that the pronoun "she" is NOT used. So why do you insist that "she shall crush your head" is the only correct translation and accuse those who disagree with you of heresy? That's an awfully big swath you must paint to include even church fathers and prominent RC theologians into that category.

I suspect that the main reason you hold so tightly to your preferred version of Genesis 3:15 is so you can segue into the false assertion that Revelation 12 is ALSO speaking of Mary. You would again be bumping heads with others of your religious persuasion and even the magesterium who have NOT come down on an either/or decision for that section just as they have failed to provide any semblance of an exhaustive commentary for the Bible. After 2000 years, even!

If you would like to read a well-researched essay on that chapter of Revelation and see how it ties into the entire body of prophetic Scripture, please read http://www.biblrytr.com/revelation11.htm. Or, not. Just reserve your condemnations of heresy to those actual dogmas your church has officially defined. All else is personal/private interpretations...you know, what you guys always accuse "us" of doing.

145 posted on 04/16/2012 10:13:39 PM PDT by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies ]


To: boatbums

“You expect everyone to bow down to what “John Salza” says is the truth? Is he part of the hierarchy of the Magesterium? Is he a Bishop? Does he have the authority to criticize the American Bishops who approved the NAB?”

~ ~ ~

boatbums, you don’t bow down to any authority. Protestantism is inconsistent in belief, everyone is their own authority. You are talking out of two sides of your mouth brother. In your next quote you are mocking Catholic authority. Which is it?

~ ~ ~

“You would again be bumping heads with others of your religious persuasion and even the magesterium who have NOT come down on an either/or decision for that section just as they have failed to provide any semblance of an exhaustive commentary for the Bible. After 2000 years, even!”

“Have you forgotten that the Old Testament and especially Genesis was originally written in HEBREW? Jerome was NOT fluent in Hebrew when he began his translation into Latin. Shouldn’t the Hebrew version of Genesis 3:15 be correct? You have already been shown that the pronoun “she” is NOT used.”

~ ~ ~

St. Jerome got it WRONG? Okay, what part of Scripture is correct? King James and his fellas corrected Jerome twelve centuries later, I don’t think so.

If non-Catholic Christians showed a devotion for Mary or honored her as Our Lord desires, we could discuss, it is the complete opposite. Can’t you see, you’re in the same boat as the serpent, the evil one hated the thought a human person would be a part of our Redemption. You can change though, speak to Mary in prayer. She is your mother too.

Two examples of Protestant changes posted showed “He shall” and “It shall”, no way, that’s not feminine. The KJV’s
Rev 3:15 is drastically changed. You find changes as Salza said even in some modern Catholic Bibles. Go with the original, if you can’t read Latin, you will have look at the English translation of the Latin Vulgate. http://www.drbo.org/

verse and footnote ~

I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.

[15] She shall crush: Ipsa, the woman; so divers of the fathers read this place, conformably to the Latin: others read it ipsum, viz., the seed. The sense is the same: for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent’s head.


146 posted on 04/16/2012 11:55:14 PM PDT by stpio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies ]

To: boatbums
Thank you for posting the link. I don't have a lot of time lately for the extended discussions but I do enjoy reading the articles at the links when I have time.
148 posted on 04/17/2012 10:54:03 AM PDT by wmfights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson