The Ark of The Covenant Has Been Finally Discovered!

By Walid Shoebat (Shoebat Exclusive)

I discovered where the Ark of the Covenant is, but as soon as I explain it and its secret location, none of my friends will even care. For man seeks the literal gold while he forgets the spiritual gems.

For years I was an enthusiast searching for the Ark of the Covenant, was it in Aksum Ethiopia? Or was it hidden under the Temple Mount?

For years, the debates went back and forth over the whereabouts of the Ark but when one runs into certain verses, it should give us pause to think:

“It shall be in those days when you are multiplied and increased in the land,” declares the LORD, “they will no longer say, ‘The ark of the covenant of the LORD.’ And it will not come to mind, nor will they remember it, nor will they miss it, nor will it be made again.”

Is there or is there no Ark? Here it says that there is no longer a physical box called Ark of the Covenant.

Then we find John in Revelation 11 speaking of the Ark descending from heaven. Is there a contradiction, or is it a mystery?

I finally found the Ark, Mary is  to be called “blessed throughout all generations” (Luke 1:48).

It was at that moment when my serious quest to finding the Ark of the Covenant began.

I asked myself, Passover, is a Jewish practice in which God told Israel should be to “you a memorial; and you shall keep it as a feast to the LORD throughout your generations. You shall keep it as a feast by an everlasting ordinance.” (Exodus 12:14)


We still put blood on the door posts and lintels in Bethlehem, a throwback from ancient Israel. Jews still celebrate Passover now and forever. For Jews to stop this practice means that God lied, and the Jews are no more. It is impossible to stop such an ordinance proclaimed by God.

The same was for Mary, but such practice is only done by the Orthodox and the Catholic who call Mary “blessed” throughout all generations. And no, it does not mean that they just “consider” her blessed, it is what it says, “to call” and proclaim audibly Mary as “blessed”, forever.

Mary was the key to unlock the riddle of the Ark of the Covenant. Billy Graham said it at least a half a dozen times over the years: “We evangelical Christians do not give Mary her proper due.” He was right. I have hated Billy for working with Catholics, but I was wrong on this one. For all who object perhaps they can name a woman since the creation greater than the blessed Mary, the mother of all the faithful who Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary said:

“why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord [God] should come to me?” (Luke 1:43).

But discussing Mary is such a sensitive issue for my Evangelical brethren who seek to find a physical Ark.

But unless Jesus here is not God, one cannot escape it; Mary is the Mother of Jesus who is God, the Son, and unless the objector insists she is the mother of only a human being, this would make one a Nestorian heretic (1) yet we do this to only make an anti-Catholic argument.

And why do we insist that Mary slept with Joseph after the birth of Jesus?

Does it matter for salvation if the Catholic was correct or incorrect on this one?

Why is it that we never left the Catholic alone on this issue?

Is it not to accuse and undermine?

We read Scripture at times in a carnal sense so that when Joseph knew not his wife “until she had brought forth her firstborn Son,” (Matthew 1:25)

We think of it as if Scripture is to be read with western lens.

Alright then, in II Samuel 6:23, did Michal give birth on her deathbed: “Michal, daughter of Saul, had not child to (until) the day of her death” or was she barren and could not have children as we all agree? And in Matthew 28:20 will the risen Christ be with us but only stop until the end of the world: “Lo, I am with you always, even to (until) the end of the world”? And in Deuteronomy 34:6 we read “Moses was buried in a valley in the land of Moab, but no one knows his grave to (until) this day” means that they only knew the burial of Moses the day they jotted these words?

Obviously the use of the word in these passages does not imply that Michal had a child after her death, that Christ will depart at the end of the world, or that Moses’ burial place was discovered the day Deuteronomy 34:6 was written. By the same token, the word ‘until’ in Matthew 1:25 does not mean that Joseph and Mary began a sexual union after Christ was born. Such a teaching is found nowhere in Scripture and is contrary to the consistent voice of the entire early Church.

But before you object, perhaps someone could show us an early Church interpretation where it was taught that Joseph and Mary had a sexual union?

Then we have the great accusation that the Catholic intentionally twisted Scripture in Genesis 3:15 “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.”

They say that Mary crushing the head of the serpent was all intended to institute the worship of Mary.

To reply to this dilemma, I always go to my example regarding who crushed the head of Goliath: was it God, David, the stone, or all of the above? And to all I challenge: Will Jesus or will the Church or both crush Satan’s head?

“The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet.” (Romans 16:20) is obviously Christ but also includes the Church through the Messiah as understood by Calvin and others (2) Zechariah 14 makes it quite clear that the saints will land with Christ on the battle of Armageddon to end the Antichrist as it says “and all the saints with You”.

It was after all, both who were struck by the devil, Christ and Mary when the Holy Spirit through Simeon in 
Luke 2:25,34-35 “Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign that is spoken against and a sword will pierce through your own soul also, that thoughts out of many hearts may be revealed”.

Was Mary simply a sinning incubator to house the Holy God and was she only affected by Christ’s crucifixion just like any other sinner, or was she in a way an Ark that housed God?

These are mysteries that no man can fully fathom. And why not pick 
on some Protestant translations, which uses “it” (the seed) instead of “He” that strikes the serpent’s head?

But God forbid, accusations only go one way.

The use of “it” is correct as well since it addresses several who are involved in crushing the devil. (1 John 3:8)

If Mary is virgin, so is the Church, the spotless virgin bride of God as well (e.g. Mt 25:1, Eph 5:27-32, Rv 21:9-10). Mary is the Church’s figure, which is an extension of Christ and is His body, which, is also a participant in the act of destroying the devil. It is always, Christ who is God’s right hand and we are the glove so if the hand moved so does the glove.

The primary purpose for Christ’s coming was not only to save sinners and my mission in life as a Christian was not some archeologist hunting for a lost ark, but as John stated:

“For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.”

And if someone wants to insist on undermining works, how can one destroy works without works and how can Christ destroy the devil without His body—the Church cooperating with Him? Are we not also His body (Matthew 25) and His bride (Revelation 19)?

While the “He” is accurate, Jerome using “she” simply followed the Hebrew text in his edition of the Vulgate (also see Tertullian, 205 A.D.) It is easy to technically err since the subject of the verse had shifted from the woman to the seed of the woman and no one accuses several Protestant translations that the use “it” (King James Version) of forgery.

Falsely accusing stems from the spirit of the accuser.

There is also an artistic sense in which the Hebrew word for “he” could be copied as feminine, and that is in the case of poetry, which the Jewish Encyclopedia sometimes uses masculine and feminine interchangeably, as it is in my native ancient Arabic; all poetry and song never use the feminine for addressing a female love but use “Habibi” the masculine and is used to one speaking to his female love.

What probably should end all arguments regarding the blessed mother of us all is that Scripture starts in Genesis 3:15 and completes the story in my discovery of the Ark in Revelation 11-12 with the same theme.

In eastern composition, one usually should end with what started in the beginning: Genesis 3:15 addresses the woman, her seed and the triumph over Satan with Christ/Mary/The Church (Israel both adopted and literal) are seen stomping over the crescent of Islam, heylel (Isaiah 14) (Lucifer/Hilal, literally crescent) which is the main theme of Revelation 11-12 which expounds on the Mother of Christ, the man-child and the crescent “moon under her feet”.



Here, it’s the woman; “her feet”, not “His feet”. So why are we all harping over this issue?

And I could already hear it: The woman in Revelation 12 is ONLY about “ISRAEL,” “ISRAEl,” “ISRAEL,” Walid. I could already hear the screaming.

Can someone tell us then, why in Revelation 12:5-6a,17 why it says: “the dragon angry with the woman, and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus”?

Is that ‘only’ about Israel which rejected the Messiah?

We read Scripture with too many “only” as if Scripture is mechanical and can only be fathomed mathematically. We restrict so many themes to only history, we allegorize where there is no allegory and literalize were there are no literal and we ignore where there are allegories which speaks of multiple literals.

Verse 9 in between also calls the dragon “that ancient serpent,” tying it even further with Genesis 3:15. The woman in this passage is Mary because she brings forth the one to rule all nations. And like ancient Israel fleeing through the “wilderness” to Egypt, Mary also fled to Egypt with Joseph (Mt 2:13-14).

In turn, Israel is the prefigurement of the Church of the new covenant (e.g. Jer 31:31-33). And coming full circle, Mary can be seen to strike the serpent’s head in her role as figure of the Church.

But indeed, it is also of Israel the nation which labored to bring forth the Messiah and is invaded by the dragon who is the beast, the devil and Antichrist.

There is a “woman” who “labored” in “child birth”. Here we find the literal and the metaphor mingling in a way that the Almighty was hitting several birds with one stone. Indeed, it is also of Israel, which labored and is born after two millennia (see Hosea 6), but John in Revelation 11-12 uses polyvalent symbolism using one symbol to refer to many things.

Seeing the plural fulfillments is enriching. And what’s with the Ark in Revelation 11:19?


While the apostle John was exiled on the island of Patmos, he wrote something that would have shocked any first-century Jew as I discussing Mary being the lost Ark shocks current Evangelicals today. The ark of the Old Covenant had been lost for centuries—no one had seen it for about 600 years.

But here is the KEY to unlock the vision. In Revelation 11:19, John makes a surprising announcement:

“Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple.”

At this point chapter 11 ends and chapter 12 begins. But the Bible was not written with chapter divisions—they were added in the 12th century. When John penned these words, there was no division between chapters 11 and 12; it was a continuing narrative.

What did John say immediately after seeing the Ark of the Covenant in heaven?

Lets take a look:

“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; she was with child” (Revelation 12:1-2).

The woman is Mary, and here she is the Ark of the Covenant, revealed by God to John. Indeed, the Ark had multiple meanings as well. But here it’s strictly speaking of Mary. She was seen bearing the child who would rule the world with a rod of iron (Revelation 12:5). Mary was seen as “the ark” and as “a queen” in heaven.

It is indeed impossible to refute that the Church is also involved, later in the same chapter we read that the devil went out to persecute the woman’s other offspring—Christians—which certainly seems to indicate that Mary is somehow the mother of the Church (Revelation 12:17).

Some will still insist: does this passage really refer to Mary? Some say the woman represents Israel or the Church, and certainly she does. John’s use of rich symbolism is well known, but it is obvious from the Bible itself that the woman is Mary.

Its amazing that the beginning of the Bible, like a wonderful symphony, its begins with a real man (Adam), a real woman (Eve), and a real serpent (the devil)—and it also ends with a real man (Jesus, the Last Adam [1 Corinthians 15:45]), a real woman (Mary, the New Eve [Revelation 11:19-12:2]), and a real serpent (the devil of old). All of this was foretold in Genesis 3:15. Here we have a completion of God’s writ, what it began with the loss it ended with the victory of Jesus over the devil and of Mary over Eve’s sin. This is wealth indeed.

And if one thinks that Mary being the Queen Mother, to Christ is not crucial, think again, Jesus riding a “donkey” described in Zechariah vs. the Messiah coming on a “horse” as was described by rabbinic circles at the time, made the difference between heaven (recognizing Messiah rides a donkey) and hell (making the error He rides a white horse).

And so it will be with His second coming. Many will refuse to be marked on the forehead since a physical mark is a Catholic/Orthodox thing which is reminiscent to Ash Wednesday, many insist it’s a spiritual mark on the foreheads and they miss the train.



And if in doubt ask Cain who thought that God could care less about offering fruit or offering meat for sacrifice, it’s the heart after all that counts, right?
No, it’s going after God’s heart, which counts. Remember, we will “have the mark of God” on our “foreheads”, taking a literal physical mark expresses the spiritual conviction just as that water baptism reflects our spiritual baptism in which to say that one “alone” is not enough, its literal water. Moses had everyone post a literal cross with literal blood on the doorposts and lintels. Stop the symbolism on every corner of Scripture.

Prudentius (4th century) prescribe the cross as the mark of Christ. (see Symmacuhs, II. 4. 87)

I will confess, every time I spoke to an audience throughout the world, when I shared Revelation 12 mentions a “woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars . . . ” I would hypocritically say that this is only Israel when truly my heart for years was pounding with “what about Mary”? I urge everyone read the verses carefully and see how the Holy Spirit will pound at the door of your heart.

Was Mary just an “incubator”?

Scripture is rich. Its wealth of meanings and hidden gems never end.

Indeed, the Church including Mary participates in destroying the devil. In Zechariah 14, when Christ descends and “All the saints with You [Christ]” it will definitely include Mary in ways we can hardly comprehend. While this takes a manuscript to write about, Mary plays an intricate role. Mary will urge Christ to unsheathe His heavenly sword, to lead “the armies of the living God” (1 Samuel 17:26), and destroy the forces of the Antichrist.

Mary will tell Christ to unsheathe His heavenly sword? Who is Mary to tell Christ what to do? This is attempting to give Mary a position that only belongs to the Father.

Indeed, the Father tells the Son. It is here where the story of Mary the Ark even gets better. The accusation of placing Mary over God as Catholics are continually are accused is easily shattered once we examine the richness of Scripture. Was Mary bossing God around when Mary told Jesus to make water into wine? Did Mary put herself over God? Or was it destined that Mary does have such an honor in which even God yielded to her request of love?

Folks forget that God is love and Mary was holy and these are not mechanics and incubators. When the wedding at Cana took place, was Jesus God or only a human kid? Does anyone dare to blaspheme God here and say that Jesus was mere man? It is this why “alone” could present trouble.

Here, I will make all my conclusions from Scripture and nothing else. I understand that nearly every discussion on Mary provokes tension, NO Mary is not God, but in order to unravel the dilemma we must put aside our prejudices and look through what the Scriptures say about Mary, and the particular verses both foreshadowing and pertaining to her.

So allow me to start, ever wonder why in Psalm 45:9, the queen’s mother stands at the right hand of the king, arrayed in gold? In Hebrews 1:8-9, the psalm is applied to Jesus as the Messianic King. So by extension, Psalm 45 refers to the queen mother of the Messiah, Mary.

The intercession of the Saints is probably the most that generates heated debates, but it is also the most proven when one examines the volumes written about the subject during Church history regardless of how much we try to cover and play with history. Mary, as the rest of the saints are living not dead, for if they were dead than Christ is a liar when the New Testament clearly stated:

“to be absent of the body is to be present with the Lord”. (II Corinthians 5:6-8)

Are the saints dead-absent or alive-and-present with God?

I find so many who insist that they use Scripture “alone” mostly using tradition and not Scripture. I am from the east and not from the west, and was never raised on cultural prejudices as Catholic-vs-Protestant as westerners do.

Every time I ask this question about the saints being absent of the body, I get a spin and I never get a straight shooter: Yes, to be absent of the body is to be present with the Lord as living saints who think, who pray and who are living. And when Christ returns as He unites the saints with their bodies and to tread “the winepress of the fierceness and wrath” in the Marriage Festival of the Lamb, can anyone say that Mary will not be with Him, just as she was with Him when He converted the wine (nations) at the marriage festival of Cana into wine (blood)?

Any takers on this challenge?

While such an assertion provokes objection, we cannot forget what the prophet Zechariah declared, “the Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with thee [Jesus]” (Zechariah 14:5) and who would dare deny that all of the saints means both those on earth as well as those in Heaven, for God “is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living” (Mark 12:27)?

Anyone dare says that when Moses died that he did not talk with Christ on the mountain (Matthew 17)? And that even after Samuel died did he not still visit king Saul (1 Samuel 28)?

Moreover, John saw how “the armies which were in heaven followed him [Christ] upon white horses” (Revelation 19:4), and Mary most definitely is amongst this army going to earth to do battle with the Antichrist. Mary, then, will emphatically be with Christ, and add to this the fact that she brought forth God in the flesh, and furthermore the stories of Deborah and Esther in conjunction with the Wedding at Cana, and we know that she will be with Christ in a very high position.

The biggest problem one encounters is when folks gymnastically try to use verses in order to dissect a holy mystery. Mary having Jesus (God) in her womb is not mechanics; it is a Holy issue which none of us can completely fathom. And I ask: hath the Lord lied to us? Are Catholics asking a carcass to intercede for them in heaven, or are they asking who were “absent of their bodies and are present with the Lord” for intercessory prayers? Its alright to ask your buddies but is a sin to ask the saints in heaven for intercessory prayers?

Even if someone rejects Catholic teaching regarding Mary, he/she needs to answer, which came first, the chicken or the egg? What was taught first, that Mary was simply an “incubator” or that Mary was “an Ark” “queen” “ever virgin”?

No one can seriously deny that Catholics and Orthodox have scriptural foundations for it and that this was a main teaching that has been taught by the early Church—some written well before the New Testament books were even officially compiled into the final New Testament canon:

Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296–373) was the main defender of the deity of Christ against the second-century heretics. He 
wrote: “O noble Virgin, truly you are greater than any other greatness. For who is your equal in greatness, O dwelling place of God the Word? To whom among all creatures shall I compare you, O Virgin? You are greater than them all O [Ark of the] Covenant, clothed with purity instead of gold! You are the ark in which is found the golden vessel containing the true manna, that is, the flesh in which divinity resides” (Homily of the Papyrus of Turin).”

Gregory the Wonder Worker (c. 213–c. 270) wrote:

“Let us chant the melody that has been taught us by the inspired harp of David, and say, ‘Arise, O Lord, into thy rest; thou, and the ark of thy sanctuary.’ For the Holy Virgin is in truth an ark, wrought with gold both within and without, that has received the whole treasury of the sanctuary” (Homily on the Annunciation to the Holy Virgin Mary).

It was at this 
festival where Christ began His divinely destined ministry, by making the water into wine. But Christ did not arise and do this miracle, until His mother told Him to do so. When she said to her Son, “They have no wine” (John 2:3), Christ told her, “Woman, what have I to do with thee? 
mine hour is not yet come.” (John 2:4) Christ did not say this to chide her, rather He told her that the hour of His Passion has not yet come.


But what does wine have to do with Christ’s passion? Wine is symbolic of blood and death, thus why Christ tells His Father, “let this cup pass from me” (Matthew 26:39), and to Peter He says, “Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me” (John 18:11). The cup is pictorially sublime, being filled with wine, that is, suffering and anguish.

Now, in order for wine to be made, grapes must first be crushed and squeezed under a winepress, and this is symbolic of the shedding of human blood in war, and it is this very imagery that God uses when describing the victory over His enemies. For in Lamentations we read: The Lord hath trodden under foot all my mighty men in the
 midst of me: he hath called an assembly against me to crush my young men: the Lord hath trodden the virgin, the daughter of Judah, as in a winepress. (Lamentations 1:5)

Thus, we know that the wine Christ made from the water represents blood, fury and slaughter. But what of the water? Water is symbolic of nations, of peoples. Hence the angel tells John, “The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.” (Revelation 17:15)


Therefore, Christ changing the water into wine is a prophetic moment, foreshadowing His return in which the ark (Mary) will issue the conversion of water (nations) into wine (blood) as Christ partnering with His Bride will slaughter entire nations and people. The Wedding at Cana is greatly correlated by God, through Moses, turning the waters of Egypt into blood:

“and he lifted up the rod, and smote the waters that were 
in the river, in the sight of Pharaoh, and in the sight of his servants; and all the waters that were in the river were turned to blood.” (Exodus 7:20)

Likewise, Christ transforming the water into wine and God turning Egypt’s 
waters into blood, both ultimately prophesy the Second Coming of Christ in which He will turn nations of the Antichrist (the seas) into blood (wine).

Even the day upon which the Wedding at Cana took place is significant and connects to Christ’s battle in His Second Coming. St. John tells us, “And the third day there was a marriage at Cana” (John 2:1), and this foreshadows what the prophet Hosea declared regarding Israel’s labor, which mimics Mary’s travail (Revelation 12)

“Come and let us return unto the Lord: for he hath torn and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up. After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.” (Hosea 6:1-2)

A day is as a thousand years, and “the third day” is after an 
approximate of two thousand years after the Resurrection. This verse of Hosea is speaking of Christ’s second coming, “in the third day” in which “we shall live in his sight”, and be in His presence.

Such closure should make us weep.

Just as on “the third day there was a marriage at Cana” in which Christ made water into wine, on the “third day” of Hosea there will be The Marriage Supper of the Lamb in which Christ will shed the waters of Satan’s armies into blood as grapes are crushed for wine. Let us read St. John:

“Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb.”

“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: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.”

“And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, King Of Kings, And Lord Of Lords. And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God; That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.” (Revelation 19:7-18)

The Wedding at Cana is a simple story that beautifully signifies the greatest and most desired of military victories. It is a story that foretells a war. It is a most transcendent moment in which justice conquering evil is illustrated by water turning into wine.

Christ turning the water into wine foretells how He will shed the 
blood of His enemies, Mary stomping the crescent moon, the Muslims, as grapes are crushed under the winepress, for He told Isaiah:

“Who is this that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments 
from Bozrah? this that is glorious in his apparel, travelling in the 
greatness of his strength? I that speak in righteousness, mighty to save. Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel, and thy garments like him that treadeth in the winefat? I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me: for I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment.” (Isaiah 63:1-3)

Christ comes from Edom (Arabia) stained in blood as though He was covered in wine, that is, blood, foretelling how the Messiah destroys Saudi Arabia, the motherland of Islam, the religion of the Antichrist (see Dedan and Teman in Ezekiel 25:13)

The angel told John, “The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues” (Revelation 17:15), and it is these waters (nations) which Christ will turn into wine, that is, a great slaughter.

Therefore, when Christ turned the water into wine, it was a prophetic symbol of Him crushing his enemies and shedding their blood. But who was it that told Christ to make the wine? It was His mother, Mary, the Ark, which also finally comes down from heaven. It was she who told Christ, “They have no wine”; she who brought the servants and ordered them, “Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.” And so we (the Church) as servants of Christ will follow suit. And it was Christ Who obeyed His mother’s order to make wine, a symbolic moment foretelling of His future wrath and slaughter of the hordes of 

This theme could be easily found throughout Scripture. And just as Mary told Jesus to make wine, Deborah told Barak to war against the Canaanites, saying, “Hath not the Lord God of Israel commanded, saying, Go and draw toward mount Tabor, and take with thee ten thousand men of the children of Naphtali and of the children of Zebulun?” (Judges 4:6)

And after Deborah told him this, Barak said, “If thou wilt go with 
me, then I will go: but if thou wilt not go with me, then I will not 
go.” (Judges 4:8) And so Deborah accompanied Barak in the war against the pagans, just as Mary accompanied Christ in His making the water into wine and will accompany her Son to land on the Mount of Olives “and all the saints with you”.

It is the seed of Mary that shall crush the head of the Serpent 
(Genesis 3:15), just as the woman Jael hammered her nail into Sisera’s head, as Deborah sang:

“She put her hand to the nail, and her right hand to the 
workmen’s hammer; and with the hammer she smote Sisera, she smote off his head, when she had pierced and stricken through his temples. At her feet he bowed, he fell, he lay down: at her feet he bowed, he fell: where he bowed, there he fell down dead.”(Judges 5:26)

It was Jael of whom Deborah sang, “Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Heber the Kenite be, blessed shall she be above women in the tent.” (Judges 5:24) And it was Mary of whom God praised, with very similar words, through the angel Gabriel: “Hail, thou art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed are thou among women.” (Luke 28) It was Jael’s nail that crushed the head of Sisera, and it is the 
fruit of Mary’s womb that crushes the head of Satan.


And just as Deborah praises Jael hammering her nail into Sisera’s head, and calls her “blessed above women”, so does Elizabeth praise the fruit of Mary’s womb, that shall crush the serpent’s head, and calls her blessed above women: “Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.” (Luke 1:42) Jael hammers the nail into Sisera’s head Mary told Christ to make wine in a wedding, and Esther told the king to kill Haman “at the banquet of wine.” (Esther 7:2)

As Christ “treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath” 
(Revelation 19:15) to defeat the Antichrist, Esther’s husband the king, “arising from the banquet of wine in his wrath” (Esther 7:7) came out and had Haman, a precursor to the Antichrist, executed (Esther 7:10).

For how long must we harden our hearts on our ignorance of Mary? It is Christianity that taught me to honor women. Must God have little honor for women when it is satan and antichrist who does not honor women (Daniel 11)? Must we resort to Islam’s type of theology in which women are seen as incubators?

Heavens no!

It was Christ who showed me to rescue my mother. All of these women of the Old Testament connect perfectly with Mary, and all are involved in leading warriors to kill God’s enemies, and participate in the victory. The king killed Haman, but it was Esther who exhorted the killing, and was with him when the enemy was killed. Barak defeated the Canaanites, but Deborah urged him to commence the war, and was with him in the holy fray. Christ made wine, but Mary told Him to make wine, 
and was present when He did so.

With all of these parallels and connections, the argument is made that in the time of the Apocalypse, the ultimate fulfillment of the Wedding at Cana shall be fulfilled, and the waters of the enemy will be ready to be turned into blood.

Just as Esther, in her request to bring justice upon Haman, told the king, “we are sold, I and my people, to be destroyed, to be slain, and to perish” (Esther 7:4), Mary will plead the case of the suffering and persecuted saints to her Son the King of Heaven, to unsheathe His sword, commence the final battle against the Antichrist, and make blood out of the sea of nations belonging to Satan.
One may argue that this is wrong since Christ does the will of the 
Father, and not that of Mary. While it is true that Christ does the will of the Father, it cannot be simply rejected that the Father can command His will to His son through Mary.

Can anyone deny that Christ did the will of His Father at the Wedding at Cana through the command of His mother?

Its impossible to deny.

The Bible is intricate. Its is weaved through the Holy Spirit. Its speaks of a Triune God in mysterious way. It speaks of a mother who sinned (Eve) and another who undid her sin through her seed (Mary) and that seed was God.
One cannot simply remove Mary from the end times, or from 
participation in the victory over Antichrist, just as you cannot remove Esther from participation in the killing of Haman, nor Deborah in the vanquishing of the Canaanites.
Mary gives birth to Christ, and thus to the Church with which Christ identifies Himself, for He told Saul, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” (Acts 9:4) when he was persecuting the Church.
Therefore, “the remnant of her seed” is the Church. Satan hates the Church, he hates Christ, and thus he hates Mary. Because of this enmity, Satan’s attacks are not just against Christ and His Church, but against His mother. Therefore, Mary is involved in the war against Satan and his corrupt seed, the Antichrist.
Is it not that in ancient Israel the mother of the king was the queen, and so thus is Mary the queen, accompanying the King in His battles? And why did God orchestrate Israel’s kingdom in such fashion?

During the Crusades, it was said by a French monk that “the soldiers of Christ marched out against the acolytes of the Antichrist,” (Robert the Monk, Historia Iherosolimitana, 6.8, trans. Carol Sweetenham), the same will happen in the end, but this time it will be God in the flesh leading forth His armies into the ultimate victory over the Father of Lies and the one who “was a murderer from the beginning” (John 8:44) and
 He shall fight alongside His mother, “terrible as an army with 
banners.” (Song of Songs 6:4)
And why was Jael to “strike the enemy’s head”? In Judges 4:21 and Judges 5:26, she is described killing the oppressive king’s general Sisera by driving a tent peg into his head.
The second woman is Judith. In Judith 13:8-9, she is described cutting off the head of Holofernes, who is called later in the chapter the “leader of…enemies,” and whose name means “stinking in hell.”

There are no contradictions in Scripture, indeed, it is David who strikes the head of the enemy Goliath. David, as a figure of Christ, reflects Christ’s role in smiting the enemy’s head. One very strong connection is that all three women, Jael, Judith, and Mary are called “blessed among women.”

Jael is called “blessed of women” in Judges 5:24. Judith is called “blessed…among all women on earth” in Judith 13:18. And Mary, of course, is called “blessed…among women” in Luke 1:42.
Mary’s weapon is not a peg, like Jael, or a sword, like Judith. Rather can Mary’s weapon be considered her very immediate offspring––Jesus Christ? I think the typology here supports that understanding.
Therefore, we should not treat Mary as Muslims treat their women: just “vassals” to bring in children, taking no care for the fact that the Child Who Mary bore was God, just as the Ark of the Covenant housed God.



(1) This title took on great importance in the fourth century, when a heretic named Nestorius-a man who held high office in the Church-claimed that the one in Mary’s womb was certainly man, but that He was not God. Orthodox Christians, with one accord, said, “Wrong!” To see Jesus Christ as something less than God in the flesh is sub-Christian. For unless the one in Mary’s womb was and is God, we are dead in our sins. To safeguard the full deity of Christ, the Church has always insisted that Mary be rightly called as Elizabeth called her-the Mother of God. This title, of course, does not mean mother of the Holy Trinity, for the Holy Trinity has no mother. Neither does it mean she originated the Person Who is God the Son. It refers instead to Mary being the Mother of the Son of God, Who assumed full humanity in her womb.

(2) 1 MacArthur, John, The MacArthur Study Bible, Thomas Nelson (publisher), 1997, p. 20-21.
2Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1965-1966, p. 985.
3Many Protestant traditions do not recognize the book of Judith as Scripture. However, I think the strength of the argument can be drawn from the Jael story alone, or by acknowledging the historical tale of Judith as part of Jewish tradition even if one denies its Scriptural quality.
John MacArthur, whose contra-Catholic ideas, wrote:
 Believers should recognize that they participate in the crushing of Satan because, along with their Savior and because of His finished work on the cross, they also are of the woman’s seed.1
Protestant “Reformer” John Calvin, in his commentary on Genesis, wrote similarly of this verse:
[I]t comes to pass that, in the same manner, the whole Church of God, under its Head, will gloriously exult over him. To this the declaration of Paul refers, “The Lord shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly,” (Romans 16:20.) By which words he signifies that the power of bruising Satan is imparted to faithful men, and thus the blessing is the common property of the whole Church.
 There are Catholic sources that agree with these sentiments, such as the New American Bible’s footnote:
 He will strike…at his heel: since the antecedent for he and his is the collective noun offspring, i.e., all the descendants of the woman, a more exact rendering of the sacred writer’s words would be, “They will strike…at their heels. “
Or the Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition footnote:
 he shall bruise your head: i.e., the seed of the woman, that is, mankind descended from Eve, will eventually gain the victory over the powers of evil.