It might be helpful to compare how the full blown Catholic understanding, say, of Mary developed out of the Scriptural and early Christian understanding of Mary with the way an oak tree develops from an acorn. In each case, the before and after look different but are essentially the same. And one naturally leads to the other just as promise leads naturally (on a good day) to fulfillment.
This is a nice way to try to avoid being cornered re the irreality of the self if you're a reductionist, for you can assert that a pattern obtains at the microscopic level that is not all that unlike the pattern found at the societal level. No need for the one self that does it all: instead, you have many sub-selfs that compete for dominance or take turns guiding the whole. The problem with this is, however, that the voters/officials are all zombies. None of them thinks about the whole as such. And perhaps none of them thinks even about themselves (unless one is a panzoist). None of them makes a comparison of alternatives. The more this proposed democracy seems like a zombocracy, the more consciousness will be seem to be epiphenomenal. Furthermore, if the oneness of the self is less real than the multiplicity of explanatory neural parts, then why can't each of these neural parts be conceived of as democracy as well? And why not parts of these parts, et...
Comments
So the Old Eve / New Eve contrast alluded to, I think by Iraneaus (or was it Ignatius -- I get those two guys mixed up) is a kind of acorn from which the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception developed.
As for intercession of the saints, that is very, very helpful inasmuch as it undercuts the possible claim that the Catholic focus on the saints is an adaptation of the Roman Pantheon. But if ancient Jews understood Elijah as you say, then the doctrine of intercession was already "oakie" to begin with (I probably should avoid such wordplay when in Oklahoma).