Protestants: Where is the Bible in the Bible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JMJ_coder
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
justasking4 said:
This has already been done with the assumption of Mary. There is no scriptural support for it nor any historical support either.
Click to expand...
Really?:

Gen. 5:24, Heb. 11:5 - Enoch was bodily assumed into heaven without dying. Would God do any less for Mary the Ark of the New Covenant?

2 Kings 2:11-12; 1 Mac 2:58 - Elijah was assumed into heaven in fiery chariot. Jesus would not do any less for His Blessed Mother.

Psalm 132:8 - Arise, O Lord, and go to thy resting place, thou and the Ark (Mary) of thy might. Both Jesus and Mary were taken up to their eternal resting place in heaven.

2 Cor. 12:2 - Paul speaks of a man in Christ who was caught up to the third heaven. Mary was also brought up into heaven by God.

Matt. 27:52-53 - when Jesus died and rose, the bodies of the saints were raised. Nothing in Scripture precludes Mary’s assumption into heaven.

1 Thess. 4:17 - we shall be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air and so we shall always be with the Lord.

Rev. 12:1 - we see Mary, the “woman,” clothed with the sun. While in Rev. 6:9 we only see the souls of the martyrs in heaven, in Rev. 12:1 we see Mary, both body and soul.

2 Thess. 2:15 - Paul instructs us to hold fast to oral (not just written) tradition. Apostolic tradition says Mary was assumed into heaven. While claiming the bones of the saints was a common practice during these times (and would have been especially important to obtain Mary’s bones as she was the Mother of God), Mary’s bones were never claimed. This is because they were not available. Mary was taken up body and soul into heaven.

Obviously I just gave the chapter and verse then added comments.
 
justasking4 said:
This has already been done with the assumption of Mary. There is no scriptural support for it nor any historical support either.
Click to expand...
this is where you get into trouble. you can’t say “there is no scriptural or historical support”. because there is some. it’s not great (imo) but there is some. the belief in the dormition (what the eastern church calls the assumption) goes back to the
2nd century and the old testament archetypes are there, it comes down to interpretation of them and they can be interpreted in so many different ways is the problem i have. but you can’t just make the blanket statement that there is no support because you would be wrong.
 
justasking4 said:
This has already been done with the assumption of Mary. There is no scriptural support for it nor any historical support either.
Click to expand...
This is history isn’t it?:

“If the Holy Virgin had died and was buried, her falling asleep would have been surrounded with honour, death would have found her pure, and her crown would have been a virginal one…Had she been martyred according to what is written: ‘Thine own soul a sword shall pierce’, then she would shine gloriously among the martyrs, and her holy body would have been declared blessed; for by her, did light come to the world."
Epiphanius, Panarion, 78:23 (A.D. 377).

and this…

“[T]he Apostles took up her body on a bier and placed it in a tomb; and they guarded it, expecting the Lord to come. And behold, again the Lord stood by them; and the holy body having been received, He commanded that it be taken in a cloud into paradise: where now, rejoined to the soul, [Mary] rejoices with the Lord’s chosen ones…” Gregory of Tours, Eight Books of Miracles, 1:4 (inter A.D. 575-593).

“As the most glorious Mother of Christ, our Savior and God and the giver of life and immortality, has been endowed with life by him, she has received an eternal incorruptibility of the body together with him who has raised her up from the tomb and has taken her up to himself in a way known only to him.” Modestus of Jerusalem, Encomium in dormitionnem Sanctissimae Dominae nostrae Deiparae semperque Virginis Mariae (PG 86-II,3306),(ante A.D. 634).
 
bengal_fan said:
this is where you get into trouble. you can’t say "there is
Click to expand...
no scriptural or historical support". because there is some. it’s not great (imo) but there is some. the belief in the dormition (what the eastern church calls the assumption) goes back to the
2nd century and the old testament archetypes are there, it comes down to interpretation of them and they can be interpreted in so many different ways is the problem i have. but you can’t just make the blanket statement that there is no support because you would be wrong.

This “support” is not really historical i.e. eyewitnesses but speculations. Speculations is not proof or evidence.
 
Lampo said:
This is history isn’t it?:

“If the Holy Virgin had died and was buried, her falling asleep would have been surrounded with honour, death would have found her pure, and her crown would have been a virginal one…Had she been martyred according to what is written: ‘Thine own soul a sword shall pierce’, then she would shine gloriously among the martyrs, and her holy body would have been declared blessed; for by her, did light come to the world."
Epiphanius, Panarion, 78:23 (A.D. 377).

and this…

“[T]he Apostles took up her body on a bier and placed it in a tomb; and they guarded it, expecting the Lord to come. And behold, again the Lord stood by them; and the holy body having been received, He commanded that it be taken in a cloud into paradise: where now, rejoined to the soul, [Mary] rejoices with the Lord’s chosen ones…” Gregory of Tours, Eight Books of Miracles, 1:4 (inter A.D. 575-593).

“As the most glorious Mother of Christ, our Savior and God and the giver of life and immortality, has been endowed with life by him, she has received an eternal incorruptibility of the body together with him who has raised her up from the tomb and has taken her up to himself in a way known only to him.” Modestus of Jerusalem, Encomium in dormitionnem Sanctissimae Dominae nostrae Deiparae semperque Virginis Mariae (PG 86-II,3306),(ante A.D. 634).
Click to expand...
No this is not historical evidence for the event but the speculations of men. Notice the dates for these speculations. Its centuries.
 
justasking4 said:
This “support” is not really historical i.e. eyewitnesses but speculations. Speculations is not proof or evidence.
Click to expand...
Are you saying my interpretation of those passages I used to support the Assumption is wrong?
 
Is there a place a can go to find the “official teaching of sola sciptura that all Protestants adhere to?”
 
Lampo said:
Are you saying my interpretation of those passages I used to support the Assumption is wrong?
Click to expand...
No. What i’m referring to are the claims and the date of the claims being made. Just because something is said by men doesn’t mean its true.
For example how does Gregory in 590 know that the apostles were there if there is not historical evidence for it?
 
justasking4 said:
No. What i’m referring to are the claims and the date of the claims being made. Just because something is said by men doesn’t mean its true.
For example how does Gregory in 590 know that the apostles were there if there is not historical evidence for it?
Click to expand...
My off the cuff answer is: Tradition.
 
Lampo said:
Why in the world would that matter? The thousands of different Protestant denominations don’t even agree on one definition of sola scriptura.
Click to expand...
It matters because i want to be sure i understand what you and others mean by it. So what is your defintion of it?
 
justasking4 said:
No. What i’m referring to are the claims and the date of the claims being made. Just because something is said by men doesn’t mean its true.
For example how does Gregory in 590 know that the apostles were there if there is not historical evidence for it?
Click to expand...
Does everything have to be written down? When I was about 5 years old, I once called my dad a “heathen.” This was never written down or recorded, but is still fact. My dad remembers it vividly. Now, when my dad dies, and if I never write this down and I pass this on to my son, does it cease being true?
 
Lampo said:
Does everything have to be written down? When I was about 5 years old, I once called my dad a “heathen.” This was never written down or recorded, but is still fact. My dad remembers it vividly. Now, when my dad dies, and if I never write this down and I pass this on to my son, does it cease being true?
Click to expand...
Is your Dad really a ‘heathen’?

Because unless he really is you have just proven justasking4’s point. Just because you said it and pass it on down doesn’t actually mean it’s truth!
 
justasking4 said:
It matters because i want to be sure i understand what you and others mean by it. So what is your defintion of it?
Click to expand...
I don’t answer for “others.” I answer for myself. Sola Scriptura - sole infallible authority for God’s Word
 
Lampo;2783197]Does everything have to be written down?
Click to expand...
Yes. Otherwise you leave yourself open to all kinds of false ideas and speculations.
When I was about 5 years old, I once called my dad a “heathen.” This was never written down or recorded, but is still fact. My dad remembers it vividly. Now, when my dad dies, and if I never write this down and I pass this on to my son, does it cease being true?
Click to expand...
No. However, if we needed to have some support for this then we would need something to support this claim. When great claims are being made like the assumption of Mary or her being queen of heaven then some evidence is going to be needed. Without it all you have is speculations.
 
Lampo said:
I don’t answer for “others.” I answer for myself. Sola Scriptura - sole infallible authority for God’s Word
Click to expand...
Can you expand this? That would help me to understand what you mean.
 
Singinbeauty said:
Is your Dad really a ‘heathen’?

Because unless he really is you have just proven justasking4’s point. Just because you said it and pass it on down doesn’t actually mean it’s truth!
Click to expand...
Oops, you misinterpreted the meaning I was trying to convey.(sounds familiar…kinda like sola scripturists)

The STORY is true - me at 5 years old calling my dad a heathen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top