Sacred Oral and Written Tradition

[davidv]

If you are going to limit yourself to the Scriptures alone
{snip}

Why should I do that?

Please provide a historical basis, from the first century or two (AD), for making this limitation.

 

[guanophore]

If you are going to limit yourself to the Scriptures alone you will not find anything about her assumption.

One of the best reasons I can think of not to make such a mistake!

Who would want to cut themselves off from part of the Revelation of God? I disagree, though, we do find evidence in the Scriptures/

Nothing. You will also not find any reliable historical support either.

Well, your refusal to accept the evidence does not nullify it’s existence. That is like saying “I find no evidence for Pluto”, since you cannot see it with your naked eye. Your inability to see things in history an scripture only makes them invisible to yourself. Those of us with magnifying glasses can see them just fine.

:bounce:

For example from a Catholic scholar:

Sorry, ja4. The Church teaching is not determined by “scholars”, but by the Authority appointed by Christ. Your continued efforts to find people that appear to disagree with the Apostolic teaching and make them sound authoritative will not work.

… For my own part, I do not dare to speak, but I keep my own thoughts and I practice silence …

If this scholar commends himself to you, why don’t you follow this sage advice?

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;4387792]
Originally Posted by justasking4
If you are going to limit yourself to the Scriptures alone you will not find anything about her assumption.
guanophore
One of the best reasons I can think of not to make such a mistake!

Who would want to cut themselves off from part of the Revelation of God? I disagree, though, we do find evidence in the Scriptures/

Not so. There is not one verse in the NT that attests to her supposed assumption. Not one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
Nothing. You will also not find any reliable historical support either.
guanophore
Well, your refusal to accept the evidence does not nullify it’s existence.

What evidence? There is none…

That is like saying “I find no evidence for Pluto”, since you cannot see it with your naked eye. Your inability to see things in history an scripture only makes them invisible to yourself. Those of us with magnifying glasses can see them just fine.

The evidence for Pluto was inferred by its affect on other planets. If i’m not mistaken we know can see it with our telescopes. There is no inferences to Mary’s assumption in Scripture (the last time she is mentioned is in Galatians and not by name) and after 2000 years the church still does not know what happened to her.

Originally Posted by justasking4
For example from a Catholic scholar:
guanophore
Sorry, ja4. The Church teaching is not determined by “scholars”, but by the Authority appointed by Christ. Your continued efforts to find people that appear to disagree with the Apostolic teaching and make them sound authoritative will not work.

Catholic scholars are to support church teachings and this scholar does not because as he writes there is no evidence for it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justasking4
… For my own part, I do not dare to speak, but I keep my own thoughts and I practice silence …

i don’t remember writing this…

If this scholar commends himself to you, why don’t you follow this sage advice?

I do for the reasons given and so should you.

 

[twb1621]

If you are going to limit yourself to the Scriptures alone you will not find anything about her assumption. Nothing. You will also not find any reliable historical support either. Now why in Heaven’s name would I limit myself to scripture alone, thats your thing, remember? you are the one who came on a Catholic forum, I’m not on yours.For example from a Catholic scholar:
“The Roman Catholic writer Eamon Duffy concedes that, ‘there is, clearly, no historical evidence whatever for it …’ (Eamon Duffy, What Catholics Believe About Mary (London: Catholic Truth Society, 1989), p. 17). For centuries in the early Church there is complete silence regarding Mary’s end. The first mention of it is by Epiphanius in 377 A.D. and he specifically states that no one knows what actually happened to Mary. He lived near Palestine and if there were, in fact, a tradition in the Church generally believed and taught he would have affirmed it. But he clearly states that ‘her end no one knows.’ These are his words:
But if some think us mistaken, let them search the Scriptures. They will not find Mary’s death; they will not find whether she died or did not die; they will not find whether she was buried or was not buried … Scripture is absolutely silent [on the end of Mary] … For my own part, I do not dare to speak, but I keep my own thoughts and I practice silence … The fact is, Scripture has outstripped the human mind and left [this matter] uncertain … Did she die, we do not know … Either the holy Virgin died and was buried … Or she was killed … Or she remained alive, since nothing is impossible with God and He can do whatever He desires; for her end no-one knows.’ (Epiphanius, Panarion, Haer. 78.10-11, 23. Cited by juniper Carol, O.F.M. ed., Mariology, Vol. II (Milwaukee: Bruce, 1957), pp. 139-40).”

What is your point? I can produce (and you know they are available) numerous dissertations from many Catholic scholars as you say, that find in favor of the assumption including that of the Catholic Church who is also represented by recognized scholars.

Never did I say it is Spelled out in Scripture. I also presented you with a sound rational theory of why there is little written in the gospel regarding Mary at all. Other than refusal to accept which is a given, you have produced no rational or sound refutation. I have yet to hear from any of those who “believe in Scripture only” and also in the Blood of Christ being the source of Christian salvation any refutation as to Mary’s perpetual virginity, devotion or sinless state based on the fact that both she and Jesus shared the same saving blood. There has also been no reasonable or rational argument against Mary’s assumption based on the study of Christ’s life and Mary’s parallel life with her Son, the teachings of love and respect in all situations including honoring thy mother, which He did, the commandments and the OT prophecies. Do you believe in the OT prophecies regarding Jesus? You can’t even provide a reasonable explanation as to how honoring Mary because she is the mother of the Son of God is insulting to her Son when He is the very point of that honor. If you want to limit yourself to scripture only you are in the wrong place, this is a Catholic Forum and we use all the Word and teachings of Jesus as He proclaimed it taught.

 

[twb1621]

I’ve read all of your posts that were here this morning, OK?

I understand your points, I’m ex-RC, OK?

Actually, there is no such thing as an “ex-RC” in the Christian Faith. The more offered, the more expected. I’ll keep you in my prayers…

 

[twb1621]

Amazing; no?

nop!

 

[cfrancis]

“The Roman Catholic writer Eamon Duffy concedes that, ‘there is, clearly, no historical evidence whatever for it …’ (Eamon Duffy, What Catholics Believe About Mary (London: Catholic Truth Society, 1989), p. 17). For centuries in the early Church there is complete silence regarding Mary’s end. The first mention of it is by Epiphanius in 377 A.D. and he specifically states that no one knows what actually happened to Mary. He lived near Palestine and if there were, in fact, a tradition in the Church generally believed and taught he would have affirmed it. But he clearly states that ‘her end no one knows.’ These are his words:
But if some think us mistaken, let them search the Scriptures. They will not find Mary’s death; they will not find whether she died or did not die; they will not find whether she was buried or was not buried … Scripture is absolutely silent [on the end of Mary] … For my own part, I do not dare to speak, but I keep my own thoughts and I practice silence … The fact is, Scripture has outstripped the human mind and left [this matter] uncertain … Did she die, we do not know … Either the holy Virgin died and was buried … Or she was killed … Or she remained alive, since nothing is impossible with God and He can do whatever He desires; for her end no-one knows.’ (Epiphanius, Panarion, Haer. 78.10-11, 23. Cited by juniper Carol, O.F.M. ed., Mariology, Vol. II (Milwaukee: Bruce, 1957), pp. 139-40).”

Please note, this is an excerpt from a source that uses Duffy’s use of a quote from Epiphanius; it is not a quote from Duffy, and neither is it the entire quote from Epiphanius. Here is that quote with the ellipses removed and the text returned (in red):

But if some think us mistaken, let them search the Scriptures. They will not find whether she died or did not die; they will not find whether she was buried or was not buried. More than that: John journeyed to Asia, yet nowhere do we read that he took the Holy Virgin with him. Rather, Scripture is absolutely silent, because of the extraordinary nature of the prodigy, in order not to shock the minds of men. For my part, I do not dare to speak, but I keep my own thoughts and I practice silence. For it may be that somewhere we have found hints that it is impossible to discover the death of the holy, blessed one. On the one hand, you see, Simeon says of her, ‘And your own soul a sword shall pierce, that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed’ (Luke 2:35). On the other hand, when the Apocalypse of John says, ‘And the dragon hastened against the woman who had brought forth the male child, and there were given to her an eagle’s wings, and she was carried off into the wilderness, that the dragon might not seize her’ (Acts 12:13-14), it may be that this is fulfilled in her. However, I do not assert this absolutely, and I do not say that she remained immortal; but neither do I maintain stoutly that she died. The fact is, scripture had outstripped the human mind and left (this matter) uncertain, for the sake of that valued vessel without compare, to prevent anyone from harboring carnal thoughts in her regard. Did she die? We do not know. At all events, if she was buried, she had had no carnal intercourse.1

1 Epiphanius, Panarion, haer. 78, 23, in The Testimony of the Patristic Age Concerning Mary’s Death, Walter Burghardt, S.J., (Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1957), 5-6.

Amazing, no, what is actually said vs what it purported to be said.

 

[cfrancis]

And your ignorance continues, in that you fail to recognize that though there may be myriad definitions of SS, I have given you point one of the correct definition: SS presupposes a canon of scripture.

You continue to prove my point made in the preceding post.

My point has been that you cannot prove the Marian dogmas from scripture. That point has not been refuted.

Marian dogmas…in scripture…where do I find them?

You again prove my first statement in this post.

Dude

That’s your position, it’s not the Jews position.

The lack of substance to your reply affirms your waving of the white flag.

 

[sandusky]

The lack of substance to your reply affirms your waving of the white flag.

You’re lack of a reply confirms the depth and breadth of the substance of my reply.

You insist on defining what I believe, thereby erecting a straw man against which you vigorously argue, while I sit on the sidelines, in amusement, watching you beat your straw man.

 

[cfrancis]

You’re lack of a reply confirms the depth and breadth of the substance of my reply.

You insist on defining what I believe, thereby erecting a straw man against which you vigorously argue, while I sit on the sidelines, in amusement, watching you beat your straw man.

Sadly, that upon which you sit is illusory, as I have shown; the good news is your white flag is waving vigorously

 

[sandusky]

Sadly, that upon which you sit is illusory, as I have shown; the good news is your white flag is waving vigorously

ISTM that all you do, you do in vain.

By the way, what have you named your straw man?

 

[Realcatholicgk]

cfrancis, maybe you can tell me… Are my posts difficult to understand or are some individuals just not able to substantiate any argument in them?

Not sure what you are asking. Can you clarify?

 

[Realcatholicgk]

You’re lack of a reply confirms the depth and breadth of the substance of my reply.

You insist on defining what I believe, thereby erecting a straw man against which you vigorously argue, while I sit on the sidelines, in amusement, watching you beat your straw man.

**Hi sand, **
**I have noticed you always refer to a strawman.Is it some type of fetish with you? Are you fixated on the Wizard of OZ? You are amused with the abuse of a poor straw man? Between your strawman and Cfrancis’ white flag this is an interesting thread! :yawn: **

 

[sandusky]

**Hi sand, **
**I have noticed you always refer to a strawman.Is it some type of fetish with you? Are you fixated on the Wizard of OZ? You are amused with the abuse of a poor straw man? Between your strawman and Cfrancis’ white flag this is an interesting thread! :yawn: **

.

.

Cfrancis is angry with his straw man, either because he has been betrayed by his straw man, or he’s being accused by him.

 

[justasking4]

cfrancis;4388307]
Quote:
But if some think us mistaken, let them search the Scriptures. They will not find whether she died or did not die; they will not find whether she was buried or was not buried. More than that: John journeyed to Asia, yet nowhere do we read that he took the Holy Virgin with him. Rather, Scripture is absolutely silent, because of the extraordinary nature of the prodigy, in order not to shock the minds of men. For my part, I do not dare to speak, but I keep my own thoughts and I practice silence. For it may be that somewhere we have found hints that it is impossible to discover the death of the holy, blessed one. On the one hand, you see, Simeon says of her, ‘And your own soul a sword shall pierce, that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed’ (Luke 2:35). On the other hand, when the Apocalypse of John says, ‘And the dragon hastened against the woman who had brought forth the male child, and there were given to her an eagle’s wings, and she was carried off into the wilderness, that the dragon might not seize her’ (Acts 12:13-14), it may be that this is fulfilled in her. However, I do not assert this absolutely, and I do not say that she remained immortal; but neither do I maintain stoutly that she died. The fact is, scripture had outstripped the human mind and left (this matter) uncertain, for the sake of that valued vessel without compare, to prevent anyone from harboring carnal thoughts in her regard. Did she die? We do not know. At all events, if she was buried, she had had no carnal intercourse.1

1 Epiphanius, Panarion, haer. 78, 23, in The Testimony of the Patristic Age Concerning Mary’s Death, Walter Burghardt, S.J., (Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1957), 5-6.

Amazing, no, what is actually said vs what it purported to be said.

The way i read what you have posted agrees with Duffy. There is no evidence for it.

 

[Realcatholicgk]

Not so. There is not one verse in the NT that attests to her supposed assumption. Not one.

Not sure what you mean. Can you clarify?

What evidence? There is none.

A great Catholic theologian once said: “Well, your refusal to accept the evidence does not nullify it’s existence”. --guanophore

The evidence for Pluto was inferred by its affect on other planets. If i’m not mistaken we know can see it with our telescopes. There is no inferences to Mary’s assumption in Scripture (the last time she is mentioned is in Galatians and not by name) and after 2000 years the church still does not know what happened to her.

The evidence for Mary’s assumption was inferred by her affect on other christians. If I am not mistaken we can see that without our telescopes. There is no inferences of the existance of Pluto in Scripture (It was never mentioned at all not even in Galatians) After 2,000 years the Church doesn’t care what you think!

Catholic scholars are to support church teachings and this scholar does not because as he writes there is no evidence for it.

Well guanophore supports church teachings. What makes you think the evideance wasn’t there? Not sure what you mrean. Can you clairfy? Is this part of your Pluto is a son of god theory? What the other scholar said was: For my part, I do not dare to speak, but I keep my own thoughts and I practice silence. For it may be that somewhere we have found hints that it is impossible to discover the death of the holy, blessed one.

i don’t remember writing this…

It is called oldtimers! As much as ytou write I think one of yuo did write it!

I do for the reasons given and so should you.

 

[twb1621]

Not sure what you are asking. Can you clarify?

 

[twb1621]

Not sure what you are asking. Can you clarify?

:egyptian:

 

[justasking4]

:egyptian:

:takeoff:

 

[twb1621]

:takeoff:

hey, thats cute…