Scriptural Basis for Mary's Assumption

[LilyM]

God did tell men what books were inspired.

When, where and how? In any event the canon of the Bible was not set for at least 250-odd years after the writing of Revelation. Interesting that He waited so long, no?

And why not tell them that Mary was assumed and many other things in the same extraordinary manner? Accounts of Mary’s Assumption and recordings of belief in same start appearing around the same time. Interesting, no?

 

[NonDenom]

=Milliardo;2383854]It has much to do with salvation;

In what way?

Mary’s assumption to heaven shows us how we should be, in that physical death has no victory over us, and that it is in a way a precursor to the resurrection of the just on Judgment.

No, that is what Jesus did in the resurrection. This last quote from Milliardo shows how many are making the mistake of replacing Jesus with Mary.

 

[BrooklynBoy200]

Hello,
Thanks for the reply. I suppose the sad and simple truth is that battle of the reformation is still taking place. Protestants and Catholics agree on many things, but their disagreements are as high and wide as Rocky Mountains and as vast as the Pacific.

Nice similies

 

[zemi]

God did tell men what books were inspired.

To what men did God reveal it?

What authority did they these men have to say which books were inspired?!

No, He founded HIS church, the Church of Christ.(Not the denomination).

What is your understanding of Catholic before we go on?

The leaders of your church assume that Mary was assumed to Heaven. Once again I’m not sure if it happened or not because there is no proof one way or the other.

Could the same God reveal this about Mary to the same men (meaning with the same authority) just as they were led to know which books are inspired?!

 

[zemi]

No, that is what Jesus did in the resurrection. This last quote from Milliardo shows how many are making the mistake of replacing Jesus with Mary.

OK, Jesus showed it to us. The RCC knows that very well (e.g. CCC 655)

Another thing - RCC condemns Mariolatry! RCC condemns worshipping Mary (=replacing her with Jesus)!

Does this sound ok to you now?

This is what the RCC has always taught.

Maybe you’re a Catholic deep inside

 

[Randy_Carson]

Hi,
Thanks for the direction. I found the articles very interesting. As I mentioned in my meet and greet message, I have been looking into the apparitions of Mary for quite some time now. I suppose what I find disturbing about them is that some of the messages seem to me to fly right in the face of the Bible. The titles of Co-Redemptrix and Co-Mediatrix as well as Advocate, all claimed by the apparition, seem to be contrary to what the Bible teaches - that these titles should belong to Jesus alone.

Mary as Mediatrix

The Catholic Church recognizes Mary’s role in salvation history and invokes her under the title of Mediatrix. However, many people struggle to understand how Mary can have this role which they reserve for Christ alone, and they cite the following verse in support of their position:

1 Timothy 2:5-6
5For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time.

How then are we to understand the titles by which she is honored for the role she played and continues to play in the economy of salvation? Let’s take a look at what the Bible has to say.

Hebrews 7:24-25
because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. 25Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.

Here we see that Jesus “always lives to intercede” for “those who come to God through him.” The role of the mediator and the intercessor are synonymous; a mediator lives to intercede for others.

All Christians are called to be mediators or intercessors for one another because we are all members of Christ’s body as we see from Paul’s letter to the Ephesians:

Ephesians 1:22-23
“And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.”

Paul referred to himself as a co-laborer with Christ when he wrote:

1 Corinthians 3:9
For we are God’s fellow workers.

Paul went further in his understanding of our responsibility as co-laborers with Christ when when he wrote:

Colossians 1:24
Now I rejoice in what was suffered for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church.

Is anything lacking from the perfect sacrifice that Christ offered upon the Cross? Paul clearly indicates that more is to be done and that he makes up what is “still lacking” in his own flesh.

2 Corinthians 1:6
If we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation

Additionally, we know that we are called to share in the priesthood of all believers (cf. 1 Peter 2:5-9), and a priest, by definition, is called to be a mediator between God and men. Each of us is called to this role and to be a mediator or mediatrix for others before God.

Therefore, if we are all called to this role of mediator and intercessor for one another, how much more can this be said of Mary who said, “Yes” to God and brought Christ into the world?

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[Mannyfit75]

Here is short Scriptural Basis for Mary.

Mary is Immaculate Conception based on “Hail, Full of Grace” (Luke 1:28).

Mary is Ever Virgin. When Jesus was twelve, he went with Mary and Joseph. There were no other children thereafter. Second, the brothers and sisters of Jesus are his cousins. There is no word for cousin in Hebrew or Aramaic. So the Greek used was brothers and sisters. Even Lot call his nephew brother.

Her Assumption. The woman clothed with the sun appeared (Rev 12:1) in Heaven. Many Catholic theologians identify this woman as Mary. In fact many of the paintings of Mary have her with crown with twelve stars on her head, and a moon under her feet.

How did the woman appeared in heaven? She assumed. How do we know the woman is Mary? Because the Male Child will rule all nations with an iron rod. He was taken up to God and to his throne. This Child is Jesus.

 

[Calvinator]

Here is short Scriptural Basis for Mary.

Mary is Immaculate Conception based on “Hail, Full of Grace” (Luke 1:28).

Mary is Ever Virgin. When Jesus was twelve, he went with Mary and Joseph. There were no other children thereafter. Second, the brothers and sisters of Jesus are his cousins. There is no word for cousin in Hebrew or Aramaic. So the Greek used was brothers and sisters. Even Lot call his nephew brother.

Her Assumption. The woman clothed with the sun appeared (Rev 12:1) in Heaven. Many Catholic theologians identify this woman as Mary. In fact many of the paintings of Mary have her with crown with twelve stars on her head, and a moon under her feet.

How did the woman appeared in heaven? She assumed. How do we know the woman is Mary? Because the Male Child will rule all nations with an iron rod. He was taken up to God and to his throne. This Child is Jesus.

Revelations 12:1 speaks nothing of Mary’s Assumption.

While it may have been fitting for Mary to be assumed into heaven the scriptures are entirely silent on the matter. Additonally, to the best of my knowledege at least, it isn’t until centuries after the apostles that we find any trace of a belief in Mary’s assumption.

If you guys could post something from the early church…prior to say 400 AD supporting the assumption I would appreciate it. I realize that one father (Epiphanaius?) around 370 AD wrote that he didn’t know what happened to Mary’s body but that in itself doesn’t support the assumption.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Revelations 12:1 speaks nothing of Mary’s Assumption.

While it may have been fitting for Mary to be assumed into heaven the scriptures are entirely silent on the matter. Additonally, to the best of my knowledege at least, it isn’t until centuries after the apostles that we find any trace of a belief in Mary’s assumption.

If you guys could post something from the early church…prior to say 400 AD supporting the assumption I would appreciate it. I realize that one father (Epiphanaius?) around 370 AD wrote that he didn’t know what happened to Mary’s body but that in itself doesn’t support the assumption.

In the ancient Christian tradition both the East and the Western Christianity believed that Mary died and resurrected by Jesus and assumed into Heaven by God. This is called Dormition of Mary or falling asleep.

The theological reasoning for belief in the assumption of the Virgin Mary is as follows: Christ, by His glorious death, resurrection and ascension, gained a perfect victory over the devil, sin and death. The Virgin Mary, as the immaculately conceived Mother of God and the New Eve, is most intimately associated with Christ’s perfect victory (Gen. 3, 15). If there was no assumption of the Virgin Mary, She would have been vanquished by death and Her parallelism with Christ would therefore be destroyed.

No one can reasonably doubt that the Virgin Mary’s soul is now in heaven; Jesus Christ would not have it otherwise: “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…And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron” (Rev. 12, 1-5). The doctrine of the Virgin Mary’s assumption is not contained explicitly in Scripture, but the fact that Scripture does not record an event is no absolute argument against it. The Bible does not record the death of St. Joseph either, but all believe this must have happened. The Bible neither mention that God is One God in Three Persons, but the majority of Christians believe in the Trinity.

Belief in the Virgin Mary’s assumption can be** traced back to the earliest days of the Church**. A first century work attributed to St. Denis the Areopagite entitled the “Books of Divine Names**” records a funeral panegyric pronounced by a said Hierotheus, who purported that the Apostles had been divinely warned of the impending death of the Virgin Mary. All, except St. Thomas, managed to return in time for Her death and funeral. For three days the Apostles and other faithful kept up a vigil at the Virgin’s tomb, where they heard at times the distinct sound of heavenly music. When St. Thomas finally arrived, he requested to see the body of the Virgin Mary. To everyone’s surprise, when the tomb was opened Her body was not there, only flowers and Her burial shroud being left in the sepulchre.

 

[Calvinator]

The basis of the Assumption is based on Scripture and Sacred Tradition. You failed to see about the woman appearing in heaven. If she is Mary, how did she appear in heaven? The fact that ID the woman in Revelation 12:1 is Mary is the basis on the male child whom she gave birth to, who is Jesus Christ. The male child will rule all nations with an iron rod… and further down Chapter 12, it states, the male child was taken up to God and to His throne. That piece of the verse sounds very much like the Ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ. This isn’t a exactly a proof text of Scriptural basis the Assumption it is rather implied like the Trinity which is not mention the Bible either, nor is that the fact that God is Three Persons but One God is not mention in Scripture.

I disagree. The only way one could see the assumption in scripture is to start from the point of tradition and work their way back to the scriptures. You ask how did she appear in heaven but your church’s assumption doctrine has a little more involved than merely her soul being in heaven doesn’t it?

As far as the Trinity goes…the word “Trinity” isn’t found in scripture but the basis for it is there. In fact, Fr. Pacwa admitted as much in a debate against White in one of their debates.

In the ancient Christian tradition both the East and the Western Christianity believed that Mary died and resurrected by Jesus and assumed into Heaven by God. This is called Dormition of Mary or falling asleep.

The theological reasoning for belief in the assumption of the Virgin Mary is as follows: Christ, by His glorious death, resurrection and ascension, gained a perfect victory over the devil, sin and death. The Virgin Mary, as the immaculately conceived Mother of God and the New Eve, is most intimately associated with Christ’s perfect victory (Gen. 3, 15). If there was no assumption of the Virgin Mary, She would have been vanquished by death and Her parallelism with Christ would therefore be destroyed.28

No one can reasonably doubt that the Virgin Mary’s soul is now in heaven; Jesus Christ would not have it otherwise: “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…And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron” (Rev. 12, 1-5). The doctrine of the Virgin Mary’s assumption is not contained explicitly in Scripture, but the fact that Scripture does not record an event is no absolute argument against it. The Bible does not record the death of St. Joseph either, but all believe this must have happened.29

I don’t doubt that Mary’s soul is in heaven but again, there is more to the assumption than just Mary’s soul being in heaven. Nor do I doubt that at some point in history a portion of the church held to a belief in the assumption both in the east and in the west.

You are right, just because the scriptures are silent on an issue doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen. But, not only are the scriptures silent on this issue it appears to me that this was a fairly late development. Right now I can’t find any evidence of a belief in the assumption in the first four centuries of the church’s existence. Epiphinaius says that he doesn’t know what happened to Mary’s body but that doesn’t support a belief in the assumpton but even if it did, I believe Epiphaius wrote this in 377 AD.

I was about to ask you why you think your church felt it necessary to bind it upon your conscious to accept the assumption but I think you answered that question above when you state “The theological reasoning for belief in the assumption of the Virgin Mary is as follows: Christ, by His glorious death, resurrection and ascension, gained a perfect victory over the devil, sin and death. The Virgin Mary, as the immaculately conceived Mother of God and the New Eve, is most intimately associated with Christ’s perfect victory (Gen. 3, 15). If there was no assumption of the Virgin Mary, She would have been vanquished by death and Her parallelism with Christ would therefore be destroyed.”

Although, why would anyone care if Mary’s “parallelism” with Christ would therefore be destroyed?

 

[BrianH]

Mannyfit75
Belief in the Virgin Mary’s assumption can be** traced back to the earliest days of the Church**. A first century work attributed to St. Denis the Areopagite entitled the “Books of Divine Names**” records a funeral panegyric pronounced by a said Hierotheus, who purported that the Apostles had been divinely warned of the impending death of the Virgin Mary. All, except St. Thomas, managed to return in time for Her death and funeral. For three days the Apostles and other faithful kept up a vigil at the Virgin’s tomb, where they heard at times the distinct sound of heavenly music. When St. Thomas finally arrived, he requested to see the body of the Virgin Mary. To everyone’s surprise, when the tomb was opened Her body was not there, only flowers and Her burial shroud being left in the sepulchre.

First century?
How did a person, who lived in the 3rd century, pen a work in the 1st century?
The work is probably 5th century. Read the Catholic Encyclopedia, or even Wikipedia, at least before you throw around dates without any support.

Centuries later, a series of famous writings of a mystical nature, employing Neoplatonic language to elucidate Christian theological and mystical ideas, was misleadingly ascribed to the Areopagite[1]. They have long been known to be 5th century works in his name (pseudepigrapha) and are now attributed to “Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite”. The Pseudo-Dionysius has been identified with various people in the past, but more recent conjecture ties him to an obscure Georgian writer named Peter the Iberian, a Georgian Bishop of Majum (452-491).
Dionysius was also popularly mis-identified with the martyr of Gaul, Dionysius, the first Bishop of Paris, Saint Denis.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Although, why would anyone care if Mary’s “parallelism” with Christ would therefore be destroyed?

If she had not assumed then we won’t be glorified. Most people fail to realized that Mary’s assumption into heaven is what we Christians will happen with us someday.

For one God’s grace preserved Mary from original sin and committing actual sin. We as Christians received the grace of God so that we maybe perfect just as God the Father is perfect.

Mary is the first Christian. Her FIAT or proclamation, “Be it Done unto Me according to your Word” so her obedience to God’s will. She could have not consented but salvation history shows that Mary said, “Behold I am the Hand maid of the Lord. Be it Done Unto Me According to Your Word.”

Mary’s completely obedient to God’s will. She was reward by God for bringing forth the Word and that Word became flesh and dwelt amongst us; Jesus Christ.

 

[Mannyfit75]

First century?
How did a person, who lived in the 3rd century, pen a work in the 1st century?
The work is probably 5th century. Read the Catholic Encyclopedia, or even Wikipedia, at least before you throw around dates without any support.

I’m pretty sure the basis for the Assumption took place in the First Century. Mary died in the First Century, and the record of her death was taken down no later than the fifth Century.

 

[Mannyfit75]

catholicapologetics.org/ap080500.htm

 

[Milliardo]

No, that is what Jesus did in the resurrection. This last quote from Milliardo shows how many are making the mistake of replacing Jesus with Mary.

Where is it even implied that it replaces Jesus? Mary’s assumption shows us how it would be for us in Judgment; no one is saying Mary assumed herself. It is always God working, and here we are shown how we are to be raised up on Judgment. So where did you get the notion that it replaces Jesus?

 

[guanophore]

Hi All

I believe that Mary was a very special person, the Scriptures say so. God would not choose your everyday run of the mill person to be the Mother of Jesus. Christianity is about ONE thing, JESUS. There is a reason that Mary is not mentioned in the Scriptures very much, it’s about CHRIST and HIS sacrifice. If God wanted us to devote so much time to Mary he would have said so in the Scriptures. If he wanted us to know that she was sinless, forever virgin, and assumed to heaven he would have made it clear in his Holy Word. Why did he think that it was important to mention Enoch was assumed but not Mary?

Gosh. Why didn’t Jesus explain and define the Trinity? How come we can’t find that word in the scripture? How come he did not define which books or writings belong in the Bible? How come He hung around for 40 days, and still did not select a replacement for Judas? What is WRONG with that guy!?

 

[SORROWS]

That seems to be the constant mindset of noncatholics - that we are replacing Jesus. I know of no Catholic that can’t distinguish the difference.

Everything in the Catholic Church is centered around Christ BUT our love for the Holy Family gives room for everyone especially the Blessed Mother.

Please I ask you to open yourself to oral tradition that has been around for 2000 years and see the truth of the Blessed Mothers Assumption.

 

[LuvHim]

Hi,
I’m new here, can anyone give me a Scriptural Basis for the Assupmtion of Mary?

Here it is:

__________________________ __________________________

 

[Mannyfit75]

Here it is:

__________________________ __________________________

Revelation Chapter 12:1 Scriptural Proof Text.

 

[Mannyfit75]

That seems to be the constant mindset of noncatholics - that we are replacing Jesus. I know of no Catholic that can’t distinguish the difference.

Everything in the Catholic Church is centered around Christ BUT our love for the Holy Family gives room for everyone especially the Blessed Mother.

Please I ask you to open yourself to oral tradition that has been around for 2000 years and see the truth of the Blessed Mothers Assumption.

How true, they think we are replacing Jesus with Mary. That was never taught by the Catholic Church. It’s the first I heard of it, as a cradle Catholic.