the assumption of the Virgin Mary

  • Thread starter Thread starter occupant
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Good_Fella said:
Then pay attention to what the Bible tells you:
*
“the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth”*
1 Timothy 3, 15

Pax Christu :harp:
Click to expand...
I do.It’s just that the church that is the body of Christ is not the Catholic Church.
 
Richard_Kastner said:
I do.It’s just that the church that is the body of Christ is not the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church had existed for 1500+ years before you came along, and it still does as the one universal Church founded by Christ himself who promised to be with his bride until the end of this age.

“I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.”
John 14, 18

“See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those who carry out the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is administered by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.”
Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch (A.D. 110)

As a disciple of John, Ignatius believed and taught that the Eucharist is the body and blood of Jesus Christ and that the true members of the mystical body of Christ are those who partake of the Blessed Sacrament. I’m afraid you are outside the Church and in no position to question the veracity of the Assumption of Mary. Moreover, you have no authority to interpret the Scriptures and formulate your anti-dogmas. You would have no canon of Scripture to begin with if it were not for the magisterial authority of the Catholic Church.

“Now the cause, in all the points previously enumerated, of the false opinions, and of the impious statements or ignorant assertions about God, appears to be nothing else than the not understanding of the Scriptures according to its spiritual meaning, but the interpretation of it agreeably to the mere letter. And therefore, to those who believe that the sacred books are not the compositions of men, but that they were composed by inspiration of the Spirit, agreeably to the will of the Father of all things through Jesus Christ, and that they have come down to us, we must point out the ways of interpreting them which appear correct to us, who cling to the standard of the heavenly Church of Jesus Christ according to the succession of the apostles.”
Origen (A.D. 230)

Then the cloud* covered** ( episkiasei = overshadow) the meeting tent, and the glory of the Lord filled the Dwelling. Moses could not enter the meeting tent, because the cloud settled down upon it and the glory of the Lord filled the Dwelling.*
Exodus 40, 34-35

And the angel said to her in reply, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore, the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.”
Luke 1, 35

“Arise, Lord, come to your resting place, you and your majestic ark.”
Psalm 132, 8

Pax Christu
 
st_lucy said:
And as St John said not everything is in the bible. St John 21:25
Click to expand...
There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written.
*John 21, 25 *

At least not explicitly. The Scriptures implicitly reveal the Assumption of Mary. Meanwhile, Protestants cannot find anything in Scripture to show us how belief in the Assumption contravenes the spirit of the written word. Certainly one of the “many other things that Jesus did” was something wonderful and honorable for his Blessed Mother.

Pax Christu :harp:
 
Richard_Kastner said:
Psa 146:4 His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.
Ecc 9:5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
Ecc 9:6 Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any [thing] that is done under the sun.
Ecc 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
Job 21:32 Yet shall he be brought to the grave, and shall remain in the tomb.
Psa 115:17 The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence.
Psa 88:10 Wilt thou shew wonders to the dead? shall the dead arise [and] praise thee? Selah.

Ok, hear are those sciptures from the OT again. Are you saying that these scriptures are wrong. Are you saying that you beleive that those who died in Christ before He came went to the same place that the wicked, to writh in torment, sometimes for hundreds or thousands of years until Jesus came to get them? Doesn’t sound fair to me. Doesn’t sound like something a God who “is love” 1Jn4:8 would do.

As for your quote from Revelation. You will notice in verse 9 that the souls were under the altar, that doesn’t sound like heaven to me. The book of Rev. is mostly a symbolic book and should not be taken literally. This is a referance to the OT practice of pouring the blood of the sacrifice on the ground under the altar. Ex29:12And thou shalt take of the blood of the bullock, and put it upon the horns of the altar with thy finger, and pour all the blood beside the bottom of the altar. These were under the altar to symbolize that they were slain (sacrificed) for the word of God and the testimony of Jesus. Rev 12:17And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

You will notice that the white robes (righteousness of Jesus won for them on the cross) is promised to them, but that they should rest under the altar (in the grave) untill their bretheren are slain. This tells me that the dragon (Satan) is not through with his evil work of martyring the saints of God.
Click to expand...
No, I never claimed the scriptures were wrong. But I do think your interpretations and understanding are bizarre.
Do you understand the difference between bodily death and spiritual death? You seem to cherrypick passages and equate some to one understanding while it may mean the other.

No, the dead were in the Bosom of Abraham or Limbo of the Fathers, a place of comfort in Hades (or Sheoul)
The place where jews believed the righteous awaited Judgment day. Jesus makes reference to it in the parable in Luke 16:22-23
Tertullian described the Bosom of Abraham as that section of Hades in which the righteous dead await the day of the Lord.
The righteous were not admitted to Heaven until Christ’s resurrection.
The Apostles Creed tells us *Jesus descended into Hell *and on the third day rose again.
St. Thomas Aquinas tells us one of the purposes of Jesus decent was to “deliver the saints who were in hell” “For although Christ destroyed death altogether, He did not altogether destroy Hell, but took a piece of out of it, as it were, in that He did not deliver all who were there, but only those free from mortal sin as well as Original Sin. As regards the latter, they were freed personally therefrom by circumcision or by the faith of their parents who were believers or (in the case of adults) by sacrifices and their faith in Christ to come.”

So, the martyrs are dead and in the grave? Where are their souls? Their souls are in the grave?? You referred to the souls of righteous being in the Bosom of Abraham as being unfair of a loving God but then claim the souls of the righteous are in the grave. :ehh:
No, John was given a vision of Heaven in which he saw souls in Heaven.
The bones under the altar sound strikingly similar to relics under Catholic altars, no? :cool:
Awaiting the final bodily resurrection of the dead at the end of time.

Mary was assumed, by God, into Heaven. Body and soul.

Hope that helps.
:tiphat:
 
You will notice that the white robes (righteousness of Jesus won for them on the cross) is promised to them, but that they should rest under the altar (in the grave) untill their bretheren are slain.
Click to expand...
Saying that “altar” means “grave” is a good example of eisogesis–that is reading into a passage what you want it to say.
 
mbgumby28 said:
And her soul…
Click to expand...
I beleive that you labor under some misinformation as to what a soul is. A soul is not an entity that lives inside your body which departs to live somewhere else at the death of that body. A soul is a body plus the breath or spirit of God, these two together constitute a soul. You can’t have one without the other. Gen2:7And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Man becomes a living soul. He doesn’t have one. So when you die the spirit or breath of God goes back to Him and the body goes into the ground to await the resurrection either to life eternal in Christ or eternal destruction.
 
mark_a said:
This is turning into bizarro world. . . .

But where does the bible state that Mary was full of grace when she died??
Click to expand...
I agree. It is a bit silly, mark a. Perhaps you can tell me what you are driving at.

BTW, have you been surviving the storm and tornado warnings of late down there in the upstate?

Jon
 
Good_Fella said:
The Catholic Church had existed for 1500+ years before you came along, and it still does as the one universal Church founded by Christ himself who promised to be with his bride until the end of this age.
Click to expand...
I don’t beleive Christ founded the Catholic church the way it is today. To much heresy.
“I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.”
John 14, 18
Click to expand...
Ya, He is talking about His church. not the Catholic church.
"See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those who carry out the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is administered by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."
Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch (A.D. 110)
Click to expand...
This is what I am talking about. Paul never sets up the office of bishop as one to be followed and certainly not to be reverenced. He is to be a servant of the body of Christ. By the way 1Tim3 says that a bishop must be married.
As a disciple of John, Ignatius believed and taught that the Eucharist is the body and blood of Jesus Christ and that the true members of the mystical body of Christ are those who partake of the Blessed Sacrament. I’m afraid you are outside the Church and in no position to question the veracity of the Assumption of Mary. Moreover, you have no authority to interpret the Scriptures and formulate your anti-dogmas. You would have no canon of Scripture to begin with if it were not for the magisterial authority of the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
These are some rather arrogant statements. Let’ take them one at a time. You have me at a disadvantage. I’m afraid that I don’t know who this Ignatius is, but I seriously doubt that he was a disciple of John’s, if as you say he taught that Christ was present in the eucharist. If he was he must have splintered away from the true church because John never taught this kind of blasphemy.

Are you saying that the only ones in a position to question the veracity of the assumption are those inside the church. I would have to disagree with that because those inside the church probably would not consider questioning this doctrine under pain of mortal sin. I labor under no such condemnation, therefore that makes me and those outside of the church uniquely qualified to do so.

Well, if you mean anti-catholic dogmas. I again would have to disagree The bible not only gives me the authority but the responsibility to speak up against anti-biblical teachings However I agree that we cannot do this on our own we must do everything in conjunction with the Spirit of God. 1Cor2:12Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
You would have no canon of Scripture to begin with if it were not for the magisterial authority of the Catholic Church
Click to expand...
This is probably the must unbeleivably arrogant thing I have ever seen posted on this forum and I have seen some beauts. To say that the God who created the universe would be encumbered by the so-called magesterial authority of the Catholic church to give His word to His Curch is mind bogaling.
"Now the cause, in all the points previously enumerated, of the false opinions, and of the impious statements or ignorant assertions about God, appears to be nothing else than the not understanding of the Scriptures according to its spiritual meaning, but the interpretation of it agreeably to the mere letter. And therefore, to those who believe that the sacred books are not the compositions of men, but that they were composed by inspiration of the Spirit, agreeably to the will of the Father of all things through Jesus Christ, and that they have come down to us, we must point out the ways of interpreting them which appear correct to us, who cling to the standard of the heavenly Church of Jesus Christ according to the succession of the apostles."
Origen (A.D. 230)
Click to expand...
Then the cloud* covered*** ( episkiasei = overshadow) the meeting tent, and the glory of the Lord filled the Dwelling. Moses could not enter the meeting tent, because the cloud settled down upon it and the glory of the Lord filled the Dwelling.
Exodus 40, 34-35etc.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what your point is in all this. So i’ll just let it be.
 
Richard,
i like your style. all i have to do is read scripture and that’s it! there is no other authority than me. whatever conclusion that i come to must come from the Holy Spirit. that means the Holy Spirit rests with me and doesn’t guide me in error. if it just so happens that i don’t come to the same conclusions than others, it has to mean that i am right and everyone else is wrong. i did read the bible!
you are helping a lot. you helped me realize that the Church that Christ started failed and turned to heresy. thank goodness for the reformation or the Body of Christ may still be one!

regards,
occupant
 
mark,
it’s a conspiracy. the apostles took them and hid them to fool us all.
 
JonNC said:
I agree. But where does the Bible contradict the Blessed Virgin’s assumption? I know it isn’t explicit, but that isn’t the same as contrary.

Soul sleep is a difficult concept for me in light of the appearance of Moses and Elijah at Christ’s transfiguration.

Jon
Click to expand...
Exactly the same reason I don’t buy the soul sleep theory.
 
Richard_Kastner said:
These are some rather arrogant statements. Let’ take them one at a time. You have me at a disadvantage. I’m afraid that I don’t know who this Ignatius is, but I seriously doubt that he was a disciple of John’s, if as you say he taught that Christ was present in the eucharist. If he was he must have splintered away from the true church because John never taught this kind of blasphemy.
Click to expand...
What? Are you kidding? You seriously do not believe that the Real Presence was practiced and taught in the Early Church? What then does John 6 even exist for if what you seem to be alleging is true?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top