the assumption of the Virgin Mary

  • Thread starter Thread starter occupant
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
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?
No I’m not kidding. Jesus Himself tells us exactly what He is talking about John6:63It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
 
No I’m not kidding. Jesus Himself tells us exactly what He is talking about John6:63It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
really?

then why does St Paul explain in 1 Corinthians 11:27 that " Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord."
 
Also Richard, in the bible Jesus himself talks about the real presence and you can’t get much earlier than that!

John 6:53-58, 66-67
“So Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever.’ After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him. Jesus said to the twelve, ‘Will you also go away?’”

He was obviouslt talking about the real presence here because he did not say to the disciples that no longer “went about with him”, “hey, wait a minute i didn’t mean for you take it literally, it was just symbolic, or spiritual”. They understood exactly what he was saying but they rejected it.
 
It is true that the Holy Spirit will never guide you into error.

If I am following the Spirit’s lead that is exactly right. The Spirit of God and me make a majority.
May I ask you how you know when the Holy Spirit is leading you into the proper context and interpretation of the Bible? Are you now claiming infallibility on everything you’re saying here regarding soul sleep for example? Are you saying Protestants who are ‘praying’ to the Holy Spirit before they read are wrong if they do not believe in soul sleep and being mislead yet you are the one without a doubt being directed to believe this understanding? How is anyone to know who’s right? Why should I believe you if I pray to the Holy Spirit yet come out with a different interpretation? You seriously think God is going to lead us into a path of confusion after He commanded his Apostles to teach all the world? That’s His divine plan? To have the body of believers bicker on things that should have been solved 2000 years ago? And a year from now the same thing. And 10 years from now the same thing. And a hundred years from now it happens again over and over and over till Christ returns. Nobody knows where to look except in themselves and hope ‘this time’ the Holy Spirit is leading them. That’s insanity man!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Kastner forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
No I’m not kidding. Jesus Himself tells us exactly what He is talking about John6:63It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
He wasn’t talking about real flesh. He was talking about the natural inclinations brought about by fallen man.
Are you saying that Jesus’ Flesh never profited us? His fleshy body dying meant nothing to you? To put it bluntly, if there was no flesh to die Christ could not have been crucified for us.
 
Richard Kastner;5185196
Continued…
1Tim3:2 says that a bishop must be married.
Paul actually tells Timothy that a bishop must be married only once. The apostle is referring to those bishops who were widowers and not allowed to remarry. Likewise, married Bishops couldn’t remarry after the death of their wives because of their divine office and mandate. Celibacy is a Church discipline, not a dogma. Nice try, but no cigar. :nope: Aren’t you veering from the topic again in your anti-Catholic blitzkrieg? 🤷
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**.
It isn’t the Bible that confers teaching authority on anyone – it is Christ himself. And this authority was conferred by Him on his apostles and by them on their valid successors in the episcopacy on our Lord’s authority which he initially received from the Father.

“And I confer a kingdom on you, just as my Father has conferred one on me.”
Luke 22, 29

“Everything that the Father has is mine; for this reason I told you that he will take from what is mine and declare it to you.”
John 16, 15


The Assumption of Mary into heaven is to be counted among these declarations made by the Holy Spirit who speaks to the Church what he hears from the Father through the Son. (Jn 16:12-13). Again, referring to his apostles and not general believers or laypersons:

“As you sent me into the world, so I sent them into the world. And I consecrate myself for them, so that they also may be consecrated in the truth.”
John 17, 18-19


Our Lord’s intention is a single unity of faith, which one does not find in Protestantism where the Apostolic teaching authority is absent. Some Protestants believe in the Assumption of Mary while most of them do not. A division of faith results from the presumptuous self-appointment of private individuals to the divine teaching office of the Church with a book in their hands.

“I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, so that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that you sent me.”
John 17, 20-21


The apostles and their valid successors in the episcopacy are the shepherds and guardians of the One Holy Catholic Apostolic faith appointed by the Holy Spirit. No private individual is his own shepherd and guardian or that of others with respect to faith and morals.

Keep watch over yourselves and over the whole flock of which the Holy Spirit has appointed you overseers, in which you tend the church of God that he acquired with his own blood.
Acts 20, 28

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 Church is mind boggling.
“I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
Matthew 16, 19

“Whoever receives you receives me, and whoever receives me receives the one who sent me.”
Matthew 10, 40

“Not that of ourselves we are qualified to take credit for anything as coming from us; rather, our qualification comes from God, who has indeed qualified us as ministers of a new covenant.”
2 Corinthians 3, 5-6

Say these things. Exhort and correct with all authority. Let no one look down on you.
Titus 2, 15

So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the holy ones and members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and the prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the capstone.
Ephesians 2, 20


It’s not so mind boggling as you think. :nope:
I’m not sure what your point is in all this. So i’ll just let it be.
Hopefully you now understand what my point is.

For you had gone astray like sheep, but you have now returned to the shepherd and guardian of your soul.
1 Peter 2, 25


PAX :harp:
 
Your poor interpretation is self contradicting. The only thing we can conclude from that verse is that the body formed by God was void of a soul until He breathed into the nostrils telling us indeed a body does not have to ‘always’ be united with a soul for every second of it’s existence. They were not simultaneously interwoven as the body came first and the soul came second. You would also have to show us where in Scripture was Moses’ body taken to Heaven since you NEED to hear it from Scripture to know it to be true correct? You cannot assume this.
How is my interpretation self contradicting? And why is it poor? If you will read the verse a little closer. It tells us that the body plus the breath of God makes a living soul. You are right that the body does not have to be united with the breath of God. But if it isn’t it’s called a corpse. We know that Moses was taken to heaven because we see him on the mount of transfiguration. The bible tells us that both body and soul can be destroyed in hell . Matt10:28And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. The soul (body plus breath of God can die. Only God is immortal 1Tim6:14That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:
15Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;
16Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.
 
It is the Catholic Church! when our lord said to Peter " you are Peter the rock, and on this rock i will build my church". was he talking to all the disciples or was he only talking to Peter? The answer ofcourse is Peter as he driectly addressed Peter and not the other disciples.
Well, what the bible actually says does not seem to bear out what you say. I have seen Catholics bring up this passage ad infinitum as proof that Jesus set Peter up as the head of His church on earth. Nothing could be further from the truth. The trouble is they always seem to start at verse 18. When the passage really starts at verse 13. Here is the entire passage:

13When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
14And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

You will notice that Jesus contrary to what you say is addressing “his disciples” and this first question is key to understanding the whole passage He asks them “Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?” He doesn’t ask them who do people say that Peter is but
“Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?” The answer comes back “Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.” This comes back from the disciples in general. The next question is directed to the disciples specifically, “But whom say ye that I am?” Again He doesn’t ask them about Peter but about Himself. Peter because of his great faith in who Jesus is answers first “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Again Peter is talking about Jesus, not himself. This answer is very important. We need to ask ourselves who Jesus is to us? Is He The Christ, The Annointed in our lives, or is it some pretender to His throne? Jesus then says that This answer did not come from Peter, but from the Father. Now After Jesus had been talking and inquireing about Himself. You say He suddenly switches gears and starts talking about Peter. I don’t think so. If you do a bible search on the word rock you will come up with many many instances were Rock refers to God. Here are a couple.

15 Jeshurun [d] grew fat and kicked;
filled with food, he became heavy and sleek.
He abandoned the God who made him
and rejected the Rock his Savior.
16 They made him jealous with their foreign gods
and angered him with their detestable idols.
17 They sacrificed to demons, which are not God—
gods they had not known,
gods that recently appeared,
gods your fathers did not fear.
18 You deserted the Rock, who fathered you;
you forgot the God who gave you birth.

Not once do they refer to Peter. When Jesus says:18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. He is not saying that He is going to build His church on Peter who was an imperfect sinner against whom the gates of hell would prevail in a few days when he denied “the Rock his Savior”, but that He was going to build His church on Himself. The Rock of Ages
 
"And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
Matthew 16, 18

You make Jesus out to be either a liar or impotent against Satan.
How do I make Jesus a liar or impotent against Satan? Jesus here is not establishing the Catholic church or any denomination. He is establishing His church on Himself The Rock of Ages. See post #88
"I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear it now. But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth. He will not speak on his own, but he will speak what he hears, and will declare to you the things that are coming."
John 16, 12-13
Jesus is addressing his apostles, and referring to those men who will validly succeed them in their divine office through the invocation of the Spirit and by the laying on of hands in a line of apostolic succession (Acts 9:17-19; Eph 2:20; 1 Tim 4:14; 5:22; 2 Tim 4:1-6), not general believers like ourselves who have appointed themselves the teaching authority in their private interpretation of the Scriptures.
I disagree. I beleive and the bible shows that the Spirit is given to all men
1Cor12: 7But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.
Eph4:11And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
Christ never founded his One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church in 16th century Europe. Protestantism began then with Martin Luther, a Catholic monk, who nevertheless believed in the Assumption of Mary his entire life. Protestants eventually lost touch with the scriptural Mary with the rise of Rationalism and an alienation from divine mystery, which was inevitable in that they had made themselves spiritual orphans by separating themselves from the Church and the protection of the promised Paraclete.
I agree that Christ didn’t found His church in the 16th century. But because Protestants and Catholics beleive the lie of the assumption doesn’t make it true. Where do you find the assumption in scripture? I certainly have not seperated myself from the body of Christ and I do beleive that the Spirit of God dwells in me.
Are you sure about that? :coffeeread:
"Presbyters who preside well deserve double honor, especially those who toil in preaching and teaching."
1 Timothy 3, 17
Remember your leaders who spoke the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of their way of life and imitate their faith.
Hebrews 13, 7
Obey your leaders and defer to them, for they keep watch over you and will have to give an account, that they may fulfill their task with joy and not with sorrow, for that would be of no advantage to you.
Hebrews 13, 17
For we are not like the many who trade on the word of God; but as out of sincerity, indeed as from God and in the presence of God, we speak in Christ.
2 Corinthians 2, 17
Those who preach the gosple deserve honor for the word they preach not for their (office)
Anyone can preach the gosple.
The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” Jesus said to them,* “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.”*
John 6, 52-54
Jn1: 14And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Jn6:63It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
“Whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.”
1 Corinthians 11, 27
What do you think this means?
 
Richard,

read carefully what Cluny wrote. " am saying that if you ONLY believe what is in the bible and reject the rest you are cutting yourself severely short".

He is not saying don’t believe what’s in the bible, he is saying there are truths that are taught by the the oral traditions of the church as well as the truths in the bible.
There may be, but if the assumption is an example of that truth I’m not interested. The bible has everything in it that I need to gain eternal life. Again, How am I cutting myself short?
 
Richard Kastner, one thing I have noticed in all of your post is that there is an awful lot of “I”'s in them. As in “I don’t think the bible says…” or “I believe this is what the bible means…”

Just my thought but maybe you need to try to take yourself out of the equation. Try to study up on what it is those early fathers or even the those who actually followed the apostles had to say about these things. You mentioned before that you have no idea who Ignatius is, maybe that is a good place to start.

As Christians we need to remember that it is not about how “I” feel about God, it is about what He actually wants. And my thought has always been since God does not contradict Himself, we must see where we are going wrong. Thankfully we have 2000 years of Christians to shift through to get to the correct answers.👍

Good Luck.
 
There may be, but if the assumption is an example of that truth I’m not interested. The bible has everything in it that I need to gain eternal life. Again, How am I cutting myself short?
You just maybe if you are intentionally deciding to be blind to what God has shown. The bible tells us that not all is in the bible, so why would you ONLY look there? God is way bigger then the bible, so please don’t just confine Him to it.🙂
 
Richard, unfortunately for you there are hundreds of quotes from the early church fathers and saints that support and agree with the doctrine of the assumption of our lady into heaven, some saints more known than others (St Augustine, St Thomas Aquinas etc). They also agreed on the infallibility of the Pope and his authority as the head of Jesus’ church here on earth.
Why is this unfortunate for me? I couldn’t care less if a million apostates promulgate a lie, that doesn’t make it the truth.
The onus is on you to refute this
Ok, I refute it.
are you questioning the teachings of the doctors and fathers of the faith?
If you mean the doctors and fathers of the Catholic faith. That’s exactly what I am doing.
You base your argument on a false premesis that “it has to be in the bible to be true”,
I never said that it had to be in the bible to be true. There may even be some Catholic teachings that are true (ie. the trinity) But if it’s the word of man it can’t be 100% trusted. The bible can be.
if that’s the case then why does St Paul say to honour the both the **oral and written traditions ** of the church?
Paul was talking specifically to the church at Thessolenica.
He also states that the church is the pillar of truth! The catholic church has 2000 years and thousands of theologians/doctors of the faith that support this! not to mention Christ’s promise that the gates of hell will not prevail against the church.
The church certainly is the pillar of truth and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. That church however is not the Catholic church.
 

How could we be more arrogant than Jesus, who presumed to forgive sins - a thing that, as His critics pointed out, God alone could do ?​

Ya, the only one who can forgive sins is God.
Catholics are “arrogant” because He was. How is it any more arrogant to say “This is the Church of God” than to say, “This Jesus, Whom God raised up, is Lord & Messiah & Saviour ?”
Because the first statement is not true the second. The second is.
BTW, the magisterial authority of the CC is the very same authority as that with which Jesus taught.
This is what you say and you are only a man. I don’t beleive the CC speaks with the voice of Christ.
So far is He from being dead, that He teaches even now. So if He, rather than Pius XII, had defined the Assumption, it would have been no truer, no more authoritative: because the authority by which Pius XII defined it was the authority of Christ. How can Christ’s authority be divided against Christ’s authority ?
Yes, He does teach even today through His word. But Jesus didn’t define the assumption did He? Pius X11 does not talk with the authority of Christ. He is a pretender to the throne of Christ. This is just one of many heresies foysted upon it’s members by the church.
 
really?

then why does St Paul explain in 1 Corinthians 11:27 that " Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord."
I don’t get it. What do you think 1Cor11:27 has to do with Jn6:53
 
Mary is not in heaven. She was not assumed. This is a figment of Pius Xll’s very fertile imagination.
Belief in the Assumption of Mary had existed in Christendom by the late 4th century. The earliest extant account of a Church Father speaking of the Assumption is Epiphanius:

“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 into the world.”
Epiphanius, Panarion, 78:23, in PG 42: 737 (A.D. 377)


By this time the Church had been questioning whether Mary had actually died and was buried before being taken up to heaven. Even with the dogma of the Assumption promulgated by Pope Pius Xll the Church holds no definitive position on the question of whether Mary had actually died before being assumed into heaven body and soul.
The bible tells us that there are three named people in heaven. These are Enoch, Elisha, and Moses. There are also the souls raised at the time of Jesus resurrection.
It is only through Jesus Christ and his Church that anyone can make that bodily and spiritual ascent to the highest realm of the heavens either in this life or after death. In the time of the Old Covenant the Gate of Heaven was still closed, for Christ had not yet died for our sins. The Church Fathers and Doctors believed that these great Old Testament figures only ascended to paradise - the Garden of Eden, situated before the Gate of Heaven. There they wait at the entrance gate until the Resurrection of the body on the last day when Christ will return to judge the living and the dead. Only our Lord Jesus and our Blessed Mother Mary gloriously exist body and soul in heaven. Tombs were open, and the bodies of many saints were raised at the moment Jesus commended his spirit into the hands of his heavenly Father on the cross, but this event occurred before Christ rose from the dead. These righteous ones were merely restored to life, as Lazarus and Jairus’ daughter were, and not raised to new life. Our Lord is the firstfruits of the resurrection of the body.

Just as in Adam all die, so too in Christ shall all be brought to life, but each one in proper order: Christ the firstfruits; then, at his coming, those who belong to Christ.
1 Corinthians 15, 22-23

“In my Father’s house there are many dwelling places. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you?”
John 14, 2

There is no reason to believe that Mary was assumed into heaven…
In faith we know with a moral certitude that Mary was taken body and soul into heaven by the power of her divine Son. The spirit of the word of God assures us that mother and son are happily reunited: Honour your father and your mother. Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death. Jesus obeyed all of God’s commandments when he dwelled among us. He gave no cause for anyone to condemn his actions, nor did he do anything he himself would disapprove of as the Son of God. Our Lord could never condemn himself for his actions for they truly reflected his divine word. True Christians must find it hard to believe that our Lord could ever possibly dismiss one of his own commandments by casting the curse of Eve on his own mother: In pain you shall bring forth children until you return to the ground from which you were taken. For you are dirt, and to dirt you shall return. Jesus meant what he said about honoring our parents and he exemplified with divine perfection how we ourselves should treat them. Certainly Jesus would never dismiss any of his own commandments, seeing that we are expected to observe and keep them.
… and certainly no reason to believe the belief or non-belief in this so-called doctrine has anything to do with your salvation.
The corporeal assumption of Mary into heaven is a participation in her divine Son’s resurrection preceding our own in the order of grace. This glorious event is deeply rooted in the love and power of Christ and is a sign of hope for all the faithful.
John3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Doesn’t say anything here about beleiving that Mary was assumed into heaven.
If God hadn’t so loved the world that he gave his only son so that whoever believes in him should not perish, Mary wouldn’t have been assumed into heaven. Nor would the rest of us faithful rise from the dead on the last day.

PAX :harp:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top