Things We Believe That Aren't In The Bible

[fermat]

I am starting a new thread based on a brief exchange on a thread about Mary.

the Theotokos was free from original sin; and before she was assumed I don’t know if she died or not. I believe the East believes she did, the tradition of Thomas not being there and having the grave opened etc.

Now isnt death one of the results of original sin? If she was free of original sin, then she wouldnt have ever died…right? I’m probably wrong. I am an orthodox Catholic and this is the one thing I am not sure of, if the Mother of God died before her body physically left his world.
coosa;6235226:

I do not know of any explaination given in the scriptures that makes Mary’s death different from other followers of Christ. Our lord implied that all that know him are his brother, sister, and mother.
fermat;6235471:

Granted, but there are all sorts of things that we as Christians believe that are not spelled out in the scriptures. This is a good example of one.
coosa;6235509:

Please, more examples. Thank you.
fermat;6236016:

I’d hate to derail this thread, so I’ll start a new one and move this comment over. I’ll post the link,

Not everything your average Christian believes is found spelled out in the scriptures. I would imagine that you believe in the Trinity, but you don’t find the word ‘Trinity’ on any pages of the bible (footnotes not withstanding). You won’t find the term ‘Hypostatic Union’ in the pages of the bible, yet most Christians believe that Christ was both God and man. Those concepts are there, but not in explicit language.

What we know about Mary follows a similar vein. Here we must look to both scripture and Tradition with the understanding that the bible itself is a form of Tradition. There is no book in the bible that tells us which books are in the bible. Everything we believe is from some kind of Tradition, so to reject something simply because it is not found directly in the pages of scripture forces us to ignore some part of Gods message.

 

[BerhaneSelassie]

There are also examples of things the Apostles wrote in the New TEstament about the Old Testament that were not found in it which were also conveniently Jewish traditions

 

[Cominghome89]

There are also examples of things the Apostles wrote in the New TEstament about the Old Testament that were not found in it which were also conveniently Jewish traditions

That’s good, I’ve never heard that presented that way before. I’m going to use that Thanks.

Pax et caritas,
Frank

 

[coosa]

You will find all of what we know as the Trinity in the scriptures common to all christians.
You may also find our Savior’s proclaimation that only He is the one and only way to the Father. Forgive me for speaking and offending. God Bless.

 

[thistle]

You will find all of what we know as the Trinity in the scriptures common to all christians.
You may also find our Savior’s proclaimation that only He is the one and only way to the Father. Forgive me for speaking and offending. God Bless.

I think the OP is saying you won’t find the actual word “Trinity” in the Bible and not that we don’t know about the Trinity from what is written in the Bible.

 

[fermat]

You will find all of what we know as the Trinity in the scriptures common to all christians.
You may also find our Savior’s proclaimation that only He is the one and only way to the Father. Forgive me for speaking and offending. God Bless.

No offense taken!

It sounds to me like you have some incorrect information about how Catholics view the mother of our Lord. As Catholics we believe that Christ Jesus is the only way to the Father.

If you don’t mind sharing, what is your understanding about the Catholic view of Mary?

 

[thistle]

No offense taken!

It sounds to me like you have some incorrect information about how Catholics view the mother of our Lord. As Catholics we believe that Christ Jesus is the only way to the Father.

If you don’t mind sharing, what is your understanding about the Catholic view of Mary?

Sorry but what does Mary have to do with Coosa’s comment? The Church most certainly does not teach that the way to the Father can be through Mary.

Jesus is the only way to the Father. He said so himself.

John 14:6
Jesus said to him, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

His use of the word “except” makes it clear the way to the Father is not through anyone else.

 

[mo3]

Where in sacred scripture does it use the word Bible?

Where in sacred scripture does it list the books of the Bible? Without this, there would not be a Bible.

Where in the Bible does it say: All public revelation has ended?

Where in the Bible does it tell you which Bible to use? Eg. Jehovah Witness Bible, NIV, NAB…

Where in the Bible does it “interpret scripture”? “Do you understand what you are reading?” He replied, “How can I, unless someone instructs me?” (Acts 8:30, 31).

 

[fermat]

Sorry but what does Mary have to do with Coosa’s comment? The Church most certainly does not teach that the way to the Father can be through Mary.

Jesus is the only way to the Father. He said so himself.

John 14:6
Jesus said to him, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

His use of the word “except” makes it clear the way to the Father is not through anyone else.

From the context of Coosa’s comments, I think he has some incorrect information about Mary. Jesus absolutely is the only way to the Father. The context of Coosa’s comments suggests to me that he may believe that Catholics think Mary is necessary for salvation, or that we thinks she is divine or she is the gatekeeper to get to Christ or any number of crazy notions.

I have found it is helpful just to ask what the views are. They may not agree with the explanation, but at least the are objecting to the correct information.

 

[thistle]

From the context of Coosa’s comments, I think he has some incorrect information about Mary. Jesus absolutely is the only way to the Father. The context of Coosa’s comments suggests to me that he may believe that Catholics think Mary is necessary for salvation, or that we thinks she is divine or she is the gatekeeper to get to Christ or any number of crazy notions.

I have found it is helpful just to ask what the views are. They may not agree with the explanation, but at least the are objecting to the correct information.

You may well be right but I’m curious as to how you came to that view considering that poster did not even mention Mary at all.

 

[Cristian_B]

Now that we are talking about things that aren’t in the Bible, why does the majority believe that [all] angels have wings?

 

[Janet1983]

Well there is more that is not in the Bible, but we traditionally assume it…
Why do we believe there are 3 magi? There are 3 presents mentioned, but that does not really limit the number of magi to 3.

 

[mo3]

Well there is more that is not in the Bible, but we traditionally assume it…
Why do we believe there are 3 magi? There are 3 presents mentioned, but that does not really limit the number of magi to 3.

These are not dogmatic teachings and therefore we don’t have to believe them.

 

[kepha1]

Baseball is in the Bible. Gen 1:1

"In the big inning…

And the Apostles drove a Honda because “…they were in one Accord…”.

 

[Ralph4454]

You may well be right but I’m curious as to how you came to that view considering that poster did not even mention Mary at all.

I understood it just like fermat did. Not everybody read the same thing in that comment, and fermat did not sound confrontational to me.

 

[Erich]

Baseball is in the Bible. Gen 1:1

"In the big inning…

And the Apostles drove a Honda because “…they were in one Accord…”.

The Accord is mentioned at least twice in Scripture

 

[Ignatius]

You may well be right but I’m curious as to how you came to that view considering that poster did not even mention Mary at all.

You haven’t done a lot of apologetics among the protestants, have you? Many of them won’t bring up a criticism outright, a lot of them prefer inuendo.

 

[Ignatius]

Essential things that are not in the Bible:
#1 What books should be in the New Testament.

 

[edjco]

He brought up the Blessed Virgin because the original thread was about her. He was I think just continuing on that one and didn’t want to derail the original thread.

 

[Bellus]

You haven’t done a lot of apologetics among the protestants, have you? Many of them won’t bring up a criticism outright, a lot of them prefer inuendo.

Well I’m one of “them”. I won’t stoop to inuendo. Christ was born without sin so that He could make the perfect atonement for our sins. Only the Saviour could do such a thing. No where in the bible are we told, nor are we led to believe that Mary was also born without sin or without the stain of sin. Nor are we told that she remained sinless throughout her life. Likewise the bible doesn’t mention her assumption. All of this can be attributed to supposition. Having said all of this, there is no reason to revere Mary in any type of way, such as prayers and supplications to her. Granted, Mary was a very special young woman chosen to do a great job. She was the most blessed woman I can think of. Yet God’s Word does not instruct us to venerate her in any way. Since the bible clearly states that “no man can come to the Father execpt by the Son” we can know that Mary, the saints, etc. are not going to get our prayers to God for us. Only Christ can do this. This is why we pray to God in the name of Jesus. The bible does not instruct us to pray to Mary or to saint Joseph for anything. Many Christians may feel a kinship with certain biblical characters, such as the Apostle Paul. I feel like Paul did when he said that “the things he wanted to do he did not and those things he did not want to do he did”.

In order for Mary to be “sinless” we’d have to assume she was perfect. But only Christ was and is perfect. This is precisely why He was the perfect blood atonement for the sins of the world.

Whether anyone agrees with me is not important. I’m not here to argue a point, rather to show that this is what most “protestants” believe. I don’t actually consider myself a protestant as I’m not protesting anything. I’m here also to say that in all the years I’ve been reading the bible and studying God’s Word I’ve never read any scripture that would even lead me to believe that Mary was sinless, was assumed into heaven or should be offered prayers to her son.

I’ve spoken to many Catholics on this subject and their belief (the one’s I spoke with) is that Catholic scholars and leaders down through history have declared that Mary was sinless and was assumed into heaven based on the belief that only a perfect and sinless woman would have been allowed to carry and give birth to the Son of God, the Saviour of mankind. Again this is supposition on their part. If God did not clearly instruct us to venerate Mary and to seek her guidance in dealing with Jesus why make that jump? We know from history that Mary was a simple girl from a simple family. If Mary were born sinless wouldn’t it stand to reason that her mother also would have to have been born sinless? And if that were so wouldn’t her grandmother also have been born sinless? The entire lineage would have had to come from a sinless parentage in order for this to work. I see no reason what-so-ever to place something special on Mary that God did not tell us to. Mary was special in that God chose her. My focus is and will remain on Christ. As for Mary, I don’t know what actually happened to her. Whether or not her life ended in death or whether she was assumed into heaven is of no consequence. She was an obedient woman who did what God called her to do. There has never before nor since been a woman who was called to such a great thing as bringing the Son of God into the world. Did that make Mary a special woman? Yes, by all means. Does she deserve our veneration, our worship? No. Only God through His Son deserves our veneration and worship. Mary deserves all the respect we can give to her.