NO, it’s NOT because the “church” has validated it. It’s because it’s clearly stated in scripture. He was described as both God and man.
>>Let us start with Mary’s assumption into heaven.<<
You mention Enoch – Proven by scripture and documented
Then you mention Elijah – Proven by scripture and documented
Then Jesus – also documented in scripture obviously
You then mention the saints who arose from their graves when Jesus died on the cross – again, documented in scripture.
Then you make a really weird statement. >>It is not unreasonable to think that Mary falls into this group.<<
It’s not unreasonable to think that Mary falls into this group? Are you kidding me? Did you notice that each of those is documented by scripture? Unreasonable is to try to insert something into scripture that is NOT there. In fact there is a rather stern warning not to do that. You could just as well start to “not unreasonably” think any other sort of extra Biblical scenarios or “revelations” like John Smith did.
Then you begin your Churcheanity and direct me to the RCC sites. With statements like, “but it has been believed and taught by the Church for hundreds of years.” Well, there you have it. It must be scriptural because the “church” with a capital c no less, teaches it and for hundreds of years to boot. I would remind you that Islam has been taught for hundreds of years also. That doesn’t make it scripturally true. Trying to get someone to believe something because “it’s not unreasonable” is what cults are developed from.
>>In Revelation 12:1 John sees the Woman, “1 A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman, clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 2 She was pregnant and cried out in pain, looking to her time of delivery.”<<
That “woman” is the nation of Israel. Out of her our Lord Jesus was birthed. The passage goes on to explain who the women is.
Revelation 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.
That is the Jewish people being protected for the last 3 ½ years of the Tribulation or during the “Great Tribulation” or “the time of Jacobs trouble”. The “twelve stars on her head” are the twelve tribes of Israel. To try to make us believe that is Mary is not supported in any way by scripture.
>> I believe these things and I accept them. And, though I despise it, I can take the ridicule that comes to me here for having done so.<<
I don’t ridicule you at all. My heart aches for you. You have been led astray by the “doctrines of man”. My admonition to you would be taken from Revelation 18:4 ...'And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.'
Please, let your heart rest easy. Mine does.
So, we have two terms which you seem to use interchangeably and which I take to be two different things.
To not be found explicitly in Scriptures is not the same as unBiblical or unScriptural.
I have proven, through these verses, that to believe that Mary is in heaven, body and soul is not unBiblical. It is entirely Scriptural for God to take into heaven “holy people”. Mary, I would hope you could agree, was certainly a holy person.
The Trinity, the doctrine and the word Trinity are not explicitly to be found in Scripture though the doctrine is completely Scriptural.
You say you believe it because Scripture says it,or that it is clearly stated in Scripture, but it is not. There are many, many verses which support it. If you know of one verse in Scripture that clearly says, God is One in Three Persons, and this is called the Trinity, please post it.
And there are those who read the very same Scriptures and do not believe it. They disavow the Trinity. They can point to what they believe are contradictions to that doctrine in Scripture.
I am not going to argue the Trinity, only that whether you care to admit it or not, Christians, ALL Christians adhere to this belief and it was defined by the Church.
Another thing that is Scriptural but not found explicitly in Scripture is Sunday worship or Sunday as the Sabbath.
There is nowhere in Scripture where the Apostles or any other disciple say that they stopped going to synagogue on Saturday. But, that the Apostles went there is. Do you still follow them in that practice?
Probably not. Most Christians celebrate the Lord’s Day on Sunday, the day of the Resurrection. That comes straight from the Catholic Church and if you meet on Sunday and not on Saturday, then you are following a doctrine of the Church.
Again, it is Scriptural but not in Scriptures.
I directed you to Catholic sites, only for brevity and because they supported an underlying interpretation of Scripture which I was using. It was meant to show the historocity of those beliefs within the Christian community. I also told you that there were many who explain these things in more depth of theology than I.
I mention Revelation in regards to the Ark and how John immediately after seeing the Ark, then sees the woman. Go and read the entire passage regarding the woman and the dragon noting the very last passage...
17 Then the dragon was angry with the woman, and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus. And he stood on the sand of the sea.
Does Israel bear testimony to Jesus or is it Christians who do this?
And you cannot gloss over that the woman bears a male child.
And does Mary not flee to Egypt with Joseph and Jesus to escape the persecution of Herrod? Do you know how long they were there?
Consider also that in the NT, Mary and only Mary is called “Woman”, something John would have known well.
I find it interesting that in the first and last book of the Bible we find the woman. And again, only Mary is ever called woman. It’s not a coincidence.
At the very least, the passage could certainly contain symbolism which points to both Israel and Mary. The whole of that Book references many different times and places and people.
ABSOLUTELY INDEED.