THE ASSUMPTION OF MARY: Condemned as Heretical by 2 Popes in the 5th and 6th Centuries

christiantruth.com ^ | William Webster

[verga]

Call me Rush, I point out the absurdity and stupidity or prot comments by being equally absurd. I also hear that he only time Jesus took a bath was that one time in the Jordan river.

[Salvation]

LOL!

[boatbums]

“What you probably mean is that you don’t like that Catholicism is freely disputed here by other Freepers who aren’t Catholic.”

No, what I actually mean is that the management is hostile toward Catholicism.

Ridiculous! In what way do you think the "management" of Free Republic is hostile towards Catholicism? Do any of the daily Religion Forum Catholic Caucus threads get pulled? Do the Moderators not enforce the Caucus rules? Do you feel Catholics' nasty personal comments get deleted and the non-Catholic ones don't? I think JR has been more than fair and accepting of your religion. Any hostility at all is towards those who whine and disrupt threads for no reason other than they don't like what someone says. That's the nature of ONLINE forums. I think Free Republic is the best one out there for Conservative Christians.

You don’t “freely dispute” Catholicism; you malign it with the constant repetition of “inaccuracies.”

You don't ever say what these "inaccuracies" are. Why is that? I think you probably didn't expect to get the kind of scholarship and care of response so many non-Catholic Christians contribute to this site. Maybe you thought it WAS a Roman Catholic website, who knows. I'm glad it's not and I am grateful for every person that takes the time to respond to the often virulent and bigoted comments made by the anti-everyone-who-isn't-Catholic group with respect and gentleness. You'd see that too if you could get past the outrage over having your religion examined in the light of the Scriptures.

Unreason, malice, dishonesty, all are protected here so long as they are directed at Catholics—personally—and Catholicism.

Everything you are whining about has been said by the other side at some time. The truth is nobody is "protected" when they flaunt the rules - and that happens much more from the pro-Catholic side than the non. Anytime you believe someone is being dishonest, you have the freedom to expose it. Unreason and malice...those are in the eye of the beholder, are they not?

Here's a suggestion...why don't you stay OFF the open Religion Forum threads for a while seeing as you get so worked up and all? The RM warns all the time about how a thick skin is required to participate. Why don't you take some time to do some thickening? You'll probably feel better.

[Syncro]

Then where is her tomb?

Read the article, it's mentioned in there. Sometimes it helps to read the article before asking questions.

[WVKayaker]

Call me Rush, I point out the absurdity and stupidity or prot comments by being equally absurd.

Hahahahahahahaaaaaa!

Hahahahahahahaaaaaa!

Hahahahahahahaaaaaa!

Hahahahahahahaaaaaa!

Really? There is never any refutation of the truth and trying to make it into the banal seems the preferred favorite methodology of the Roman Catholic whiners.

When we post Scripture to demonstrate and reveal the truth, all we get is cereal boxes and silly posters. That is why I found a cereal box design site, and have made my own responses to such drollery... but we see the two RC's who have tried and failed immeasurably!

Pinging out of courtesy...

Deflect and obfuscate...

Look! Squirrel! (pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!)

[Salvation]

She is praising God....not pleading.

[Salvation]

Maybe I have read more of the Early Church Fathers than you have.

[Steelfish]

No, this kind of tossing of scriptural quotations from here and there does not work. This is why we have Biblical anarchy from what “you” think is the Word of God as does Daivd Koresh. “You” have no basis for authoritative interpretation as does your uncle or mine or Jim Jones or anybody’s grandmother. This would end up in interminable scriptural debates.

Try having Rev. Moon, the Mormons, Billy Graham, Jehovah’s Witnesses and a David Koresh in the same room.

Books in Scripture were not simply “RECEIVED” like leaves falling from the skies. This is for simpletons.

They were the product of years of laborious sorting out by reference to a number of sources like the oral tradition, rituals, customs, and the interpretation of the Aramaic and Greek texts by the early Church fathers. Perhaps, if you had a rigorous theological training rather than playing street theologian you will understand and not engage in risible statements of this kind.

The supremacy of Petrine authority has been established by a long line of eminent scholars at different points in history, to say nothing of eminent theologians in the Protestant world who converted to Catholicism. You keep burying your head in the sand and engage in linguistic textual games. This is not about “swallowing up” everything a religious leader says. That’s for the stuff spouted out by your Billy Grahams, Osteens, Swaggarts, Schullers, Jeremah Wrights.

No, the divine authority of the Church results in ONE truth reflected in one Catechism, with a single Credo. Even the days of Christmas, Good Friday, and Easter are established by the Catholic Julian and Gregorian calendars. If you disagree go choose your own dates.

Everything else is mush because it is one’s “own” interpretation resulting in multiple faiths. Go tell the Mormons that they got it wrong in their “study of the Scriptures God gave us and be able to discern truth from error.”

[boatbums]

FYI, re: William Webster. He was never a Catholic priest, though he was brought up Roman Catholic and is now an Evangelical Christian.

William Webster is the founder and director of Christian Resources, a teaching and publishing ministry dealing with issues related to the Gospel, Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy, church history and the Christian life. He is the author of three books with Banner of Truth. In addition to writing and publishing, Mr. Webster is also the pastor of Grace Bible Church in Battle Ground, Washington. He has been a guest on Christian talk radio and has been the featured speaker at several Bible conferences dealing with the Christian life. He has a B.A. degree in History from Southern Methodist University and is a graduate of the Evangelical Institute in Greenville, SC. http://discerningreader.com/authors/william-webster

[Salvation]

??

[verga]

You don't ever say what these "inaccuracies" are.

BALONEY!

1) Catholics believe that Mary is divine.3) Catholics don't read the Bible.

4) The Catholic Church was formed in the(pick any century after the first.) century.

5) Catholics hold the Magisterium and/or Tradition above the Bible.

That is a short list off the top of my head.

You have made the claim to have been Catholic at one time. If that is true than you know that each of these statements is an outright lie. You may not have repeated them, but you sure have not engaged in fraternal correction when others have repeated them.

[Religion Moderator]

Do not accuse another Freeper of telling a lie, it attributes motive, the intent to deceive. It is "making it personal."

Words such as "false" "error" or "wrong" do not attribute motive.

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

[Syncro]

Another anti-Catholic thread?

Another anti-Mary thread?

Pius XII, in his decree in 1950, declared the Assumption teaching to be a dogma revealed by God. But the basis upon which he justifies this assertion is not that of Scripture or patristic testimony but of speculative theology.

He concludes that because it seems reasonable and just that God should follow a certain course of action with respect to the person of Mary, and because he has the power, that he has in fact done so. And, therefore, we must believe that he really acted in this way.

And if you don't believe this poorly stated "dogma," you will lose your salvation.

To dispute this doctrine, according to Rome’s teaching, would result in the loss of salvation.

Wow, that's gotta be pretty scary for day to day Catholics.

Believe in dogma (not supported by scripture) proclaimed by a Pope or, even after being a "saved" Catholic, and you lose your salvation?

Is this blaspheme of the Holy Spirit?

Thank goodness real salvation received from Jesus can NOT be revoked by a Pope.

John 14:20

At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.

No one can remove a Christian from being in Jesus, nor remove Jesus from being in the Christian.

Is Jesus in the Eucharist?

Could be from the line of reasoning above: "because he has the power, that he has in fact done so"

Works for so many doctrines in Catholicism.

[Salvation]

With the context.

 

John 6

27 Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of man will give to you; for on him has God the Father set his seal."

 

32 Jesus then said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven; my Father gives you the true bread from heaven.

33 For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven, and gives life to the world."

34 They said to him, "Lord, give us this bread always."

35 Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thirst.

 

 

48 I am the bread of life.

49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh."

53 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;

54 he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

56 He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me.
58 This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever."

[mlizzy]

I’ll take Jesus at His word and rely upon the Holy Spirit, who will open my heart to understand the deep things of God. I trust Jesus over man.

I remember as a child of seven [on vacation] in Gila Bend, Arizona, I attended a sweet little Bible church. Nothing made me happier than to go there. It was simple to understand, and I got to put on a pretty dress to boot. Catholicism, on the other hand, takes time to understand, imo, and I think many people peter out on the way, instead of partaking of its Sacraments fully. For those who stick it out, though, it’s the most beautiful faith in the world. Why do you spend so much time arguing against it?

[Syncro]

...why are you so vociferously arguing...

And so it begins...

Those dern Protestants and their mean words!

"Channeling" Elsie, sorry...

[mlizzy]

Here's a suggestion...why don't you stay OFF the open Religion Forum threads for a while seeing as you get so worked up and all? The RM warns all the time about how a thick skin is required to participate. Why don't you take some time to do some thickening? You'll probably feel better.

My gosh, you don't see the condescension in your commentary? Regardless, it's not your call, boatbums...... could you try to be a little more compassionate toward the feelings of a Catholic? Christ will not ask us if we have a "thick skin," he will ask us if we loved him (and our neighbors).

[boatbums]

That's just it...there hasn't been any "tossing" of Scriptural quotations but a use of God's word to specifically teach what God intended us to know about our faith. You think there wasn't any "anarchy" or heresy in the first century Christian experience? The leaders of the believers used what had been given to them BY the Apostles - the word of God - to combat the errors that sprang up against the truth. You think there aren't any "scriptural debates" within the Roman Catholic church today? Think again. There have always been and always will be until Christ returns disagreements and debates over Scriptural truth. Having church leadership helps to define and defend the truth - be the foundation and support of it, not INVENT it. The major tenets of the Christian faith remain the SAME as they were from the start.

Tossing out the names of non-Catholics - as if you could honestly mean that Billy Graham is no different than Koresh, Jones or Joseph Smith - is just so much theatrics. Any Christian who knows the Scriptures could defend the truths of the Christian faith against any number of heretics. To presume ONLY the Roman Catholic magesterium has the authority or knowledge to debate and defeat error is awfully shortsighted and limiting of God. It is defeated today in the same way it was that first century - by the word of God.

Books in Scripture were not simply “RECEIVED” like leaves falling from the skies. This is for simpletons. They were the product of years of laborious sorting out by reference to a number of sources like the oral tradition, rituals, customs, and the interpretation of the Aramaic and Greek texts by the early Church fathers. Perhaps, if you had a rigorous theological training rather than playing street theologian you will understand and not engage in risible statements of this kind.

Who taught you such nonsense? Do you do any study outside of Roman Catholic websites? Saying the early church "received" the epistles of Scripture from the Apostles is hardly saying they dropped down like leaves from the sky! Do you even read what you write? What do you think happened when Paul or Peter, for example, wrote the letters they did under Divine inspiration and then instructed the churches scattered throughout to read them to the people, study them and OBEY what they wrote? Did these individual church leaders (because there WAS no over all Pope) say, "Well, hold on there, Paul. We'll have to take a look at this and get back to you a few hundred years from now."? NO! The Apostles were writing down the teachings (traditions) as the Holy Spirit gave them utterance and passing them on in a form that could be copied and disseminated to as wide an audience as possible. Here's a little help so you can get a better understanding on how we got the Scriptures The Formation of the New Testament Canon and The Formation of the Canon of the New Testament.

It boils down to, yes, AUTHORITY. You believe the Roman Catholic church (it's leadership) is your only authority and whatever they tell you they decided is the truth, you will believe it. It doesn't matter to you how they arrived at it, only that if they said it, you obey. Right? So, on the subject of the assumption of Mary, it doesn't concern you that there is no Apostolic teaching or Biblical source for the dogma, it doesn't matter that it didn't even become a mandatory article of the Catholic faith until nearly two thousand years AFTER the Apostles all died, only that your Pope spoke and you believe it. Is that correct?

Does it concern you at all that prior popes called such a belief heresy? That may be perfectly dandy for you and no problem at all, but it's not good enough for me. I believe God gave us the Scriptures for a reason - so that we could know what is binding upon a believer. The Roman Catholic church is under that SAME authority. Like I said, you want to believe Mary was assumed into heaven bodily? Go for it. I don't. I will obey God rather than man.

[Religion Moderator]

I have been known to instruct a poster to leave a thread when it is apparent (s)he cannot cope with the "open" Religion Forum debate on that particular thread.

Of all the thread types on the Religion Forum, only "open" RF threads permit posters to contend against deities, beliefs, religious authorities, etc.

Posters who cannot suffer having their deeply held religious beliefs ridiculed, condemned, attacked or dismissed should IGNORE "open" RF threads altogether otherwise they will be offended. They should instead read and post to RF threads labeled "prayer" "devotional" "caucus" or "ecumenical" where antagonism is not allowed.

Posters who have been on the Religion Forum for awhile should know all of this. They should understand that thick skin is required on "open" RF threads, that they must be able to mount cogent arguments in behalf of their beliefs or against the belief of others - despite the noise.