Posted on 01/18/2015 8:33:58 AM PST by ADSUM
The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary CUF
Issue: What does the Church teach concerning the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary?
Response: The teaching is aptly summarized in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 974:
The Most Blessed Virgin Mary, when the course of her earthly life was completed, was taken up [“assumed”] body and soul into the glory of heaven, where she already shares in the glory of her Son’s Resurrection, anticipating the resurrection of all members of His Body.
(Excerpt) Read more at cuf.org ...
Oh yes....Mary, the Mother of GOD was an awful sinner. I will pray for your heart that is so so hardened by anti-Catholic hatred.
Their denials when clearly shown truth is telling.
Do you just make up things up as you go?
You are missing so much of God's love and teachings by relying only on your own interpretations.
Give me a specific statement of mine which you believe to be "personal opinion, No proof". If you make an accusation at least give me the opportunity to provide the proof. Do you dare?
Look it up and read the Bible.
I have given it to you previously.
You won’t believe it anyway with your closed mind.
That is up to Jesus.
The Catholic Church just shows you the way that Christ taught to get to Heaven.
No.
Galatians 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God's curse!
Now show us where the apostles taught the assumption of Mary and the need for us to believe it like the Catholic Church states. Nothing you have posted to date does that.
Your statement: “It is RCC fiction and an unfounded hope in an unprovable myth...until Christ appears again and sets matters straight.”
You shouldn’t call the teachings of the Catholic Church “fiction” if you can not prove it incorrect. I do think that your statement’s intent is to mislead others. I have not tried to pass judgment on others, only on their misleading statements.
The teachings of the rcc have been shown time and time again to be in error when compared to Scripture. Yet the catholic refuses to recognize such.
Luke 1:28 has been explained time and time and time again on this board, yet catholicism still clings to the dogma espoused by the rcc.
It has been shown numerous times that the catholic apologists recognize you cannot directly point to Scripture or "Tradition" to justify the immaculate conception. Yet catholics on this board persist in claiming you can.
This is why Christians rise up and post the articles we do to point out the errors of the rcc. And when we do, the catholic resorts to name calling and calls to ban the thread. These are sure signs of a cult.
If catholicism cannot stand to have its' teachings exposed to the light of the Truth, then that tells us they are lurking in the darkness.
I do agree we shouldn't call the assumption and immaculate conception fiction though. They should be called what they are.
False teachings of a cult that has deceived many.
Rather you should pray that the Holy Spirit would enlighten you to the apostasy of the Catholic Church.
NO, you haven't. You have only shown where it was given to individuals and the apostles said it was given to us as it was to them.
This is stupid as it is foolish. This is not about the Bible. The Bible did not fall from the skies. It was assembled by the early Church fathers, those theologians who spent decades in sorting out what books should be included and excluded. The New Testament itself makes clear that the Bible is not the sole text of the Life of Christ. The assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary was believed from early times. She is in many way a co-redemptrix. She was the tabernacle of the Incarnation, her early body was not for the worms.
In the modern Catholic church, the papacy has abandoned the position that Christians outside the church are not saved. Anyone have contrary info?
Does “co-redemptrix” mean Mary is a Godess?
Of course not in the derogatory sense you imply. Without her assent, there would be no incarnation of the Word made flesh. This often happens when so-called “Bible” Christians wade into the profound aspects of Church theology and doctrine.
She was a sinner. She even admitted she needed a Savior. The Bible says everyone has sinned. That includes Mary.
Thanks. Some people refuse to see the truth.
Whoa there, Steelfish..... I am merely trying to understand what you mean by “co-redemptrix”. Can you please explain what that term means and site scripture?
LOL. Guess I should be praying for y’all instead. Y’all sure need it.
There you again. Everything must be cited to Scripture when Scripture itself says that not everything Christ said and done is recorded in Scripture. Mary is a co-redemptrix in the sense she and her Son together were responsible for the Incarnation, for the Word made flesh.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.