[boatbums]

The foundation for the teaching is rooted in Scripture

Don't you think if Scripture was really the foundational "root" for the teaching of the Assumption of Mary the Catholic church wouldn't have waited almost 2000 years to declare it? What about all the supposed apparitions of Mary, didn't they have a greater influence on that decision?

I know the Immaculate Conception relied heavily on such visions and apparitions when that dogma was declared in 1854.

[MHGinTN]

As to these 'apparitions' asserted to Mary the Mother of Jesus, the Fatima events have been proven to be 'something else' when the lies promoted by the Catholic religion have been researched. And researched using the actual written eyewitness acounts that can be found int he archives at Fatima, Portugal, recorded by a Catholic Priest who interviewed so many from the witness population. There is also the photgraphic evidence of an UFO which buzzed the crowd and caused damage to people and vehicles during the big event.

It is almost amusing how ardetnly the catholic religion ignores scripture warnings ... 'satan can come as an angle of light' even.

[MurphsLaw]

Don't you think if Scripture was really the foundational "root" for the teaching of the Assumption of Mary the Catholic church wouldn't have waited almost 2000 years to declare it?

Don't you think that logic then similarly condemns the modern inventions of saving oneself by proclaiming Jesus as a personal Lord/Savior? Or scriptural evidence proclaiming the (nicodemus) ideal of being "born again" salvation not found in two millenia? OR the later invention 500 years ago of sola scriptura...or once saved, always saved... that have no explicit usage in Scripture either and only appear 1500 -2000 years later as well?