Would you please show where Christ and His Apostles taught "the Bible alone as the sole or ultimate rule of faith?"
This principle cuts both ways, if you want to be intellectually honest.
Luther's tradition doesn't show up until 14 centuries after Christ.
The Assumption can be traced back at least to the fifth century in writing. Additionally, there are no relics of Mary, which would have been prized possessions in the early Church.
There is also biblical evidence supporting Mary's Assumption.
We know from Luke that Jesus has inherited the throne of David, and from Revelation that he holds the "key of David." Jesus is the King of the eternal, redeemed Davidic Kingdom, the Kingdom of God, or Christ's Church.
In the ancient Davidic kingdom, the mother of the king, the "Gebirah" or "Queen Mother" held a position greater than that of the wives of the king. The Bible records her sitting on a throne at the right hand of the king.
Mary, as Jesus' mother, is the Queen Mother of the eternal, redeemed Davidic kingdom. She is the Queen of Heaven, as seen in Revelation.
Galatians 1:9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God's curse!
"It should be noted that though many might write concerning Catholic truth, there is this difference that those who wrote the canonical Scripture, the Evangelists and Apostles, and the like, so constantly assert it that they leave no room for doubt. That is what he means when he says 'we know his witness is true.' Galatians 1:9, "If anyone preach a gospel to you other than that which you have received, let him be anathema!" The reason is that only canonical Scripture is a measure of faith. Others however so wrote of the truth that they should not be believed save insofar as they say true things." (St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Gospel of John 21) [(Romae: Marietti E ditori Ltd., 1952) n. 2656, p. 488.]
In Latin: "Cuius ratio est, quia sola canonica scriptura est regula fidei."
Go figure! Sola Scriptura way before Luther! And in comments made on Galatians 1:9 no less!
Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's not the question I asked. The apostles said something they taught. Now, show where the apostles taught the assumption of Mary and the requirement to believe it to belong to the church.
Why should anyone read nonsense? It is not Biblical.
We know from Luke that Jesus has inherited the throne of David, and from Revelation that he holds the "key of David." Jesus is the King of the eternal, redeemed Davidic Kingdom, the Kingdom of God, or Christ's Church. In the ancient Davidic kingdom, the mother of the king, the "Gebirah" or "Queen Mother" held a position greater than that of the wives of the king. The Bible records her sitting on a throne at the right hand of the king
Really ?? Do you have any scripture on this ?? Interesting that Mary holds higher position than Jesus ... I missed that somewhere ???
Now time for the ONE TIME that the queen mother sat at her sons "right hand"...HERE IS HE REST OF THE STORY...as they say
1 Kings 2:22King Solomon answered and said to his mother, "And why are you asking Abishag the Shunammite for Adonijah? Ask for him also the kingdom-- for he is my older brother-- even for him, for Abiathar the priest, and for Joab the son of Zeruiah!" 23Then King Solomon swore by the LORD, saying, "May God do so to me and more also, if Adonijah has not spoken this word against his own life. 24"Now therefore, as the LORD lives, who has established me and set me on the throne of David my father and who has made me a house as He promised, surely Adonijah shall be put to death today."…25So King Solomon sent Benaiah the son of Jehoiada; and he fell upon him so that he died.…
Oppps guess momma "sitting at the right hand" of the king...didn't help with her "intercessory plea huh?
BTW as Reformed believers, we use scripture to interpret scripture.. not write in our own meaning ...there is NO OTHER passage that says or implies the kings mother has a regular seat on the right hand of the king
Mary, as Jesus' mother, is the Queen Mother of the eternal, redeemed Davidic kingdom. She is the Queen of Heaven, as seen in Revelation.
Just another misrendering of scripture by Rome..
Rev12:1A great sign appeared in heaven:
Notice the prophet John did not say he saw Mary (that he knew and cared for.. he said he saw A SIGN ..Like all of Revelation this is PROPHETIC in nature..ant o replay
The end of this vision makes clear that this IS NOT MARY ..read on ..
Rev12;13And when the dragon saw that he was thrown down to the earth, he persecuted the woman who gave birth to the male child. 14But the two wings of the great eagle were given to the woman, so that she could fly into the wilderness to her place,... Did Mary ever grow wings and fly away?I missed that statue in the churches..
Most see the Woman as Israel .. but then most do not ned a goddess
The Case for the Assumption of Mary <<<<<<<<<<
Show me the scripture.. I have no interest in doctrinal fiction
500 years?
500 years.
Let's put that in perspective, shall we?
It is 2015. Go back 500 years and it is 1515 AD. What is to stop someone from crafting a document today, claiming it represents a historical fact that was passed down by word of mouth, without error?
And yet your crowd finds Scripture somehow inadequate.