Why? The Vatican admits as much: “the New Testament does not explicitly affirm Mary’s Assumption,” (General Audience, # 3, Pope John Paul II). The divinity of Christ was dogmatically proclaimed only at the “late” date of 325, the fully worked-out doctrine of the Holy Trinity in 381, and the Two Natures of Christ (God and Man) in 451, all in Ecumenical Councils which are accepted by most Protestants. Protestants manage to believe all these things (or use these words) with no problem whatever. Kirby! Accredited and affordable. . This is a reply to Matt Slick: Presbyterian pastor and head of the large and influential anti-Catholic Protestant CARM discussion forum. Church and ministry leadership resources to better equip, train and provide ideas for today's church and ministry leaders, like you. Because the doctrine of the Assumption of Mary is not found in the Bible, it must be derived from what Roman Catholicism calls Sacred Tradition–the oral … . Once a week, perfect for rejuvenating and fresh inspiration. . Our Protestant friends in Christ often challenge us to find “proofs” of our doctrines in the Bible. ‣ Publisher: OpenBible.info. Or, more specifically, why do they believe these things, which are absent from or non-explicit in the Bible, while giving Catholics misery for similar things, or else doctrines and practices with far more indication of various sorts than the things above, that Protestants accept? There isn’t a single mention in God’s word. 6. . W The other example I give is the canonicity of biblical books. 2 Corinthians 12:2-3 I know a man in Christ [i.e., Paul himself] who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven . The Westminster Confession of Faith (held by all or virtually all Reformed Protestants) states in 1:6: The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men. Nevertheless, there is … [3] And I know that this man was caught up into Paradise — whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows —. [8-14-15]. . R ‣ Q ‣ For such a supremely important dogma of the Church that must be believed to be a faithful Christian, one would think that it would be found in God’s Inspired Word, the Bible. Visit the Bible online to search for words if you don’t know the specific passage your’re looking for. L . (cf. Will Common Core Requirements Keep Homeschoolers Out of College? Mary’s Assumption is the “first fruits,” sign, and type of the general resurrection of all (created) mankind; she exemplifies the age in which death and sin are conquered once and for all (1 Cor 15:26). Maybe it would be nice if we had a proof text for everything. I disagree with the latter contention, too, but it is a position stated by many respectable, renowned Protestant apologists and theologians. Unless otherwise indicated, all content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License. Many doctrines that they hold were not readily apparent, and far from the consensus of the early Church and the Church fathers: I made further such analogical arguments in a long article explaining my conversion to Catholicism, citing Cardinal Newman and his Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine: Some notion of suffering, or disadvantage, or punishment after this life, in the case of the faithful departed, or other vague forms of the doctrine of Purgatory, has in its favour almost a consensus of the first four ages of the Church. A full-time Catholic apologist since 2001, Dave was received into the Church in 1991. Since February 1997, he has blogged over 2,500 times. I am responding to his article, “The Bodily Assumption of Mary.” His words will be in blue. What I have been taught is to consec... My Son Won't Pay Attention to His Studies: How Do I Keep Him on Track? . Even many of their own foundational and distinctive doctrines, such as the notion of, Jason Engwer and a Supposedly Sinful Mary, "While Mr. Seidensticker complains about Protestant ministers not writing an honest critique of atheist, I ...", "Given that Our Lord died on the cross for all humanity, including Jeffrey Dahmer and ...", "In my experience Gnus like Seidensticker are always trying to come up with vile creative ...", "These atheists would have us all believing that “science” can yield Truth. That is, we must look to the Bible as our foundation for Truth. We are a full-service program for grades Pre-K through 12, built around the needs of individual students and families. On the other hand, Protestants clearly accept developing doctrine on several fronts: the Canon of the New Testament is a clear example of such a (technically “non-biblical”) doctrine It wasn’t finalized until 397 A.D. Biblical Parallel [3-1-07], Mary’s Bodily Assumption: Eleven Related Bible Passages [2009], Defending Mary (Revelation 12 & Her Assumption) [5-28-12], Is Mary’s Assumption Able to be Inferred from Scripture Alone? Online learning. K casually made by those who argue in this way is the notion: “all doctrines believed by Christians must be explicitly mentioned in Scripture.” This is a key aspect of the Protestant foundational belief in sola Scriptura (Scripture is the only infallible authority or rule of faith). H Because it wasn’t taught, and it is not a true doctrine of Christianity. Mary's assumption is the “first fruits,” sign, and type of the general resurrection of all (created) mankind; she exemplifies the age in which death and sin are conquered once and for all 15). A version of this argument that I often use is to ask, “where in the Bible does it say that all true doctrines must be explicitly stated in Scripture?” There is no such passage. The Church hasn’t declared whether Mary died or not. B For such a supremely important dogma of the Church that must be believed to be a faithful Christian, one would think that it would be found in God’s Inspired Word, the Bible. T (19). Still, the theological formulations of such figures as Augustine, Anselm, and Aquinas did not preclude a rediscovery of this judicial element in the Pauline doctrine of justification . I . Yet Protestants accept it (minus seven books); and this is contrary to sola Scriptura. Period. I have made several biblical arguments for it, that are implicit, deductive, and/or arguments from analogy: Bodily Assumption of Mary: Harmonious with the Bible? All Scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are taken from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version. S article explaining my conversion to Catholicism, Seidensticker Folly #63: Answer Comfort But ...", Seidensticker Folly #64: A Saved Dahmer ...". . M .During the patristic, and especially the later medieval periods, forensic justification was largely lost . So, if it isn’t in the Bible, where did the Roman Catholic church get this teaching? [2002], Mary’s Assumption: Brief Explanation, with a New (?) Bible Verse of the Day – Catholic Readings For Solemnity of The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary . The first had to do with the doctrine of purgatory, vis-a-vis the doctrine of original sin, which is, of course, accepted by Protestants as well: Newman then recounts no less than sixteen Fathers who hold the view in some form. 19. ‣ . . Yet Protestants believe in a 66-book canon (excluding seven deuterocanonical books that Catholics accept). Contact me: openbibleinfo (at) gmail.com. I agree that there is no direct “proof” of Mary’s Assumption in Scripture. (17) In spite of the forcible teaching of St. Paul on the subject, the doctrine of Original Sin appears neither in the Apostles’ nor the Nicene Creed. But in comparing this consensus to the doctrine of original sin, we find a disjunction: This is a crucial distinction.