when was the assumption of mary first taught?

[Daniel Marsh]

when was the assumption of mary first taught?, by whom? What are the proof texts?

thanks,
Daniel

 

[Monksailor]

Probably after she was born by her parents who assumed she existed.

 

[com7fy8]

Possibly, when she died, her closer people knew there could be artifact hunters who would go after her body; so they hid her. And when the hunters could not find her, then then could have assumed she never had died but bodily was taken by God.

Possible indirect support for this possibility is how now people are making a major thing of what is an artifact of the cross of Jesus, what is the body of Peter, and other things.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

when was the assumption of mary first taught?, by whom? What are the proof texts?

thanks,
Daniel

By Pope Pius XII. It is written in the Munificentissimus Deus.

 

[Aussie Pete]

when was the assumption of mary first taught?, by whom? What are the proof texts?

thanks,
Daniel

It was declared to be true by a Pope in 1950. It has no Biblical basis and the RCC admits it. It just fits in with their Mary cult deception. There are no proof texts. The Roman Catholic organisation does not require Biblical authority. I'll upset a few people here, but Mary worship is a carry over from Babylonian religious beliefs, as are a number of syncretistic Catholic beliefs.

 

[chevyontheriver]

By Pope Pius XII. It is written in the Munificentissimus Deus.

That was when it was finally declared an official teaching of the Church. It goes way back before that.

 

[Skittles]

This article offers some additional information

The Assumption of Mary in History

 

[Daniel Marsh]

It was declared to be true by a Pope in 1950. It has no Biblical basis and the RCC admits it. It just fits in with their Mary cult deception. There are no proof texts. The Roman Catholic organisation does not require Biblical authority. I'll upset a few people here, but Mary worship is a carry over from Babylonian religious beliefs, as are a number of syncretistic Catholic beliefs.

What is your proof for "Mary worship is a carry over from Babylonian religious beliefs"?

Primary Sources only with links to sources that are primary sources.

Hislop's nonsense will not fly. Using Hislop's logic all of Christianity is refuted.
Which is exactly what Atheists do with their books.

His line of ill logic has been refuted by
The Babylon Connection? Paperback – March, 1997
by Ralph Woodrow (Author)
https://www.amazon.com/Babylon-Connection-Ralph-Woodrow/dp/0916938174

The Babylon Connection? shows that the claims about Babylonian origins often lack connection, takes a closer look at the oft-quoted The Two Babylons by Alexander Hislop, and provides some much needed clarification on this subject. Was Nimrod a deformed, ugly black man, married to Semiramis, a beautiful white woman with blue eyes and blond hair? Was Semiramis the originator of Soprano singing and priestly celibacy? Was she the mother of Tammuz? Is the cross a symbol of Tammuz? Are round communion wafers sun-symbols? Are candles, black clergy garments, the letters I.H.S., the fish symbol, halos, and church steeples of pagan origin? Does the Pope wear a crown with 666 on it? Was the papal mitre copied from the fishhead of Dagon? Does the Book of Revelation describe the Roman Catholic Church as "Mystery Babylon"? https://www.amazon.com/Babylon-Connection-Ralph-Woodrow/dp/0916938174

Hislop's logic has also been refuted by

Shattering the Christ Myth (Tekton Building Blocks) Paperback – June 27, 2008
by James Patrick Holding (Author)
https://www.amazon.com/Shattering-C...=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1215055331&sr=8-3

That stupidity is known as the copycat thesis which historians have rejected decades ago.
http://www.tektonics.org/copycathub.html
Pagan copycat thesis refuted - creation.com
Classic Works of Apologetics - Copycat Myth-takes
copycat
Trending in reviews

https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf...hUKEwjkwODn37bnAhUKca0KHYz8CNIQ4dUDCAs&uact=5

 

[Daniel Marsh]

It was declared to be true by a Pope in 1950. It has no Biblical basis and the RCC admits it. It just fits in with their Mary cult deception. There are no proof texts. The Roman Catholic organisation does not require Biblical authority. I'll upset a few people here, but Mary worship is a carry over from Babylonian religious beliefs, as are a number of syncretistic Catholic beliefs.

see other post

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Thanks All

Don't fall into the trap of the copycat thesis it is poor logic, poor history and just plain silly.

 

[com7fy8]

Are round communion wafers sun-symbols?

Even if someone has used a round wafer as a sun symbol, this does not mean that person owns it.

We can use the round wafer the way we mean it. May be it could mean the sun . . . as a symbolic representation of Jesus who is the light of the world . . . like the sun is the source of light which also is life energy, after plants transform the sunlight into energy in plants, within sugar.

And since the round edges are continuous, we could say this represents how the life of Jesus is unending, though this would not be a perfect representation.

No matter how Satan in the past has used something, we can use it in a good way.

God has used the crucifixion of Jesus for so much good.

So, what ones in the past have done does not decide what I do and mean.

If what others do with something automatically means it is good or bad . . . this can mean that because evil people have used money, you can't use money, any more! However, I have not known of ones claiming that money has been used in a bad way, and therefore they do not use money. But when it comes to comparing their group with someone else's, all of a sudden certain things used badly can no longer be used . . . in someone else's group.

 

[prodromos]

The knowledge of Mary's bodily assumption was preserved primarily in Jerusalem, but became more widely known after Emperor Marcion and his wife Pulcheria requested that her relics be transferred to a church they had built to honour her in Constantinople at the time of the 4th Ecumenical Council.
The fact that the event of Mary's assumption is also celebrated by the Oriental Orthodox who seperated from the rest of the Church at that time, demonstrates that it was not only known at Jerusalem.

 

[Aussie Pete]

see other post

I'm happy to back my statements. The assumption is just that, an assumption.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Even if someone has used a round wafer as a sun symbol, this does not mean that person owns it.

We can use the round wafer the way we mean it. May be it could mean the sun . . . as a symbolic representation of Jesus who is the light of the world . . . like the sun is the source of light which also is life energy, after plants transform the sunlight into energy in plants, within sugar.

And since the round edges are continuous, we could say this represents how the life of Jesus is unending, though this would not be a perfect representation.

No matter how Satan in the past has used something, we can use it in a good way.

God has used the crucifixion of Jesus for so much good.

So, what ones in the past have done does not decide what I do and mean.

If what others do with something automatically means it is good or bad . . . this can mean that because evil people have used money, you can't use money, any more! However, I have not known of ones claiming that money has been used in a bad way, and therefore they do not use money. But when it comes to comparing their group with someone else's, all of a sudden certain things used badly can no longer be used . . . in someone else's group.

You missed the quotation marks. Not that a big problem. It reminds me of something planed when I was in high school. There were doves flying in the gym from a wedding.
After, we captured them by feeding them. Someone pointed out that the Pastor was preaching on the Holy Spirit this week. So, we kept them and feed them and cleaned up after them. We hid in various places in the church like the Baptismal pool after draining it.
We fed them to keep them manageable. Did you know a bird dumps every 15 minutes?
Everytime, the Pastor said, Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit we would release a few. Many in the congregation knew this was going to happen and brought their umberias. Another class released Swans into the congregation too. The behavior then reminded me of a song about a Squirrel slipping into church one sunday. We had to clean the place up after church.

I think the picture was a better plan now.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Even if someone has used a round wafer as a sun symbol, this does not mean that person owns it.

We can use the round wafer the way we mean it. May be it could mean the sun . . . as a symbolic representation of Jesus who is the light of the world . . . like the sun is the source of light which also is life energy, after plants transform the sunlight into energy in plants, within sugar.

And since the round edges are continuous, we could say this represents how the life of Jesus is unending, though this would not be a perfect representation.

No matter how Satan in the past has used something, we can use it in a good way.

God has used the crucifixion of Jesus for so much good.

So, what ones in the past have done does not decide what I do and mean.

If what others do with something automatically means it is good or bad . . . this can mean that because evil people have used money, you can't use money, any more! However, I have not known of ones claiming that money has been used in a bad way, and therefore they do not use money. But when it comes to comparing their group with someone else's, all of a sudden certain things used badly can no longer be used . . . in someone else's group.

Those who are allergic to pagan symbols today are welcome to send me all their green papers in their pockets.

triquetraTriquetra
In some modern traditions, it represents the connection of mind, body, and soul, and in Celtic-based Pagan groups, it is symbolic of the three realms of earth, sea, and sky.

This symbol is used in modern times for the Trinity or a variation of it is used.

Even the Bible itself employs pagan symbols of speech. See the Hellenistic Commentary for a lot of examples.

Psalm 68:4 - Bible Gateway
Lift up a song to the rider on the clouds—his name is Yah— and rejoice before him. ... Sing to God, sing in praise of his name, extol him who rides on the clouds; ...

Ugarit / Baal Cycle

El, the aged high God, is the ultimate sovereign in the council.
El bestows kingship upon the god Baal, the Cloud-Rider, after Baal defeats the god Yamm in battle.
Baal is king of the gods and El's vizier. His rule is everlasting.


Daniel 7

The Ancient of Days, the God of Israel is seated on the fiery, wheeled throne (cf. Ezekiel 1). Like Ugaritic El, he is white haired and aged (“ancient”).
Yahweh-El, the Ancient of Days, bestows kingship upon the Son of Man who rides the clouds after the beast from the sea (yamma) is destroyed.
The Son of Man is given everlasting dominion over the nations. He rules at the right hand of God.

The Rider of the Clouds: Psalm 68:5

 

[prodromos]

I'll upset a few people here, but Mary worship is a carry over from Babylonian religious beliefs, as are a number of syncretistic Catholic beliefs.

Why would your ignorance be likely to upset a few people?

 

[Aussie Pete]

Why would your ignorance be likely to upset a few people?

I'm happy to justify my position, but it's not practicable on the forum. I've studied this quite extensively and I'm far from the only person to come to that conclusion.

 

[prodromos]

I'm happy to justify my position, but it's not practicable on the forum. I've studied this quite extensively and I'm far from the only person to come to that conclusion.

If you are able to demonstrate a tangible link between two cultures separated by 1000 years and over 1000 miles with all the steps in between I would be mightily impressed, but all the explanations I've seen have been of the same ilk as the alleged "easter = ishtar" link or bishop mitres being derived from Dagon fish head hats. "it looks similar" or "it sounds similar" are not valid arguments.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

I'm happy to justify my position, but it's not practicable on the forum. I've studied this quite extensively and I'm far from the only person to come to that conclusion.

Pete this applies to the false claims you are making,

2 Timothy 4:3-4 [Full Chapter]
For the time is coming when people will not put up with sound doctrine, but having itching ears, they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own desires, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander away to myths.

Now what does it take to prove the copycat thesis?

1. correctly understand and present from primary sources what another religion taught.

2. correctly understand and present from primary sources what the religion you are making claims about really teaches.

3. An admission that something specific that you correctly represented was copied verbatim by the person who did it using primary sources..

4. Note: There is a difference between using the tools of philosophy like logic and proving something was copied.

Your so called research will fail to meet the combination of those simple criteria.

What are your primary sources? with links so others can check context.

Honestly, your view is laughable to those of us trained as historians.

If you want a great examples of how not to do it, read,

The Paganism in Our Christianity, Arthur Weigall
Two Babylons by hislop
The Golden Bough. A Study in Comparative Religion. By. James George Frazer,
or any of the atheist books out there. There is also that silly movie.

Oh the most recent refutation of your methods of thinking is:


Getting at Jesus: A Comprehensive Critique of Neo-Atheist Nonsense about the ...
By Peter S. Williams

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Peter, see post 8 for other sources that refutes your nonsense.