Assumption of Mary is an Assumption

Ask any Roman Catholic and the earliest possible time of a church father claiming Mary was assumed into heaven, and the earliest they will come up with is the 4th century. Since the Bible was already completed in the 1st century what does it matter what some guy says in the 4th century?

It was already determined that Mary was not assumed since there is no such indication in the Scriptures, that is, the 66 books of the Bible. And there are verses that say nobody is in heaven yet, not even David a man after God's own heart (Acts 2.34).

The Roman Church which is the great harlot of religious Rome that makes drunk the nations with the wine of the wrath of her fornications (Rev. 14.8) claims to be the one true church and if you are not a member of, you are not saved and shall go to Hell.

The Roman Church claims to be the true church solely based on pedigree, but don't many cults use the same reasoning. Since the Bible nowhere requires pedigree then this is a false argument on their part.

Do not exceed the written word of God. "Do not go beyond what is written" (1 Cor. 4.6).

The true Church, of course, is that Church where 2 or 3 are gathered in His name, or more, who are born-again. Even if they reject biblocality they are still the Church because they are saved members of the body of Christ no matter how disorganized they are.

But it is God's will Christians abide in locality, that is, where Apostles today, directly chosen by God, work regionally to appoint Elders of a locality, and in turn, the Elders of a locality approve the Elders of many meeting places within a locality. The Church is not divided by congregation or denomination, but by locality only! The Church is never defined as a congregation or a denomination. Never forget this!

The Church is the pillar of truth, but that truth is founded on the word of God the 66 books of the Bible.

Paul spoke authoritatively the word of God which was written in his letters, that never exceeded what was formerly written, to complete the word of God in the 66 books.

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Tim. 3.16).

It says "Scripture" not Roman Church tradition.

"And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers" (1 Thess. 2.13).

"So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thess. 2.15).

This tradition flows from the word of God already written so this tradition gets added to complete the full word of God in 66 books.

Any conflict between tradition and word of God would indicate there is something wrong with man's tradition.

When James in his book talks about works, that we are saved by faith and works, he is not saying that we are saved by works. He is saying a person who has no works though saved by faith makes his faith as though dead since naturally works flow from faith. Our initial salvation is by faith, but to strengthen and grow in that faith is by works and faith increased.

A Christian can never lose salvation, for he is born-again, and those born-again "they shall never perish" (John 10.28). Whereas a Roman Catholic says he can lose salvation. These are two different faiths worshiping two different Christs.

The Roman Catholic has not given himself to the Jesus that once-saves-always-saved. Therefore, the Roman Catholic is going to Hell, because he forever rejects the Jesus that saves once and forever.

The Roman Catholic by his own strength attempts to keep himself saved because, admittedly, he does not give his life to the God who always keeps. Something can change where he can lose salvation and since that is dependent on him, it is by his own strength of self that he can renounce his faith and reject the Jesus he formerly gave himself to.

Whether this is a work or not in rejecting the Jesus he formerly gave himself, what is true is it was by his strengthen he renounces the Jesus he once believed in which is a good thing since now he is open to receiving Jesus Christ into his life for eternal life which is given once born-again.