Pretended Debunking of Mariology — Debunked

I did not watch all of the video, the first 8 minutes or so, I just verified what the Mariological dogmas are he was polemising against. I missed, so far, the polemics he did under the way.

The Mary Cult
By God's Standard | 31 March 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO_sj94Blbg

8:07 OK, I believe:

1) the Perpetual Virginity
2) the Bodily Assumption
3) the Queenship in Heaven
and
4) the Immaculate Conception, i e sinlessness of Mary from the moment of Her being conceived.

Would you mind telling me, apart from "that's not in the Bible" (which is not necessarily true for each and even if true wouldn't make the dogma untrue) how these four "elevate Mary to the status of Jesus"?

[Spoiler, apart from "each of them is true of Jesus" — he didn't in the following minutes]

8:36 You probably refer to:

Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world, and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.
[Romans 5:12]

Is this "all" without exceptions? No, we know Jesus is an exception. One that's not explicitly mentioned in this verse.

Righteousness came by Jesus, but Jesus came by Mary. A reason why God might make Her the first fruit of receiving righteousness from Her Son.

In fact, "we have all sinned" is not even true when it comes to imitating Adam:

But death reigned from Adam unto Moses, even over them also who have not sinned after the similitude of the transgression of Adam, who is a figure of him who was to come. (verse 14 same chapter).

9:33 God's our Saviour by restoring us after we are fallen.

God's Her Saviour by preserving Her from taken any fall at all.

Both qualify as saving actions.

Why did She say those words? Because Elisabeth had just told Her She was sinless.

How did She tell that? By repeating the words of the angel, and adding in Jesus into them.

Here are the words from Luke 1:28 and 1:42 : blessed art thou among women. / Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.

So, to understand how these words say She was sinless, we need OT context, which She and Her cousin certainly knew very well.

Blessed among women be Jahel the wife of Haber the Cinite, and blessed be she in her tent. (Judges 5:24)
And Ozias the prince of the people of Israel, said to her: Blessed art thou, O daughter, by the Lord the most high God, above all women upon the earth. (Judith 13:23)

The angel had compared Mary to Jael and Judith. So, what exact Sisera or Holophernes had Mary killed?

There is one candidate, and Elisabeth confirmed that.

I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel. (Genesis 3:15)

So, Jael and Judith had killed their adversaries by head related wounds. When the "fruit of the womb" or "seed" of Mary is added to the equation, the Sisera or Holophernes narrows down to "the old serpent" ... Mary was crushing the head of the old serpent.

Elisabeth by the way confirmed the translation I gave of Genesis 3:15, St. Jerome's Vulgate and Catholic Bibles derived from it.

Because, Mary did not just become head-crusher of Satan when teaming up with Her Son through the pregnancy, She already was that before the pregnancy started. See the words of the angel again, Luke 1:

28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
31 Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and shalt bring forth a son; and thou shalt call his name Jesus.

If She wasn't yet pregnant in verse 31, She wasn't yet pregnant in verse 28 either. So, She was in and of Her own right head-crusher of the old serpent.

There is no way She could be that in a "physical force contest" way. The one exact way that is conceivable is, She had never sinned.

10:09 Bible and Tradition.

Tradition is not just extra information so to speak floating a bit freely, between different Bible verses, but it's also ... Traditional Exegesis of the Bible.

10:30 Perpetual Virginity, for instance:

This is the gate of the Lord, the just shall enter into it.
[Psalms 117:20]

Said of Her, according to traditional exegesis. Any other child would have been born in iniquity.

Or especially these verses:

Lift up your gates, O ye princes, and be ye lifted up, O eternal gates: and the King of Glory shall enter in.
[Psalms 23:7]

Lift up your gates, O ye princes, and be ye lifted up, O eternal gates: and the King of Glory shall enter in.
[Psalms 23:9]

Jesus however is this King of Glory.

10:38 No meaningful exegesis?

You mean non-traditional exegesis as if you came to the texts the first time?

Well, that's not what we should be doing for exegesis in the first place!

10:41 "Christian teachings should come from Scripture alone"

No. That is by the way a teaching that does not come from Scripture.

It does also not come from Tradition.

10:49 |Matthew 22:31] And St. Paul made a point about OT not being on all necessary levels it's own exegesis in II Tim 3:15. The OT Scriptures do not instruct to salvation all by themselves, but only by faith in Jesus Christ.

11:01 There are three things described as God breathed in the NT.

First of all, the Apostles:

When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost.
[John 20:22]

Scripture and Tradition are both derived from God by these.

11:23 "none of the bishops at Nicea believed" ...

Huge claim. St. Athanasius certainly believed the sinlessness. Within a few generations, St. Jerome believed the perpetual virginity.

What is your historic methodology for knowing what the bishops meeting at Nicea believed if the decisions at the council were not on the subject?