YouTube Transcript:
Catholic Apologists Abuse Scripture to Teach Mariology: How to find Jesus in the OT pt 15

Skip watching entire videos - get the full transcript, search for keywords, and copy with one click.

Video Transcript

Video Summary

Summary

Core Theme

This content warns against the dangerous abuse of biblical typology, particularly how it's used to introduce and justify doctrines not clearly found in Scripture, using Catholic Marian dogmas as a primary example of this flawed methodology.

Mind Map

Click to expand

Click to explore the full interactive mind map • Zoom, pan, and navigate

okay as you guys know I love typology I

love love love typology but it's

potentially really dangerous and I think

it'd be irresponsible of me if I didn't

in this long series on Jesus in the Old

Testament if I didn't just take at least

one message and just deal with the

dangers of typology so that's what we're

gonna do today because some people

radically abuse typology to spread false

teachings they use it to manipulate and

deceive people so that people think

something's biblical when it's not and

that's that's what I wanted to deal with

today I don't know if you've noticed but

I try to have careful protections as I'm

finding a type in the Old Testament you

know and sharing it with you as to what

it might be or how that relates to

Christ I have careful protections but

here's how this happens how typology is

abused that's we're gonna focus on today

and particularly we're gonna talk about

the Catholic Church because I think

they're not someone I want to pick on

but when it comes to Mary ology that's

the best example of abusing typology

that I've ever seen isn't the specific

teachings about Mary so we'll get into

that today here's how it happens right

when your church or the group that

you're involved with has teachings that

everyone in your group accepts but one

day you ask how do I find that in the

Bible and then you start looking and

searching and you go I can't find this

in the Bible I'm starting to worry that

this teaching may not be biblical may

not be true but you know false use of

typology rescues them by going into the

text and saying well it's not clearly

taught in Scripture but it's pictured

there and it's not that hard to find a

picture of whatever you want and to then

use it to reinforce what ends up being a

false teaching and then let's your

people think they're being biblical when

they're not and that's what we're gonna

talk about I'm so I have three rules

that I'm gonna mention first these are

three rules I use when I am trying to do

typology or find Jesus in the Old

Testament and the first rule is this and

I mentioned it several times so I know

you already know it it's no new theology

that's my first rule it's like I'm not

coming up with any new teachings there's

no new theology it's not like some new

revelation that I'm getting when I look

at a picture in the Old Testament see

typology starts with theology

and then looks for something in the Old

Testament that might reflect that

theology in a picture form it starts

with the New Testament clear teachings

and looks for Old Testament pictures we

do not start with extra biblical

teachings and then try to force that on

to the text of Scripture that would be

by nature not part of the Bible that's

not part of the biblical revelation so

you scriptures a completed Revelation

old to New Testament this is a completed revelation

revelation

that's why Jude in Jude 3 it says that

were to contend earnestly for the faith

that was once for all delivered past

tense to the Saints and the faith is the

things we believe so I'm to contend or

fight not physically but fight for the

faith that was once for all delivered

past tense to the Saints like if it's

not here if it's not part of that

ancient record then it wasn't part of

what was delivered so don't try to force

something into it in first Timothy 1:3

Paul tells Timothy that he charges

Timothy that that Timothy would go and

charge certain persons not to teach any

different doctrine so just nothing

different nothing different than what

they've already been taught so unless

it's apostolic unless it's ancient

unless it's really recorded in our New

Testament which is our only true record

of first century apostolic teachings

right there unless it's that then we're

not going to try to smash it into the

Bible and use typology as an excuse if I

can only find a doctrine in pictures and

I can't find it in clear teachings what

does that mean it's not a biblical

doctrine you're just finding analogies

for it you're not actually finding it

that's the problem so thy first rule is

no new theology my second rule as I do

typology and I encourage us to all to

have this rule is Jesus is the center of

typology it's all about Jesus Christ

John 5:46 Jesus says if you believed

Moses you would believe me for he wrote

of me he wrote of Jesus Moses wrote of

Jesus revelation 19:10 the angel says to

John that the testimony of Jesus is the

spirit of prophecy it's like the heart

of the whole thing it's all about Christ

in fact part 1 in this series on

typology if you want to look at that

that's got we did a whole thing on how

we established the existence of typology

and that it's all about Jesus Jesus is

the one we have the liberty to speculate

about because we already know there's

dozens and dozens

of types specifically told from the New

Testament that tell us that was Jesus

Jesus himself he's like the bronze

serpent yeah

like Moses if the bronze serpent so me

so like Jonah in the belly of the fish

so me and so he relates it to himself

that's clear

mary ology on the other hand is one

example that violates this because

there's no clear New Testament teaching

that gives you any types of Mary not

that I'd be bothered if it did I'd be

like that's cool

right like just any Catholics who may

watch this

we love Mary we nothing against Mary

there's no hatred for Mary here Mary is

super blessed but in the same sense as

Moses he gave them the bronze serpent

right generations later they started

worshipping the bronze serpent and so

then they just it was destroyed it

became an idol and so God indefinitely

you know he used Mary and there's a

wonderful way blessed among women and

all this sort of thing but generations

later they started to lift her up as an

idol basically and so they started

adding more than what was originally

there and that's that's a problem so

number three the the third rule so the

first one's no new theology second is

Jesus as the center and the third one is

the Bible guides us in identifying types

in the first place so I'm not just like

willy-nilly just totally making stuff up

the Bible guides us now I've done this

in this series I've tried to identify

just about every type I've given except

for maybe a couple examples we actually

have a specific New Testament teaching

that gives us a reason to find that type

and then we go to it and we look for

more details

so we've 14 hours of it so far this is

the fifteenth session in this series

finally after you do like the clear

types you can enjoy some conjecture

about some stuff that may not be clear

but you use the clear ones to help you

find the not clear ones because you

figure God's gonna be consistent in the

way he does typology and so that's

that's again the the third rule the

Bible guides us in identifying types so

if I don't see this type then I'm gonna

hold it much more loosely because the

New Testaments not giving it to me

clearly I'll hold it more carefully more

loosely and again no new teaching is

getting established here I'm just making

connections between the New Testament

teachings and Old Testament pictures

that's what I'm doing I'm not creating

new theology

so let me give you really quick as our

example here again I'm not trying to

pick on Catholicism it's gonna sound

that way to some people I really don't

mean it that way I love Catholics and

for that reason actually it's one reason

why I want to do this it's to try to

help there's for Marian dogmas now a

Dogma according to the Catholic Church

is something you have to believe in

order to be saved like it's it's if now

I reject these Marian dogmas now because

I reject it knowing about them and

intentionally rejecting them that's

considered a mortal sin and Catholicism

so I'm I'm condemned to hell that's

traditional Catholic views there are

some you know like Pope Francis today he

probably would not agree with that but I

don't think he agrees with a lot of

Catholic theology actually I think

there's a really weird thing going on

with the Pope nowadays but here's the

four dogmas and there's other doctrines

about Mary that they teach but you don't

have to accept but here's the four

dogmas you have to accept the first one

is that Mary the Immaculate Conception

of Mary and you might be thinking oh you

mean the virgin birth no no no this is

not about Jesus this is about Mary the

idea is that Mary was conceived and born

with no sin and Mary lived her whole

life without sinning that's the idea she

never sinned she now they'll they'll say

oh we're not saying that she doesn't

need Jesus's grace because they'll say

Jesus is Jesus is the one who made her

without sin and they'll often say things

like well if you could make your mother

without sin wouldn't you except that's

not how we make theology right like we

don't just go wouldn't you and therefore

it's true theologically like that's not

how we do it but Immaculate Conception

she was born and stayed throughout her

life without sin she never sinned the

second one is a perpetual virginity of

Mary we believe that Mary was a virgin

at the conception of Jesus Christ right

at the birth of Jesus Christ she had

never been with a man but their belief

is that she continued to be a virgin

throughout her entire life and therefore

the brothers and sisters and that's a

whole different video a whole different

topic and I'm not gonna get into that

but that's the belief right therefore

those are cousins and not really

relatives and Joseph and Mary were never

together so that's the perpetual

virginity of Mary and the number three

the divine maternity of Mary or the

phrase Mary is the mother of God that's

the terminology used the terminology

itself isn't so terrible actually

because it's actually about Jesus it's

about who is Jesus Jesus is God in one sense

sense

as a non-catholic I could say Mary's the

mother of God isn't the sense that Jesus

has got but what they're saying is that

she has a special role that continues as

the Divine Mother she's in a motherly

role forever and she intercedes for you

and you can pray to Mary and she can go

to Jesus being his mom and she can still

intercede and we'll get into that in a

second so number four the fourth one the

glorious assumption and this is

something you have to believe that Mary

either when she died or she never died

there's Catholics on both sides of that

issue but that she was bodily taken up

into heaven she didn't you know her tomb

was found empty also along with Jesus's

right so she was taken up into heaven

that's the belief about the Assumption

of Mary now converts to Catholicism

people especially who leave say a Bible

teaching environment and they become

Catholics they often struggle and

they're like how you know I'm accepted

you know Catholicism but I have a hard

time with these Marian doctrines dogmas

because I can't find them in the Bible

and this is a regular issue and then on

Catholic Answers and programs where you

can call in and talk to Catholic

apologists they're constantly getting

questions about these sorts of things so

they found ways of defending these

Marian doctrines and dogmas and the way

they do it is with typology and they say

ah maybe maybe it's not clearly taught

in New Testament but it's pictured in

the old and therefore it's true so we're

gonna unpack that let me let me what

we're gonna play clip number one I so

get that ready but this is a gentleman

named Scott Hahn Scott Hahn is a

Catholic apologist

the video I got this clip from has like

over two hundred thousand views he goes

around defending Catholicism he used to

be a non Catholic and now he's Catholic

he says he used to be anti-catholic I've

never been that but it seems like all

the converts always talk about how

hateful they were of Catholics and I was

like well maybe that was a problem but

yeah we're not on that page we love

Catholics we just think that the

theology of Catholicism is wrong but but

this is what he says about when he felt

trepidation and he was bothered because

when he was a new convert he couldn't

find mary ology in the bible so here was

his solution let's play that clip

like to share with you how I found the

Blessed Virgin Mary in Scripture

typology now typology is the thing I'll

play some more clips from him typology

is the thing this is how they get these

theologies from typology that's already

violating our first rule right because

typology is saying God you revealed this

in the New Testament now I'm looking for

a picture rather the Catholic approach

to Mary ology is to say it's not in the

New Testament

let's just go dig up a picture for it to

justify our belief in this thing and

that's a problem so let's share with you

three examples of this type ology we'll

play clip two this is what he says and

how he gets doctrines about Mary from

pictures supposedly of Mary in the Old

Testament now you might be thinking how

does this apply to Mary quite simply you

see if Jesus is the new Adam Mary is the

new Eve if Jesus is the new Moses then

Mary is the arc of the New Covenant

if Jesus is a new Solomon the son of

David then Mary is the clean mother of

the son of David the new is prefigured

by the old and the old is fulfilled and

the new and you can see why I am

concerned in doing a series on typology

that I might in my if I don't cover this

I might open the door for this sort of

thinking to people so let's deal with it

very plainly right he gives three types

and this is very normal this is normal

Catholics teaching here this is not like

Scott Hans not on his own here this is

the standard line for how they deal with

these issues when he says that Mary's

the new Eve he uses the new Eve to bring

in the doctrine of Immaculate Conception

Eve was born without sin therefore

Mary's born without sin when he says

that Mary is the new Ark they used this

to bring in the dogmas of Perpetual

virginity that she was see remained a

virgin I'll explain how in a minute

and also the bodily assumption they used

this analogy about the Ark to say see

that proves Mary was assumed in a

perpetual virgin then when he says that

she's the Queen Mother he uses this to

bring out the divine maternity and her

ability to intercede for us so you could

pray to Mary and she can go to Jesus on

your behalf because she's the Queen

Mother so it's really now most of you

guys are with me right that's sketch

like you just made up theology out of a

picture that you you say you found but

let's analyze these pictures more carefully

carefully

so let's first we'll talk about new Eve

is Mary the new Eve well here's how they

sell it they sell it like this explain

it like this they say that Jesus is the

new Adam Mary's the new Eve and they say

Jesus supposedly said this in John

chapter 2 that Jesus gave us this type

in John chapter 2 and it's in John 2:4

there they are at the wedding at Cana of

Galilee in John chapter 2 verse 4 and

Jesus said to her woman woman that one

word is gonna be the key here woman what

does this have to do with me my hour is

not yet come now Jesus when he says to

her woman this is a special term

referring to her as an equal because he

this is a special word there's a lot of

Greek mumbo-jumbo that comes out and

when I dig into sometimes Catholic apologetics

apologetics

but there's a special Greek word that

means equality and he's elevating her

position and then later on in John 19 26

he speaks to her again once at the

beginning of his ministry where he's

turning water to wine you know and then

at the end of his ministry when he's on

the cross he says to her again in John

19 26 when Jesus saw his mother and the

disciple whom he loved standing nearby

he said to his mother woman behold your

son woman behold your son that's that

word woman again so he's elevating her

again and then he said to the disciple

behold your mother and from that hour

that disciple took her to his own home

and that's also not when they do

typology but when they just say behold

your mother they're saying she's the

mother of all of all Christians based

upon that phrase with John which there's

several problems with that um but that's

a different video I don't wanna get into

that topic right now or talk about the

typology so first there's this the word

used in John 2:4 in John 19 26 they make

a lot of this I've heard it from

multiple different Catholic apologists

it's the word goon I you guys want to

know what gu9 means woman is it special

no is it normal yes like the English

word woman it's just normal you just say

it when you're talking to females this

was the normal and did Jesus even use it

in a special way no not even in the

Gospel of John did Jesus use this in a

special way in John 4 verse 21 he's

talking to the woman at the well and it

says Jesus said

woman goon aye woman believe me the hour

is coming when neither on this mountain

nor in Jerusalem will you worship the

father so Jesus talks to the one at the

well is he elevating her in some sense

is he putting her down no he's just

talking to her it was a normal

appropriate way of addressing a female

that was just what it was

in John 2015 after he says woman behold

your son to marry in John 2015 Jesus

says to a different Mary who's there

weeping at the tomb woman why are you

weeping whom do you seek supposing him

to be the gardener she says sir if you

have carried him away tell me where

you've laid him and I will take him away

so he referred this is in other words

this is just how Jesus talked to ladies

now sometimes in English if you call a

lady woman a woman it's actually comes

off like it's an insult that's not

what's happening here it's not an insult

it's just a normal appropriate form of

address for a lady that's all so they

make a lot out of this can you can you I

don't even unless you hear them say it

you don't even know how did you get the

new Eve out of Jesus saying woman plus

he says it to other ladies too and

they're not elevated in it or change in

any sense because of it that seems

really strange but there's more to it

and so I'm gonna play clip in a second

of how he does this but there's some

juggling that goes on here and what he

does is he says in John 1 other

Catholics do this too but Scott Hahn

kind of stands as representative of it

they say that there's the seven days of

creation theme attica Lee in in John 1

and John 2 and the moment when Jesus

says woman you know what is your concern

have to do with me when he says that

it's at the seventh day of the seventh

day of creation which symbolizes Adam

and Eve and Eve Adam naming Eve woman

according to Scott on the seventh day so

let's listen to this clip and then we'll

unpack it and explain all the things

that are wrong with it so let's couldn't

play it in John 2 verse 1 we read on the

third day there was a marriage at Cana

in Galilee and the mother of Jesus was

there so what does John mean when he

says on the third day there was a

marriage at Cana so the next day the

first time would be day two the next day

the second time would be day three

the next day the third time would be day

four on the third day would bring us

suddenly to the seventh day and what

happened in Genesis 1 and 2 on day 6 God

made man male and then female and in

Genesis 2 we discover he wakes up the

morning of the seventh day and what is

he spy bone of my bone flesh of my flesh

and he says woman and so there on the

seventh day is the sign of a marriage

covenant between the first Adam and the

first Eve so what did the early church

fathers discover in John 1 and 2 in the

beginning was the word light darkness

life creation all of that the next day

the next day the next day day 4 the

third day leading us up to day 7 and

there's this beautiful marriage a

wedding at Cana in Galilee what is the

first thing that Jesus says to his

mother woman what have you to do with me

that is a euphemism an idiomatic

expression in the Greek and the Hebrew

implying no disrespect whatsoever in

fact it implies mutuality so here on day

7 the new Adam coming to redeem the old

creation that the first Adam had plunged

into ruin and along with the new Adam

comes a new Eve and along with the new

Adam and the new Eve comes a mystical

marriage a mystical covenant the new

covenant and on that occasion he turns

water into wine this was the first sign

to reveal his glory ok so this is the

this is the reasoning though let me just

start by saying this is that clear

Bible teaching that you just heard it's

huge leaves based on implications of

adding up numbers and twisting the

actual original Genesis story along with

like I mean I read Genesis or John 2 and

I don't see an Adam theme for Jesus in

this passage so why would I even look

for an Eve thing for anybody else it's

not it's just not there but let me talk

about the issues okay so John 1 does

have a creation motif but it's earlier

in John 1 it's not later in John 1 right

in the

beginning was the word or was with god

right all things were made through him

and it talks about light and also there

is a creation motif but then it just

goes into story the story the actual

history of John the Baptist so in John

1:29 135 and 143 we have these next day

phrases and he tries to say that these

are all part of a creation motif in John

1 and John to here's the problem when

you actually look at them and you say

well if the seventh day is somehow

creation motif then I expect all the

other days to be related to right to

creation somehow but if you actually

just read the passage which is a lot for

us to read today so I'm just gonna skim

through it but um

okay first follow this he says after the

next day next day next day he says the

third day of John 2:1 is is actually the

seventh day symbolizing God making Adam

and Eve and then Adam wakes up when he

sees he even calls her a woman on day

seven according to Scott Hahn what does

Genesis say day six

why does Scott Hahn change it and make

an act Leggett says day seven because he

needs it to say that because when he

added up the days in John it was day

seven it doesn't fit the motif but he's

just gonna say it he does that a couple

times where he just honestly twists the

scripture maybe on purpose maybe not I

don't know I'm not gonna worry about

judging his heart but I will judge his

words and his words are not biblical so

in John chapter one verse 19 through 28

we get the first day in this what Scott

Hahn thinks is a creation motif right in

day one the the religious leaders

question John and he tells of the one

coming after him which is gonna be Jesus

Christ how is that related to creation I

have no idea neither does anybody else

in John 1:29 we have the phrase the next

day so here's day two and from 29 to 34

we have John the Baptist he identifies

Jesus as the one he's like behold the

lamb of God this is the guy I was

telling you about fest on the next day

how is that related to creation I don't know

know

neither does anybody else and the next

one John 135 242 that's day three it

says the next day again and now Andrew

and Simon they go on to follow Jesus

that two of his disciples have been

recruited now on the third day how does

that relate I don't know how's

everything to creation like where's the

creation motif

it's not it's in John one early part of

the book it's not here

then in John 1:43

we have the fourth day Fortin that's

where it says the next day again and now

we have Philip and Nathanael they join

Jesus and so now two more of the

disciples have joined Jesus how is that

relate to creation it doesn't in John

2:1 it says and then on the third day

and there's a debate is that three days

after the previous event in John and

that's how long it took them to go to

Galilee from where John was to get to

Galilee to Cana where this wedding was

or is it just like it was in the wedding

and it was the third day of the week

there's a debate on that their theology

needs it to be one thing maybe they're

right on that I don't know but it just

says on the third day there was a

wedding at Cana in Galilee and the

mother of Jesus was there Jesus was also

invited to the wedding with his

disciples when the wine ran out the

mother of Jesus said to him they have no

wine and jesus said to her woman what

does this have to do with me my hours

not yet come his mother said to the

servants do whatever he tells you and he

sees this as clear clear indication right

right

Jesus is the new Adam Eve yeah Mary is

the new Eve and there's like a marriage

covenant going on between Jesus and his

mom this is weird but this is this is

what happens when you're forced to find

your theology in pictures so you use

pictures that you create fabricate in

the New Testament and then you use

pictures that you you just force onto

the Old Testament there's a lot of

problems with this right Adam first off

he didn't wake up on the seventh day to

see Eve that's completely fabricated

that's not what Genesis reads God made

Adam and Eve both of them on the sixth

day according to the creation account so

they're made on day six in a story day

seven nothing else was made right Adam

experienced all those things on day six

is the idea he just changes it because

he has to make it fit somehow so it's

also far too vague and here you are

you're arguing from pictures to pictures

like that's not how we do the right like

I don't have to do this with the Trinity

right in the beginning was the word the

Word was with God the Word was God like

that's not just a picture like this is

the only way to understand this is the

Trinity it's forced upon us

so Scott Hahn also talks about even the

cursive marry even the cursive marry in

Genesis 3

according to Scott Hahn Eve and her seed

quote Eve and her seed will crush the

head of the serpent so this is the clip

we played it I played it by mistake

earlier I didn't specify but let's play

it one more time in case n we missed it

catch see if beyond the big words that

he uses if you can catch the actual

reasoning he's using because he's a big

beefy speaker but to me that's not

persuasive like I want to hear the

reasons you know so let's listen to that

that when biblical scholars apply

themselves to the terminology and the

imagery in genesis 3:15 where the woman

and her seed shall crush the head of the

serpent biblical scholars have come away

looking at that in its ancient

historical light and they see quote the

woman of genesis 3:15 is a prototypical

Queen Mother figure were Eve failed a

new evil succeed were the first Queen

Mother sinned a new Queen Mother will

arise in righteousness he quotes offers

Cazale Robert foo Yale our intense Jule

Miller and many others no doubt the

Queen Mother has her place here in

genesis 3:15 she is clearly the Queen Mother

Mother

from whom royal offspring will arise to

crush the Serpent's head so what we find

in the Davidic Kingdom is the

restoration of what God established in

the creation Kingdom way back in the

beginning I know some of you caught it

where he actually just changed the bible

genesis 3:15 does not say that the woman

and her seed will crush the head of the

serpent why do you think he would change

it to say that because he's trying to

smuggle in new theology so he just

changes it this is abuse of the text

like I'm not honoring God's Word genesis

3:15 he says i will put enmity between

you god speaking to the serpent between

you and the woman

and between your offspring and her

offspring he the offspring shall bruise

your head and you shall bruise his heel

not he and her it's a single agent

acting to destroy the serpent that's the

prophecy and this isn't even a picture

this is a prophecy pictures and

prophecies are not the same thing it's

one agent acting it's not the woman in

the seed and honestly I find this

shocking but the reason why he smuggled

that terminology in there why he changed

the wording there which knows who in the

audience there even noticed it when he

was teaching it the reason why he did

that is because they're also now it's

not it's not a Dogma but it's a doctrine

they're teaching and many Catholics

wanted to be a Dogma that marries

co-redemptrix that she actually is one

of the ones who helped redeem us and

participated in redeeming us not Jesus

alone but Mary and so that terminology

comes from that that push for that new

dogma that they really would like to

have some of them would like to help

so what theology did they get from this

analogy of

Adam as the new Jesus as the new Adam

and and Mary as the new Eve they say

that Mary was therefore without original

sin because Eve was made without sin

right they were made sinless therefore

Mary was made without sin and then and

she stays that way and she never sinned

because just as Eve disobeyed God Mary

obeyed God you know he was told don't

eat of the free Mary out of the tree

Mary was told you're gonna you're gonna

be with child over the Holy Spirit and

she she delighted in it and so she had

the responsive faith and and then

they'll even some of them would even say

that Mary doesn't die as a result of

this because just like Eve died so Mary

doesn't die but it's just smuggling

theology into places it doesn't belong

does the New Testament tell us who Eve

might foreshadow

is it Mary there is this great picture

between Adam and Eve about the husband

and a bride and out Jesus is clearly the

new Adam who is Jesus's bride is it Mary

as weird as that is even to think about

no it's the church the church is the

Bride of Christ and I have scripture for

this clear scripture not pictures

teachings like clear teachings Ephesians

5 the husband is to love his wife and

give himself for her just as Christ

loved the church he talks about marriage

and at the end of it he goes this is

profile mystery but I speak to you

concerning Christ and the church that

husband and wife is a picture of Jesus

and the church that's the idea that Adam

and Eve the picture of husband and wife

is a picture of Christ in His Church in

2nd Corinthians 11 12 he says I feel

divine jealousy for you since I've been

to excuse me I betrothed you to one

husband to present you as a pure virgin

to Christ now being presented as a pure

virgin to Christ if you're coming from

the Catholic mindset you're thinking

that's got to be Mary but the text is

clear this is about the church

revelation 19 in Revelation 21 talk

about the final marriage between the

bride and the which is the church and

Jesus that has finally come and

consistently throughout the New

Testament the bride is the church not

Mary if there is typology of Mary even

if you could say Mary with somehow this

new Eve how does that get you the

theology that they're giving us like

even if they did correctly identify the

type I'm not opposed there being a

typology of Mary I mean Mary is kind of

important it's kind of a big deal she's

definitely prophesied in Isaiah right

the virgin shall conceive so there's I

wouldn't be a problem with that the

problems when you try to create theology

out of that so Jesus is considered

here's our second example of typology

Jesus just consider the new Moses and

therefore Mary is the new Ark of the

Covenant right the Ark of the New

Covenant is I think how he put it I

found it a an article on National

Catholic Register which is a website

where they promote Catholic teachings

and and doctrines and things like that

and it the title of the article was

amazing parallels between Mary and the

Ark of the Covenant so they're trying to

draw parallels between the Ark we just

had last time we did the the temple and

how the Ark all represents Christ

they're saying that that's really about

Mary now you might ask how do you find

that in the New Testament and they find

it in Luke 1:35 Luke 1:35 in Luke 1:35

it says and the angel answered her the

Holy Spirit will come upon you and the

power of the most high will overshadow

you therefore the child to be born will

be called holy the Son of God that word

overshadow is Epis keas oh at least

that's that's the lexical form of the

word a pesky hace is another way too

put it but here's what the National

Catholic Register their website said

about this word and how they use it to

say that this proves this the Holy spirt

will overshadow you proves that she is

the new Ark they say and I quote the

Greek word for overshadow is Epis Kia

say which describes a bright glorious

cloud notice their description of this

Greek word

it describes a bright glorious cloud it

is used with reference to the cloud of

Transfiguration of Jesus in Matthew 17:5

mark 9 7 and Luke 9 34 and also has

connection to the Shekinah glory of God

Exodus 24 40 and first Kings chapter 8

but if you actually look up this word

Epis kaizo our APIs key ah say in a

Greek dictionary you find out that it

doesn't mean anything bright or glorious

do you know what it means right write

this down this important right because

you're gonna find when you look up Greek

words it you they usually mean the same

thing as they were already translated to

mean in your Bibles

it means overshadow that's all it means

they're just it's just Greek

gobbledygook it's gobbledy Greek is this

this is not people try to sometimes

manipulate others saying oh in the Greek

there's a special thing here and usually

that's not the case for instance the

same author of Luke 1:35 the same guy

wrote the book of Acts right Luke wrote

acts as well and in acts 515 he uses the

exact same word and he's talking about

Peter and how Peter was traveling and

they wanted Peters shadow to fall on

them that they might be healed let me

read the passage and ask yourself if you

think this means a quote bright glorious

cloud so acts by 15 so that they even

carried out the sick into the streets

and laid them on cots and mats that his

Peter came by at least his shadow might

fall on some of them obviously Peter is

being followed by a bright and glorious

cloud no that's just not what it means

like this is just it's it's not true

it's just not true but from that word

over shadow they say that relates to the

to the tabernacle by the way the word

that word is never used related to the

tabernacle in the Septuagint the Greek

translation of the Old Testament I look

forward I can't find it

it's its other words that are used

I won't get into all the details there

but but basically this is fabricated

this is a fabricated connection it's not

established in the text but then the

same article goes on to list for

connections between the arc and Mary to

try to establish that she really is a

picture the arc is a picture of Mary so

I'll give the four connections and

they're all from second Samuel six and

Luke chapter one so Luke chapter one

second Samuel six these two looked at

together are supposed to give us the

idea that Mary is this this Ark of the

Covenant so in second Samuel six nine

when the Ark is coming to David and he's

receiving it after he's become King he's

very happy right he's very excited about

the Ark and it says in chapter six verse

9 of second Samuel and David was afraid

of the Lord that day and he said how can

the Ark of the Lord come to me now

parallel out to what happened when

Elizabeth found out that Mary was coming

to her in Luke chapter 1 verse 43

Elizabeth as Mary's pregnant Elizabeth

says and why is this granted to me that

the mother of my lord should come to me

and it's the phrase come to me that's

highlighted here right David's like how

could the Ark of Lourdes come to me and

Elizabeth says how could the mother of

my lord come to me mother of the Lord

arkad the Lord

she's the Ark right the Ark's of

container she's containing Jesus Christ

right the the all the things that were

in the ark represent of Jesus she's

holding Jesus this is the idea the

problem is second samuel in context

doesn't look like a very good picture

the reason why-y-y david says this how

can the art come to me is because who'sa

just touched the ark and was slain and

David's David's not welcoming the ark

he's rejecting it now he's not like

Elizabeth oh this is so wonderful that

no he's like no I can't go into me and

he doesn't accept it into his home or

into his palace or into anywhere he'd

want it to go

let me read it to you in in context 2nd

samuel 6 verses 5 through 11 let's read

the whole passage because if we have a

consistent type it should have as I've

said before multiple points of

Correspondence that are consistent if

we're gonna call it a time so 2nd Samuel

6 5 and David and all the house of

Israel we're celebrating before the Lord

with songs and lyres and harps pliars

the Lear's the the instrument not like

people telling lies that would be a

weird way to celebrate and harps and

tambourines and castanets and cymbals and

and

they had common to the threshing floor

of nakhon Musa put out his hand to the

Ark of God and took hold of it for the

oxen stumbled and the anger of the Lord

was kindled against Isaiah and God

struck him down there because of his

error and he died there because the ark

because the Ark of God and David was

angry because the Lord had broken out

against use' and that place is called

Peres Souza to this day and David was

afraid of the Lord that day and said how

can the Ark of the Lord come to me and

let's just keep reading the next verse

so David was not willing to take the Ark

of the Lord into the City of David and

what is that parallel with Elisabeth

somehow how can you come to me you can't

go away like you see he doesn't she

doesn't reject Mary that the connection

doesn't doesn't hold

but David took it aside to the house of

obed-edom the get tight now if Elizabeth

had House Mary in somebody else's house

maybe it would be a better case for a

connection there and the Ark of the Lord

remain in the house of obed-edom the

gittite three months and the Lord

blessed Ovid Edom in all his household

so what's the connection between Mary

and Elizabeth it's literally just the

phrase come to me that's the whole

connection there's a second connection

that they'll try to give by the way when

Jesus came to John to be baptized what

did John say in Matthew 3:14 John says I

need to be baptized by you and do you

come to me so here's a come to me

pastors that's not and Mary's not there

so I don't know what they do with that

one number two the second connection

that this website gives is that

Elizabeth was loud and the people of God

were loud when the Archy came and

there's these two verses so second

Samuel 6:15 so David and all the house

of Israel brought up the Ark of the Lord

with shouting and with the sound of the

horn and then Luke 142 Elizabeth she

exclaimed with a loud cry blessed are

you among women and blessed is the fruit

of your womb there's a problem with this

for one it's just loudness that's not

really all that specific I feel like we

need a lot more points of compatibility

to call it a type I wouldn't care if it

was a type if Mary's gonna be the Ark

fine Lord you can make her they are

doesn't mean she's born without sin and

she is physically assumed into heaven

like that's just wrong but this is

actually three months later now so what

we want to do is parallel David greeting

the ark with Elizabeth's greeting of Mary

Mary

except within the parallel they're

bouncing around the time line of second

Samuel 6 so at first it's David

rejecting the ark and then three months

later he goes okay let's bring the Ark

back let's let's make sacrifices and

bring the ark in that's when they're

shouting and that and Elizabeth she

created her at the first time so and

there's no blessing it was just loud

miss it's just paralleling loudness

which seems a little weak to me and then

the third connection is leaping leaping

in second Samuel 6:14 when three months

after ooza then they bring the Ark in

and David danced before the Lord with

all his might and David was girded with

a linen ephod King David leaping and

dancing before the Lord that's also 1st

chronicles 15 29 so we haven't dancing

in 2nd Samuel in first chronicles we

have the word leaping specifically Luke

144 here's what Elizabeth says for

behold when the voice of your greeting

came to my ears the baby in my womb

leaped for joy so this is again three

months later these are two separate

events they're trying to smash them

together to create a type but the

dancing is not Elizabeth is it if

Elizabeth's supposed to be David then

why is John dancing is John David well

then Elizabeth was the one shouting and

saying come to me so the whole type is

just kind of kind of like patchwork

smashed together it's not really how we

like to do this sort of thing and then

the fourth connection the final

connection that they say these are

remarkable connections best examples of

how Mary's the Ark of the New Covenant

is the the term three months so second

Samuel 6:10 so David was not willing to

take the Ark of the Lord into the City

of David but David took it aside to the

house of obed-edom the get tight and the

Ark of the Lord remain in the house of

obed-edom they get tight three months

now of course all the other parallels

are parallels two and three the second

and third one they come after all this

but they're saying that it's just all

mish-mashed Luke 1:39 actually Luke 156

Mary remained with her about three

months and then returned to her home so

Mary stayed with Elizabeth for three

months there's a 3-month connection

between the two passages here's my problem

problem

first Elizabeth is David David then

Elizabeth is all Israel shouting then

she's David again in the third

example or the second example I should

say then John is David when he's leaping

then Elizabeth is obed-edom when she's

bringing the arc to her house because

that's where he the arc stayed was Oh

buddy Tim's house not David's house so

it it just doesn't make sense like the

type doesn't hold together very well

it's not well constructed but even if it

was it doesn't give you the theology

they get listen to this here's a quote

from that same article on ax in C

fitting and proper for Mary the arc of

the New Covenant Theotokos bearer of God

who had the sublime honor of carrying

God incarnate in her womb to be

exceptionally perfect exceptionally

perfectly holy all this gymnastics is

done to say that Mary is holy and

sinless that's the idea she's without

sin she's without sin this is how they

get theology from this another article

on Catholic com call which I'll quote

actually I've been quoting from the same

article Catholic calm there's NC

description for people who want to look

at this stuff but here's this this

article they quote it like this they say

God was very specific about every exact

detail of the arc I will agree there

right it was a place where God Himself

would dwell God wanted his words

inscribed on stone housed in a perfect

container covered with pure gold eat

within and without how much more would

he want his word Jesus to have a perfect

dwelling place if the only begotten son

were taken were to take up residence in

the womb of a human girl would he not

make her flawless right like wouldn't he

that's not how we do things a lot less

everybody won't he save everybody I mean

wouldn't he look there's no how you do

theology guys like that's reckless and

dangerous theology so it doesn't argue

for a New Testament truth it just starts

with Catholic theology tries to push it

into patchwork pictures in the Old

Testament so here's some problems the

ark is actually not filled with God

where was the presence of God in the

temple or the tabernacle above the ark

outside of it in between the cherubim

whether wings outstretched so the ark is

not filled with the presence of God

that's not the case the tabernacle in

the very passages they quote I don't

read them to you for the sake of time

but in the Ezekiel and or sorry Exodus

in particular the tabernacle gets this

cloud covering it but not specifically

the ark so they're saying she's the ark

but it's the tabernacle that has the

covering not specifically the Ark and

the tabernacle as we understand

represents Christ the tabernacle was the

dwelling not the Ark God's Spirit was

above and outside of the ark it was

behind the veil it was not under the lid

there's a bit just the difference there

and this breaks the picture apart for us

Mary's never called the Ark in the New

Testament not even once

at any point which would be interesting

if she was then we could look at these

pictures you know and this of course

creates a new theology one Catholic

apologist in a debate I saw on the

Marian dogmas a guy named Peter Williams

he says that because you wouldn't use

the ark to store ordinary things after

storing the tablets in the manna and the

and the rod that budded you would never

put normal stuff in there

therefore Mary wouldn't be used for

ordinary births and child carrying after

carrying Jesus so you see why they want

to establish this connection between

Mary and the Ark is to import the

perpetual virginity of Mary into the

text when it's really never there

they also import the bodily assumption

with this Ark analogy because in

revelation 11 19 it says that John saw

the Ark of the Covenant in heaven so

Mary's the Ark so Mary must have been

taken up into heaven bodily assumed this

is this is offensively bad theology is

what it is the third one and the final

one will do I think is the final one

will do now is that Mary's the Queen Mother

Mother

she's the Queen Mother and this is

sounds really good until you look at the

details and don't get me wrong hey man

if you show me in the scripture that

says that Mary can intercede for me

guess what I'm gonna do I'm gonna pray

to Mary

I trust God's Holy Word okay but this is

the problem is that when some some of

the Catholic teachings when you try to

get people who care about the scriptures

and I want it in the Bible the kind of

people you know when you try to get us

on board you start doing weird things

so let's well we'll play clip 7 in a

second here but Solomon Solomon

son of David Scott Hahn says and

therefore Jesus is the ultimate son of

David and just as Bathsheba with

Solomon's mother the Queen Mother so

Mary's the ultimate Queen Mother and

let's listen to listen for the reasoning

listen for how he gets you there and

listen for the Catholic teaching about

her interceding for you yeah I know

we'll talk about it but what's so

interesting to me would I recall vividly

studying as a Protestant focusing upon

the biblical record of David's Kingdom

what really jumped off the page was a

passage in first Kings chapter 2 verse

19 for there we see Solomon's mother

going into the Royal Court the Royal

chamber where everybody vows before King

Solomon now that he is newly crowned

freshly anointed when Bathsheba went to

King Solomon to speak to him on behalf

of Solomon's half-brother a Tunisia the

King rose to meet her

and he bowed down to her and then he sat

on his throne and had a throne or a seat

brought for the Kings mother and she sat

on his right hand and from that position

at the Kings right hand she gave to him

royal petitions not just from royal

subjects but from his own brethren who

preferred to go through his mother

rather than going directly to Solomon

himself so this sounds like this was a

normal thing right Bathsheba it was just

known even his brothers plural brothers

brethren would go through Bathsheba

rather than to Solomon and this was

considered accepted what is he implying

that that a Catholic person who says I

just like praying through Mary don't

worry even Solomon's brothers went

through Bathsheba but let's look at that

passage a little more carefully and see

is this is this really saying about

Sheba interceded does this relate to

Mary is it saying that Mary Anne

received and that's okay well let's look

at it let's pretend that this is a

picture about Mary so first Kings

chapter 2 verse 13

just so you know a Tunisia was someone

who wanted to steal the throne from

Solomon it's not considered a generally

good thing to do and that's the context

so first Kings 2:13 then a denizer the

son of hagath came to Bathsheba the

mother of Solomon and she said do you

come peacefully

he said peacefully then he said I have

something to say to you she said speak

he said you know that the kingdom was

mine and that all Israel fully expected

me to reign however the kingdom is

turned about and become my brother's for

it was his from the Lord so nice pious

language this is from the Lord and now I

have one request to make of you do not

refuse me she said to him speak and he

said please ask King Solomon he will not

refuse you to give me Abishag the

Shunammite as my wife this woman who

would lain with David to warm him in

this rather interesting story makes us

all feel slightly uncomfortable like why

did you guys do that but but anyway if

he wants Abishag verse 18 Bathsheba said

very well I will speak to you for the

king so here's the passage where that

Scot refers to where she goes and

intercedes for Solomon's brethren well

one brother one time verse 19 so

Bathsheba went to King Solomon to speak

to him on behalf of a tour nijah and the

King rose to meet her and bowed down to

her and she sat on his throne and he had

a seat brought for the kings he sat on

his throne excuse me that was that would

be good Catholic the house right there

he sat on his throne and had a seat

brought for the king's mother and she

sat on his right then she said I have

one small request to make of you do not

refuse me and the king said to her make

your request my mother for I will not

refuse you and that is where all

Catholics stopped reading the passage

because if you keep reading it kills the

picture but so far oh yeah you can go to

Mary and she can influence Jesus for you

and it's somewhat offensive to me to be

honest to think like that but verse 21

she said here's the request let Abishag

the Shunammite be given to a denizer

your brother as his wife King Solomon

answered his mother anything you you

want mother I will always bow to you

because you're my great divine queen

mother no what does he say to her King

Solomon answered his mother and why do

you ask

Abishag the Shunammite for a Tunisia ask

for him the kingdom also for he's my

brother and on his cider abiathar the

priest and Joab the son of zeruiah so in

other words this is a coup he's just

trying to steal a throne and he's minute

using you to manipulate me in order to

get me to do that and he's already

promised I'll do whatever you want mom

I'll do it

but then after finding out what she

wants he says then the verse 23 then

King Solomon swore by the Lord saying

God do so to me and more also if this

word does not cost a de nyjah his life

now therefore as the Lord lives who has

established me and placed me on the

throne of David my father and who has

made me a house as he promised a tunisia

shall be put to death today in the

single example we have that's meant to

be an example of Mary interceding for us

the guy who's doing the intercession

through the picture of Mary is killed

for it this is not good typology right

this is not consistent biblical typology

I say please compare it to what I've

given you the last 14 weeks you know

this is not good biblical typology hon

acts like this is an office that was

established that was healthy and good

the text seems to indicate that her her

intercession was rejected it was

manipulative and it was the wrong way of

doing things no the result all you have

to do is read read the whole passage

right he missed quota genesis 3:15 he

missed supplies this passage right here

he just seems to consistently he takes

John and does all kinds of weird

gymnastics with John 1 and 2 to try to

say it's a seven-day creation motif and

all this stuff just read the passage and

you'll be safe you will be safe there's

Paste YouTube URL

Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

Get Our Chrome Extension

Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.

Add to Chrome — Free

Works with YouTube, Coursera, Udemy and more educational platforms

Get Instant Transcripts: Just Edit the Domain in Your Address Bar!

YouTube

←

→

↻

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YoutubeToText

←

→

↻

https://youtubetotext.net/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YouTube TranscriptPreparing your results…

YouTube Transcript:Catholic Apologists Abuse Scripture to Teach Mariology: How to find Jesus in the OT pt 15