What did Christ mean?

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by abcgrad94, Sep 16, 2011.

  1. abcgrad94

    abcgrad94
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    5,533
    Likes Received:
    0
    While on the cross, Jesus told Mary to "behold thy son" (John) and for John to behold his mother (Mary.) Over the years I've heard preachers say this meant for John to take care of Mary, but this doesn't make sense as Christ had other brothers and sisters. So what is the significance of this? Was he asking John to care for Mary just for that day? Is there some other meaning?
     
  2. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0

    Think that most non catholics woulod interprete this literally, that jesus was giving the physical care for mary over to john...

    catholics treat this as being 'spiritual", in that Jesus was 'giving over" to the Church His mother, so that she can be the "co matrix/co redempttress/Mother of God etc"

    basically, thisis part of the process they would use to get her elevated to being a "Goddess" 4th member of the Godhead!
     
  3. abcgrad94

    abcgrad94
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    5,533
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't believe in elevating Mary as equal with Christ or God, but it certainly seems odd to me that John was to care for her if she already had several other children who could do so. It does make me wonder why Christ said this.
     
  4. Scarlett O.

    Scarlett O.
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,836
    Likes Received:
    115
    All I've got is speculation.

    Doesn't the Bible say somewhere that Jesus' brothers didn't believe in Him until after He was resurrected (and/or ascended)? I'm too lazy to look it up right now.

    John was the only man standing there with Mary while Jesus died. Jesus' brothers weren't there. They didn't believe. The other disciples had scattered like the proverbial quail. They were scared that the same fate was in store for them.

    John was the only man showing any spiritual backbone to step up to the plate and stand by Mary at this horrible time in her life - the "piercing of her soul" as Simeon has prophecied to her in the Temple that day some 33 years before.

    All I know is that I would want someone like taking care of my elderly mother - even if he weren't blood kin.

    I think it's a matter of who is the most trustworthy person.
     
  5. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    IMHO, Jesus was, as the eldest son, fulfilling His earthly obligation to His mother to insure she was taken care of for the rest of her life.

    As Scarlett said, the brothers (sons of Joseph and Mary) weren't believers at the time. From what we know, they do become believers and are killed for their faith at some point.

    John lives to be a very old man and would surely have outlived Mary. So Mary was taken care of for the rest of her life.

    peace to you:praying:
     
  6. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your post made me wonder if possibly the reason John did not die as a young martyr was because God let him live long enough to care for Mary until her death. Just a thought and no way to verify it, but it made me think.
     
  7. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,165
    Likes Received:
    322
    Though He had other brothers and sisters, I think it meant he was to care for her permanently.

    It was His choice.

    John 19:27 Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home.



    HankD
     
  8. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    That was my thinking as well. Perhaps not "the' reason, but it could certainly be "one of" the reasons.

    In I Tim. 5:8, where Paul is speaking specifically of taking care of widows, he says, "But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household,he has denied the faith, and is worse than an unbeliever."

    Jesus was providing for His own family, imho, making sure Mary would be cared for for the rest of her life by being a part of John's household.

    Interesting to meditate on, I think.

    peace to you:praying:
     
  9. Gwyneth

    Gwyneth
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/gwyneth.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,137
    Likes Received:
    0
    Matthew 12


    I think that the Lord Jesus was indicating to John that he should have the same attitude as He did, in that, all men, women and children, who did Gods will were his ` family`, and as Mary was part of the `family` she should be given the care afforded to widows within that `family`.
     
  10. abcgrad94

    abcgrad94
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    5,533
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks, y'all. That gives me something to chew on.

    Interesting, too, that John was the one disciple who actually witnessed the trials, as Peter did not go in. Perhaps John was a "safe" choice for Mary as he had connections there. It's just a thought.
     
  11. Jerome

    Jerome
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    5,632
    Likes Received:
    45
    As Annsni reminded us in another thread, good Christian women are supposed to remarry if widowed before turning sixty:

    Amen. Now we know from the Reformed churches' Second Helvetic Confession that:

    So per the OP scripture, Mary, though still young, was never to remarry, but remain a chaste widow in the household of an apostle.

    Connect the dots people.
     
  12. drfuss

    drfuss
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,692
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think the Catholics use this scripture to support their sinless, ever virgin belief that Mary never had sex with Joesph and had no other children, so He was passing His responsibility on to John. They claim that his brothers, referred to in scripture, were really his expended family, i.e. cousins or perhaps sons from Joseph's previous wife that died.
     
  13. drfuss

    drfuss
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,692
    Likes Received:
    0
    Spelling correction.
     
  14. righteousdude2

    righteousdude2
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    10,468
    Likes Received:
    138
    Not Sure I Have an Answer, BUT...

    ....I know there will be a day when we can all sit down and asked Him the why's we could never wrap our minds around in this life. Won't that be glory!
     
  15. Zenas

    Zenas
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,640
    Likes Received:
    6
    The O.P. implies several questions.

    1. Why did Jesus make any provision at all for His mother if she had other children? I submit that she had no other children. Had there been other children this would not have been a matter that Jesus had any control over. Mary would have been theirs to care for by default. Taking this position clears up all those questions about this passage.

    2. Why did Jesus exclude his brothers from caring for Mary? Because they were not Mary’s children. Scarlet O has stated a much used hypothesis that the brothers of Jesus did not believe in Him at that time. We read in John 7 that His brothers did not believe somewhat earlier in His ministry and they may have still been nonbelievers at the time of Calvary. But we are talking about the Son of God. He absolutely knew that His brothers would be assembled with the apostles praying in an upper room in Jerusalem only 40 days later. I don’t think that could have been the reason.

    3. Why was John selected? The obvious reason, of course, is that he was there and the others weren’t. But there may have been a better reason. John and James may have been first cousins of Jesus. Scripture is not conclusive on the point, but leaves open that possibility. James and John are the only apostles of whom we know the names of both their parents.

    •Their father was Zebedee. Matthew 4:21; 10:2; Mark 1:19,20; 3:17; 10:35; Luke 5:10.

    •Their mother was Salome. We know this only by comparing the parallel passages of Matthew 27:56, "among whom was Mary Magdalene, along with Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee," and Mark 15:40, "And there were also some women looking on from a distance, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the Less and Joses, and Salome." It is evident that the mother of the sons of Zebedee in Matthew is the same woman as Salome in Mark.

    Now we examine whether Salome was the sister (sister in law perhaps) of Mary the mother of Jesus. Whether she was or not depends on whether John 19:25 refers to four women or to only three. "But there were standing by the cross of Jesus His mother, and His mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene." If this verse portrays four women, we can know with virtual certainty that James and John were first cousins of Jesus. This would explain the closeness of these apostles to Jesus, expecially John to whom He entrusted the care of His mother. The four women would be:

    1. Mary the mother of Jesus;

    2. Mary's sister (or sister in law), who must be Salome to be consistent with Matthew 27:56 and Mark 15:40;

    3. Mary the wife of Clopas;

    4. Mary Magdalene.

    Here is how the John account would correspond to the accounts given in Matthew and Mark:

    Women in Matthew: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.

    Women in Mark: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the Less and Joses, and Salome.

    Women in John: Mary Magdalene, Mary the wife of Clopas, Jesus' mother's sister, and Mary mother of Jesus.

    If John 19:25 portrays three women, they would be:

    1. Mary the mother of Jesus;

    2. Mary's sister (or sister in law), also named Mary who was the wife of Clopas;

    3. Mary Magdalene.

    If that is the case, there is no evidence that Salome was Mary's sister, and thus no evidence that James and John were related to Jesus. There is no consensus as to which is correct. The Syriac New Testament, known as the Peshito, clearly identifies four women. However, the the Greek New Testament renders the verse ambiguous, and we see this ambiguity in all commonly used English translations.

    4. Finally was Jesus asking John to care for His mother for just that one day? I don’t think so. The scripture text implies a permanent undertaking. Moreover, tradition holds that Mary accompanied John to Ephesus where they both lived out their lives.
     

Share This Page

Loading...