This posting represents another in my ongoing discussion with a gentleman by the name of Arthur. He takes the position that Mary didn’t believe in Jesus’ ministry and withdrew her support for him. While I believe it was difficult for Mary to understand all that was occurring and everything that was said about her Son, I don’t believe she was unsupportive. She did what she could. It would be wrong of us to expect more than that from her. Other posts in this discussion can be found HERE, HERE and HERE. Below you will find Arthur’s words in bold italic to distinguish them from my replies.
Arthur asked earlier concerning Mary: “…why did she not support Jesus in His religious life.” To which I replied: “You are presuming an understanding for Mary that God’s people are given after Pentecost due to the Holy Spirit being within us. She could understand only as much of the Scriptures that her father had correctly taught her. She received no such teaching in the synagogues.”
Is it really being presumptuous when I say that Mary knew from the angel that her son was directly from God?
No, that would not be presumptuous of you. However, you asked why she didn’t support Jesus in his religious life. I assume you are speaking of his public ministry. First of all, the text never claims she didn’t believe Jesus was doing just as he should. You are presuming this and the text does not support your understanding in Mark 3 or elsewhere. But, assuming your argument that she did disbelieve Jesus message, all she knew was what she was told by those who taught her concerning what to expect of the Messiah.
Moses erred and was not permitted to come into the Promised Land. Samson erred and his strength was taken away. An unnamed prophet erred by believing a false prophet and was slain (1Kings 13). You cannot expect Mary, who did not have the Holy Spirit within her, to understand the Scriptures apart from what she had been told they said. Neither you nor I know the complete story behind the incident in Mark 3:31. However, Mark 3:21 is in the context of the Pharisees and scribes telling the people that Jesus cast out demons by the lord of demons. It was because of the leaders’ testimony that Jesus’ friends believed Jesus was beside himself, and presumably they told Jesus’ family. What were they to think? Everyone was saying—i.e. the Jewish leadership and Jesus’ friends—that Jesus was saying and/or doing things that gave the impression that he was having what we might call today a ‘nervous breakdown.’ What would you expect of Mary? Most women were unschooled in the first century. She was taught to trust her religious leaders. She had no reason to doubt Jesus’ friends, and she hadn’t spoken with her Son yet. It seems to me, you may be trying to give her a modern education and modern female liberties, not to mention a post-Pentecost spiritual maturity. She had none of these.
I made the statement concerning Mary: “…and she certainly wouldn’t want to believe that her Son, who was supposed to be the Messiah, was going to be crucified.”
Forgive me here, but is it not yourself who is making the presumption here…
Luke 1:46-48
And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
Are you saying that by this testimony of Mary that she knew Jesus would be crucified? If so, I certainly don’t see it. No one believed the Messiah would be crucified—none of the Apostles, not his family, not John the Baptist, not anyone. Jesus told the disciples he would be crucified, but the idea was so foreign to their understanding of what the Messiah was to do, that they simply didn’t understand. If the disciples, whom Jesus specifically taught he would be crucified didn’t understand, how could Mary of whom we have no record of her being taught such things?
Concerning John’s astonishment that Jesus was the Messiah (John 1:31, 33)…
I’m sure that John’s parents must have mentioned to John the amazing events which took place while in the womb. I only use my common sense to indicate, why should John be astonished?
False doctrine has tremendous power. It captures the mind, if believed, so that one cannot see the truth it hides. The false doctrine must first be proved false, before the truth can be understood. No one in Israel believed the Messiah would suffer, be rejected and be crucified. Anything that Jesus might have shared with John about these things while they were growing up would have been too difficult to believe, because of the prevailing false doctrines concerning the Messiah. Thus, when John saw Jesus coming and the sign from heaven come down upon him—he was astonished.
I said: “I think John really thought that, when the Messiah would come along, he would have been able to pick him out without the help of the vision”
Or perhaps he had doubts about what his parents had been telling him?
We can presume many things but whatever we believe should agree with the context of Scripture, and the text says that John would be great in the sight of God. If this is how God saw John, then we need to adjust our beliefs so that they agree with what God says.
It is not my intention, to cause hurt or to upset anyone, or even to try and disprove someone’s faith.
My view is this, if one is a Hindu, then be the best Hindu you can be, if one is Catholic, Protestant, Muslim or Jew, my advice would always be the same. Be the best in your religion whatever your faith and set the highest of standards. Aim for God’s heart and love your brothers/sisters whatever faith or no faith.
I don’t consider anything you have stated was meant to hurt me or anyone else. As far as this debate/discussion is concerned, it is to seek the truth. While I do not wish to make any disparaging remarks against anyone’s faith, I do believe truth is truth. I do not endorse the modern social doctrine of political correctness. Every faith cannot be correct concerning its understanding of God because all contradict one another. If any are correct, it can be only one. There is such a thing as absolute truth. The “That is your truth and this is my truth” doctrine is a false doctrine that takes away everyone’s responsibility to the truth. That said, Jesus claimed “No one can come to the Father but by me!” (John 14:6), and no one even knows the Father except Jesus and he to whom Jesus reveals the Father (Matthew 11:27). If this is true, then none of the other faiths is able lead one to the true God. It is through Jesus alone that we are saved (Acts 4:10-12).
Smoodock's Blog 
7 responses to “Did Mary Believe in Jesus’ Ministry?”
Hi Eddie
Quote from Eddie
“I assume you are speaking of his public ministry. First of all, the text never claims she didn’t believe Jesus was doing just as he should”
Yes, I was speaking about His public ministry. If we look at the text…
Luke 11: 27-29
And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. 28But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.
Someone is saying, bless your Mother, and Jesus replies, rather bless those that hear God’s word. Wasn’t His Mother hearing God’s words?
Also as explained in the video, In Mark 3:21 we read that the family of Jesus thought Jesus was out of His mind.
Mark 3:31-35 is even clearer….
There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him. 32And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee. 33And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren? 34And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 35For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.
Here Jesus is saying directly to His Mother, whoever is doing the will of God is my Mother.
Quote from Eddie
“But, assuming your argument that she did disbelieve Jesus message, all she knew was what she was told by those who taught her concerning what to expect of the Messiah”
All she knew…? An angel told her. She has a virgin birth. She must have heard the testimonies of Zechariah and Elizabeth. Added to this were the actual miracles of Jesus, and yet you still can say; “all she knew….”??
Quote from Eddie
“You cannot expect Mary, who did not have the Holy Spirit within her, to understand the Scriptures apart from what she had been told they said.”
Luke 1: 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
Quote from Eddie
“Neither you nor I know the complete story behind the incident in Mark 3:31. However, Mark 3:21 is in the context of the Pharisees and scribes telling the people that Jesus cast out demons by the lord of demons. It was because of the leaders’ testimony that Jesus’ friends believed Jesus was beside himself, and presumably they told Jesus’ family. What were they to think? Everyone was saying—i.e. the Jewish leadership and Jesus’ friends—that Jesus was saying and/or doing things that gave the impression that he was having what we might call today a ‘nervous breakdown.’ What would you expect of Mary? Most women were unschooled in the first century. She was taught to trust her religious leaders. She had no reason to doubt Jesus’ friends, and she hadn’t spoken with her Son yet. It seems to me, you may be trying to give her a modern education and modern female liberties, not to mention a post-Pentecost spiritual maturity. She had none of these.”
I say again…
All she knew…? An angel told her. She has a virgin birth. She must have heard the testimonies of Zechariah and Elizabeth. Added to this were the actual miracles of Jesus, and yet you still can say; “all she knew….”??
Quote from Eddie
“Are you saying that by this testimony of Mary that she knew Jesus would be crucified? If so, I certainly don’t see it. No one believed the Messiah would be crucified—none of the Apostles, not his family, not John the Baptist, not anyone. Jesus told the disciples he would be crucified, but the idea was so foreign to their understanding of what the Messiah was to do, that they simply didn’t understand. If the disciples, whom Jesus specifically taught he would be crucified didn’t understand, how could Mary of whom we have no record of her being taught such things?”
No, I was not saying that Mary knew that Jesus was going to be crucified. I think with respect that you have missed the whole point of this discussion. If John had said yes, he was the Elijah, the people would surely have accepted that (they did think that maybe he was even the Messiah). Upon accepting John as Elijah, they are now able to look for the Messiah, Jesus. If they had accepted Jesus, John/Elijah would have been called ‘Great in the kingdom’, The people would be doing what God wanted them to do (Believe in Him, whom He has sent), Jesus would not have been crucified as Paul states in 1 Cor. 2:8.
And Jesus would not have had to cry over Jerusalem with such desperate tears, or ask God to forgive them while on the cross. Also the kingdom would not have had to be taken away from them, to give to another nation. Finally, the Kingdom of Heaven on earth would have happened, as Jesus had taught at the beginning of His ministry.
Quote from Eddie
“False doctrine has tremendous power. It captures the mind, if believed, so that one cannot see the truth it hides. The false doctrine must first be proved false, before the truth can be understood. No one in Israel believed the Messiah would suffer, be rejected and be crucified. Anything that Jesus might have shared with John about these things while they were growing up would have been too difficult to believe, because of the prevailing false doctrines concerning the Messiah. Thus, when John saw Jesus coming and the sign from heaven come down upon him—he was astonished.”
Actually, I had been thinking more of the Disciples than of John, they were with Jesus far more than John ever was. This leads me to another point, why was John, not a Disciple of Jesus? Why did John’s Disciples follow John, and not the greater leader Jesus?
Quote from Eddie
“We can presume many things but whatever we believe should agree with the context of Scripture, and the text says that John would be great in the sight of God. If this is how God saw John, then we need to adjust our beliefs so that they agree with what God says.”
Yes, that IS how God saw John, but John did not stay great. Jesus said that John was Elijah…
Mathew 11:14-15
1nd if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
John denied those words of Jesus.
Malachi shows that there was a choice. Israel would suffer the curse IF the hearts were not turned to the children. Meaning, there was two possible outcomes for Israel. John had free will, he could choose to accept his role as Elijah, or deny he was Elijah. Are you removing John’s free will?
Isaiah predicted that Israel would be the head, OR Israel would become the tail. Depending on faith (free will).
God Bless.
Arthur
Greetings Arthur,
Concerning Luke 11:27-29…
Someone is saying, bless your Mother, and Jesus replies, rather bless those that hear God’s word. Wasn’t His Mother hearing God’s words?
This is a conclusion you are drawing from the text, but the text does not say Mary wasn’t listening to God. The fact is Jesus agrees with the woman says: “Yes…” (Mary is and should be blessed), but “…rather blessed are they…” In other words, Mary’s blessing in bearing Jesus pertains to this life alone, rather are they blessed who hear and keep God’s word, because their blessing pertains to life in the Kingdom. Jesus was pointing this woman’s eyes to the Kingdom, rather than this life.
Also as explained in the video, In Mark 3:21 we read that the family of Jesus thought Jesus was out of His mind.
Mark 3:31-35 is even clearer….
Actually, the speaker in the video is confused about these Scriptures. Matthew 3:21 refers to Jesus’ friends believing Jesus was beside himself. Why? Because the leaders of their community were saying Jesus had a demon. Apparently, Jesus’ friends went and told Jesus’ family whom we see in Mark 3:31-35. Nothing is said about how they understand Jesus’ condition. They do understand the situation had turned dangerous. Jesus and those with him could have been beaten or stoned. The Jewish leaders had tried to do this on a number of occasions. The family was there perhaps to rescue Jesus from a dangerous situation, or to find out for themselves, if what was being claimed was true. We may speculate, but the text does not make the reason for their presence clear enough to be definitive.
Here Jesus is saying directly to His Mother, whoever is doing the will of God is my Mother.
Actually, this is not true. Jesus’ mother and brethren were outside the building. They couldn’t get near Jesus, so they called for him from outside. Jesus couldn’t hear them and had to be told that his family was calling him. They could not hear one another.
Concerning this Scripture, Jesus was preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom. To be a family relative in this life, one needs to be related through blood. Jesus was pointing out that family relationships in the Kingdom has to do with those who were obedient to God, meaning believe on him whom he sent (John 6:29), something concerning which his audience (the Jewish leadership) was not doing.
All she knew…? An angel told her. She has a virgin birth. She must have heard the testimonies of Zechariah and Elizabeth. Added to this were the actual miracles of Jesus, and yet you still can say; “all she knew….”??
I was **assuming** your argument to be true. I said that in my reply. I do not believe your point of view is true, but I **assumed** it was for the sake of the argument. Then I pointed out it would be wrong to take such a stand that you do take. You had implied that Mary was not believing Jesus. For an observant Jew in the 1st century to disbelieve Jesus would mean he was comparing what Jesus was saying with what he understood to be true in the Scriptures (if he was sincere). I was pointing out how Mary would have had to have come to understand the Scriptures enough to disagree with what Jesus claimed.
Concerning Mary’s not having the Holy Spirit to understand the Scriptures for herself…
Luke 1: 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
You are comparing apples with oranges. We agree that Mary receive a heavenly apparition and that Jesus birth was miraculous. This says nothing about Mary’s ability to understand the Scriptures.
Concerning Mark 3:21-35…
Luke 1: 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
Are you presuming to know all the details of what occurred here, including knowing the hearts of Jesus’ physical family? Let me point out again that Jesus was in a hot debate with his enemies. His enemies, who happened to be the Jewish leadership, were claiming he had a demon and this is how he was performing miracles. Mary was not in a position to see or hear Jesus. All of what Jesus had to say was for the benefit of those who **could** hear him. Who **could** hear Jesus? Jesus enemies heard him and many of the people who had claimed he was the Messiah heard him. However, the leadership had compromised the inroads Jesus had been making with the people by claiming that Jesus’ miraculous power was of the devil. This scared the people, alarmed Jesus’ friends and made Jesus quite angry with the Jewish leadership. Jesus’ words were for the benefit of those who could hear him—judgment against his enemies and an invitation to those who were afraid.
No, I was not saying that Mary knew that Jesus was going to be crucified. I think with respect that you have missed the whole point of this discussion. If John had said yes, he was the Elijah, the people would surely have accepted that (they did think that maybe he was even the Messiah).
I doubt very seriously that I have missed this point. I have been addressing this very matter throughout our discussion. First of all, you are at odds with the speaker in the video on your website concerning the Jewish understanding of Malachi 4. I agree with him on the point that the Jews totally missed the point of Malachi 4. You have posted that they did understand correctly.
Secondly, I disagree with both of you that John should have replied “Yes” to the scribes and Pharisees who interrogated him in John 1:21. They were asking John if he was the Elijah (according to their understanding of him). John replied “No” and this is what he should have done. Neither he nor Jesus ever replied in support of false doctrine. The problem is, the speaker in the video on your website does a 180 here and claims John should have answered “Yes! I am the man you are seeking!”
Upon accepting John as Elijah, they are now able to look for the Messiah, Jesus. If they had accepted Jesus, John/Elijah would have been called ‘Great in the kingdom’, The people would be doing what God wanted them to do (Believe in Him, whom He has sent), Jesus would not have been crucified as Paul states in 1 Cor. 2:8.
First of all, as I had been saying all along, God did not send Elijah/John in order to be seen. He was not the sign that the Messiah was here. His work was to reconcile the hearts of the children with the fathers. He was also to point to Jesus—saying “That is the one we’ve been waiting for!” John did all of this. He was a prophet, the one who introduced the Messiah. Jesus said John did his job, but was not believed (Luke 7:33). He likened that generation to people complaining that neither John nor Jesus danced to their tune, and neither John nor Jesus seemed interested in what they considered most important (Luke 7:31-32). In other words, they wanted to call the shots. John and Jesus would have been received, if they did what they were told!
Concerning 1Corinthians 2:8, this has absolutely nothing to do with John’s ministry. Paul is speaking of the hidden wisdom of God (1Corintians 2:7), something which the world could not receive (1Corinthians 2:14). Had the leaders known who Jesus was, they would not have crucified him, but they couldn’t have known, because they didn’t have the Spirit of God. The only alternative was to believe John, who was sent by God. John pointed to Jesus, but the leaders did not believe John. Not having the Spirit of God, they placed themselves in a position where they would reject the Messiah.
And Jesus would not have had to cry over Jerusalem with such desperate tears, or ask God to forgive them while on the cross. Also the kingdom would not have had to be taken away from them, to give to another nation. Finally, the Kingdom of Heaven on earth would have happened, as Jesus had taught at the beginning of His ministry.
Whatever the reason for these things, they did not occur because John failed in his ministry. John did fine, but men’s deeds were evil and they didn’t wish to bring their deeds to the Light (John 3:19).
Actually, I had been thinking more of the Disciples than of John, they were with Jesus far more than John ever was. This leads me to another point, why was John, not a Disciple of Jesus? Why did John’s Disciples follow John, and not the greater leader Jesus?
John wanted to be Jesus’ disciple (Matthew 3:14), but Jesus told him no. John’s purpose needed to be fulfilled pointing to Jesus, not joining forces with him. As for John’s disciples, we are all given the gifts and calling of God according to the will of God. Each performed his purpose according to that same will of God. Jesus and John did not need to join forces. ‘Joining forces’ is a presumption of the speaker in the video. He is wrong and cannot support his claim with Scripture. He merely implies that the larger the ministry the better it would be, but this is his opinion and is not supported in the text.
Yes, that IS how God saw John, but John did not stay great. Jesus said that John was Elijah…
Mathew 11:14-15
1nd if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
John denied those words of Jesus.
On the contrary, John denied the words of his interrogators. They assumed a wrong doctrine concerning Elijah. John denied their words/understanding.
Malachi shows that there was a choice. Israel would suffer the curse IF the hearts were not turned to the children. Meaning, there was two possible outcomes for Israel. John had free will, he could choose to accept his role as Elijah, or deny he was Elijah. Are you removing John’s free will?
Not really! God said he would send Elijah… lest he smite the earth with a curse. It is the presumption of the speaker on the video that the whole thing depended upon John. God worked through John and John was obedient to God. The leadership had concocted an elaborate appearance of Elijah pointing to the Messiah. They looked to their false doctrine rather than the actual claim of Malachi and John’s call to repentance. This is why they didn’t see the Messiah.
Lord bless,
Eddie
Hi Eddie
You sure can write a lot.
Quote from Eddie
“This is a conclusion you are drawing from the text …”
I suppose it is.
Quote from Eddie
“but the text does not say Mary wasn’t listening to God. The fact is Jesus agrees with the woman says: “Yes…” (Mary is and should be blessed), but “…rather blessed are they…” In other words, Mary’s blessing in bearing Jesus pertains to this life alone, rather are they blessed who hear and keep God’s word, because their blessing pertains to life in the Kingdom. Jesus was pointing this woman’s eyes to the Kingdom, rather than this life.”
I understand what you’re saying (I think), but, I read that very clearly as Jesus saying ‘rather’, if Jesus had used the word ‘also’ instead of rather, I would accept your
point.
Quote from Eddie
“Actually, the speaker in the video is confused about these Scriptures. Matthew 3:21 refers to Jesus’ friends believing Jesus was beside himself. Why? Because the leaders of their community were saying Jesus had a demon.”
The speaker was using the New International Version. I personally prefer King James version. I assumed you meant to type Mark 3:21?
Quote from Eddie
“Apparently, Jesus’ friends went and told Jesus’ family whom we see in Mark 3:31-35. Nothing is said about how they understand Jesus’ condition. They do understand the situation had turned dangerous.”
Where are you getting the idea from that the situation was dangerous? The friends thought that Jesus ‘was beside Himself’, in other words crazy.
The verses of Mark 3:31-35, do not mention anything to do with Jesus being in a dangerous situation, He was teaching with His Disciples!
Quote from Eddie
“Jesus and those with him could have been beaten or stoned. The Jewish leaders had tried to do this on a number of occasions. The family was there perhaps to rescue Jesus from a dangerous situation, or to find out for themselves, if what was being claimed was true. We may speculate, but the text does not make the reason for their presence clear enough to be definitive.”
Quote from Eddie
“Actually, this is not true. Jesus’ mother and brethren were outside the building. They couldn’t get near Jesus, so they called for him from outside. Jesus couldn’t hear them and had to be told that his family was calling him. They could not hear one another.
You are absolutely correct, I shall retract that sentence.
This is what I should have said…
‘Here Jesus is saying directly about His Mother, whoever is doing the will of God is my Mother.’
Quote from Eddie
“Concerning this Scripture, Jesus was preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom. To be a family relative in this life, one needs to be related through blood. Jesus was pointing out that family relationships in the Kingdom has to do with those who were obedient to God, meaning believe on him whom he sent (John 6:29), something concerning which his audience (the Jewish leadership) was not doing.”
Concerning all the speculation you do, I feel that I am no longer having a debate on the actual scriptures, but rather on your speculations.
Quote from Eddie
“I was **assuming** your argument to be true. I said that in my reply. I do not believe your point of view is true, but I **assumed** it was for the sake of the argument.”
You assumed my argument to be true, so you replied, ‘I do not believe your point of view is true????
Quote from Eddie
“Then I pointed out it would be wrong to take such a stand that you do take.”
**“You cannot expect Mary, who did not have the Holy Spirit within her, to understand the Scriptures apart from what she had been told they said.”**
The above is what you actually said.
Did I say, that I expected Mary to understand Jesus’ ministry, from scripture? She had enough evidence without scripture.
Quote from Eddie
“ You are comparing apples with oranges. We agree that Mary receive a heavenly apparition and that Jesus birth was miraculous. This says nothing about Mary’s ability to understand the Scriptures.”
Who mentioned anything to do with Mary’s ability to understand scripture? SHE didn’t need scripture.
The rest of your post returns to the subject of John. As I have already just answered many of the points you mention here, I see no need to continue in this particular post.
God Bless.
Arthur.
Hi Arthur,
Concerning Luke 11:28 and Mary being blessed…
I understand what you’re saying (I think), but, I read that very clearly as Jesus saying ‘rather’, if Jesus had used the word ‘also’ instead of rather, I would accept your
point.
Actually the words: “Yea, rather…” in the Greek are really one word. The same word is used in Romans 10:18 and translated “yea, verily (truly)…” One could get either a positive or a negative outlook concerning Mary, depending upon the translation used. Bottom line, I now think it is unwise to base anything definitive (positive or negative) concerning Mary over this one word.
Concerning Mark 3:21
The speaker was using the New International Version. I personally prefer King James version. I assumed you meant to type Mark 3:21?
Well, I looked at a number of translations, some saying ‘family’ others ‘friends’ and some ‘his own people’ or ‘next of kin’. So, there seems to be disagreement as to who the people are in Mark 3:21, but whoever they are, they are in a close relationship with Jesus. The problem is of the 68 occurrences of the Greek word translated here as friends/family it is so translated only here. 67 other times it means something else (side, above, before, against, among etc.).
For the sake of argument I’ll agree it was some members of his family, because John 7 says Jesus’ brothers and sisters did not believe in him. We agree with this. The question is, did Mary ever change her mind about Jesus. After all she knew how she got pregnant. She knew Jesus’ birth was of God. Whatever Jesus’ brothers and sisters thought they knew, Mary knew at least that much was true.
I think it would be difficult to prove one way or the other what she believed in her heart. She may have believed just as you claim, but could you show that the text supports your claim? I don’t think you are able to do that. The words used here are not very definitive. And, don’t forget the Gospels are about Jesus and not about Mary, so there isn’t much that they say about her, except in Luke 1 and Matthew 1 where it was important to show Jesus’ birth was miraculous.
If we are to consider references like those saying Mary kept these things in her heart, then I have to say that Mary didn’t always understand what was said or done, but she pondered them without drawing rash conclusions. She seems to be a careful person. Whether or not she was educated (I don’t think she was, but it is possible), she was a careful and a thoughtful woman. Believing this about her, I can just as easily conclude that she was with Jesus’ brethren in Mark 3 not only see for herself and see what Jesus had to say, but was also there to make sure the brothers (her sons) didn’t carry things too far. I believe this is also within the realm of possibility, if one were to consider all the texts about Mary.
Concerning the ‘friends’ telling the ‘family’…
Where are you getting the idea from that the situation was dangerous? The friends thought that Jesus ‘was beside Himself’, in other words crazy.
The verses of Mark 3:31-35, do not mention anything to do with Jesus being in a dangerous situation, He was teaching with His Disciples!
There is a lot of misunderstanding on both parts here. First, I wrote this before I considered the idea that ‘friends’ in v.21 could also be translated ‘family’ or something else, for that matter. Secondly, I was not very clear with my pronouns. Believing ‘friend’ and ‘family’ were two different groups of people, I knew the ‘friends’ thought Jesus was beside himself, but I was not willing to agree the ‘family’ thought so without seeing what was going on.
Concerning what Jesus said:
This is what I should have said…
‘Here Jesus is saying directly about His Mother, whoever is doing the will of God is my Mother.’
I don’t think Jesus would be that trivial in public with his Mother. Don’t forget, Jesus would not have broken any of the commandments. If Mary was sinning, Jesus’ love for her would have sought to hide her sin from public view. That, I believe, would have been the honorable thing to do. Certainly Joseph tried to do this when he thought Mary was unfaithful. Why would Jesus do less and wish to publically embarrass or dishonor his Mother?
How I see Jesus’ remark is that he was responding to the threats already made against him by the Jewish leadership. They accused him of operating out of the realm of Satan. Jesus pointed to his disciples and said they are his family, because these obey his Father. Obeying the Father is the same as believing in Jesus, whom he had sent (John 6:29). They were not doing so. They tried to change the subject by pointing to Jesus’ family outside the house, but Jesus brought everything right back to the Gospel and pointed out that they were not obeying God because they did not believe in him (Jesus). In fact, those who were believing in him, the Jewish leaders discouraged by saying he had a demon (was crazy), – showing where his ‘friends’ or ‘family’ got the idea.
Concerning how I respond to you…
Concerning all the speculation you do, I feel that I am no longer having a debate on the actual scriptures, but rather on your speculations.
If all we did was read the Bible to one another, would we have a discussion? :-)
Certainly the man in the video took a great many liberties with the text—too much for my taste. He read from the text and then elaborated and offered his thoughts as to what it all meant. Why would you expect anything different from me? :-)
Concerning my ‘assuming’ your argument to be true…
You assumed my argument to be true, so you replied, ‘I do not believe your point of view is true????
It is just another way of saying I am giving you the benefit of the doubt in order to get on with the discussion. I thought I was quite clear about that. If I used the word improperly, well, I understand your confusion. What I meant was for the purpose of discussion, I was not requiring you to prove a particular phrase was true. I ‘allowed’ it to stand in order to approach it from a different angle.
**“You cannot expect Mary, who did not have the Holy Spirit within her, to understand the Scriptures apart from what she had been told they said.”**
The above is what you actually said.
Did I say, that I expected Mary to understand Jesus’ ministry, from scripture? She had enough evidence without scripture.
What hard evidence is there in the text that shows Mary was not supportive of Jesus? What power did women have back in the 1st century CE? They weren’t even considered good witnesses. We know several women supported Jesus’ ministry, but we know very little about them or how it was all done. The mother of James and John interceded for her sons to place them on either side of Jesus in the Kingdom. But nothing more is said about her. All the text says is Mary was outside the building where Jesus was speaking and called for him. That is it! John is not at all shy about saying Jesus brethren (meaning James and Jesus’ brothers and sisters) didn’t believe in Jesus, but John says nothing about Jesus’ Mother disbelieving in him. I admit that all this is very circumstantial, but how is the case that Mary disbelieved Jesus any more substantial? The fact is, if all the Scriptures concerning Mary are considered, more show she considered Jesus’ words in her heart and made no rash judgments against him when she didn’t understand, even when he was 12 years old.
Concerning Mary’s spiritual understanding…
Who mentioned anything to do with Mary’s ability to understand scripture? SHE didn’t need scripture.
Unless you think Mary should have known Jesus was/is God in the flesh, she is commanded to draw her spiritual conclusions from the Scriptures, letting them be her guide especially when deciding which religious leader to believe when they are not in agreement.
“To the Law and the Testimony, if they speak not according to these, it is because they have no light in them.” (Isaiah 8:20) is spoken against putting one’s trust in what seems to be miraculous power. As I said earlier failure and/or discipline from God could occur in the case of wrongdoing; Moses sinned and couldn’t enter the Promised Land; Samson sinned and his spiritual power was taken away; Saul sinned and was rejected; the unnamed prophet sinned and was killed. There are many indications in the Scriptures that would annul the miraculous birth as an infallible testimony that God was behind everything Jesus said and did. If Mary was not habitually present with Jesus, listening to him etc. she would need more than the miraculous birth to categorically deny what was being said about him by his enemies—who happened to be the religious leaders of the day.
Lord bless,
Eddie
Hi Eddie
Quote from Eddie
“What hard evidence is there in the text that shows Mary was not supportive of Jesus?What power did women have back in the 1st century CE? They weren’t even considered good witnesses. We know several women supported Jesus’ ministry, but we know very little about them or how it was all done. The mother of James and John interceded for her sons to place them on either side of Jesus in the Kingdom. But nothing more is said about her. All the text says is Mary was outside the building where Jesus was speaking and called for him. That is it! John is not at all shy about saying Jesus brethren (meaning James and Jesus’ brothers and sisters) didn’t believe in Jesus, but John says nothing about Jesus’ Mother disbelieving in him. I admit that all this is very circumstantial, but how is the case that Mary disbelieved Jesus any more substantial? The fact is, if all the Scriptures concerning Mary are considered, more show she considered Jesus’ words in her heart and made no rash judgments against him when she didn’t understand, even when he was 12 years old.”
Is it not strange, that the family is behaving in such a fashion towards Jesus? Wouldn’t Mary have been chastising them for thinking Jesus crazy?
Didn’t Mary explain about the Angel and other events?
By believing that Jesus is crazy, they are, by implication, saying their mother must be crazy too.
Quote from Eddie
“As I said earlier failure and/or discipline from God could occur in the case of wrongdoing; Moses sinned and couldn’t enter the Promised Land; Samson sinned and his spiritual power was taken away; Saul sinned and was rejected; the unnamed prophet sinned and was killed.”
I find this very strange, you are able to recognize that all those people could fail or turn from God, yet you are unable to see the possibility that John could too!
Quote from Eddie
“There are many indications in the Scriptures that would annul the miraculous birth as an infallible testimony that God was behind everything Jesus said and did. If Mary was not habitually present with Jesus, listening to him etc. she would need more than the miraculous birth to categorically deny what was being said about him by his enemies—who happened to be the religious leaders of the day.”
Whether Mary was educated in the scriptures or not, I do not know. I would hazard a guess that the possibility she had been educated in them, would be very, very low.
As to the miraculous birth, wow, have I had some amazing debates on this subject. Lol
God Bless.
Arthur