[Springfield Reformer]

Just prior to his commands to his mother and his beloved disciple there are two prophetic fulfillments. Both include the language "that the Scripture might be fulfilled."

The two events are in a single prophecy, here:

Psa 22:18  They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.

And they are a wonderful prophecy, being so obviously unique to the circumstances of Christ's death.

That phrase is not found in, and does apply to, verses 25 through 27 which happened at the same relative time.

I honestly am not sure what you're getting at here.  The death of Christ in general is fulfillment of numerous other OT prophecies, some right in Psalm 22, some in Isaiah 53, and elsewhere.  But I am not aware of any specific prophecy that would have anything to do with the relationship between John and Mary specifically, and in that sense I would have to disagree that versus 25 through 27 represent the fulfillment of a specific prophecy.  If indeed that is what you were trying to say.  If I have misunderstood you, please feel free to correct me on this.  I am somewhat guessing as to your meaning.

On the broader matter of a command of relationship, Jesus did have half-brothers (extended family), but they were all younger than Him, and it was His decision as the eldest with whom she should live, and He chose John.  However, I agree with you in the sense that this was not a strictly legal decision, though it had that aspect. As an attorney, I have seen some of the difficult decision-making that goes into caring for aging parents, and a genuine spiritual love between the parties is extremely important to the happiness of those final years. We know Mary was deeply wounded by these events, and who better to bear her up than Jesus' most faithful student during His moment of deepest need, John, the disciple whom Jesus loved.

As for commanding a unique spiritual relationship between the two, Christ had already commanded all his disciples that they love one another with the same kind of love that existed between the Father and the Son, and you can't do better than that, no matter who you are.. Commanding such love here, as though it were something new, would seem redundant.  And again, the commands are two, one to Mary, one to John, and they are equilateral. So whatever you make of the content of the command, you must apply it equally to both.  Mary is not being set over John in some mediatorial sense that can be extended to all believers. This is strictly between Jesus, Mary and John. There is no textual warrant for taking it further.

Your references confirm as much. See this parallel passage:

Luk 8:19-21  Then came to him his mother and his brethren, and could not come at him for the press.  (20)  And it was told him by certain which said, Thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to see thee.  (21)  And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are these which hear the word of God, and do it.

Jesus is not accepting the strictly biological definition of family, but wishes us to see ourselves, as believers in Him, as members of a much bigger and more important family, those whose unity is in love for God and love to both hear and do what God says.  This passage is saying that whatever familial connections He may have to Mary and His earthly brothers, those are secondary to being connected to Him through faith in Him.  Thus any of us who are in His spiritual family have as much access to Him as Mary or His brothers ever had.  Again, this eliminates the possibility that Mary or any other uber-saint is intended to act as mediator between us and God:

1Tim 2:5  For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

If there is only one designated mediator, there can't be two.

Peace,

SR

[af_vet_1981]

I honestly am not sure what you're getting at here. The death of Christ in general is fulfillment of numerous other OT prophecies, some right in Psalm 22, some in Isaiah 53, and elsewhere. But I am not aware of any specific prophecy that would have anything to do with the relationship between John and Mary specifically, and in that sense I would have to disagree that versus 25 through 27 represent the fulfillment of a specific prophecy. If indeed that is what you were trying to say. If I have misunderstood you, please feel free to correct me on this. I am somewhat guessing as to your meaning.

Let me explain again. Verses 25 to 27 were not designated as a fulfillment of any prophecy, or any law such as Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee. Those verses appear in the midst of other verses that were explicitly designated as a fulfillment. Since John was writing or recording this, or it was written or recorded from his oral tradition, this is the Gospel from his perspective, under the inspiritation of the Holy Spirit so that each and every word has meaning. Why was this done ? Why was it not designated as the fulfillment of a law or prophecy ? What is its meaning to us ?

If it were for Mary's physical care or for the sake of not going against Jewish tradition and custom, it would seem logical that her sister and sister's children should care for her as a widow, rather than someone who was not a relative. John had no income, no prospects for wealth in this world. I see this as a spiritual assignation. John and Mary never betrayed Jesus nor left this side. They clung to him through it all and he told them to regard each other as mother.

I think approaching this with an antiCatholic bias is a mistake. Just take it as it is. Any disciple that Jesus loves can regard Mary as his or her spiritual mother and Mary can regard any disciple that Jesus loves as her spiritual son or daughter. It fits with Matthew 12:46-50, which is a more complete version of his words than Luke 8: 19-21 which some erroneously interpret as a personal rebuke to his mother and cousins, and miss the tremendous truth and beauty that when we are in Messiah and walking in the Spirit we have these spiritual relationships.

On the broader matter of a command of relationship, Jesus did have half-brothers (extended family), but they were all younger than Him, and it was His decision as the eldest with whom she should live,

I'm unfamiliar with that law or custom in any Biblical or Jewish teaching. It sounds more like a Gentile custom to me. I think he chose John because John chose himself, by being there. However, I agree with you in the sense that this can also be applied as an example to us to make provision for our family, including our parents, should we pass away before them.

We know Mary was deeply wounded by these events, and who better to bear her up than Jesus' most faithful student during His moment of deepest need, John, the disciple whom Jesus loved.

No, I don't agree. The prophecy Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also was no doubt fulfilled, yet John and Mary were already there. They were faithful through it all because of their deep love for Jesus. It is altogether logical and proper for them to have a spiritual relationship as son and mother because it is completely rooted in, and centered on, the LORD Jesus Christ. Obviously they understood Jesus' words and remained together until Mary's passing. Now they are together again.

As for commanding a unique spiritual relationship between the two, Christ had already commanded all his disciples that they love one another with the same kind of love that existed between the Father and the Son, and you can't do better than that, no matter who you are..

Who obeys him ?

Commanding such love here, as though it were something new, would seem redundant.

Are these things not written for our instruction ? Otherwise, it it were a fulfillment of a law or prophecy it would have said so. If it were a private family matter, why would it appear here ? Everything word has a reason to be in this book.

And again, the commands are two, one to Mary, one to John, and they are equilateral. So whatever you make of the content of the command, you must apply it equally to both.

Precisely

Mary is not being set over John in some mediatorial sense that can be extended to all believers. This is strictly between Jesus, Mary and John. There is no textual warrant for taking it further.

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; It is for our benefit if we fit the same criteria, as listed in Matthew and John. I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me.

Thus any of us who are in His spiritual family have as much spiritual access to Him and Mary and His brothers as anyone ever had. We are all one in his holy catholic apostolic church. It is his will that we be one. If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.