I'm sure He needed a little nudging right? Being so timid and all. /s
While the article seems to attempt to make Mary the focus of this Scripture, that is a typical use of the passage in the allegorical construction to bolster the doctrine of Mariolatry, making the chaste maiden a kind of anti-Eve, a replacement for Diana or Athena in the Gentile culture.
In contrast, I believe this winsome maiden was of remarkable character, in her willingness to obey The Most Holy God, whether under The Law in the age of Law, or under Grace in the age of Grace.
But she, like John the Baptizer, seems willing to take her place in the panorama (not a Pantheon) of a supporting cast that the Holy Ghost uses to draw one's attention to The Jesus, in Whom we trust to raise us to Heaven, with Him Alone as our High Priest, Rebbe, Lord, Messiah, Savior, Intercessor--and mostly important--our compassionate Friend.
That is the greatest sign of the true regenerate believer-disciple, that Abraham and Paul and Baptizer John and you and I become lesser, and He greater, eh?
I believe that would have been Mary's approach as well, and worthy of recognition as one of her spiritual attributes.
"Have Thine own way, Lord, have Thine Own way;
Thou art the Potter, I am the clay.
Mold me and make me, after Thy Will
While I am waiting, yielded and still."
That is the proper metaphor for this winsome woman, bowing in homage to the Mighty God in Christ, the Hope of Glory.
Let Mary's name and repute be so remembered.
DID JESUS MAKE ALCOHOLIC WINE AT CANA ?Jn 2:1-11 AV
Please note that the purpose of this passage is to give Jesus glory from the first of his public ministry until the last. It is not a passage given over to glorifying His birth mother, in which she plays a close, but minor, role.
(Also take note that it is well proven that when oinos/wine is used, it may be either what is known as juice to us, or it may be alcoholic beverage)(The sense of what "wine" means in the Bible, OT or NT, is context-dependent.)
=========
1 And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there:
This event happened the third day after arriving in Galilee, directly after His baptism by John in the south at Bethabara. Nathanael was from Cana and was present at Jesus' baptism. Did he perhaps invite the group to the event at Cana? It's a possibility.
2 And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage.
The use of "called" might be better translated here as "invited," as well as His disciples, since it was not a commanded performance, not an imperative call.
3 And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine.
This is has been taken--contextually and grammatically wrongly--to mean that at the wedding banquet, they had consumed all the wine so far provided, and have "run out of wine." That is not what the verse says.
The phrase υστερησαντος οινου (from hustereo, verb, aorist tense, active voice, participle mode, 3rd person, singular) is properly rendered, ". . . it was lacking wine" (where 'it' refers to the wedding).
Jesus' mother turned to face him and said,"οινον ουκ εχουσιν" (from the verb ἔχω = to have, present tense, active voice, indicative mode, 3rd person plural). "They continually have no wine" (during the process of holding the marriage and its feasting, so far); or better yet, "They are not having wine" with inference "at this banquet." What this is not saying is "They ran out of wine."
Mary did not say, "They have no more wine." "No more" is not anywhere written into this little scenario. What is there is that they have no wine, none at all.
4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come."
Or, perhaps, "What has this to do with thee and me? You haven't gotten us here just to provide the drinks, have you?" But actually, He and the disciples are invited guests, and it is usual to bring a present for the bride and groom. What can they do to show graciousness?
This might have been the marriage of family relatives or friends, since His mother had been there (imperfect tense) for some time, as one may infer from the grammar. If He is likely to want to give a wedding present, she may be hinting both that the celebrating families are too poor to provide wine, so they are not having it at the wedding. Or on the other hand, that they are very aware of the admonition of Habakkuk 2:15, and have no intention to provide an occasion of drunkenness for guests, therefore are not serving alcoholic beverages at their holy ceremony and celebration.
5 His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it (struck out, as it was added by the translators for clarity only).
Mary is only telling them that if He takes initiative to do something that needs the help of the servants, they should be ready to do as He orders as if he were representing the caterer or the family.
6 And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece.
Note that there are six vessels, and a firkin is about 10 gallons. Estimate that each vessel has 25 firkins (6 vessels x 25 ga each, or about 150 gal). That would be about 600 quarts, enough for the whole wedding feast for everyone? If that were alcoholic, that would be a lot of temptation for drunkenness even if they were not yet drunken. But if it were pure, sweet, fresh, cool blood of the cluster, any amount wold be an appropriate gift.
7 Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim.
The waterpots here are ritual vessels, not hust ordinary jugs. They are handcarved from stone, not just clay, so they are very expensive, and kept holy and passed from generation to generation. Since wine has leaven in it, fermented wine with yeast would never be put in these vessels. That would defile them. I reckon that Jesus simply would not put filthy stuff in them. No sense in just making sweet, tasty wine like Welch's does, eh?
8 And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it.
Made as if freshly pressed, and without the process that normally would cause filth to be in the created juice; however, on the other hand, Jesus could have created alcoholic wine without the usual filth.
9 When the ruler of the .feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom,
Assuming that the bridegroom had finally broken out the festival wine, the caterer/master of ceremonies called out for the bridegroom (with his voice) to compliment him on his prudent strategy, of saving the wine to be served later in the feast, and using pure water at first from the waterpots --
10 And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now.
"You have not had wine from the start of the feast, like everyone usually begins the feast. Instead of giving me wine to serve from the beginning, you wisely have saved the wine and not served any until now! That's a pretty wise strategy to extend the use of the little you have!" (Note that this verse does not say that anybody in this feast had drunk any wine. It just describes the usual practice of how a feast is commonly scheduled. Saying that anyone in this feast was previously drinking wine is simply a misinterpretation and not even a legitimate exegetical inference. It would be reading into the text by eisegesis something that is simply not there.)
11 This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him.
Building a doctrine of salvation--that is, of believing on Him--on assuming Jesus was serving gallons and gallons of alcoholic beverage to revelers that were already three sheets to the wind, to prove His Divinity, is a very unsafe way to claim any kind of theological repute for the interpreter who essentially claims this as genuine inspired Bible truth.
Even then, it would be very questionable to think that The God who hates the influence of even a little recreationally taken alcohol on the spiritual life of a true believer, would agree with His Son being just a purveyor of a mind-bending drug to attract followers.
The meek and righteous scholar will not do so, but place the greatest emphasis on the sanctified nature of the first of many affirming miracles that He, the great Teacher and Master performed in His earthly ministry.
When seen this way, Jesus now appears as a compassionate and beneficial Friend, with Solomonic ingenuity of helping make this a truly memorable and spiritual adventure not only for the celebrants, but also for the disciples He has called to minister with Himself, and to be told to us.
And this is how we, the readers and studiers of the Bible, ought to take the vignette. Using a misinterpretation of this to justify the acceptability of social drinking is a great dishonor to The Christ and his recorder, John the Apostle.
