Respect?
“Woman, what do I have to do with you?” John 2:4
Woman – Have you noticed how much time women spend trying to keep the peace between people? Perhaps it is the built-in result of being mothers. Maybe it’s just genetic. But it seems that when conflict arises, women do their best to soothe the situation. Men, on the other hand, seem to be much more hardheaded. They have the flight or fight syndrome. Just get out or else prepare for battle. I don’t think this is a result of left-over Neanderthal aggression. A lot of this difference comes from childhood training processes. Most boys learn about life through games of competition. They are taught values through defeating others. But girls learn games of cooperation. Their early childhood play is inclusive. That training has a lot to do with worldview.[1]
In this story, Jesus’ mother is trying to keep the peace. The first miracle in the gospel of John is about social expectations. After Jesus gathers a few of the disciples, he attends a wedding. Mary is also one of the guests. It becomes obvious to her that the wedding party will soon run out of wine. She wants to rescue the situation and prevent a conflict. So, she decides to take the issue to her oldest son.
We are apt to read our own cultural bias into this conversation between Jesus and his mother. At first glance, Jesus seems insensitive. He seems to be acting like a typical male. Why would Jesus address his own mother with such a cold expression? The Greek word gunai commonly means woman or wife. The surprising element of this verse is not the translation but the tone. We are a gender sensitive culture, so this translation seems to depict Jesus speaking harshly to his mother, questioning why she is bothering him about so insignificant a fact as no wine at a wedding. While the English wording is correct, we lose the real emotion in this translation.
In some respects, this verse seems like the one thing that every mother fears – rejection by one of her children. Mary is at the wedding. She is thrilled to have her oldest son there. She is proud, perhaps much more so than anyone can realize. The absence of her husband Joseph probably indicates that he has died. So, Jesus is the “man of the house” now. She relies on him. She knows that he can take care of things. When she realizes that there is a social embarrassment in the making, she goes to her reliable refuge – Jesus, the good son. But it looks as though Jesus says something that would unnerve any mother’s expectations.
Does Jesus really say, “Mother, please! What does bad wedding planning have to do with me?” as if to imply that this kind of problem is not really a problem that should be brought to the attention of the God-Man? If we read the verse like this, we will be greatly mistaken – and we will miss a very important lesson. In order to understand the real emotions here, we need to look at other uses of this word translated “woman”.
Jesus uses this same Greek word in moments of great tenderness, for example, when he transfers earthly responsibility for care of his mother to John as he is dying on the cross and when he speaks to Mary Magdalene at the tomb. It is not a cold and sterile rejection. Our modern translations remove the tone of voice. We are inclined to think that Jesus is separating himself from the concerns of his mother. That is a mistake. Jesus is actually being tender.
But it is not just the tone that is missing. The way that Jesus frames his response to Mary has been altered. It might not be good English grammar, but the chopped-up word order in the Greek text tells us something we need to know. This verse literally says:
“What to me and to you, woman?”
Do you see that Jesus is not isolating himself from Mary at all? He includes both of them in the situation. His expression is “to me and to you.” Jesus makes both of them a part of this problem, and part of the question about its solution. Jesus is not saying, “Why are you bothering me?” He is saying, “How are we related to this issue?” Jesus is inviting her into the solution. He seeks her cooperation.
Jesus is not playing the stern male. He is not correcting her or belittling her. He acknowledges her concern with tenderness. He asks Mary how this matter connects them. Jesus does not cast her aside. He invites her to join him in the solution. With tenderness, he salutes her role in his life – and then he asks if she understands his role in her life. What does this thing have to do with us? How will this issue bring us together?
No problem is too small to put before Jesus – not even wine at a wedding. But do not be surprised if the problem raises a different question – a question that includes you in the solution, a question that asks about your relationship to him before both of you decide what to do.
Jesus puts the same question before each of us. We come to him with some problem. It may not even be our problem. We may, like Mary, be looking for a solution for someone else. But when we place the problem before Jesus, he does not ask, “What do you want me to do?” He asks, “How does this thing bring us together?” The lesson is simple: the problem we see is only a window that opens a relationship with Him. It’s not about the wine. It’s about the willingness to enter into the problem together.
Expectation. Interruption. Surprise. Re-orientation. Are you watching for God in all the wrong places?
Topical Index: woman, gunai, together, Mary, John 2:4
This is excerpted from my book Jesus Said to Her which I hope to have out by the end of the year.
[1] A very insightful woman, Deborah Tannen, noted all this in You Just Don’t Understand (Quill, 2001).
Skip …. I agree with the cool insights you presented regarding our personal relationship with Yeshua.
I do however have a question: “in the second portion of John 2:4 Yeshua states that His hour (time) has not yet come …. I’ve been inclined to understand that Yeshua’s questioning of His mother’s intercession in this matter has more to do with the timing as opposed to her actual request for provision by Yeshua?” …. Can this verse be fully explained without accounting for the second half of 2:4? The timing with respects to Yeshua manifesting His glory/divinity does not seem to be unimportant.
I would just note that in 2:11 the talmidim believed in Yeshua after this first miracle in Cana. It seems apparent (to me anyway) that Yeshua’s mother already believed …. however her actions could indeed represent a significant personal step of faith and a change in the relationship between her and The Lord!
Oftentimes my passivity (which can also become disobedience) is a hindrance to His moving in a particular situation. For many years I mistook and misunderstood the concepts of “standing still” and “watching the salvation of the LORD” and “the battle belongs to the LORD”. I would do nothing and expect God to do it all for me. Sometimes my ignorance of the ways of Jesus needs to be learned and He so graciously calls me to Himself and the Spirit counsels and instructs. Other times I am rebellious and prideful and the chastening comes,along with the pain, discouragement and raw emotion of failure. But then, He lovingly lifts me up and provides once again because He is faithful and true. Another opportunity has appeared to learn of Him and to take (notice the activity here) His yoke and His burden. Once again there is another GREAT EXCHANGE! My relationship with Him is restored, peace comes in the valley and He mounts me on the eagle’s wings so I can walk uprightly again. What a wonderful Savior! What a true friend!
I love this story from our Book of books. We really need to lay hold of the concept: “Christianity” is not a religion, it is a relationship with the living G-d through Yeshua HaMashiach/Jesus who is the Christ. Brennan Manning (one of my favorite authors) has written in one of his books concerning the “fierce tenderness” of Jesus. This tenderness or compassion was evidenced from this starting point of His “ministry” until the completion of His mission. Mary knew her Son. (Remember the revelation from G-d concerning her pregnancy “out of wedlock?” She knew He was the Chosen One, the Rescuer, the Redeemer, the Deliverer, G-d our help incarnated into flesh. Out of her concern for a potentially embarrassing situation she asked her Son to help. (A mighty fine choice you made there Mary!) He is The Source of help! And let us remember (zakar- thank you Skip!), it was the servants who witnessed the water transformed into wine! Today’s word shows once again, the compassionate heart of our sympathetic Savior who came to give us great joy, feasting and celebration! Blessed be HaShem! We can also look forward to “another” wedding soon to be!
It is comments like these (Mary and Carl’s) that prompt me to check back on the blog board periodocially throughout my day. 🙂
Some comments make us think or challenge ourselves … other comments have us reaching out in prayer for the benefit of mishpocha …. other comments have us simply praising Him and some comments provide us comfort and reassurance!
For those that take the time to share on this site … thanks a bunch! Let us never under-estimate the power of Ruach HaKodesh. I am always amazed at the breadth and diversity of His Ruach inside the collective Body of Mashiach. Sometimes just the different thought processes that I see are edifying! For instance in the case of Carl’s communication … I have contemplated this joy in Mashiach before while pondering these Godpel verses …. but not today! That is until I read his post … and now I will be quite happy for a while and 🙂
Shalom
I ponder your closing remark, Skip…the willingness to enter into a problem together, and I find that this community is all about this. In fact, in reflecting upon recent blogs, I have not seen Carol respond, and I wanted to communicate that I am entering her problem by continuing to stand in prayer on her behalf.
Also, I was one of those readers of Scripture that thought Jesus “appeared” insensitive in this teaching and did not know the truth until now.
Thanks:)
Kelly … although I did not share the same feeling that Yeshua was “insensitive” I did get and still think that Yeshua was questioning His mother’s timing. I did ask Skip to respond (see first comment) on this issue.
As for me the word would be “impatient” and not “insensitive”! More along the lines that the request was probably not the issue but rather the timing of the issue. More like mother … not now … the time is not yet upon Me!
I was just wondering if Skip or anyone else thought this “time” Yeshua spoke of was akin to His glorious sacrifice as indicated: 26:18 And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples.
In any event it surely became “a time” for His glory to be witnessed. I have often wondered about this and Skip brought a very cool perspective.
On the other hand I have heard a teaching wherein a Rabbi is of the opinion that Yeshua was “busting His mother’s chops” in a respectful manner. The give and take being more along the lines (as Skip pointed out) “what does this have to do with you and me?” In the Rabbi’s context however it was Yeshua’s response to a mother presuming to have her son do her bidding. The Rabbi of course went on to teach that Yeshua made the commentary simply to clarify that His acquiescence to Miriam was not as a son to a mother but as a Lord to a believer.
And I can’t rule out view point … even with Skip’s eloquent message today!
Certainly in as much that this specific story is utilized by literally millions of Catholics to support Miriam’s position as the “divine intercessor or go between”! Who knows … maybe the Rabbi taught this message simply to counter balance this poor theology?
Ultimately I am not completely convinced that all the bases on this issue have been covered!
I never thought of our Lord as being impatient with his earthly mother. It seems so ‘out-of-character’. And I don’t think he ever was ‘out-of-character’. I always felt he was being teasingly tender with her.
The one place he could have been ‘out-of-character’ was in His response to the soldiers that carried out the death sentence. He did not. He stayed ‘in-character’ even in the face of death.
Just a thought. Suz
Suzi … well stated …. I think! 🙂
Perhaps my feelings of “impatience” may be incorrect. Maybe the Rabbi I had mentioned was closer with regards to “tender teasing” ….?
However this does broach the broader topic of Yeshua’s human nature … His character. He most assuredly experienced deep emotions such as with the money changers in the Temple courtyard. Or with His scathing discourse regarding the Pharisees … packed with emotion no doubt! He was certainly impatient with His own Talmidim on a number of occasions yet we would all consider His emotional handling to of course be perfect and “without sin”.
So I ask … why can’t Yeshua express impatience? Is impatience under all circumstances sinful or is there justifiable impatience? In revelations Yeshua reveals how He HATES the deeds of the Nicolataines … HATES …. I know that this reality does not go over well with some segments that forget Yeshua is also wholly righteous and a destroyer! The reason being that we people impose a behavioral pattern on Yeshua that stems from our idea of righteousness!
If one reads the Scriptures objectively, it is packed with all kinds of emotions and if you listen close enough you can hear these emotions in The Lord’s voice. So I hope we never go down a path that removes emotions and boldness and humor, etc. from our Lord! (And Suzi I am not implying by any means that you are doing so. You just happened to raise a very rarely discussed issue!)
I guess the question is simple … Who gets to judge what is out of character for The Living G_D?. I get a little squeamish trying to put Yeshua in a box thinking that He must have acted this way or that way! Frankly I think He must have been incredibly audacious and bold and emotional as well as humble and totally compliant with the character of Elohim … that is why He was perfect!
In the past I actually have had conversations/debates with folks who do not believe that Yeshua ever relaxed or laughed or …. lived like us at all …. but I never bought into this thought process. These same people believe that YHVH Who ordered an Israelite stoned to death for breaking Shabbat rules is not the same character of Yeshua! This of course can’t be so. My point is that there is much more to Our Lord’s character then we can ever understand or explain!
In the end we will agree that He “stayed in His character” and we know that it was perfect by the standards of YHVH and not any person’s idea or standards of what character should be!
Thanks for post … got me thinking! 🙂
Thank you, for the encouragement, Drew. Suz
Dr. Charles Paige told us once in a Master’s class, that the only responsiblity for the bride’s family at the wedding, was provision of the wine. For that reason, he believes that this was a wedding of one of Jesus’ sisters, and in the absence of Joseph, Jesus would be the logical provider of the wine. That makes Mary’s anxiety very logical, and Jesus’ response of “to me and to you” as the bride’s family also logical.
To me this would make his tenderness even more obvious — to see his mother’s embarrassment at the empty wine casks, and join her in providing not an ordinary replenishment, but an exquisite wine.
Donna, I have not noticed you on a comment before, and I was greatly blessed by the one above. I do not know what School Dr. Charles Paige is with, but I really like his thoughts on this. They just seems to bring that scripture together so very smoothly, and I thought, oh, why had I not heard that before! Thanks for sharing a good thought from one of your teachers. L.B.
Dr. Page (oops I spelled it wrong above) sometimes teaches with Master’s International Divinity School. He is an archaeologist and directs the Kursi/Gergesa Excavation. You can see more about him on his website re Jerusalem Institute for Biblical Exploration. He often delivers “one-liners” like the one above that can shift your entire paradigm on a subject.