>I appreciate the discussion on this without jumping to conclusions or accusations.
Likewise. I'll admit I'm eager to jump the gun and go full hog on trying to score scalps at times, and that is a flaw of mine. I do always appreciate dialogues that at least feel more productive, and it's a lot harder to find those, so thank you for choosing the high road.
>True, but we also have Jesus seemingly telling her to not interfere with His ministry in that same story (John 2:4)
I think there's a number of ways we could run with this. I just don't feel that, in light of the rest of scripture, the Marian interpretations of this event are more compelling or even *as* compelling as any number of alternative readings.
>One thing worth noting is the NKJV translation and KJV both feel a bit weak in this verse.
I'll take your word for it. My go to is the NIV with commentary from Concordia; I got it as a gift from my parents recently as I've started to lead an independent Bible study on 1 Peter at church. I've never been much for the KJV. That said, the vagueness is still there to me. There is a *whole* rabbit hole that could be gone down here, ranging from how we are supposed to understand the use of "favorite disciple" to the more topical article here, "this man is now your son". I don't have the text in front of me at the moment, but I'll reiterate my (admittedly gut reaction) issue here: in light of the rest of scripture, it simply is not clear to me that we should read this as Mary serving a particular role as someone with the capacity to influence and sway the decisions of God himself (I understand there may be some nuance here from the Marian perspective- that Mary isn't "changing God's mind" per se- I use that term for the ease of not being exactly sure how else to phrase it at the moment)
>Indeed it is.
God bless you. As much fun I personally derive from sectarian squabbling, it is not something that, for the most part, gets us where we should be.