[Bill]

The first 10 verses of John, chapter two, record attendance at a wedding feast by Jesus and his mother, Mary. During the wedding Mary made an observation to Jesus that they were out of wine. Jesus's response was to declare a separation from Mary, addressing her as "woman," and saying that "Mine hour has not yet come." The NIV changes Jesus' statement to be a separation from the situation rather than Mary, which makes no sense because Jesus went on to miraculously make wine for the party. The RSV changes Jesus' statement to be a separation of Mary from Jesus. The NKJV, ESV, and NASB also change Jesus' staterment to be a separation from the shortage of wine situation." The suggestion by Mary, pointing out a need, seems to me to be the least assertive form of control that can be used, but Jesus apparently recognized the communication as a means of control and rejected it. His referral to Mary as "woman" shows that he considered the issue as between an man and a woman and not as a child and mother, showing that Jesus isn't the eternal mama's boy that the Roman Catholic Church represents him as; so completely under the control of his mother's suggestion that prayers can be addressed to Mary. The KJV also contradicts the Gnostic idea of a female goddess ruling over Jehovah. This seems to me to be a significant error introduced by using Alexandrian manuscripts and/or dynamic equivalence. Jesus' statement that his hour had not yet come appears to be a reference to the time of his execution, as this reference is made in other places in the Bible. While Jesus was on the cross he provided for his mother's welfare by assigning John as a son to Mary, which I think shows that when he declared a separation from Mary, it was not to indicate a rejection of responsibility for her welfare. I would appreciate any opinions on this subject.