Clearly in the scripture I provided Jesus is using the words 'mother' and 'son' as titles for two people rather than using their names. According to what you are teaching Jesus should have said 'Women, behold John' and 'Behold Mary'.
I'm not suggesting anything about what Jesus
should have done. I'm looking at what Jesus actually did.
The word mother is clearly a title here because it is used to recall the familial responsibilities a son has towards his mother, which in that male dominated society was for the son to take his mother into his house.
I think you're trying too hard to make the situation fit what I see as a bias in your reasoning. "Mother" is not used as a title here, because it's not being used to address Mary directly. Mary is a mother. Mary, the mother of Jesus. Your mother is Mary. Look at your mother. Look at my mother.
None of these occasions is using mother as a title, because none of them are addressing the mother as a person. They are talking
about the mother. But if you said, "Look at mother Mary" then the word is no longer talking
about Mary, but is being used as part of her name. It has switched over to being used as a title.
The context of the verses from John 19 where Jesus tells John to look after his mother clearly does not use "mother" as a title. You say it clearly does, but the fact that it clearly does not should indicate to you that you have a bias in this area, and you should be asking yourself
why you have this bias. You say it's clearly a title because it's being used to let John know that he should care for Mary, but that's not what defines the use of the word as a title.
The intent of the speaker and how the word is used is what defines it as a title. In the same situation we see that when Jesus DOES directly address Mary, he does NOT say, "Mother". He says "woman".
This is what happens when people try to "explain away" the teachings of Jesus which they don't like. They start making irrational arguments. When directly addressing Mary, Jesus says, "woman". When talking
about Mary he says "mother". And yet in your own mind you insist he was using the word "mother" as a title. Why? It's irrational.
Deb did something like this earlier about how me interpreting "dad" to have the same meaning as "father" was somehow "adding to the scripture" and then she herself posted huge paragraphs of commentary about how "what Jesus really meant was..." followed by lengthy explanations which ended up saying that it's perfect fine to use these special titles so long as we don't grow "fond" of them. Jesus didn't say anything even remotely close to that, and yet Deb sees no problem with "adding to scripture" these explanations which basically make the teaching of no effect.
Of course, people show their fondness for the titles when they refuse to let go of them. Deb made it clear that her own mother would be hurt if she used her mothers' proper name, but when I asked, 3 times, for an explanation as to
why her mother should be hurt by not receiving the special title, Deb did not answer. Sometimes silence can be the most telling answer.
The distinction you suppose between using a word as a title to address someone versus using the very same word when talking about someone is flawed.
But you've not shown how it's flawed.
We could try a slightly trickier example to make it more clear. "Look at your mother, Mary" and "Look at your Mother Mary". The punctuation shows how the emphasis of the word changes, depending on how the person uses it. That's what's really most significant about Jesus' teaching on the subject. We're not talking about a legalistic approach, (even though in the legalistic sense your argument still doesn't work), but rather getting the spirit of what Jesus was trying to communicate.
What is the intent of how the word is being used. No one, not me or Jesus, suggested that the words in themselves are wrong, or that using the words as nouns are wrong. The purpose of the lesson is to address the intent of how the word is used. This means examining motivation.
People have been arguing that they
can do it without falling into the same temptations as the Pharisees, but the Pharisees are not a special class of people. They are simply more extreme examples of where the use of special titles leads to, to make the point abundantly clear.
Jesus was not singling out the Pharisees but rather using them as examples to illustrate why we should not use these special titles. His solution was to not use them at all. It's not a matter of working out how we can use the titles and still avoid the bad parts. He said don't do it.
Are people getting that part? He said don't do it. You have your various reasons and explanations, but the bottom line is that he said don't do it. Are we willing to obey Jesus just because he said to?
