No what I prepied to was the term LTM used including Mary to imply she was embarrased of her son Christ. If she had said she was concerned for her son because of his preaching then yes I would have agreed with her. Then you try to imply my statement had nothing to do with Matthew 12:46-50 becuase of the scriptures I used to show in no way would she have beem embaracced knowing who he was. Concerned for his safety yes but not emarraced.<quoted text>not often do I agree with you but you are correct and if he had read anthonys reply to you he would have seen that. in your own perverted way, you WERE defending mary.
but in retrospect, it is difficult to keep up with every post. so that is probably what occurred with clay on your post.
but you should have pointed the finger of speaking about an idiot to mean yourself.lol
Therefore you are the idiot not me.
Comments (Page 20,222)
Amen Preston, I believe that Mary and Jesus' brothers came to that
place to get Him to stop preaching, He had became an embrassment to
mary knew who her son was. wever the brothers were in doubt.
Remeber Christ also told Mary his time had not come when she asked
for the water to be turned to wine.