S
Socrates4Jesus
Guest
Good point, Mercy!
- Status
M
mercygate
Guest
Thanks! :tiphat:Good point, Mercy!
P
Pax
Guest
Here is my stock answer to the statement about calling no man “Father, Teacher, or Master.”
In Jesus time there were a number of Jewish sects. These were the Pharisees, Saducees, Essenes, and Zealots
These sects had houses of teaching within them .
Within the Pharisees there were two famous rival houses.
They were the House of Shammai(Beit Shammai) and the House of Hillel (founder of the Beit Hillel school). The individuals that these houses were named after were considered the “father” of the house.
Jesus warns the apostles not to be fathers to “separate” houses for there is but one house of the Lord. Jesus also says to call no man “teacher” or “master.”
–side note:
Paul was taught by Gamaliel[Acts22:3], a pharisee from the house of Hillel. Gamaliel was, in fact, the grandson of Hillel. Gamaliel was known as an elder and had the title of “Rabban” which means “Our Master.” This title explains why Jesus also said call no one “master”, for there is but one house and one master of all.
Again, Jesus wanted unity see John 17], and does not want the apostles to set up separate houses or schools of thought. The corollary of this is clearly expressed in Paul’s complaint in 1 Cor 1:10-15 where some are arguing their superiority by being baptized by, and belonging to, Paul vs. Apollos, or Cephas, etc. Paul goes on elsewhere to further warn against factions and divisions, and stresses the importance of one mind and unity of doctrine.
The meaning of “call no man father, teacher, or master” concerns unity and consistency of doctrine and has nothing to do with the commonly used references that are seen elsewhere in scripture or everyday use.
In Jesus time there were a number of Jewish sects. These were the Pharisees, Saducees, Essenes, and Zealots
These sects had houses of teaching within them .
Within the Pharisees there were two famous rival houses.
They were the House of Shammai(Beit Shammai) and the House of Hillel (founder of the Beit Hillel school). The individuals that these houses were named after were considered the “father” of the house.
Jesus warns the apostles not to be fathers to “separate” houses for there is but one house of the Lord. Jesus also says to call no man “teacher” or “master.”
–side note:
Paul was taught by Gamaliel[Acts22:3], a pharisee from the house of Hillel. Gamaliel was, in fact, the grandson of Hillel. Gamaliel was known as an elder and had the title of “Rabban” which means “Our Master.” This title explains why Jesus also said call no one “master”, for there is but one house and one master of all.
Again, Jesus wanted unity see John 17], and does not want the apostles to set up separate houses or schools of thought. The corollary of this is clearly expressed in Paul’s complaint in 1 Cor 1:10-15 where some are arguing their superiority by being baptized by, and belonging to, Paul vs. Apollos, or Cephas, etc. Paul goes on elsewhere to further warn against factions and divisions, and stresses the importance of one mind and unity of doctrine.
The meaning of “call no man father, teacher, or master” concerns unity and consistency of doctrine and has nothing to do with the commonly used references that are seen elsewhere in scripture or everyday use.
B
Brian_C
Guest
I was going to say the same thing. Does anyone think Jesus was sitting there dictating this to someone and telling them “that’s father with a big ‘F.’”
P
Pax
Guest
Mercygate,
Thanks for your kind words…I have admired your work on the forums and have gained much from you.
Thanks for your kind words…I have admired your work on the forums and have gained much from you.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Wow. Anti-Catholic and anti-Irish prejudice all rolled into one package. That’s ugly.
But you have concerns about calling someone “Father”. Here’s what the Bible says about:
Calling Priests Father
From a parable of Jesus
"There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores. The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. In hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. So he called to him, ’ Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’ "But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’ "He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father’s house, for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’ “Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’ ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’ He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’” (Luke 16:19-31)
Did Jesus contradict His own teaching against calling someone “father” by using that very phrase in His own parable? Or have you misunderstood what our Lord meant when he said, “Call no man your father.”
From the teaching of Paul
“I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (1 Cor. 4:14–15).
“I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I have become in my imprisonment” (Philemon 10)
“To Timothy, my true child in the faith: grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord” (1 Timothy 1:2)
“To Titus, my true child in a common faith: grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior” (Titus 1:4)
"Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all. (Romans 4:16)
I guess Paul didn’t get the memo.
From a Letter of John
“No greater joy can I have than this, to hear that my children follow the truth” (3 John 4)
Sounds like Paul and John considered themselves spiritual fathers to all these disciples, doesn’t it? And this is from the Word of God inspired by the Holy Spirit, is it not?
Note to Guardian1: The next time you see a post from Myfavoritmartin, ignore it.
G
guardian1
Guest
i may be a truck driving red headed stepchild, but i managed to pick up on that pretty quicklyNote to Guardian1: The next time you see a post from Myfavoritmartin, ignore it.
thanks to everyone who replied:thumbsup:
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
You’ve judged me wrong! I am not vindictive… Your loss!
G
guanophore
Guest
In doing so, we make a prayer that God will preserve him in all holiness, to the benefit of us all.
G
guanophore
Guest
This is a good point. Holy things, or persons are those consecrated and set apart. It does not mean they are necessarily perfect. For example:
1 Cor 7:13-14
14 For the unbelieving husband is consecrated through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is consecrated through her husband. Otherwise, your children would be unclean, but as it is they are holy."
Everyone knows that children are not necessarily more holy just because one of their parents is a Christian!
G
guanophore
Guest
guardian, if myfavorite martin is right, and Jesus did forbid the use of titles, then you cannot call him "“martin the vindictive” because that would be a title. In spite of the fact that he may have earned it on these threads…
No, he was making the point, consistent with the rest of the chapter, that people should not be revered when they do not follow the will of God.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
And if he had earned it, then Gandhi was describing him to a tee(see my signature quote)?
Yes, ignore, ignore, ignore…Randy Carson said:
Note to Guardian1: The next time you see a post from Myfavoritmartin, ignore it.
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
apologetics=defending the faith
Ignore=seered conscience.
By all means if your conscience tells you to ignore me go ahead!
But remember…
THIS STUFF ISN’T FROM ME, IT IS FROM THE WRITTEN"WORD OF GOD"
C
clmowry
Guest
Sola Scriptura (or more accurately Sola Verse-or-two-a) run amuck again.
Christ did NOT forbid the use of titles as you would like us to believe. If that’s the case, then you better go after “reverend” and “pastor” too.
Matthew Chapter 23:1-11
Then said Jesus to the crowds and to his disciples, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice. They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger. They do all their deeds to be seen by men; for they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues, and salutations in the market places, and being called rabbi by men. But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called masters, for you have one master, the Christ. He who is greatest among you shall be your servant; whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
These verses are “clearly” an indictment of self aggrandizing hypocritical behavior, not a prohibition against the use of any specific title, religious or otherwise.
If you would like to be legalisticly literal in your interpretation of these verses, it’s interesting that you take these verses as a prohibition specifically against the use of “father” in referring to a Catholic Priest.
“IF” the verse prohibits the use of terms, then it is the use of “rabbi” when refering to yourself and calling “no man” “father.”
“Obviously” Christ did not prohibit the use of the word father in reference to our earthly bio-logical father. He uses the term himself many times, in Luke Chapter 15 for example.
Given that none of this was said in English and that “father” is just one of the interpretations, I guess that we need to rule out the use of dad and pop an anything else at the same time.
This is just another ridiculously bad scriptural interpretation by someone with an axe to grind against the Catholic Church.
Chuck
G
guardian1
Guest
H
heisenburg
Guest
Martin…
Forgive me if it sounds as an attack, but this is more a question.
There are three possible sources for an interpretation…
…
So… How do you know you are right in your teaching?
May you be blessed in your journey
In Christ
Forgive me if it sounds as an attack, but this is more a question.
With respect, this is your interpretation of what God says. How do you know that what you have interpreted, and/or the interpretation you have been taught is valid?
There are three possible sources for an interpretation…
- You and your own personal experiences - Like it or not, we are all ruled more by our past experiences than we would like to believe. What you have heard in the past, what you have experienced, all influence how we see things, including the Scriptures.
- Devil - The devil can pose as an angel of light. How do you know your understanding isn’t from the devil. Many people will say, oh, you will know if it is from the devil, however, this is far from the truth. If a conman that is a mere human trick people, why is it that we expect to be able to tell if it is from the devil if he is the master of lies. The best lies are those hidden in truth
- God- 'nuff said.
…
So… How do you know you are right in your teaching?
May you be blessed in your journey
In Christ
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
Or its another situation where the easy definition of Christs’ words is getting twisted to fit to a later tradition of man…
YEP seems very likely in this case.
Kinda like the graven image verse…Doesn’t apply to ROME!
oh yeah and the bowing to people one, oh yeah and the abstaining from meat one, OH yeah and the forbidding marraige one, OH yeah and the communicating with the dead one, OH yeah and the mediator one, OH oh yeah and the eating flesh and blood one, oh yeah and the vain repetition of prayer one.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
Yep, one would have to refrain from using a good bit of words.
Part of Speech: noun 1Definition: parentSynonyms: ancestor, begetter, big daddy, dad, daddy, forebear, governor, head, old man, pa, padre, papa, pappy, parent, pater, pop, pops, predecessor, procreator, progenitor, sire, warden
Definition: priestSynonyms: abbe, confessor, cure, ecclesiastic, minister, padre, parson, pastor**, **preacher, prophet
Should I continue?
Part of Speech: noun 1Definition: parentSynonyms: ancestor, begetter, big daddy, dad, daddy, forebear, governor, head, old man, pa, padre, papa, pappy, parent, pater, pop, pops, predecessor, procreator, progenitor, sire, warden
Definition: priestSynonyms: abbe, confessor, cure, ecclesiastic, minister, padre, parson, pastor**, **preacher, prophet
Should I continue?
- Status