V
VociMike
Guest
“Call no man father” includes calling oneself father, assuming Paul was a man.
- Status
V
VociMike
Guest
Nope, can’t get off that easily. A child’s biological father is most certainly also one of his/her spiritual fathers. Biological fathers are unquestionably the spiritual leader of the family. Do I need to produce the scriptures?
M
mtr01
Guest
Hmm, I just found an interesting article on the use of “Father” in American Protestantism.
B
Brendan
Guest
It’s just one of his man made traditions
Protestants have lots of those.
B
Brendan
Guest
Guess what, Hebrew and Kione Greek have nothing BUT Captial letters. So every single use of the word “Father” would be spelled with capitals.
If a translator changed that, I am under no obligation to consider that inspired, now am I?
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Call No Man Father
1 Corinthians 4:14–15
“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 Corinthians 4:17
Therefore I sent to you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ"
1 Timothy 1:2
“To Timothy, my true child in the faith: grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord”
“This charge I commit to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the prophetic utterances which pointed to you, that inspired by them you may wage the good warfare” (1 Tim 1:18);
2 Timothy 1:2
“To Timothy, my beloved child: Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord”
2 Timothy 2:1
“You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus”
1 Thessalonians 2:11-12
For you know that we dealt with each of you as a father deals with his own children, encouraging, comforting and urging you to live lives worthy of God, who calls you into his kingdom and glory.
“But Timothy’s worth you know, how as a son with a father he has served with me in the gospel” (Phil. 2:22).
“To Titus, my true child in a common faith: grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior” (Titus 1:4);
“I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I have become in my imprisonment” (Philem. 10).
None of these men were Paul’s literal, biological sons. Rather, Paul is emphasizing his spiritual fatherhood with them.
A
Atemi
Guest
A
Atemi
Guest
Christ was addressing titles as those of spiritual leaders.
Academic titles or professional titles are not referred to at all by our Lord.
Why would anyone go out of one’s way to disobey?
That makes no sense.
…
V
VociMike
Guest
And yet that noted spirtual leader Paul said “I became your father in Christ Jesus”. According to the new Protestant interpretation (only about 150 years old), that makes no sense either.
M
myfavoritmartin
Guest
AGAIN, he did NOT say call me “Father Paul” which is clearly what Christ was speaking of…And if he wasn’t what then, Mike?
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Perhaps this:
So What Did Jesus Mean?
Jesus criticized Jewish leaders who 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” (Matt. 23:6–7). His admonition here is a response to the Pharisees’ proud hearts and their grasping after marks of status and prestige.
He was using hyperbole (exaggeration to make a point) to show the scribes and Pharisees how sinful and proud they were for not looking humbly to God as the source of all authority and fatherhood and teaching, and instead setting themselves up as the ultimate authorities, father figures, and teachers.
Christ used hyperbole often, for example when he declared, “If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell” (Matt. 5:29, cf. 18:9; Mark 9:47). Christ certainly did not intend this to be applied literally, for otherwise all Christians would be blind amputees! (cf. 1 John 1:8; 1 Tim. 1:15). We are all subject to “the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life” (1 John 2:16).
Since Jesus is demonstrably using hyperbole when he says not to call anyone our father—else we would not be able to refer to our earthly fathers as such—we must read his words carefully and with sensitivity to the presence of hyperbole if we wish to understand what he is saying.
**Jesus is not forbidding us to call men “fathers” who actually are such—either literally or spiritually. (See below on the apostolic example of spiritual fatherhood.) To refer to such people as fathers is only to acknowledge the truth, and Jesus is not against that. He is warning people against inaccurately attributing fatherhood—or a particular kind or degree of fatherhood—to those who do not have it. **
As the apostolic example shows, some individuals genuinely do have a spiritual fatherhood, meaning that they can be referred to as spiritual fathers. What must not be done is to confuse their form of spiritual paternity with that of God. Ultimately, God is our supreme protector, provider, and instructor. Correspondingly, it is wrong to view any individual other than God as having these roles.
Throughout the world, some people have been tempted to look upon religious leaders who are mere mortals as if they were an individual’s supreme source of spiritual instruction, nourishment, and protection. The tendency to turn mere men into “gurus” is worldwide.
This was also a temptation in the Jewish world of Jesus’ day, when famous rabbinical leaders, especially those who founded important schools, such as Hillel and Shammai, were highly exalted by their disciples. It is this elevation of an individual man—the formation of a “cult of personality” around him—of which Jesus is speaking when he warns against attributing to someone an undue role as master, father, or teacher.
He is not forbidding the perfunctory use of honorifics nor forbidding us to recognize that the person does have a role as a spiritual father and teacher. The example of his own apostles shows us that.
catholic.com/library/Call_No_Man_Father.asp
T
Turtullian
Guest
Christ said “call no man Father” Paul was a man, he called himself “father”. IF Christ told us to really call no man father why did Paul call himself father if he was a man?
W
water
Guest
oh man, which one is right?
- calling me “Father Paul” or - “I am your father in Christ”?
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
If not for the rabid anti-Catholicism that negatively affects the judgment of some, this kind of nonsense would never come up.
V
VociMike
Guest
He called himself (a man) father. That’s a clear violation of “call no man father”. Christ did not say “call no man father but yourself”. You’re just adding that to the scripture because you cannot avoid the clear meaning of Paul’s words.
In addition, if somebody says “I am your father” it would only be natural for you to call him your father. So in addition to violating the words of Christ himself, Paul was also leading all those who heard him call himself their father into similar sin.
V
VociMike
Guest
I agree. Nobody makes a worse bungle of scripture than those who use it to attack the Catholic Church. But the errors and heresies that come out in such attacks are amazing to behold.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Isn’t it interesting that the same people who insist upon a literal word for word interpretation of this phrase will absolutely turn somersaults trying to avoid the plain meaning of “This is my body…this is my blood”?
Or “not by faith alone”.
Or “You are Peter, and upon this rock…”.
Or “if you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven…”
Etc, Etc. :nope:
Or “not by faith alone”.
Or “You are Peter, and upon this rock…”.
Or “if you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven…”
Etc, Etc. :nope:
A
Atemi
Guest
You are still ignoring the fact that Christ was specifically and methodically addressing the very real TITLES the religious leaders of His day adopted.
We know clearly from history that NONE of the Apostles ever were addressed by titles such as “Father Paul” or “Father Matthew.”
Yet today we have men that would actually be offended if you didn’t refer to them in such a fashion. I guess the Apostles themsleves can go by just “Peter” or “Paul” but some teachers today think they are deserving of more.
…
T
Turtullian
Guest
Paul used a spiritual title “father” to refer to himself. By doing so, he violated Christ’s words in call no man father. QED.
A
Atemi
Guest
He did not apply any title for himself anywhere in the text.
There is a difference between a TITLE and common noun.
For anyone to flee from acknowledging this difference is not wise, IMO.
- Status