Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Fantasywriter

Try not to major in minors. When Jesus taught against calling abyone, ‘father,’ He was teaching against ***titles.*** Paul did not adopt the term as a *title.* He never instructed believers to call him ‘Father Paul.’ He was, in fact, never called, ‘Father Paul.’


That is only a conclusion, his writing speaks for itself

Let Peter say the same thing and he would catch hell for preaching bogus doctrine which it is.


1,274 posted on 09/02/2017 9:35:39 AM PDT by ravenwolf (If the Bible does not say it in plain words, please don`t preach it to me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1270 | View Replies ]


To: ravenwolf

Your exegetical method is not entirely consistent. When you see the word for ‘brother,’ you apply yourself to find out if you can’t find someone somewhere who says it means something other than, ‘brother.’ Otoh, when you see the word, ‘father,’ you appear to believe it can have but a single usage.

We know this is not the case. Jesus prayed, ‘Our Father who is in heaven.’ Elsewhere we see, ‘Joseph the father, as was supposed, of Jesus.’

Can you argue that these usages are identical? One refers to the Lord God. One refers to a man, a mere mortal.

Then there is the Matthew 23 passage. Can you read it in context and truthfully say that what is being discussed is spiritual or biological fatherhood?

1 Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, 2 saying: ”The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; 3 therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them. 4 They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger. 5 But they do all their deeds to be noticed by men; for they broaden their phylacteries and lengthen the tassels of their garments. 6 They love the place of honor at banquets and the chief seats in the synagogues, 7 and respectful greetings in the market places, and being called Rabbi by men. 8 But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers. 9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. 10 Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader,that is, Christ. 11 But the greatest among you shall be your servant. 12 Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted.

It’s impossible to read this passage in context and not see what it’s about. Jesus is forbidding us to appropriate titles that elevate one above another. Any title that can undercut our understanding of who God is must be eschewed.

For example, Jesus wants us to acknowledge Him as our teacher. If some human teaches us something, we can certainly acknowledge that. But we can’t bestow on them a title that will diminish our acknowledgement of Jesus as “the Good Teacher.”

Likewise with father. We’re not forbidden from acknowledging relationships. God knows we have biological fathers, and He would not criminalize our acknowledgement of this fact.

We can have a spiritual father, too, in the sense of someone who brought us to Christ. Acknowledging a spiritual relationship is not a sin.

What becomes a sin is the appropriation of a title for the purpose of differentiating one believer from another. Jesus pointed out that the Pharisees loved the title of Rabbi for the honor it bestowed. Similarly, we can’t appropriate the *title* of ‘father,’ because there is only One who merits such an honor.

Paul did not sin by acknowledging his spiritual fatherhood of those he had brought to faith in Christ. He would have sinned the instant he asked them to do him the honor of granting him the title, ‘father.’ That goes beyond the simple fact of his leading them to Christ; that takes the honor due exclusively to God and bestows it on a mere man.

We all know Paul never appropriated the title of father. He never asked those he had led to Christ to address him as Father Paul. Had he done so, it would have been a sin.

You are mistaken about Peter. Had he acknowledged spiritual fatherhood of those he had led to Christ there would be no issue. Had he asked believers to call him Father Peter, it would have been a sin. But of course he wouldn’t have done that. He had heard Jesus’ teaching firsthand, and he understood that the *title* of ‘fsther,’ was off limits to mere mortals.


1,277 posted on 09/02/2017 1:43:23 PM PDT by Fantasywriter (Any attempt to do forensic work using Inernet artifacts is fraught with pitfalls. JoeProbono)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1274 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson