Call NO MAN Father - 0r teacher for that matter

[Heidi]

It's good to see such zeal in you heidi, even if it is miguided and you see yourself in this infallible way, kind of as a one woman Bible show and everyone else be damned. Kinda the Martin Luther syndrome. But I doudt you agree with alot of what he said. So, he must have been a pagan too. Have God send down fire upon me Heidi.

Your personal attacks on this thread rather than dealing with the issue are duly noted.

So how is it my fault if you don't believe Christ's words? :o I believe Jesus when he says we have one teacher and that is the Christ. I simply believe him over others who argue with him and for that you fault me? I thought you were a Christian! Your contradictions speak for themselves, my friend. But if you always want to be right, then all you have to do is agree with Jesus and there will be no problem. But if you try to get me to disblieve Christ's words, sorry, but you're barking up the wrong tree. :wink:

I believe all of Christ's words. I just don't accept your "infallible" interprutations of them. Your opinions that you personally elevate to the Word of God. The Church is the pillar and support of the truth. Not one man/woman bible shows. You do not understand my thinking and so you don't understand how I reconcile God's Word. You do not have the mind of Christ if you do not have the mind of his Church. You are a non-family member reading the story of the family and telling them what they experience. Doing it so boldly as to tell them that what they say they experience and believe happened and is happening is wrong.

Who's the one who believes Christ's words and who's the one "interpreting" them? Christ's words are separate from our minds and they say; "Do not call anyone on earth "father" for you have one Father and he is in heaven." Those words exist outside of ourselves. But interpretations are inserting words, changing words or subtracting words and that is what you are doing.

And that is why I believe every word in the bible as it is. I don't argue with them, try to change them, insert new words, or subtract from them. But that is what you are doing if you don't believe them as written as your OP shows. So this post of yours is another lie because you obviously don't believe his words or you wouldn't have initiated this thread.

And for saying you don't believe the interpretations of fallible men, that's another lie because you look to Martin Luther for your interpretations. So since you cannot be honest, then further conversations with you will again, be a waste of time.

 

[thessalonian]

Heidi, was Paul a man? Did he call himself father?
Was Abraham a man? Did Paul call him father?
Is the command honor your FATHER and mother only a command for pagans?

A simple yes or no will do.

 

[thessalonian]

And for saying you don't believe the interpretations of fallible men, that's another lie because you look to Martin Luther for your interpretations.

:o I do? I guess this statement isn't surprizing since you think we use the KJV as well. Your very confused Heidi.

You could use a little rest.

 

[wavy]

I repeat myself from the other thread on this debate:

i am not a catholic but i do now understand why people separate all good works (Torah and otherwise) from Messiah.

we do them because it is obedience to Messiah through love and faith, as a testimony to our love and faith. we do it for him, not because we are trying to get into heaven by "filthy rag" righteousness.

yet people still want to create this false dilemma...

anyway, concerning titles of "father" and "rabbi/teachers" etc...

i think the answer is quite simple. it is you yourself self-appointing yourself as "father" and "rabbi" and "master" etc, and then having people address you by that title.

paul used "father" in the context of himself but only as a matephor. he wasn't being called "father" by anyone, and i think that creates the difference.

if i say "i am the teacher, so you need to listen so you can learn", i am not saying saying "address me as teacher". i'm making a point.

i believe we can only call one "Father" (other than our own earthly fathers, which i don't believe were included in the context of what Yahshua was saying), and that is YHWH in heaven.

thus, inevitably, i do believe catholics are wrong.

 

[thessalonian]

i think the answer is quite simple. it is you yourself self-appointing yourself as "father" and "rabbi" and "master" etc, and then having people address you by that title.

Thanks for you OPINION wavy. It's kinda hand wavy. It says "call NO MAN father". Paul would be a man wouldn't he? Wouldn't that include yourself in the spiritual sense? If not then why not? Paul was speaking in the spiritual sense. Where does he say "call no man father, except by yourself".

I am not forced to call any priest father by the way. It is what I choose to do. I think that is the difference. That's pretty simple. I've never seen anyone punished for not calling a priest father. If they were I think that would be a violation of the passage. Why is your opinoin better than Heidi's or mine? There are lots of other opinoins on this board. Why is yours superior to imagicans?

 

[thessalonian]

Imigican,

If a tree falls in a forest and noone hears it, does it make a sound?

If two people tell us that they go by the Word of God, the Bible, and they come up with contradictory understandings of what the Bible says, does that mean the Bible contradicts? Does that mean they can be both right? Can we be sure us that one is right and the other is wrong?


You look like a duck Imigican.
I'm only kidding.

 

[wavy]

Thanks for you OPINION wavy. It's kinda hand wavy. It says "call NO MAN father". Paul would be a man wouldn't he? Wouldn't that include yourself in the spiritual sense? If not then why not? Paul was speaking in the spiritual sense. Where does he say "call no man father, except by yourself".

I don't think you got what I said. Paul was using the concept of father to prove a point. He was not being called "father" by anyone else.

Why is your opinoin better than Heidi's or mine? There are lots of other opinoins on this board. Why is yours superior to imagicans?

Please do not descend into saying such things. I never said anything like this.

 

[thessalonian]

I don't think you got what I said. Paul was using the concept of father to prove a point. He was not being called "father" by anyone else.

No I got it. I just think it's kind of hand wavy to say, well Paul called himself a father for this reason and that is okay. Your justification of it is rather lacking.

Please do not descend into saying such things. I never said anything like this.

[/quote]\

Descend to what? I asked you a question. You gave your obvuscation of a passage and so I questioned why your's was better than others. You are interpreting the Word of God, giving explicit meaning and understandings to it. That is pretty serious business and if you think it should be left to the individual whims of man then you had better have solid reasons for why your opinion is correct. Otherwise you are not transmitting the Word of God. You see if someone has scripture but they do not have the correct understanding of it, they do not have the WOG regarding that passage. Sorry. It's just a fact.

 

[Orthodox Christian]

Thanks for you OPINION wavy. It's kinda hand wavy. It says "call NO MAN father". Paul would be a man wouldn't he? Wouldn't that include yourself in the spiritual sense? If not then why not? Paul was speaking in the spiritual sense. Where does he say "call no man father, except by yourself".

I don't think you got what I said. Paul was using the concept of father to prove a point. He was not being called "father" by anyone else.

Except for that part where he addresses Timothy as "my son."

The point that Paul was making was the contrast between all those self-appointed tutors and teachers (ten thousand instructors) and those true fathers, such as himself, who put the well-being of their sons and daughters above their own ego gratification.

We have millions of American Evangelical instructors in Christ, each of them competing to be more spiritual and adroit than the other.

Then we have their spokes models, dime a dozen self-appointed knuckleheads, surrounding themselves with large auditoriums filled with itching ears. This was prophesied, and has come to pass in our times.

"Rebuke not an elder, but intreat [him] as a father; [and] the younger men as brethren; "

Yeah, don't call them 'father,' but treat them as such.
I'd go along with that as a start

 

[wavy]

No I got it. I just think it's kind of hand wavy to say, well Paul called himself a father for this reason and that is okay. Your justification of it is rather lacking.

This is why i don't think you get it.

That is pretty serious business and if you think it should be left to the individual whims of man then you had better have solid reasons for why your opinion is correct. Otherwise you are not transmitting the Word of God. You see if someone has scripture but they do not have the correct understanding of it, they do not have the WOG regarding that passage. Sorry. It's just a fact

Are you...I mean...

Is something wrong with you or something? I gave my opinion. Why even ask me this question? Why is yours better than any one else's?

Why is anyone's better than anyone else's?

This was a silyl question...

 

[wavy]

Except for that part where he addresses Timothy as "my son."

What do you mean by "except..."? That's still calling no one "father" and being addressed by such a title...

Yeah, don't call them 'father,' but treat them as such.
I'd go along with that as a start

I can agree with this.

 

[thessalonian]

God bless ya wavy.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Hoooha, you had some real fireballs in these old threads didn't you! LOL

 

[Vic C.]

LOL, nothing has changed. ;-)

Ecclesiastes 1:9 8-)

 

[francisdesales]

Hoooha, you had some real fireballs in these old threads didn't you! LOL

Those were relatively tame...

At least we Catholics aren't all going to hell...

Regards

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Here is a good link to read:
http://www.catholic.com/library/Call_No_Man_Father.asp

 

[Paul W.]

May I lovingly suggest a careful consideration of the context from which "call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father who is in heaven," is to be found.

The purpose of Christ's giving his disciples this command was not for the forbidding of certain words, but to reiterate the importance of having a "servant's heart."

In the beginning of the twenty-third chapter of the book of Matthew Jesus was telling the "multitude" and his "disciples" to take heed of the honor grabbing habits of the Pharisees and Scribes. Jesus told as how "The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses's seat," and how "all their works they do to be seen by men." Jesus went on to signalize how the Pharisees and scribes "love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
and greetings in the markets, and to be called by men, Rabbi, Rabbi."


In the Sanhedrin there existed a hierarchy of ecclesiastical "supreme" dignitaries. The prince of the Sanhedrin, called the Ha-Nasi, sat in the midst of two rows of senators or elders. On his right hand sat the person termed AB -the Father of the Sanhedrin; and on his left hand the Chacham, or sage. These persons transacted all business in the absence of the president.

These positions of honor were highly sought after among the members of the Sanhedrin.

Jesus was instructing his disciples and the multitudes not to seek such positions of "honor among men" for themselves; neither to bow to those who would seek such "honors among men" for themselves for they had only one Father and Rabbi and He is is NEVER absent .


In other words, none of the disciples ever needed to "fill in" for God and they should never give any heed to any man who would presume to do so.

God does not leave orphans nor does He need a substitute teacher.





This command was never about the words "father" or "teacher;" but about the attitude of servitude.



It is important, I believe, to take special notice of how this portion of the text was ended.

Jesus said:

"Neither be ye called masters: for one is your master, even Christ.
But he that is greatest among you, shall be your servant.
And whoever shall exalt himself, shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself, shall be exalted." -Matthew 23:10-12




The apostle Paul violated no commandment from Jesus, nor do our school children when they call their school teachers "teacher."




"If there be therefore any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies,
Fulfill ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind.
Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves." -Philippians 2:1-3







I love you all in Christ Jesus' name and for his sake; and...













May the love and peace of Jesus Christ be yours,
Paul W.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

As Paul said: "...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).

 

[Imagican]

Hoooha, you had some real fireballs in these old threads didn't you! LOL

Yes we did. But they have certainly 'tamed' most of em down. But, as Vic has offered, 'nothing new............ just a different day of it.

It got so bad that it was often little more than a 'mud slinging contest' that lead to little positive understanding for most.

You should have caught the ''Trinity: Biblically sound or Catholic Baggage'' thread. If it was still here you would have certainly found some interesting reading there. I do NOT believe that there was MUCH that was left without mention in that one concerning 'trinity', (or even the subject that is the title of this thread).

I sometimes wonder what ever happened to thess, (and wavy as well). He WAS 'one tough cookie'. I just hope and pray that things are well with both of them.

MEC

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Well, at least the poll results were pretty good.