:o) Ahem. "Context". Right you are.
Look metmom, we're not talking about nutty people going over the Falls in a barrel. We're talking about New Testament Apostles and Martyrs---- in the following quotes, Stephen, Paul and John --- addressing religious leaders as "father," and referring to themselves as "fathers" of their converts:
Acts 22:1
“Brothers and fathers, listen to the defense that I now make before you.”
Romans 4:16
For this reason it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his descendants, not only to the adherents of the law but also to those who share the faith of Abraham (for he is the father of all of us, as it is written, “I have made you the father of many nations”)—
1 Corinthians 4:15
Indeed, in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.
Philemon 1:10
I am appealing to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I have become during my imprisonment.
1 John 2:13
I am writing to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning.
In none of the above cases is "father" used to mean, literally, begetter or sire. It is used to mean "father in the faith," "spiritual father," --- the same way Christians have, for millennia, called their spiritual leaders "father."
Context!
You heard the Niagara Falls one, too, eh? Living in the vicinity growing up, it was pretty common.
Anyway,
Jesus said to call no religious leaders by the title of “Father”. He also added rabbi or instructor.
Now, I find this interesting that when we’re discussing John 6 and the eucharist, there is the adamant demand that the words of Jesus be taken literally.
But here? Now they’re not? Even when they are as plain and clear as could be? And everyone is trying to weasel out of it, justifying why it shouldn’t be taken literally, even to the point of using the *Everyone else is doing it* argument.
Sorry. Not buying today.