Replies

Let's get the context of the conversation in proper perspective first. Your cut and past job misses that.

mrs.don-o: The one place where I would differ from you, is that I would point out the tightly related significance of noun and verb. All these nouns have a meaning directly derived from, and dependent upon their verbs.

>> However, the verb used in 1 Cor 4:15 which some have translated as "father" has no such association. That's the significant difference that needs to be understood. <<<

My point to mrs.d was the verb in 1 Corinthians 4:15, which many have understood to be a noun, is not derived from patera. Nor was it to be capitalized as she did in her original post.

More from Strongs.

b. in a Jewish sense, of one who brings others over to his way of life: ὑμᾶς ἐγέννησα I am the author of your Christian life, 1 Corinthians 4:15; Philemon 1:10 (Sanhedr. fol. 19, 2 "If one teaches the son of his neighbor the law, the Scripture reckons this the same as though he had begotten him"; (cf. Philo, leg. ad Gaium § 8)).

Context is again your friend in understanding Scripture.

Paul is not saying he should be called "Father" as used by the RCC today.

Nor is this justification for the RCC priesthood and calling their priests "Father".

To infer such is a huge leap...but that hasn't stopped Roman Catholicism in the past nor do I doubt it will stop it in the future.

The injunction against calling "no man father" remains with no contradiction.

My point to mrs.d was the verb in 1 Corinthians 4:15, which many have understood to be a noun, is not derived from patera.

Abraham begat Isaac; Abraham is his father.
Isaac begat Jacob; Isaac is the father of Jacob.
Jacob begat Judas and his brethren; Jacob is the father Judas and his brethren.
Paul wrote to Timothy "I have begotten you through the gospel"; Paul is the (spiritual) father of Timothy.

Nor was it to be capitalized as she did in her original post.

Are you certain ? This one, and others, claim :

All of the Greek New Testament originals were written in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS with no spaces and probably no punctuation, and all of the earlier manuscripts are in this style, whether on parchment or papyrus. This is because the Greek alphabet did not have punctuation until at least the II century, and there were no minscule (lower case) letters until much later.

More from Strongs.

b. in a Jewish sense, of one who brings others over to his way of life: ὑμᾶς ἐγέννησα I am the author of your Christian life, 1 Corinthians 4:15; Philemon 1:10 (Sanhedr. fol. 19, 2 "If one teaches the son of his neighbor the law, the Scripture reckons this the same as though he had begotten him"; (cf. Philo, leg. ad Gaium § 8)).

Context is again your friend in understanding Scripture.

Okay, so it seems to me you agree that there is a traditional sense that someone can be a spiritual father.

Paul is not saying he should be called "Father" as used by the RCC today.

Nor is this justification for the RCC priesthood and calling their priests "Father".

Okay, will you settle for FATHER like the original Greek ?

To infer such is a huge leap...but that hasn't stopped Roman Catholicism in the past nor do I doubt it will stop it in the future.

You make a very profound point here with respect historicity and endurance.

The injunction against calling "no man father" remains with no contradiction.

Undoubtably the scripture remains:

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

...

But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

...

And there went great multitudes with him: and he turned, and said unto them, If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

Matthew, Catholic chapter five, Protestant verses seventeen to twenty,
Matthew, Catholic chapter fifteen, Protestant verses three to four,
Luke, Catholic chapter fourteen, Protestant verses twenty five to twenty six,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James

Neither Greek nor Hebrew at the time of the writing of the Bible had lower-case letters. All the letters were capital. As for my capitalization (way back in that previous post you referred to), it was not intended to have some special significance. It would make exactly the same point without capitalization.

The connection between "father" as a noun and and as verb is grammatical, but it isn't merely grammatical. It is a logical corollary. Father can only mean someone who fathers in some way, whether this is biological, social, historic, pedagogic or metaphorical: "John Paul Jones, Father of the American Navy." "Martin Luther and John Calvin, the fathers of the Protestant Reformation."

The valuable information you copied from Strong's makes my point very well. Calling a man "father" because he is bringing someone over to his way of life is reckoned "the same as though he had begotten him"; (cf. Philo, leg. ad Gaium § 8))

This well explains the justification for calling Abraham our father in the faith; calling Paul the "father" of Onesimus; and calling our monks and priests "father." They are spiritual fathers.

As you yourself concluded, "The injunction against calling 'no man father' remains with no contradiction.