Sermons/Discussions

Questions and Answers: Biblical Names and the Title "Father"

Article for the October 21st, 2005 Weekly Update

The Rev. Matt Kennedy

The Church of the Good Shepherd

Today's article represents the rollout of a new feature of Good Shepherd online: Questions and Answers.

If you have questions about any aspect of the Christian faith, email them here: lambeth@flash.net or write them down and leave them in the church office.

Anne+ or I will respond to your question privately and may ask for your permission to post both your question and our answer on the website as a Questions and Answers article.

Today we'll answer two questions sent in by Christine Osgood. The first concerns names in the bible and the second has to do with the title “father” accorded to Roman Catholic and Episcopal priests.

Question:

Douglas and I want to know why some people in the bible have more then one name? We are reading Acts and Saul/Paul, John also called Mark.

Many people in the bible have more than one name. Sometimes this is significant and sometimes it's simply the difference between being referred to by a nickname or a full name rather than a partial name.

John Mark for example is the full name of the evangelist who wrote the Gospel of Mark. Sometimes he's called just Mark (Colossians 4:10), other times he's called John Mark (Acts 12:25), and other times just John (Acts 13:5). It can be very confusing unless you've studied your bible for years and have had the time to sort it out.

There are some significant name changes that are not simply nicknames or elongated names. Peter is one of those significant changes. He was originally called “Simon” (Mark 1:17). But when he replied to Jesus' question, “Who do you say that I am” with “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16), Jesus renamed him "Cephas" which means "Rock" in Aramaic. Jesus changed his name because Peter's belief in Jesus as the messiah would be the confessional Rock upon which the New Testament Church would be founded.

"Cephas" means Rock in Aramaic. In Greek, rock is "Petra" and as a name it would be “Petros” which was later anglicized to “Peter”. In the bible you find Peter called "Simon" (Mark 1:17), "Simon Peter" (Luke 6:14), "Peter" (Acts 1:13) and "Cephas" (John 1:42).

Saul (of the New Testament) was a Pharisee who persecuted the early followers of Jesus (Acts 8:58; Philippians 3:4-6). When the risen Jesus confronted him on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:1-19), Saul believed the gospel and committed his life to teaching non-Jews (Greeks mainly) about Jesus. But "Saul" is a very Jewish name. In order to gain wider access to the gentile world, he changed his name to "Paul" or "Paulus" in Latin, which would have been recognized as a common name by both Romans and Greeks.

Then of course, there are two Johns and two Jameses.

There is John the Baptist (John 1:15-34) who was beheaded by Herod during Jesus' ministry in Galilee (Matthew 14:1-12) and then there is John the disciple of Jesus, son of Zebedee (Matthew 4:21-22) and brother of one of the Jameses.

John the disciple, son of Zebedee, wrote the Gospel of John and 1st, 2nd, and 3rd John and possibly Revelation.

His brother James the disciple, son of Zebedee (John 4:21-22), was martyred in Jerusalem in 44AD (Acts 12:2).

Jesus referred to his disciples James and John, the two sons of Zebedee, as Boanerges, or “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17) possibly because of their enthusiastic zeal for Christ.

The other James was the natural brother of Jesus through Mary (Matthew 13:55), and not one of the original 12 disciples. At first James did not believe his brother was the messiah (John 7:2-5). But he joined and later led the Christian Church in Jerusalem (Galatians 2:9; Acts 15:13) after seeing Jesus alive and risen after his death and burial (1 Corinthians 15:7). This James wrote the book of James.

I'll stop here as by now you are probably thoroughly confused. But suffice it to say that the more familiar you become with the bible the easier it will become to recognize names and the people to whom they refer.

Question :

Someone at work asked why Catholic (and Episcopal) priests are called Father. She said it says somewhere in the bible that God said I am the father and no one but me shall be called father. I could not find any such passage. I told her I would get an answer for her.

She is right about the admonition. It can be found in Matthew 23:9, "And do not call anyone on earth 'father' for you have one Father and he is in heaven."

When approaching such passages the first thing to ask yourself is, "Is this a universal command applicable to all times and places or is this a localized or even a hyperbolized command or expression?"

In other words, does Jesus mean that we are never to address ANYONE on earth by the term father?

If it is a universal command then we run into a big problem right off the bat because in the very same gospel (Matthew 15:4) Jesus quotes the 5th commandment, "You shall honor your father and mother" and argues that the Pharisees have applied their traditions in such a way that they force people to break this commandment.

But if you are not supposed to call ANYONE on earth 'father' then the command itself is faulty because the command applies the term "father" to a human dad.

And yet Jesus quotes and upholds this commandment and expects his followers to keep it.

So, is Jesus contradicting himself?

Of course not.

What this means is that Jesus did not mean for his command to be taken in a wooden, literal sense, that there are some people who may properly be called 'father'.

His dictate must have been a localized or hyperbolic.

Jesus used hyperbole quite a bit to make his point.

For example he said in Matthew 5:30, "And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away..."

He was making the point that sin is deadly and dangerous and we should discipline our bodies and minds to stay away from it. He did not mean that when you sin with your right hand; perhaps touch, take or hold something you shouldn't or gesture inappropriately, that you should literally cut it off. Otherwise every single Christian would or should be walking around without a right hand.

He was simply using hyperbole to emphasize his point.

It's commonly done by speakers today as well. When you say, "this day is never going to end." Do you really mean NEVER? No, you're using hyperbolic language to make a true point, it's been a tough day.

Turning back to the passage in question you'll see that in context Jesus is rebuking the Pharisees for their pride.

He says they love to be called "rabbi" and "father" and to take the seats of honor in public places. They love to feel set apart from and above other people. But in reality they are sinners like everyone else.

The Pharisees were using the title “father” as a source of pride and/or elitist arrogance. Jesus' point was that they were putting themselves in God's place. God is the ultimate and true Father. He is the ultimate Teacher and the Rabbi to whom all must bow and obey, even the Pharisees themselves.

Given all of this, I would say that if a pastor or priest is using the title “father” as a source of sinful pride, he should not use it or allow it to be used about him.

If, however, the title is intended to convey the idea that the pastor is the leader of the flock in the same way that a father is the leader of a family, then I think it is okay, remember Jesus was not giving a universal rule, but a hyperbolic expression of a true principle, only God is God.

That's my take on it and I have never been one to insist on the "father" moniker. If you feel more comfortable calling me Matt or pastor or whatever, that's fine with me.

But if you like “father” and you mean it in the "family" sense then there is, in my opinion, nothing biblically to forbid it.

Matt+