The Family Metaphor in Jesus' Teaching, Second Edition

Gospel Imagery and Application

Stephen Finlan

• Publisher: Cascade Books
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9781498215176
• eBook ISBN: 9781621896050
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Biblical Studies

This revised edition of The Family Metaphor in Jesus' Teaching examines the family metaphors for God (Father) and for believers ("children, " "brothers") that Jesus chose to use. Jesus not only held up a child as an example of receptivity, but he defended actual children, warning against despising "one of these little ones." Using current discussions of the "equal-regard family" and of the importance of "human fathering, " Stephen Finlan explores how the gospel entails a changed model of parenting and of marriage and a new approach to spiritual growth.

one

“My Father and your Father”

The Gospel Principles

The most noticeably characteristic teaching of Jesus is his focus “on the character of God, on God as a loving Father.”24 His remarkable teaching is that God is not only his father, but the personal and loving father of believers as well.

Jesus and Paul have quite different entrance-metaphors for salvation. Paul has an adoption metaphor (Rom 8:15; Gal 4:5), while Jesus speaks of “being born from above” (John 3:3). Adoption implies that one is not a child of God to begin with, but must be formally admitted into the family. There is a subtle but important difference in Jesus’ image of a second birth, which suggests some continuity or parallel between the first birth and the second birth. One is re-born into an expanded awareness of that into which one was first born. Being “born of the spirit” (John 3:4) means becoming spiritually motivated—thinking and acting in accordance with one’s highest grasp of interpersonal, moral, and intellectual values (loving God with all one’s heart and soul and mind, Matt 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27).

People are children of God, and simply need to activate the relationship, for “it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom” (Luke 12:32). The phrase “your Father” or “your heavenly Father” occurs fifteen times just in Matthew 5–6, and is sprinkled throughout the Synoptic Gospels. Although “Father” is common in the Gospel of John, “your Father” occurs only once, but this is a very clear statement of God as the Father of believers: “I ascend to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God” (John 20:17).25 In this passage, Jesus places himself equal to believers, as regards the fact of sonship with God. In this simple fact of sonship (not in other matters, such as having life-giving power in oneself, having existed before Abraham, etc.) we have the same relationship to God that Jesus has. Further, believers’ familial relation to one another derives from that same relation to God: “You are all brethren.26 And . . . you have one Father” (Matt 23:8–9 RSV). Obviously, this status affirms the dignity of the human person. Jesus did not consider God to be remote, but fully accessible and kindly. God is not just the Father, but “our Father” (Matt 6:9): he is loving and approachable.

What kind of father is God? At least as kindly as is a good earthly father. It is important to note that Jesus affirms the basic kindness of most parents, and suggests the greater kindness of God on this basis: “Is there anyone among you who, if your child asks for bread, will give a stone? Or if the child asks for a fish, will give a snake? . . . how much more will your Father in heaven give good things to those who ask him!” (Matt 7:9–11; cf. Luke 11:11–13). As any loving parent, God cares for his children, only wanting them to grow up. Jesus’ Father is not a surly sultan, an angry judge, or an insecure ruler, but he takes a loving father’s interest in the welfare of his children.27 “Our Father” knows what we need, and he provides it (Matt 6:8–9, 32). Thus, our praying should mainly be a quest for God’s will, for help with forgiveness and avoidance of temptation, and a simple request for our daily sustenance (Matt 6:10–15). Public displays of religiosity are futile, for “your Father” knows your true motivation, and “will reward you” (6:18). If our true Father is in heaven, then that is our true home, and we should invest our “treasure” there (Matt 6:19–21). This does not negate our responsibilities in this world, but gives us a far-sighted vision that is not focused on any worldly end.

Some readers may wonder about the gendered terminology for God. The first thing to notice is that the Father of Jesus is not the authoritarian figure of traditional cultures. Dorothy Lee identifies Jesus’ Father image as “antipatriarchal”; the Father in the Gospel of John hands over authority to the Son, and then to the community (John 3:35; 5:20–22; 14:12–17; 17:17–19), very much “unlike the Roman-Hellenistic paterfamilias.”28 His power is in self-giving, in intimacy, not remoteness. Subservience is not expected, but intimate friendship is offered.29

Pamela Young points to “biblical imagery of God as a woman in labor or midwife (Isa 42:14; 49:15; Ps 22)” in order to call for “a diversity of images.”30 Of course, one could choose to substitute “heavenly Mother” for “heavenly Father” in one’s thinking. What the Bible intends to depict is selfless spiritual watchcare. Diane Tennis calls for “transformation of that parent language” in order to include “mother language” for God, but she also wants to preserve “reliable father language,”31 and pleads “do not abandon God the Father, because God as Father is a reliable male symbol in the lives of women and men.”32

I would point out that calling God “Father” has a different social effect than calling God “Mother.” It operates upon the problem of male avoidance of parental responsibility. Calling God a mother does not call for a transformation of motherhood in the same way that calling God a father demands a transformation of human fatherhood. The “fatherhood of God” notion heightens the spiritual valuation of the fatherhood assignment and sharpens the consciousness of responsibility. “A reliable Father God is a source of calling men into fathering.”33 The ancient Jews knew this. In comparison with the “weak and ineffective” father-gods of the ancient Near East, the Bible pictured “a unique father-God who is compassionately . . . concerned with the welfare of his children,” and this led to a heightened seriousness about “the role of human fathering.”34

This momentum is carried further by Jesus’ teaching of a loving heavenly Father. Earthly fathers benefit from hearing that parenting is a godly responsibility. Having more inherently nurturing qualities, mothers generally do not need an extra nudge to nurture.35 Fathers do. “Fathers must be carefully and deliberately integrated into the institution of marriage.”36 This is not to say that women are already perfect or have no need for religious values or for education in parenting. It is merely to observe that in humans, as in all mammals, mothers are far more consistent in manifesting strong attachment to, and concern for, their young than are fathers. Without the values that come from culture (usually religious values), men have a tendency “toward paternal abandonment and sexual irresponsibility.”37 It was necessary to give the warning, “Take care that you do not despise one of these little ones” (Matt 18:10).

The ethics of fatherhood depend on the internalization of cultural values. The Fatherhood of God concept promotes a strong cultural valuation of responsibility toward children. Abandonment of such responsibility is a betrayal of the Gospel. Of course, the nature of the religious consciousness determines the quality of parenting (for mothers as well as for fathers). Religious ideologies that argue for strict male supremacy and control are based upon insecurity, and lead to patterns of abuse. The household codes in the Pastoral Epistles embody a male-dominant ideology that demands the submission of wives and slaves (1 Tim 2:8–15; 6:1–9; Tit 2:1–10). The vast majority of critical scholars do not believe that Paul wrote these letters, which represent the conservative (and victorious) wing among Paul’s successors. They create a “Paul” who gives authoritarian advice about people who “must be silenced,” who ought to be “submissive to their husbands” (Tit 1:11; 2:5), who attacks teachers who “captivate silly women” (2 Tim 3:6), and says “tell slaves to be submissive” (Tit 2:9). The household code in Ephesians does not go so far (Eph 5:21–6:9), but proceeds partway down this conservative road. Ephesians is much closer to Paul’s viewpoint than are the Pastorals, but the majority of scholars also consider Ephesians to be deutero-Pauline.

In passages that are undisputedly Paul’s, there is one single verse, 1 Cor 11:3, that seems to accept the common view of man as head of the household. It is highly unlikely, in the view of many scholars, that Paul wrote what we now have as 1 Cor 14:34–35: “women should be silent in the churches . . . it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.” Those verses are absent from some ancient manuscripts and occur in different locations in other manuscripts. They contradict and interrupt Paul’s remark that all can prophesy in the church (14:31).38 Further, vv. 34–35 are inconsistent with Paul’s frequent reference to women leaders and even apostles (Rom 16:1–5, 7 [apostle]; 1 Cor 1:11; 16:19; Phil 4:1–3).39 On the other hand, there is considerable basis in Paul, Jesus, and the OT prophets, for an ethic of equal regard and respect between the parents,40 and for “an ethic of male servanthood.”41

Christians are having to face the fact that there are some widely varying ideologies in the Bible on every subject, including family life. We live in a time when Christians need to utilize a critical approach to the Bible, using intelligence as well as spirituality in choosing to draw upon some passages more than others. The ethics of family life can benefit from a thoughtful and critical approach to the Bible, linked with a vital spirituality that is confident about fundamental values. There is no religious message more supportive of healthy family life than the message of God as a loving parent, and of earthly families as a microcosm of the universal family under divine parentage (see chapters 3–4.)

What we establish in this chapter is the nature of the believer’s relationship to God. Jesus continually returns to the image and reality of the child, to illustrate the attitude that is needed. No one enters the kingdom of heaven without the honesty and humility of a child....

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Preface
• Abbreviations
• Chapter 1: “My Father and your Father”
• Chapter 2: “First the stalk, then the head, then the full grain”
• Chapter 3: “Do not despise one of these little ones”
• Chapter 4: “Who are my mother and my brothers?”
• Chapter 5: “The two shall become one flesh”
• Chapter 6: “Mercy, not sacrifice”
• Bibliography