5S0
FATHER, FATHERHOOD
FATHER, FATHERHOOD
In setting forth Jesus' conception of the Father- liood of God, we sliall consider (1) the use of tlie name ' Father ' ; (2) the meaning of Fatherhood ;
(3) the Fatherhood of God in the Fourth Gospel ;
(4) the place of Fatherhood in the teaching of Jesus ; and (5) Jesus' conception of God compared ■with that of the OT and of His contemporaries.
1. Use of the name ' Father ' by Jesus. — The first recorded sentence of Jesus (Lk 2"), and that which ■was probably the last (Lk 23*^), both contain the name ' Father.' The boy of twelve felt an in^n'ard constraint to be engaged in the things of His Father, and twenty years later, expiring on the cross, it was into the hands of His Father that He commended His spirit. Throughout His ministry His use of this name is what we miglit expect from the scene ■which St. Luke records from His boyhood. ' The child is father of the man.' When- ever the personal relation between Hiiu and God is involved, Jesus employs no name but ' Father,' if we except a single passage where He quotes from the 22nd Psalm (Mk 15*^). In each of the hve prayers where the words of Jesus are given. He addresses God as ' Father ' (Mt 1 r^"-" •26^'->- ", Lk 23"' ■**) ; and in the longest of these, which includes only three verses, the name is repeated five times (Mt 1125-2'). When speaking of God in the third person, Jesus refers to Him once as 'the Great King' (Mt 5^''), and once as 'Lord of the harvest' (Mt 9^) ; but in almost every case He uses the name 'God' or the name 'Father.' He never employs .such circumlocutions as 'the Blessed One' and 'Holy One,' and never uses abstract designations such as ' Place,' all of which were common in the synagogue. It is siioiificant to compare with this usage that of Philo, whose commonest titles of God are abstract (e.g. rb &v, rb BvTU! 6^, rb irpbs a\ri6ii'bi> &v, 6 &v — Drummond, Philo Judmus, ii. 20). The name by which Jesus Him- self addressed God was also the name which He put on the lips of His disciples. It was their privilege to share His communion with God (Mt 6" 23»).
2. The Meaning of Fatherhood. — What Jesus meant by the term ' Fatlier ' is to be learned both from His words and from His life. From His words we infer that He chose this term to describe the character of God. Thus He teaches that, as it is the very nature of a father to give good rffts to his children, so it is the very nature of God to give His good things to those who ask Him (Mt 7", Lk 11'^). Earthly fathers, though evil, give to their children j much more will God give, who is absolutely and unchangeably good (Mk 10'*). He is ready to bestow the Kingdom of heaven upon the poor in spirit, and to give the vision of Himself to the pure in heart (Mt 5^- *) ; that is to say. He gives the best He has to any who will receive it. And even upon those who will not receive the best. He bestows much ; for He raaketh His sun to rise on the evil, and sendetli rain on the unjust (Mt5«). Jesus exhorts His ht-nn-r^ to Iiave this spirit in order that they m.iy lir( ,, heavenly Father and sliaiv Hi 545. 48)_ Accordingly the tprnr -I scribes what God is in Hiiiiselt concern merely or chiefly His relation to men, but it declares His verj- spirit, that which lies liehind all relationships.
The story of the Lost Son perfectly interprets Jesus' conception of Fatherhood (Lk 15"-3-). The lost son does not stand for a lost Israelite merely, a fallen member of the theocratic jieople, but repre- llicr .lew i>r Gentile. For, in
IS of the
li.m (Mt
I Iocs not
sents the .
the first place, the Jesus' reception of licans were rated ; IS'') ; and, in tlie -
en to justify • ■), and i.ub- Gentiles (Mt conclusion „f
Jesus in the parables of the Lost Sheep and the Lost Coin, which are manifestly parallel to that of the Lost Son, is perfectly general. He there declares that there is joy in heaven over one sinner who repents (Lk IS'-"). Therefore, when Jesus, in the story of the Lost Son, says that the father watched and longed for his son's return, and welcomed him at last with kisses and a joyful feast. He teaches that the Fatherhood of God is essential, and there- fore a fact of universal significance. It is in keep- ing with tills -when Jesus, addressing the multi- tttdes as well as His disciples, said to all who heard Him, ' Call no man your father on earth : for one is your Father, who is in heaven ' (Mt 23'- "). If we had more of the addresses of Jesus to the niulti- tndes, we should probably have more instances of
A-ain, the M-ry life of Jesus shows what He iiieaiit \<\ till- Fatherhood of God, for He surely felt that the spirit of this Fatherhood was mani- fested through Him. He portrayed His own atti- tude towards the lost when He drew the picture of the father and his lost son. His brotherhood in- terpreted the spirit of the Divine Fatherhood. But the brotherhood of Jesus describes what He was. He did not simulate brotherliness. It was by the very necessity of His holy and loving will that He was the friend of sinners. It is impossible, there- fore, to suppose that, in His thought, the Father- hood of God was sometliing less than essential, a figure setting forth His gracious relationship to certain favoured people. As His own love flowed out to men irrespective of all merely outward <:ir- cumstances, and as He believed that He knew the Fatlier and was in harmony with His will. Ho must have believed that God loves men irrespective of all outward circumstances ; in other ■words, that His Fatherhood is essential, and hence of univer.sal significance.