God Our Father (and Mother)

Editorial
May/June 1988
Volume 23, Number 3

For some time it has been quite evident that there are those working diligently to perform a major sex-change operation on the Bible’s language. This is a high-priority agenda item for some feminists. We believe the trend toward inclusive language is not all bad, but it has gone too far. And the “too far” for us has to do primarily with the attempt to eliminate all male references to deity.

The whole cause behind the language issue seems to be largely artificial. Does anybody really feel left outside God’s offer of salvation and grace because the words do not always specifically refer to all genders? Must “children” and “boys and girls” always be mentioned along with grownups for them to know that they are not excluded from God’s plan? Are there really some women and girls who honestly believe that the use of male terms or masculine pronouns in Holy Scripture has barred them from the promises of God?

Something of the intimacy and personality of God is lost when we refer to God in neuter terms. Jesus needed closeness with His Father. So do we. The term “Abba” Father is employed in Scripture which would be the equivalent of today’s “daddy.” It is unacceptable to have this concept destroyed. At times I have found it disturbing during worship services at Annual Conference to be singing along heartily to the tune of some familiar hymn, and then all of a sudden have to adjust to the new words of some recent editors who thought they could improve on the hymnwriter’s words. This tends to distract from the true spirit of worship.

BRF views the strong endeavor at language change as another in a long list of attempts to undermine the authority and finality of the Bible. Tinkering with the Bible’s words cannot be done without changing the Bible’s message. Sometimes we wonder if those who are so unhappy with God as Father are really satisfied with Him as God.

We are glad to share the following carefully studied article as our way of trying to influence the language issue debate.

–James F. Myer

God Our Father (and Mother)

By Harold S. Martin

One of the most important issues facing the church in the late 1980s centers around the matter of changing language when speaking of God. Language is always changing. Dictionaries and grammars are frequently revised to include new words and phrases which become more commonplace with the march of time. The radical feminists are saying that the Scriptures are written in male terms and that the Bible should be corrected. They maintain that we must eliminate the 11 male bias” which supposedly runs throughout the Bible, and this includes references to the human family (such as “mankind”), and allusions to a male God (such as “the Father”), and the use of male pronouns (such as “he”). They argue that Bible descriptions are authoritarian and gender distinctive and in our day such terms are no longer useful; Biblical language must accommodate itself to the insights of the modern age!!

The inclusive language is being imposed upon the church like a kind of new fundamentalism. Requiring “correct” language is necessary in order to have a proper faith. The argument runs like this: Women are offended by traditional language, and so teaching materials, the words of hymns, worship liturgy, and even the Bible itself must be changed to conform to inclusive language standards.

1. SCOPE OF THE LANGUAGE CHANGE

In our day, the feminist critics are calling for a number of word changes that would make our language more inclusive of men and women. It is true that there have been some biases built into the words and phrases that are commonly used in church circles. It is not always helpful, for example, to refer to a congregation as “men” or “brethren.” In sensitivity to other persons, we can make an effort to be inclusive. We do not object to using the phrase “men and women” (instead of “men”) when referring to people, nor is it offensive to speak of “chairpersons” instead of chairmen,” or to say “mail carrier” instead of mailman.”

It is okay with most people to say that “utility men” are “utility persons” and that “manholes” are “person holes.” It doesn’t bother most of us if inspectors want to work in “sewer holes” instead of “manholes.” And certainly all of us should intentionally avoid use of stereotypes such as 11 woman driver” or “scatterbrained female.” However, the present-day discussion in church circles is not primarily concerned with typical references to people. The more serious concern centers around language which is used in reference to God.

There are groups within our churches that call for widening the terms used for God so that the language includes female images of God. They want all exclusive male references to God removed from the Bible. The language and wordpictures used in the Bible, they say, must be changed. The National Council of Churches, for example, has prepared inclusive translations of Scripture passages for use in its Lectionaries. In the NCC-sponsored Inclusive Language Lectionary, language for people is changed to include women as well as men. For example, it can be helpful to translate “Blessed is the man that walks not in the counsel of the ungodly” (Psalm 1:1) as “Blessed are those who walk not in the counsel of the ungodly” -and to render “Let your light shine before men” (Matthew 5:16), as “Let your light shine before others”–and to say, “Follow me and I will make you fishers of men and women,” instead of the translation formerly used. But to change language about God (to speak of God as Father “and Mother,” and Christ as “Child” of God) is unacceptable and can lead to some serious consequences. We will examine more carefully some of the results of such changes later in this article.

2. NATURE OF THE LANGUAGE CHANGE

The first Inclusive Language Lectionary* was released in October, 1983 by the NCC and further editions were published in more recent years. These collections of Scripture passages have been the first structural effort to eliminate male references to God in the Bible, and the words of the new translations have jolted committed Christians all across North America. When the United Church of Canada adopted the new language, the Vancouver Sun chose the headline: CHURCH MOVES MY GOD NEARER TO SHE.

(a) God as Mother

The Scripture translations for the Inclusive Language Lectionary add the words “and Mother” whenever there are references to God the Father. It is true that in several Old Testament texts, God is pictured as a woman giving birth, as a mother tending a small child, as a nursing mother, as a woman putting food and water on the table, etc. Christians down through the years have often referred to the motherly tenderness of God. It is true that in some ways God is like a mother-but God is never called “Mother.” When we speak of God as “Father,” we are including not only His fatherly (but also His motherly) qualities.

The word “Father” is the most distinctive name that Christians use for God. It is interesting to note that Muslims have 99 names for God (Protector, Provider, etc.), but not one of them is “Father.” Christians have learned to use the name “Father” by following the example of Jesus; this was the name by which He knew God. Even as a boy, Jesus said, “Did you not know that I must be about My Father’s business?” (Luke 2:49 NKJV). The last words of Jesus on the Cross were, “Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit” (L uke 23:46). When Jesus taught the disciples to pray, He said, “Say, Our Father who art in heaven.” And it is dangerous for us to tamper with those words. The prayer begins with “Our Father,” and goes on to say, “Hallowed be thy name.” What name? The name which opens the prayer – ” Father. ” To use the word “Father” when referring to God is simply to follow the example which Jesus set for us.

There is also a trend in hymnwriting that uses feminine imagery for God. British poet Brian Wren is a leader in the trend in hymnwriting. One of Wren’s most controversial hymns is entitled “Strong Mother God.” The hymn begins by calling God “Mother.” Later verses address God as 11 warm, father God; great, living God; old, aching God; and young, growing God.” For the feminists, the hymn “God of our Fathers” becomes “God of the Ages.” The line of another hymn is changed from “Like a loving father” to “Like a loving parent.” (Early reports indicated that the BrethrenMennonite Hymnal Committee favors eliminating masculine language in reference to people, but not necessarily with reference to God. See page 8, Messenger, February, 1987).

(b) Jesus as Lord

Radical feminists say that to sing songs like “The Church’s One Foundation is Jesus Christ Our Lord”-is to use sexist language and is not sensitive to the concerns of women. They say that the Bible (with all its talk about “lords” and I ‘kings”) reflects an ancient feudal society which is not acceptable in our day.

The feminist critics find something grievously wrong with the beginning of the Twenty-third Psalm. The sentence “The Lord is my shepherd,” they say, has a male-oriented sound, and so it is translated “God is my shepherd.” In their view, no one is in a position of “lord” over another. The words of Sarah recorded in 1 Peter 3 make them cringe: “So once the holy women who hoped in God … were submissive to their husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord” (1 Peter 3:5-6, RSV). The word “lord” is a four-letter “no-no” in feminist thinking.

Dropping the term “Lord” (in reference to Jesus) is a serious departure from truth. Early Christians repeatedly declared that “Jesus is L ord. ” This was in direct contradiction to the loyalties of citizens in the Mediterranean world. Citizens of the Roman Empire were required to declare that “Caesar is lord” (meaning that “Caesar is God”)-and precisely because Christians confessed that Jesus is Lord, many early Christians lost their lives. They refused to bow their knee to Caesar. If we drop the word “Lord” (when referring to Jesus), we are in effect denying the totality of who Jesus is, and we are not giving due credit to the special relationship which Jesus has with the Father, who (along with the Holy Spirit) are one God manifest in three Persons.

In the new translations, Jesus is no longer “Son of God” or “Son of man,” but He is now “Child of God” or “Human One.” And the sentences are re-written so that the pronouns “he” and “him” do not appear. Thus, in the new Lectionary, John 3:16 reads, “For God so loved the world that God gave God’s only Child, that whoever believes in that Child should not perish, but have eternal life. ”

3. RESULTS OF THE LANGUAGE CHANGE

What is behind all this call for change in language? Where might it eventually lead us? Since meaning is bound up in language, surely one cannot change the language for God without altering his understanding of who God is.

The result of changing the description of God from “Father” to “Mother/ Father” is to create the picture of a partly male and partly female God. And to make Christ “the Child” instead of “the Son” is to picture Him as immature. To speak of God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit-as “Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier”- may at first seem like an innocent change. But the terms “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” have a precise theological meaning which is not communicated by any other terms. The words “Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier” are functional names (focusing on God’s deeds), whereas “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” are names that focus on God’s own essence and the nature of His being. There are a number of results that rise out of attempts to tamper with the names for God.

(a) Questions the Validity of Special Revelation

To constantly speak of God as “Creator” and not as “Father” denies a fundamental revelation about God in the New Testament. Theologians talk about “general revelation” and “special revelation” when describing how God has chosen to reveal himself to the human family. General revelation refers to that which is plainly clear about God, while special revelation refers to that which God specifically reveals about himself (information about Him which we could not know by mere observation).

To believe that God is creator is self-evident; it is something which all religions believe and teach in some form or another. But to believe in God as Father is not self-evident; that belief comes to us especially through what Jesus tells us about God. In Matthew we read, “…no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him” (Matthew 11:27b, NIV).

(b) Takes Lightly the True Authority of Jesus

God is referred to as “Father” in twenty-five of the New Testament Books. Thus the teaching about God as “Father” is not an obscure doctrine. If we say that Jesus spoke of God as “Father” merely to accommodate the ideas prominent in the culture of His day, and that Jesus deliberately chose to use a term for God which is biased against women, we are saying that Jesus was wrong about (or ignorant of) God’s love for the female of the human family. When we say that it is an error to refer to God as “Father,” it means that we know how to describe God better than Jesus does!

Was Jesus wrong in telling us to pray to God by saying, “Our Father who art in heaven”? And if Jesus was wrong in teaching us to address God as “Father,” He might be wrong about other things as well. To eliminate the word “Father” when referring to God is to deny that Jesus had any valid authority.

(c) Diminishes God to the Level of the Mundane

To present God as “Mother and Father” is not only clumsy, but also repulsive to concerned Christians. God (when called “Mother and Father”) becomes a side-show freak instead of the supreme Person who deserves our highest reverence. If people are allowed to describe God at whim, most any image could appear. One writer says that God might be described as “Cotton Candy” by someone who experienced Him as soft and sweet, or as “Solid Concrete” by one who experienced Him as hard and cold. And of course some designate God as “The Man Upstairs” because their vision of God is apparently limited to a kind of superhuman grandfather image.

Furthermore, to add “and Mother” when referring to God the Father, has (at some places) an awkward implication. For example, in the NCC translation of John 15:26, Jesus promises “the Spirit of truth who proceeds from [God] the Father [and Mother].- This seems to add a heretical Fourth Person to the Trinity. We believe that the controversy surrounding the God-language debate is more serious than most people (who prefer to stand on the sidelines) are willing to admit. The evidence is mounting that what is happening in the church is not simply a change in language, but a change in faith.

(d) Revives the Ancient Heresy of Pantheism

Those who substitute phrases such as “Heavvenly Parent” or “Womb of Being” as descriptive terms for God the Father, are altering the apostolic faith to bring it into accord with the spirit of the times. Some of the new language implies that God is impersonal and that He gave rise to a world that is inseparable from His own Being. It implies a kind of pantheism and a revival of the ancient fertility gods of mythology. God gives birth to the earth, and God is the motherly-father of the Child who comes forth. (Theologians these days are writing and speaking about a “birthing” God. For an example of such teaching, listen to the tapes of the Pastors’ Association Meetings at Annual Conference in Phoenix, AZ in 1985).

Radical theologians are more and more conceiving of God in panentheistic terms. (Panentheism means that God and the world are mutually dependent. Just as fire and wood in a stove are two different things-but one is dependent upon the other for existence-so the new theologians say that God needs the world to continue existing!!) But the Bible does not present God as identical with creation (pantheism), nor is God dependent upon it (panentheism). God simply created the world out of nothing, and is sovereign over it. We must refuse to accept heretical diversions from truth lest we unintentionally become promoters of ancient paganism.

(e) Accuses Bible Writers of Being Sexist Males

The recent fad is to view the Bible references to the masculinity of God as just another evidence that sexist males have made God in their own image. However, we are thoroughly convinced that the wording of Scripture is not an invention of the male mind, designed to subdue (or insult) women.

There are Bible passages which speak highly of women and men, and there are passages which express contempt for women and for men. For example, there is a word of praise for Abigail 0 Samuel 25:32-33), while there is scorn for the foolishness of her husband Nabal (1 Samuel 25:25). There are Scriptures which honor women for their bravery and wisdom (Judges 4:4-9; 2 Kings 22:14-20). There are Scripture passages which praise women who are godly wives and mothers (Proverbs 31:10-31). Some females in the Bible are pictured as wanton and unstable, but others are shown to be helpers and persons who inspired others to good deeds (Romans 16:1-2; Acts 18:26). In the incident between David and Bathsheba, God punished David, and not Bathsheba (2 Samuel 12: 10). The Bible tells about reputable men and evil men, and about reputable women and evil women. God’s Word shows base depravity where it occurred, and gives proper honor where it is deserved regardless of sex.

Surely it is unfair to say that the Bible is biased against women.

In conclusion then, it is not a serious infraction of good judgment to try and eliminate an overuse of the male pronouns when speaking of people. The pronoun “he” has long been used in our English language to include both men and women. We say, “A school student must study his lessons if he expects to pass the test.” The statement refers to boys and girls who are students in school. Such a use of the masculine pronoun “he” is acceptable, but to re-word the sentence so as to limit the use of the masculine pronoun is certainly proper. Instead of saying, “The average American drinks his coffee black,” we can say, “The average American drinks black coffee.” And in the Bible, minor editorial changes which avoid overusing the male pronoun can be a healthy improvement in translation. Instead of, “If any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in” (Revelation 3:20), it is not offensive to say, “if anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in” (as translated in the New International Version).

The real concern which dedicated Christians have (with regard to the issue of non-sexist language) arises out of the dangers which surface when attempts are made to re-write the language pertaining to God. Calling God “Mother and Father,” according to Donald Bloesch, sets up a dyad and is a denial of the Trinity. The roots of this heresy stretch back to Gnosticism, which taught that God is bisexual. Tampering with the nature of God (as He has chosen to reveal Himself in Scripture), and meddling with the Personhood of the Holy Trinity-is blasphemy. It is time for Christians to vigorously resist attempts to further move in the direction of such appalling foolishness.

*A “Lectionary” is a collection of Bible passages which relate to the church calendar, and are chosen to be read aloud by the worship leader in church services. The “Inclusivist Lectionary” (according to the NCCC Chronicles, Vol. 81, No. 1) was prepared because there was dissatisfaction “with biblical language that makes women appear secondary in the eyes of God or the church.” Throughout the Lectionary the word “man” and the pronoun “he” are eliminated.

 

 
Previous
Next

In 2023, Brethren Maine Missions (BMM) purchased the Building Materials Exchange.  The Last Sheaf Building Materials Exchange provides exposure and connection with the community of Lisbon while offering a variety of new, used, and salvaged building materials, tools, and supplies at greatly reduced prices.

Why “The Last Sheaf?”

The Last Sheaf is a reference from the Bible where God says:

When you reap your harvest in your field, and forget a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to get it; it shall be for the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, that the Lord your God may bless you in all the work of your hands.

Deuteronomy 24:19 (NKJV)

Links:

  • https://lastsheafbme.org/

Highlights:

   GOD is faithful! The sun shines and GOD is with us, the rain comes down and GOD is with us.

 

   Since we’ve taken ownership of the Last Sheaf BME, we’ve made roof repairs, insulated the ceiling, repaired walls, etc. There were times it felt like every step we took there was another thing to fix. 

 

   We have two people on staff (Craig Keeney and Peter Bucher) assisted by a tremendous team of volunteers. We work together to make repairs, do pricing and inventory work, assist customers and more.  Interacting with and helping customers is the highlight of our day. People come with material needs; they need product to build or repair their home. People come with spiritual and emotional needs, as well. We purpose to get to know the individuals who come through our doors in order to share hope, truth, and love.

 

   One individual who had visited the Last Sheaf a couple of times was loud, large, and in charge. He had a “Goliath” personality. He made me quake in my boots a little (maybe a lot). His language was at times not appropriate anywhere, but especially not in a public place. One day he was standing right beside me and was about to speak that which I did not want to hear.  In a very quiet voice, I called him by name and before I could say any more, he apologized and said, “You are right. I shouldn’t be talking like that.”  Then he launched into a spiritual conversation with me. I was totally taken off guard by the change. He has been a different person ever since. Now he is more like a “David” personality. I now look forward to opportunities to speak with him.

 

   Donations of products/materials as well as finances are always appreciated, but the prayers of the saints are as vital a need to the work at the Last Sheaf, as anything.

Just as in biblical times the last sheaves of grain from a harvest were to be left behind to benefit the needy, we are taking leftover building materials, tools, and supplies and making them available at greatly reduced prices to those in need.

Our Mission:

Our mission is to benefit low-income homeowners, and to reduce waste in the environment by repurposing surplus building materials, enabling low income homeowners to better maintain their homes.

THE BOOK OF DANIEL

Captivity… Dreams… Rulers… Fire… Lions… Prayers… Kingdoms. From a dedicated youth to a faithful sage, Daniel’s life stands as an example to follow.  Yet beyond his personal life, God gifted Daniel with a message of future events.  Though difficult to grasp, these events would shape the world for the coming Messiah and the Second Coming of Christ as King.

STUDIES IN LUKE

Luke presents a warmly personal and historically accurate account of Jesus as “the Son of Man.” This course will survey the Third Gospel, with emphasis on the unique events, miracles, and parables of Jesus found in it.

HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH

This class will provide a broad overview of general church history. We will then focus on the Anabaptist and Pietist movements, especially as they relate to the formation and development of the Brethren groups. This is a two-part class. Plan to take both parts.

ONE FOUNDATION

This course is intended to lay down a measure in a world where truth is slippery and often subject to interpretation. Where “Christian Values” become a political slogan, and “good people” are our allies despite their faulty core beliefs. Where Facebook “friends” post memes about the power of God, despite a lifestyle that is anything but Godly. In the process we often fight among ourselves, doing Satan’s work for him. The purpose of this course is to lay the measure of Jesus Christ against the cults, religions, and worship in our contemporary world.

THE APOCRYPHA

While Protestant translations of the Bible contain 66 books, the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches recognize additional canonical books as well.  Where did these books, collectively known as the Apocrypha, come from and why aren’t they part of our Bible?  How reliable are they, and what value is there in studying them?

STUDIES IN 1 AND 2 PETER

The goal of this class is to acquire a firm grasp of the teachings and themes of these two general epistles. Peter covers topics from salvation and suffering to spiritual deception and the return of Christ. These letters are packed with warnings and encouragements for Christian living.

THE GREAT I AM’S OF CHRIST

A detailed study of Jesus Christ and His relationship to the “I Am” metaphors in John’s gospel. Why did Jesus describe himself in these terms? How do they relate to each other? We will look at spiritual and practical applications to further our Christian growth.

JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES: AN AMERICAN CULT

Have you ever been visited by someone who said they wanted to study the Bible with you so that you might discover the truth together?  Jehovah’s Witnesses claim to have much in common with evangelical Christians, and they seem to be well versed in the scriptures.  But what do they really believe and how can we effectively witness to those who have been ensnared by this false religion?

THE BOOK OF HOSEA

While we may consider Hosea as one of the minor prophets, his message vividly illustrates the major doctrine in all Scriptures.  The theme of God’s unconditional love is magnified and extended beyond those deserving it.  God expresses tender words towards His erring people inviting them to turn from sin to reconciliation with Him.

CHURCH LEADERSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION

This course will look at basic principles and polity of leading the local church. We will examine the balance between upholding a spiritually focused organism of ministry and cultivating proper order for effective organization. Practical applications will be emphasized. This is a two-part class. Plan to take both parts.

STATEMENT OF CONDUCT

The Brethren Bible Institute believes in the discipline of the whole person (spirit, soul, and body). We will aim to train students not only about how to study the Bible in a systematic way (2 Timothy 2:15), but also how to live soberly and righteously and godly in this present world (Titus 2:12). God calls Christians to the highest of character when He commands us to be holy (1 Peter 1:15), and holiness requires discipline.

Indulgence in the use of tobacco, alcoholic beverages, drugs, profanity, and gambling are forbidden at BBI. Objectionable literature will be prohibited. Students are asked not to use the college pool during the Institute. Each student must be thoughtful, and respect the rights of others at all times, especially during study and rest periods.

A friendly social group intermingling of students between class periods, and at general school activities is encouraged. Each student should enjoy the friendship of the entire group. At all times, highest standards of social conduct between men and women must be maintained. This means that all forms of unbecoming behavior and unseemly familiarities will be forbidden.

Personal appearance and grooming tell much about one's character. Students are expected to be dressed in good taste. In an attempt to maintain Scriptural expressions of simplicity, modesty, and nonconformity, the following regulations shall be observed while attending BBI.

MEN should be neatly attired and groomed at all times. Fashion extremes and the wearing of jewelry should be avoided on campus. The hair should not fall over the shirt-collar when standing, nor should it cover the ears.

WOMEN should wear skirts cut full enough and of sufficient length to at least come to the knees when standing and sitting. Form-fitting, transparent, low-neckline, or sleeveless clothing will not be acceptable. Slacks and culottes are permitted only for recreation and then only when worn under a skirt of sufficient length. Wearing jewelry should be avoided on campus. Long hair for women is encouraged and all Church of the Brethren girls (and others with like convictions) shall be veiled on campus.

The Institute reserves the right to dismiss any student whose attitude and behavior is not in harmony with the ideals of the School, or whose presence undermines the general welfare of the School, even if there is no specific breach of conduct.

The Brethren Bible Institute is intended to provide sound Bible teaching and wholesome Christian fellowship for all who desire it. The Bible School Committee worked hard and long at the task of arriving at standards, which will be pleasing to the Lord. It is not always easy to know just where the line should be drawn and we do not claim perfection. No doubt certain standards seem too strict for some and too loose for others. If you are one who does not share all these convictions, we hope you will agree to adjust to them for the School period, for the sake of those who do. We are confident that the blessings received will far outweigh any sacrifice you may have to make. If you have a special problem or question, please write to us about it. To be accepted as a student at BBI, you will need to sign a statement indicating that you will cooperate with the standards of the School.