What are the strengths and limitations of the God as parent analogy?

[mcarans]

In the following article, I look at limitations of the analogy we have of God as parent (typically father):

What are the strengths and limitations of the God as parent analogy? : cruciformity

What do you think are strengths and limitations of the God as parent analogy?

 

[PloverWing]

The strength of the parent image, I think, is that parents at their best are a combination of authority and deep love, which is a combination of features found in God. God created us, is much more powerful than we are, and is our guide and teacher -- so, authority. But God also loves us, loves us even more deeply than we love our own children. And the picture of God putting up with us, even when we're behaving badly, the way we continue to care for our toddlers even when they're throwing temper tantrums, is a good one.

The weakness of the image is that parents are flawed people, and parenting doesn't always go well. I had a difficult relationship with my parents. The language in the Reddit article of living "in constant fear of God's wrath every time we fail to live up to the perfect standard that Jesus showed us in His life" pretty well summarizes what the God-as-my-parent metaphor means to me personally, even though I think you meant the exact opposite in your article. So I don't use parental titles for God in my private prayers, and it's even a little difficult to address a priest as "Father" or "Mother". This is just me, though; I know that the parental imagery is helpful for many people.

One of my inferences from the gospels is that Joseph must've been an amazingly patient and loving father to the child Jesus, for Jesus to have chosen "Father" -- out of all the possible metaphors he could have chosen -- as his preferred title for God.

 

[mcarans]

The strength of the parent image, I think, is that parents at their best are a combination of authority and deep love, which is a combination of features found in God. God created us, is much more powerful than we are, and is our guide and teacher -- so, authority. But God also loves us, loves us even more deeply than we love our own children. And the picture of God putting up with us, even when we're behaving badly, the way we continue to care for our toddlers even when they're throwing temper tantrums, is a good one.

The weakness of the image is that parents are flawed people, and parenting doesn't always go well. I had a difficult relationship with my parents. The language in the Reddit article of living "in constant fear of God's wrath every time we fail to live up to the perfect standard that Jesus showed us in His life" pretty well summarizes what the God-as-my-parent metaphor means to me personally, even though I think you meant the exact opposite in your article. So I don't use parental titles for God in my private prayers, and it's even a little difficult to address a priest as "Father" or "Mother". This is just me, though; I know that the parental imagery is helpful for many people.

One of my inferences from the gospels is that Joseph must've been an amazingly patient and loving father to the child Jesus, for Jesus to have chosen "Father" -- out of all the possible metaphors he could have chosen -- as his preferred title for God.

Sorry to hear about the difficult relationship you had with your parents which gives you a very different view on the parent child metaphor to many. Thanks for the points you made in your reply particularly about Joseph.

 

[bekkilyn]

One weakness is that many Christians who grew up with abusive (whether emotionally and/or physically) and authoritarian parents, particularly the father, and up seemingly incapable of seeing God (the Father) as a more powerful version of the same. If they have never really seen a parent extend much if any love or grace, then they may have all the right bible verses memorized, but as they've never experienced it on the human level, they have a difficult if not impossible task trying to imagine it on a perfect, heavenly level.

Those who grew up with more loving, nurturing parents, particularly a father, is able to at least have a glimpse of what perfect, heavenly love is like.

Those who also force God into having a gender role as a male only have a difficult if not impossible time seeing God in the role of mother as well as father, and having qualities that are typically assigned only to females, despite that all the positive characteristics of all human beings originated with God.

I think it's helpful not to limit God to being a parent, but to see his image and his essence in many different ways in how we can relate to him (or even her, as it may be most helpful to some people).

 

[mcarans]

One weakness is that many Christians who grew up with abusive (whether emotionally and/or physically) and authoritarian parents, particularly the father, and up seemingly incapable of seeing God (the Father) as a more powerful version of the same. If they have never really seen a parent extend much if any love or grace, then they may have all the right bible verses memorized, but as they've never experienced it on the human level, they have a difficult if not impossible task trying to imagine it on a perfect, heavenly level.

Those who grew up with more loving, nurturing parents, particularly a father, is able to at least have a glimpse of what perfect, heavenly love is like.

Those who also force God into having a gender role as a male only have a difficult if not impossible time seeing God in the role of mother as well as father, and having qualities that are typically assigned only to females, despite that all the positive characteristics of all human beings originated with God.

I think it's helpful not to limit God to being a parent, but to see his image and his essence in many different ways in how we can relate to him (or even her, as it may be most helpful to some people).

Thanks for your reply with which I agree. BTW, if it's of interest, you're welcome to join the subreddit: Cruciformity: the cross is where God is most clearly seen
It is about how Jesus perfectly reveals God's character and nature of self giving love.

 

[bekkilyn]

Thanks for your reply with which I agree. BTW, if it's of interest, you're welcome to join the subreddit: Cruciformity: the cross is where God is most clearly seen
It is about how Jesus perfectly reveals God's character and nature of self giving love.

Thanks! I've joined, and will check it out in more depth when I have more than a few moments at the computer!

 

[hedrick]

The analogy tends to be tied to our parenting practices. That may be unavoidable, but it’s something to beware of. Psychologists now regard punishment as a bad idea; there are better ways to discipline. Similarly, many now reject the idea behind penal substitution, which is that all misbehavior needs to be punished. Does God engage in tough love, where he rejects and eventually even tortures some of his children? While no parent would be allowed to go quite that far, still, what we think God is capable of is tied to our feelings about parenting and treatment of human criminals.

Finally, the analogy leaves open the question of who it applies to. Is everyone God’s child? Only those with faith? Only those he chose from before the world was created?

 

[mcarans]

The analogy tends to be tied to our parenting practices. That may be unavoidable, but it’s something to beware of. Psychologists now regard punishment as a bad idea; there are better ways to discipline. Similarly, many now reject the idea behind penal substitution, which is that all misbehavior needs to be punished. Does God engage in tough love, where he rejects and eventually even tortures some of his children? While no parent would be allowed to go quite that far, still, what we think God is capable of is tied to our feelings about parenting and treatment of human criminals.

Finally, the analogy leaves open the question of who it applies to. Is everyone God’s child? Only those with faith? Only those he chose from before the world was created?

Those are astute observations. Thanks for sharing them. I agree with you about the retributive vs reconciliatory justice issue particularly as regards PSA and in my article I have presumed that everyone is God's child not just an elect group.

 

[hedrick]

There's a challenge posed by these considerations: Suppose that everyone is God's child. How could God allow any of them to be lost eternally? This wasn't such a problem in the past, when people accepted harsh punishment, including death. The argument that offending God was worthy of eternal suffering made sense then. But with the kind of mind-set you have, and which I share, how can we accept anything short of universal salvation?

The challenge is that Jesus taught about judgement. He also said things that seem to say God forgives everyone. But what do we do with all that stuff about sheep and goats? I don't know the answer.

(In my own church, the PCUSA, about 28% of people are universalists. Of the rest, the most common view is that God chooses who to save -- ministers, or that people decide whether to accept Christ -- members.)

 

[mcarans]

There's a challenge posed by these considerations: Suppose that everyone is God's child. How could God allow any of them to be lost eternally? This wasn't such a problem in the past, when people accepted harsh punishment, including death. The argument that offending God was worthy of eternal suffering made sense then. But with the kind of mind-set you have, and which I share, how can we accept anything short of universal salvation?

The challenge is that Jesus taught about judgement. He also said things that seem to say God forgives everyone. But what do we do with all that stuff about sheep and goats? I don't know the answer.

(In my own church, the PCUSA, about 28% of people are universalists. Of the rest, the most common view is that God chooses who to save -- ministers, or that people decide whether to accept Christ -- members.)

I agree with you. I am a hopeful universalist and think that post mortem salvation is possible. I have written about my view here: A new unified view of heaven and hell - A new unified view of heaven and hell : cruciformity

 

[bekkilyn]

There's a challenge posed by these considerations: Suppose that everyone is God's child. How could God allow any of them to be lost eternally? This wasn't such a problem in the past, when people accepted harsh punishment, including death. The argument that offending God was worthy of eternal suffering made sense then. But with the kind of mind-set you have, and which I share, how can we accept anything short of universal salvation?

The challenge is that Jesus taught about judgement. He also said things that seem to say God forgives everyone. But what do we do with all that stuff about sheep and goats? I don't know the answer.

(In my own church, the PCUSA, about 28% of people are universalists. Of the rest, the most common view is that God chooses who to save -- ministers, or that people decide whether to accept Christ -- members.)

UMC's official position is:

While...salvation is AVAILABLE to all persons, they (doctrinal statements) stop short of saying that salvation is GUARANTEED to all persons. There is the stated or implied condition that, while God's grace is necessary for salvation and that humankind cannot in any way attain salvation without God, that there is certainly an element of awareness and cooperation on our part to order our lives after the image of Christ if we have the capacity to do so.

Does The United Methodist Church believe in universal salvation? – The United Methodist Church

I also remember reading in one of John Wesley's biographies when he was asked if it was possible for an unbeliever to be saved after death, he responded something to the effect of while there was no guarantee based on scripture that they would be saved, God in his perfect love and grace could still decide to save the person.

I suppose it would therefore be a hopeful universalism, but no guarantee based on clear scriptural evidence.

It's one reason why I believe that intercessory prayer, even on behalf of dead unbelievers, is important as God has been known to change his mind out of compassion concerning his judgments. I also don't believe that it is any of his children (everyone) that he hates, but the evil of sin itself that infects us, so I believe he does everything possible to save everyone in that process, but perhaps some are simply too infected or would choose to refuse the "cure".

I do personally believe in "anonymous" Christians though...people who follow Christ in their hearts even without being aware of it and still produce fruit of the Spirit as a result, and I also believe in people who claim to follow Christ and yet have no love within them and thus produce rotten fruit.

 

[PloverWing]

In my own church, the PCUSA, about 28% of people are universalists.

I've thought for a long time that universalism seems a natural corollary of Reformed theology. If we really are so sinful that we're incapable of choosing God, and if it's God that does all the choosing -- well, if it's God's choice and not ours, then a God who loves us would choose for us to be saved, right? Take "limited atonement" out of the TULIP, and I think you've got a version of universalism.

 

[hedrick]

I've thought for a long time that universalism seems a natural corollary of Reformed theology. If we really are so sinful that we're incapable of choosing God, and if it's God that does all the choosing -- well, if it's God's choice and not ours, then a God who loves us would choose for us to be saved, right? Take "limited atonement" out of the TULIP, and I think you've got a version of universalism.

Yes. I believe that historically, universalism in the US came from liberal Reformed churches.

But I think any concept of God as creator raises the same question. Even without Calvinism, God is put in the position of creating a world where some people are lost.

I normally back off from that conclusion because of what Jesus said. But it's interesting to see just how much of Jesus' teaching about judgement is specific to Matthew. If you look at Mark and Luke you might be able to see it as picturesque ways of talking about accountability, which Jesus certainly does teach.

Paul seems pretty unambiguously universalist. N T Wright (who isn't universalist) alludes to Rom 6:7, saying that death ends sin. Wright himself suggest that a few people may be so opposed to God that they lose the image of God, and effectively cease being human. I think it's possible, though I hope not.

 

[SkyWriting]

In the following article, I look at limitations of the analogy we have of God as parent (typically father):

What are the strengths and limitations of the God as parent analogy? : cruciformity

What do you think are strengths and limitations of the God as parent analogy?

The strength is that Jesus claimed God was His Father.
The limitation was that my father and mom are not gods.

 

[PloverWing]

I believe that historically, universalism in the US came from liberal Reformed churches.

Hmm. I knew that Universalism and liberal Reformed theology were both strong in the northeastern US, but I'd never thought of the one growing out of the other. Thanks for connecting the historical dots for me!

 

[hedrick]

Hmm. I knew that Universalism and liberal Reformed theology were both strong in the northeastern US, but I'd never thought of the one growing out of the other. Thanks for connecting the historical dots for me!

I should have been more clear. Universalism developed from a much earlier liberal wing of the church. Wikipedia actually says it came from pietists and anabaptists. I think of it as coming from the UK, though also Europe. I connected it with liberal Reformed because I had known of the Boston version, but Wikipedia describes a wider group.

Modern liberal Christianity seems to have come from what was in effect an academic movement in Europe, going back to the Enlightenment, originally mostly German. I'm sure if you checked, there would be overlap, but I think they're largely developed independently.