Your Father?


I’m possibly just slow of mind – but yesterday evening a thought eventually hit me, that if true,  would reveal a disturbing aspect of the increasing evangelical leaning towards patriotism.

What is the root of the words patriot and patriotism?

The answer suddenly seemed obvious – but I wanted to check. And that’s what I did this morning.

(found here: )

“The deep roots of the word patriot lie in Roman antiquity, particularly in terms such as patria and patrius, which indicate fatherland, city, native, or familiar place. Familiar has links with the word family (familia). This also has ties with the term father or paternal (pater, père, Vater, padre), or what is implied by the “role of the father” within a family. In terms of the “role of father,” ”


“The state was, in a sense, paternal authority “writ large.”

And from here:

“The word patriot comes from patrios (Greek, not Latin for once), which means ‘of one’s father.’”

And from here:

“Origin of patriot
Middle French patriote compatriot, from Late Latin patriota, from Greek patriōtēs, from patria lineage, from patr-, patēr father”

BUT from here:

Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.



13 thoughts on “Your Father?

  1. This is an interesting thought, onesimus. But the problem is that people are looking to businessmen as fathers. We have concepts and principles as Americans. And that’s washing away right now with Trump as the president-elect. Republicans have been saying for a long time that only businessmen can know how to run government. And now we have this guy who is ready to ruin us. What you do as a child with a father is trust him without thinking very much because he loves you. Why do these people think he loves them?

  2. Marleen, when someone puts their faith in the wrong father their trust will never be repaid in the way they expect. There are some disturbingly revealing comments to be found after a recent post on Andrew Strom’s RevivalSchool blog. I was going to include the link, but the site isn’t working at the time I’m posting this. The majority of those comments exposed an unhealthy attitude towards America and the belief that Trump really could “Make America Great Again”.
    Maybe I can understand non-believers desperately putting their trust in Trump – but people who claim to be followers of Jesus? Why should they even desire the “greatness” of any nation and why on earth would they put their trust in Trump to bring it about, considering the kind of character he displayed throughout his campaign, not to mention other revelations about him?

    This was the link that isn’t currently working. It might be worth trying it again later:

    It now seems to be working again.

  3. The following are from the comments section of RevivaSchool, written by someone I’ve known for maybe 15 years.
    Sadly, like so many, she started to take a “detour” after Obama was elected, joining in the spreading of hate-speech and lies that become too common among “evangelicals” over the 8 years of his presidency.
    And then her attention turned against Clinton and towards Trump, her thoughts about him can be seen in the comments below.

    We have been given a space of time, a space of freedom, in this election of Donald J.Trump , Prior to the coming of the prophecied NWO. Beast System WHAT WILL WE DO WITH THIS GIFT OF TIME ?


    America will prosper during Trumps and Pence Presidency for God will use Trump for it to happen.


    Please consider Donald Trump just recently met with a couple of pastors and open to speak about his salvation and it has been reported he has made a confession of faith and he certainly knows how to repent and ask for forgiveness. He even came publically on national TV and came forth and asked the American people to forgive him for his sexest statement he made 11 years ago. I myself would be very careful stating he is not saved. He is said to be a new babe in Christ.

    Most of the comments by others indicate that her views aren’t out of the ordinary. There were very few other commenters offering a contrary opinion.

  4. Andrew
    Nov 10th 2016

    So let me ask this question-
    Given the above sentiment, isn’t it true that it was the CHRISTIANS in America that elected Trump? That he needed the Christian vote to secure those “battleground” states?

    Isn’t it true that the Christians are responsible for electing him – just like they elected George W. Bush?

    -Andrew Strom.

  5. Someone else said: One of the respondents stated that it was the christians that gave Trump the victory. While they contributed, they cannot be given all the credit. I heard statistics today that refute that. I was surprised to see the numbers of how many black men, hispanics and white young men voted for Trump.

  6. Hi, Tim:

    I find your blog very convincing. Our allegiance to God the father, in contrast to our allegiance to “the father (-land)” (“patriotism”).

    Who’s your daddy ?

    Straightforward, and very convincing.

    blessings, Steve

  7. No single group was entirely responsible for Trump’s election – but there is one significant, sizable group that had to go against its professed, very basic “principles” to elect a man who reflects most of the characteristic described here:

    “lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God”

    And to that we can add confessions of sexual assault and a constant resorting to lies.

    …from such people turn away!

  8. “…there is one significant, sizable group that had to go against its professed, very basic “principles” to elect a man who reflects most of the characteristic described here:…”

    That’d be my take too. Trump is a disaster. People survive disaster. But Christians unable to discern, and making common cause with, ungodliness and unrighteousness…unmitigated catastrophe.

  9. What I thought was weird was that the person (who’s name I didn’t bring over from Andrews site) who named black people, Hispanic people, and more, seemed to be contrasting those categories from Christians. Listing those specific kinds of people doesn’t refute that Christians were largely responsible. And having the perception that those types aren’t Christian (for instance, white people thinking that) can account for a large part of what happened, while being Christian might account for some people (for instance black or Hispanic) voting against what is good for them (because Christianity is often just harsh and asking for harshness against oneself as well as others).

  10. I don’t see why it should be surprising that “white young men” voted for Trump. They seemed to be the ones EXPECTED to vote for him. More surprising was the reported number of women, considering the things he said about women, and the attitude to sexual assault that he boasted of.

  11. Well, women too. There are women who have been convinced life is about putting up with stuff. You just have to wait until people want to treat you better. This is a Christian point of view. Yeah, it’s strange that the writer included young white men as people who surprisingly voted for Trump. Maybe that’s the best illustration of what I’m trying to get across (and which I don’t seem to be getting across very well). Why did she [I think it was a she] mention them? She was saying not that she was surprised white young men voted for him but that white young men, black people, and hispanics aren’t her view of who is Christian.

  12. To clarify a bit further, she didn’t say young white men, young black people, and young Hispanics.

    Rather …how many black men, hispanics and white young men voted for Trump.

    I have to backtrack before I go forward with additional clarification. I sort of misspoke or wasn’t precise in saying she wasn’t surprised white young men voted for Trump. She was surprised, but that wasn’t her main point or the thrust of what she was trying to say. She mainly was disagreeing that Christians got Trump elected. And she was trying to illustrate that there were these people she didn’t see as Christian who voted along with Christians (or along with those Christians who voted for Trump). She apparently thought that white men and women would be Christians and vote for Trump, but not so many young white men.

    So, now, to get back to what I wanted clarify (with regard to people she didn’t see as Christian), she only had the qualifier on the white men. Thus, young white men; curiously, she does qualify black people in terms of being men (but not young, so it looks like she doesn’t think most black men of any age are Christian) — but then Hispanic people in general (not qualified by young or being men) are on the list.

    So, when she sees many (however she would define many) “hispanics” vote for the Christian candidate and black men vote for the Christian candidate, and white men who are young vote for the Christian candidate, she’s surprised. And she feels she can (in her view) refute what Andrew said.

    [But then I also take your point in concert with this, Tim. I might deduce that she thinks more women are Christian than men are. But that would mean, I think, that to her then it’s not a surprise they vote for Trump. I don’t know the statistics, how many women, black men, Hispanics, and so forth voted in what way.]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s