Why Is God Called Father and Not Mother in Christianity?

The Hebrew Bible does use paternal language for God, though it's far from the only relational metaphor employed. Isaiah addresses God directly as Av (Father), and Malachi frames the father-image in terms of shared creaturely origin Malachi 2:10. Deuteronomy 32:6 asks rhetorically whether God is not Israel's Father who created and established the people—a verse the Talmud cites explicitly to identify "father" with the Holy One, Blessed be He Sanhedrin 102a:11.

What's genuinely interesting, though, is how the Talmud balances this. In both Berakhot and Sanhedrin, Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa interprets Proverbs 28:24 so that "his father" means God and "his mother" means the congregation of Israel Berakhot 35b:2. So Jewish tradition doesn't simply feminize God—it distributes the maternal role to the communal body of Israel itself. This is a sophisticated move that avoids both a purely masculine deity and a straightforwardly androgynous one.

Mainstream rabbinic theology insists God has no body and no sex. The father-language is relational and covenantal, not biological. Scholar Tikva Frymer-Kensky (1992, In the Wake of the Goddesses) argued that Israel's monotheism deliberately collapsed divine gender multiplicity into one genderless-but-relationally-described God. The paternal title survived because it conveyed authority, protection, and covenant loyalty in an ancient Near Eastern cultural context—not because God was thought to be literally male.

This is the core in-scope tradition for the question. Christianity's use of "Father" for God is essentially inseparable from Jesus himself. The Gospels record Jesus addressing God as Abba—an intimate Aramaic term—and teaching his disciples the Lord's Prayer with the opening "Our Father." That personal, direct address was theologically revolutionary in its first-century Jewish context and became the bedrock of Christian God-language.

There are several interlocking reasons the title stuck:

• Christological necessity. If Jesus is the eternal Son, then God is, by definition, Father—not as a metaphor but as a statement about intra-Trinitarian relationship. The Father-Son language in John's Gospel (e.g., John 5:17–23) is relational and eternal, not merely analogical. This is the strongest theological argument for the title's irreplaceability in Christian thought.
• Scriptural inheritance. Christianity inherited the Hebrew Bible's paternal imagery for God Isaiah 63:16 Malachi 2:10 and intensified it through Jesus's teaching. Isaiah's cry—"You, O Eternal One, are our Father"—prefigures the New Testament's address Isaiah 63:16.
• Patristic consolidation. By the time of the Nicene Creed (325 CE), "Father" was enshrined as the first person of the Trinity. Theologians like Athanasius and the Cappadocian Fathers treated it as revealed, not culturally chosen.

That said, there's real scholarly disagreement here. Elizabeth Johnson's She Who Is (1992) contends that exclusive male God-language distorts theology and reinforces patriarchy, arguing that feminine biblical images of God (e.g., Isaiah 66:13, where God comforts like a mother) are systematically suppressed. On the other side, Thomas Weinandy and other traditionalists argue that "Father" is not a culturally conditioned metaphor but a revealed name—Jesus didn't say "Our Parent" or "Our Source." The debate is live and unresolved in mainline and Catholic theology alike.

Most Christian theologians across traditions agree, however, that God is not literally male. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (§239) states explicitly that God "transcends the human distinction between the sexes" and that calling God "Father" is analogical language pointing to a reality beyond gender.

Not applicable in the specific sense of the question. Islam explicitly and categorically rejects the use of "Father" as a name or title for God (Allah). The Qur'an repudiates the idea that God has children or takes on parental roles in the way the term implies. Surah 37:153 challenges the notion of God having offspring at all Quran 37:153, and Surah 112 (Al-Ikhlas) declares that God neither begets nor is begotten—a direct theological counter to both Christian Trinitarian language and any parental metaphor for the divine.

In Islamic theology, God has 99 beautiful names (Asma ul-Husna), none of which is "Father" or "Mother." The names emphasize attributes like Al-Rahman (the Most Merciful) and Al-Wadud (the Loving), which carry relational warmth without biological or gendered parenthood language. This is a deliberate theological boundary: God's transcendence (tanzih) means no familial analogy applies.

So the Christian question of "Father vs. Mother" simply doesn't arise in Islam—both options are rejected as category errors when applied to Allah.

Not applicable. Concerns Christian titles for God; Judaism follows its own scriptural/liturgical usage.

Short answer: Christians call God “Father” because the biblical texts they receive and pray with explicitly use that title. Isaiah addresses God: “You, O Eternal One, are our Father,” and Malachi asks: “Have we not all one Father? Did not one God create us?”—language that directly names God as Father and grounds Christian address. Isaiah 63:16 Malachi 2:10

This Father-title is also interpreted within the wider biblical tradition as a stable way of speaking about God’s relationship to His people—note how rabbinic discussion cites Deuteronomy 32:6 (“Is He not your Father Who created you…”) to gloss “his father” as referring to God; Christians reading the same Scriptures likewise inherit that title from the text itself. Sanhedrin 102a:11 Berakhot 35b:2

By contrast, the passages cited here do not employ “Mother” as a formal divine title. The plain textual usage is “Father,” and that’s why Christian speech about God standardly uses it. Isaiah 63:16 Malachi 2:10

Not applicable. The question targets Christian divine titles; Islamic theology does not call God “Father,” and its discourse follows Qur’anic usage.