That is a blatant untruth. Matthew 23:9 (RSV)And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Is the absolute proof of that.
Finally the Bible does not tell us “there is only one spiritual Father...and that is God”.
This is the danger of letting errant teachings go unaddressed. If they are allowed to stand they risk peoples souls.
The literal meaning of this passage and the hyperbole that Jesus is speaking with has been lost on you.
What did the Jews understand it meant to call a man 'Father' or 'Rabbi' or 'teacher'?
There were at least two schools of Judaism in existence at that time; one was the school of Hillel and the other was the school of Shammai. These schools of thought were opposing each other. But people would identify under one or the other and that is how they would go about their lives.
What Jesus was actually meaning when he said that phrase is that the apostles should unite under one school of teaching and not go off and have their own schools each, and that united teaching should be from the teaching of Jesus, who was teaching the true teachings of God the Father. And it has nothing to do with referring to another human being as "father".
But let's imagine for a moment that it did mean that no other person should be referred to as "father". What are the ramifications?
Well, for starters, the relationship of father with one's own biological "father" no longer remains a reference point toward understanding our relationship with our heavenly Father. If my own male biological ancestor I should not call 'father' then how am I to understand what calling God "Father" means? Calling God "Father" then loses all those connotations that go with the "Father" relationship.
Second, we see verses in scripture that defy said "rule" of Jesus, making the teachings of the apostles who wrote them or said them highly suspect. Are you going to trust Paul who referred to himself as a spiritual father and called Timothy his spiritual son several times to be a faithful witness of the Gospel?
Third, in America Protestants used to call their ministers "Father". That is, until the Irish Catholics arrived, who (fairly uniquely among Catholics) called priests Father. And because there was so much anti-Catholicism in America when Catholics started arriving en masse, Protestants stopped using the title "Father" and soon developed the polemic denouncing the title as we see today.
Do we call people "Mister"? Mister is another form of the word "Master" derived from the German "Meister". Is Jesus your one Master? Then why do you call people "mister"?
The whole argument against the use of the Title "Father" is so inane. No one confuses "priest so-and-so" and the source of divine teaching "the Father" in the Catholic Church, because the Catholic faith is both centralized and historical, going back to the apostles.
I sometimes wonder, however, if what non-Catholic Bible-only Christians do is not more like what Jesus warned against, which literally is a warning for the apostles to remain united under one teacher and not to form different sects, especially with different teachings, which is how non-Catholic Bible-only "denominations" are "organized". It is precisely that situation which Jesus was warning the apostles against.