Throughout all my writings on this subject so far I have sought to prove that "huiothesia" should not have been translated as "adoption." I have presented various kinds of evidence to prove this. I have presented evidence from scripture that says that people enter the family of God by a birth, and that this fact nullifies any claim that they are adopted into the family. I have shown evidence as to what "huiothesia" is, which is a point in time when a birth son reaches a state of maturity or adulthood and is allowed to possess his inheritance and to rule over the family in the stead of his father. I have shown that "the huiothesia" belonged first to Israel and speaks to the time when the nation had come out of Egypt as a mature son of Jehovah. Israel went into Egypt as a child but came out a mature adult son, a time when the child was emancipated. So, we read in Hosea 11: 1: "When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son." This text shows us that Israel was a child by being begotten of Jehovah many years before Israel became a mature adult son.
I have shown that "the huiothesia" is yet future, as Paul affirmed in Romans 8: 23, and occurs in connection with the "redemption" and resurrection of the bodies of the children of God, being the time when the children become full grown, perfected, fully made into the image of the Father. We have also seen where the Greeks had other words that meant adoption, though huiothesia was one of them. In this chapter we will continue to give evidence for these things. Further, as we stated in earlier posts on this subject, the Greek word huiothesia is not in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew old testament. That is surprising on the assumption that Israel was God's adopted son.
In a future chapter we will look at the examples in Greek where the term huiothesia was used to denote adoption, it being the reason why so many Greek scholars give that as the English word equivalent to the Greek word, and will deal with that argument, which is the only real argument that those who believe in adoption have for their case. But, for now, we will continue to give exegetical reasons why "adoption" is not the best word to convey Paul's meaning or usage of huiothesia. Also, as I have argued, just because the majority of translators give "adoption" as the English equivalent of huiothesia and just because the majority of commentators agree, does not mean it is right, it being a fallacious argument for the majority is not always right.
In an article titled "The True Meaning of (Huiothesia, G5206) Adoption, and the Doctrine of Reward!" (See here), in a Christian Forum by Antonio, we have these insightful words (enphasis mine):
"The Greek word “huiothesia” translated “adoption” occurs five times in the N.T. (Rom.8:15, 23; 9:4; Gal.4:5; Eph.1:5); and is a compound of two words in the Greek; the first is (tithemi, G5087), which has the meaning “to assign or appoint”; the second is (huios, G5207) meaning “son”. This is the biblical theme of the (beracah) blessing of the (becorah) First born right; this motif runs throughout scripture; and it concerns abundant life, and a position of preeminence in the house of the father, which is rewarded for being an obedient son (Gen.12:1-3; 22:16-17; 25:1; 27:3-4, 7-8, 26-38; 49:1-28; cp. 37:2,14; cp. 2-14;48:9-22; 49:8-10; cp. 44:33-45:3). The “huiothesia” takes place at the time appointed by the father; it is the time when the son is appointed as ruler over all the father’s house (Gal.4:1-2; Mt.24:45-47; cp. Rev.2:26-27; Ps.2:8-9;89:27); when he receives the blessing of the firstborn right (Rom.8:17, 29); the “reward of the inheritance” received by the matured obedient image bearing sons (Col.3:10, 23-25; cp. 1:9-12, 28)."
That is exactly right. We will see, or have seen, how this was true in the life of the man Christ Jesus and how it will be true for every believer in Jesus. He will not be declared as fully grown, or a son who is in the full likeness of the Father, until the resurrection, perfection, and glorification of their bodies and whole selves.
Said the same further:
"It will be necessary to gain a proper understanding of how the word for “son” (huios) is used (in the context under consideration), being the root of “huiothesia”. In doing this, we will also look at two other words; that have different meanings in the Greek but have (like huios) been interchangeably rendered “child” or “son”. Making it difficult for the reader to see the differences of meaning, thinking they are one in the same. Which has resulted in confusing the “huiothesia” to be what takes place at the time one becomes a child of God (becoming a member of Gods family); instead of being the reward of the inheritance (Jn.3:16; Col.3:24; cp.2Tim.2:10-13)."
In the earlier chapters in "waiting for the huiothesia" I spent a lot of time showing how the word "son" in scripture meant "likeness" to a father, and rarely referred to a newborn or birth son, referring rather to a son who has grown up under the supervision of the father via teachers and care givers appointed by the father. So, we are, as Christians, growing towards being "son" in the fullest sense. See especially that chapter titled "Teknon, Huios, and Huiothesia." (See here)
Said the same further:
"The first word is (teknon, G5043) which should be properly rendered “child” and has the meaning of producing, to bare, to generate, and is used of one who is born; this word's theological usage refers to when one becomes a child of God, upon placing faith in Christ (Jn.1:12; Rom.8:16). And has wrongly been rendered “son” in many occurrences in different bible translations, not making the distinction of when huios is being used."
I have argued the same in my writings thus far. The Greek words for a "child," at whatever stage of growth, always signified a birth child and not an adopted child. So, those who say that a child is such by adoption, in a given text, miss this truth, a truth that a simple study of the etymology of teknon would reveal.
Said the same further:
"Huios “son” has the meaning of being full grown, or maturity; and is used in a conditional sense (in the context under consideration), which rest upon the believers walk as being led after the spirit in obedience: “for those who are led by the spirit of God, these are the sons (huios) of God”; this speaks of the child of God who images the character and wisdom of the father, “pray for them which despitefully use you,…..that ye may be the sons (huios) of your Father which is in heaven….Be ye perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect” “But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons (huios) of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.” (Rom.8:14; Mt.5:44-48; Lk.6:36)."
Again, this was fully shown to be true in earlier chapters in this work. Others, like Antonio, have affirmed the same. A study of the use of "huios" (son) in the new testament will demonstrate this. We have insisted that the KJV has greatly erred in seeing no distinction between "children" and "sons," between tekna and "huioi."
Said the same further:
"The second word (nepios, Gr3516) has the meaning of immaturity, or adolescence, rendered “underage” (Gal.4:1, NIV) “nepios” is in contrast with “son” (being full grown), and is used of the carnal believer, as babes in Christ, not skillful in the word of God (1 Cor.3:1; Eph.4:14; Heb.5:13)."
Again, in earlier writings we went through these various Greek words that represent the various stages in the life of a child. Just as we have several words, such as child, toddler, adolescent, teenager, etc., so too did the Greeks. One passage that clearly shows this are the words of the Apostle John in I John 2: 12-14 where he addresses believers as being either fathers, children, young men, etc. In one of my preceding posts I dissect that passage and show how John is referring to Christians who are on various levels of growth.
Said the same further:
"Romans 8:23 clearly states, without a question of a doubt that the “huiothesia” is the future hope of the believer “waiting for the adoption (huiothesia), that is the redemption of the body". Here Paul equates the timing of the adoption to be when the body is redeemed, which takes place at the appearing of Christ (Phil. 3:21)."
Again, I have stressed the importance of Romans 8: 23 for it not only says that "the huiothesia" is not a present experience, but says what it is, i.e. "the redemption of the body," and could not be adoption, because those who believe in adoption say that Romans 8: 15 proves that adoption is a present reality because it says that believers now receive "the spirit of huiothesia." As I argued before, how can adoption be both a present reality and also a future reality? The response by believers in adoption say that adoption is begun when one becomes a believer but is finished at the second coming of Christ. But, if that is so, when does a child become the adopted child of another? When the process of adoption is begun or when it is completed? It is interesting to watch those who are stubborn on this view deal with this incongruity.
Said the same further:
"Rom. 8:23, allows us to see that the similar language in Ephesians, is indeed associating the “huiothesia” with the future hope of the believer; and is not what took place once one came to faith in Christ, and became a child of God (as entering Gods family), as it has usually been understood due to the English translation “adoption”. Let’s read in Ephesians: “Having predetermined us unto (eis) adoption” “you were sealed with the holy spirit…which is the earnest of our inheritance until (eis) the redemption of the purchased possession” “whereby you are sealed unto (eis) the day of redemption” (Eph.1:5, 13-14, 4:30). These scriptures along with Rom. 8:23 are clearly teaching that “huiothesia” is a future event that takes place at the appearing of Christ, when the believer receives his inheritance (2 Tim.4:8)."
In my series "Waiting For The Huiothesia" I analyzed (exegesis) the five passages where Paul speaks of the huiothesia and I showed that in those passages all were in agreement that the "son placement" is the final step in becoming fully mature and perfected sons of God. Romans 8: 23 affirms this plainly but the other passages are in agreement. Paul said to the Ephesians that God had predestined them to the placement of sons, which means that he predestined the "end" state of the elect. That end state is being installed to the right hand of God and Christ as perfected sons and is why in the resurrection they are called "sons of the resurrection." It corresponds to the time when they are fully made into the likeness of Christ and God the Father, which is the chief significance of what it means to be a "son" as in the saying "like father, like son." It will also occur in a formal ceremony, at a time appointed by the Father, in which he will declare publicly of every resurrected son - "this is a beloved son in whom I am well pleased." As we will see, this is the chief likeness between Greek and Roman adoptions (huiothesia) and the son placing Paul has in mind. But, more on that in the next closing chapter. It is also the time, as the above writer says, and as I have repeatedly said, when the begotten children of God receive their inheritance in full (of which they only have a down payment or earnest now - Eph. 1: 14) and when they are then qualified to rule over it.
Said the same further:
"Here In Galatians “nepios” is used of the spiritual condition of those who were previously under the law; being servants to the spiritual powers of sin, they were in an adolescent state, or infant spiritually; and how through faith in Christ, they are now full grown “sons” (nepious is here being used in contrast with “son”, huios); because Christ has redeemed them from the law; they are now impowered (sic) by the spirit unto perfection, no longer slaves to the powers of sin, but “sons” in Christ (Gal.1:4;3:2-3, 22; 4:1-7)."
Those who argue for the adoption model will say that a believer is both adopted and born of God at the same time. Others, however, as I showed in my series on the huiothesia, will want to put one before the other, at least logically, if not chronologically. This creates all kinds of problems however. The wiser among them will say that they occur simultaneously, seeking to avoid those problems. However, they still have several problems. One, this is a most strange occurrence, for no one on earth gives birth to an adopted son, nor does one adopt his own son. So, if they argue that adoption among the Greeks and Romans is a picture of God's adoption, they will then have to say that God's adoption is not like those human adoptions; And, when they admit that, they have no legs to stand on. Or, as Solomon said, "the legs of the lame are not equal" in such reasoning. (Prov. 26: 7)
We have two more chapters contemplated to complete our belief on this important subject.
No comments:
Post a Comment