Norm Mundhenk in "Adoption: Being Recognized as a Son." has some good things to say on this subject. He is a recently retired UBS translation consultant for the Asia-Pacific Area. (See here) He wrote (emphasis mine):
"In v. 5 Paul uses the Greek word huiothesia, a word that is often understood to mean “adoption.” Apparently this word is used in the ancient Greek papyri in places where the English word “adoption” would seem to fit, and as a result the lexicons often say that the word means “adoption” (see the entry in BAGD). I am not in a position to study the papyri and other places where this word may appear outside of the New Testament, so I do not want to discuss the meaning of the word in those places. But in the New Testament itself, this word is used only by Paul, three times in Romans and once in Galatians. (It is also found in Eph 1.5, a passage which may not have been written by Paul.) Therefore, it seems reasonable to ask a very specific question: “When Paul used this word, what did he mean by it?”
In the next closing chapter I will deal with those places in Greek literature where huiothesia denotes an adoption (that is, a taking of someone else's son to make him his own son by a legal process) and answer the arguments made upon that fact. However, as I stated in my series on the huiothesia, we can discern what Paul had in mind by seeing how he used that word in the several contexts in which he used the term and this weighs much heavier than citations from ancient Greek literature and from its usage among the Greeks. Who can deny that the new testament writers often took a Greek word and enlarged its meaning? Certainly this is true with the word "grace."
Mundhenk continued:
"In the passage that we have just looked at, from Gal 4, Paul is talking about people who are in fact heirs, but who have not yet reached the age when their rights as heirs take effect. They have to wait until “the date set by [their] father.” When that time comes, Paul says, we receive huiothesia. In the context of this passage, where Paul is talking about people who are already children of the father, “adoption” seems to be a very inappropriate English word to describe what Paul is thinking of. That is why, in my summary of the passage above, I translated “receive huiothesia” as “be recognized as God’s sons.”"
Those who argue that adoption and divine begetting occur simultaneously have a problem in the Galatians passage for it is clear that those who were adopted as sons were already children long before they became sons, i.e. adult sons. "The time appointed by the father" denotes a time when the biological father declared that his child had now grown and reached the age where he would rule with his father over the inheritance, or the time when his education was ended. In other words, "the time" when a child was born into the family was not the same time when the child was put into the place of a mature son.
Also, the likeness to the father that came with being begotten was not as great as the likeness that comes with having been trained by the father's appointed means and tutors and through having been personally working beside the father. Up till a Hebrew son's Bar Mitzvah the child was not with his father much of the time but was with the tutors appointed by his father. After Bar Mitzvah the child continued his training towards full sonship but it was now through direct contact with his father. I see this in the life of Jesus. He no doubt was under tutors mostly until he was about twelve years of age but after his Bar Mitzvah he no doubt worked in the carpenter shop with his father Joseph. Those are two stages in his growth towards full sonship. The final stage occurred when he was about thirty years of age. Following each of these stages there was greater likeness to the father. But, more on that shortly.
As I also stated in the huiothesia series, Paul says that new testament believers are far ahead of old testament believers in their becoming mature sons. Yet, even new testament believers must await the resurrection to become fully matured sons who are in every whit the image of their father.
Mundhenk then cites Sandra Hack Polaski who says "To be adopted as a son in Paul’s day meant to be granted a share in the inheritance."
That is correct. Yet, believers only receive a small portion of this inheritance now in their lives. Also, they are sons in training, being made not into birth sons, but into mature sons. Full likeness to the Father comes not by birth alone, but by the spiritual training and the resurrection.
We must also see in Galatians chapter four how Paul uses what is called a "futuristic present tense" when he says "and because you are sons, God has sent for the Spirit of his Son into your hearts crying Abba Father." That could means "because you are sons via being born of God," or "because you are appointed or predestined sons." Or, we could read it as follows: "and because you are (evidently) sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts crying Abba Father." There are stages to sonship and at each stage it may be increasingly said "this is my son." However, as we have shown, "son" often carries the connotation of being full grown and of ones who in every way reflect the image and likeness of God the Father in their character and in their thoughts and deeds. Notice these words from Galatians chapter four:
"Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, does not differ at all from a slave, though he is master of all." (vs. 1) Notice the present tense "he IS master of all." But, in reality he is not yet master of all, for he is still a child and is as a slave when it comes to rights and privileges. When contemplating the end destiny of the child we can say "he is the master of all." Also, Paul calls the child an "heir" when he has not yet received his inheritance (except as a small portion). That is another futuristic present tense. If I say "believers are (present tense) the ones who inherit the earth" I am using a futuristic present tense, for believers are not now inheriting the earth. Further, notice the words "as long as he is a child." Are not those who are born again always the children of God, always his offspring? Yes, and therefore, we see how "child" here means a mere babe or toddler. Therefore "the time appointed by the father" denoted the time when the child ceased to be a child, but reached a stage of development beyond childhood and further toward manhood or complete likeness to a father.
Notice also how being sons of God precedes having the Spirit sent into the hearts. The word "because" tells us that they were sons before they received the Spirit of God. If receiving the Spirit refers to being born of God, then they were sons before they were born of God. This is a difficulty for those who say that God adopts and begets his children at the same time. I therefore believe "because you are the sons" means the same thing as "because you are masters of all" and this is because Paul is looking to the predestined end.
Mundhenk continues:
"In Newman’s lexicon at the back of the UBS Greek New Testament we are offered a choice. The word huiothesia can be translated either as “adoption” or as “sonship.” With the cultural background offered by Polaski and the exegetical background we have reviewed regarding the use of this word in Gal 4, it seems to me that the English word “adoption” does not fit the context, whereas “sonship” or something like it is precisely what Paul is talking about."
Exactly. The idea of adoption does not only not work in the Galatian's passage but not in the other four places where Paul speaks of "huiothesia." By becoming "sons" Paul is thinking of the time when the child is no longer a child but becomes a man, an adult "son" who is now more like his father than when he was born.
Mundhenk continues:
"There is nothing that I can see in this particular passage of Romans that would help us to choose between the translation “adoption” and the translation “sonship.” That is, in this passage, unlike in the Galatians passage, Paul has not previously described the believers as “sons.” Therefore, one might argue that he is thinking of those who are not sons being legally made into sons, which is the meaning of “adoption” in English. However, the clear connection of the thinking here to the thinking in Gal 4 suggests that if a word like “sonship” was appropriate for conveying Paul’s meaning there, it would be equally appropriate here. Certainly the emphasis of the passage is on our status as God’s children and heirs. There is nothing whatever that would suggest that “adoption” is a more appropriate term than “sonship.” On the contrary, the choice of the word “adoption” might introduce components of meaning which are irrelevant or misleading."
Nothing to add to this except to say that I strongly believe this is correct.
Mundhenk continues:
"Here we meet again the word huiothesia. As we have seen, in the preceding verses Paul has made much of the fact that we are already children of God, appropriately addressing him as “Abba, Father!” Then, in this passage, where Paul turns to the wonderful things that are to come, we are described again as “sons of God” (v. 19) and “children of God” (v. 21). So what is this state of huiothesia that we (and all creation) are waiting for with such high expectation? It clearly cannot refer to “adoption.” Even “sonship” does not seem fully appropriate here, since our status as “sons” has already been stressed so much."
Rather than "sonship" being a word for word translation where huiothesia is used, we should use several words (a common practice by translators), such as "public declaration or acknowledgment that this child is now my son, fully conformed to the image of his father."
Mundhenk continues:
"The commentaries on this passage remind us of the frequent tension in the New Testament between “the already” and “the not-yet.” Perhaps Paul’s metaphor in Gal 4.1-2 can help us here. We are sons of God; we have received the Spirit; we can even be described as heirs. But we have not yet received the inheritance. We are still waiting for “the time appointed by the Father.” That is precisely what Paul is talking about in this passage, the glorious inheritance that we, God’s children, are waiting for. At the time when we finally receive our inheritance we are finally revealed as what we are, the sons of God (8.19). In this passage “adoption” is a strikingly inappropriate word to show what Paul is thinking of. If “adoption” is ever appropriate to describe some stage of a Christian’s relationship to God, by the time we get to this passage it is a stage that has long been passed. What Paul has in mind when he uses the term huiothesia here might be better described as “our full sonship” or “our reception of all that belongs to us as God’s sons.”
This is just excellent commentary! I could not have said it better myself. This is what the body of Christ needs to see and quit confusing others by telling them that they are adopted children of God rather than born of God. That idea confuses them, but the truth about what Paul had in mind about "the huiothesia" enlightens them.
Mundhenk continues:
"In this passage, huiothesia clearly focuses on Israel’s special status as “sons of God.” As in the other examples of this word that we have looked at, there is no reason that the sense of “adoption” should be selected here. Even if one wanted to argue that for Paul the word can sometimes mean “adoption,” in this passage it is the status as sons, the result of the adoption, which is in focus. But in view of Paul’s other uses of this term, which we have already looked at, it is very unlikely that Paul thinks of this word as meaning “adoption” at all. It is better to assume that here too he has a meaning more like “sonship” in mind."
On this we have elaborated in our series on the huiothesia. Israel was never said to be adopted in the old testament but rather they are always described as begotten by Jehovah. Further, we have seen where Israel went into Egypt as God's begotten "child" but came out of Egypt God's "son." The time in Egypt equates to the tutoring of the child Israel, or to the first stage of growth. Their emancipation out of childhood would then correspond to their redemption or exodus from Egypt. Their second stage of training, towards being fully conformed to their Father, occurred during their wilderness journey. The final stage was when they entered the land of promise.
Mundhenk continues:
"As with the passage in Rom 9.4, even if the word is thought to mean “adoption,” the meaning here surely focuses not on the event of adoption but on the state of relationship with God that results from it, that is, on “sonship.” If Paul is the writer of Ephesians, one can argue on the basis of other passages that the word does not mean “adoption” at all, but “sonship.” If Paul is not the author, then that particular argument is not so strong. Nevertheless, the sense of “sonship” would seem to be more appropriate in the context than the sense “adoption.” As Polaski pointed out in her comments on Roman culture, the emphasis in any case is on the status and rights of the son and heir. In general “sonship” would seem to be a more relevant translation than “adoption.”"
Of course, I fully believe that Ephesians was written by Paul. Again, I agree with what Mundhenk says.
Mundhenk continues:
"The English word “adoption” refers to a legal process by which someone who is not one’s child by birth can be officially declared to be one’s child, and therefore to have the same status as any other children one may have. There are several ways in which this term is not the right word in English to convey Paul’s meaning in the passages where he uses huiothesia."
Agreed.
Like Father, Like Son
"For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren." (Rom. 8: 29 kjv)
So, when will the foreknown ones be conformed to the image of God's "Son"? When will they themselves become fully sons themselves, fully like their Father in heaven and fully like Christ the firstborn? All these sons are begotten sons, and none are adopted sons. Christ was not an adopted Son, either in his divinity or in his humanity. Yes, they partake of some of the Father's traits by being begotten of him, having his spiritual "seed" (I John 3: 9; I Peter 1: 23) or DNA, so to speak, but they are not yet like him in thought, word, deed, or character. That comes in stages and the final stage is one where the child has fully become the image of his father.
Wrote Paul further:
"And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly." (I Cor. 15: 49 kjv)
In this text Paul is speaking particularly of the physical bodies of believers. Their bodies, as they dwell in them during their lifetimes, are "the image of the earthy." But, after they have become "sons of the resurrection," they will then in their bodies "bear the image of the heavenly." But, what about their minds and spirits and souls? When will they bear the image and likeness of God? Wrote Paul again:
"But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." (II Cor. 3: 18 kjv)
The words "beholding" and "are changed" speak of an ongoing experience (present tense linear) and should be translated "are continuously beholding" and "are continuously and progressively being changed" (or transformed). And, in this context the apostle is not speaking of any transformation of the physical body or "outer man," but of the ongoing transformation of the soul and spirit, and of the mind, or of the "inner man." This perfection of the inner man, of making it to perfectly image the Father and Son, will not occur till the saint enters into heaven upon either the death of the body, or at the rapture and resurrection of their bodies at the time of Christ's second coming.
Think of how many times a proud father has exclaimed of his son, after his son has done something extraordinarily good, "that's my boy" or "that's my son"? That is said because the father sees the son as imaging himself and his father to son teaching.
Paul also said, along these lines:
"And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him." (Col. 3: 10 kjv)
"Which is renewed" is again linear reflecting a continuous action, being a present tense participle. So, becoming like the Father occurs not all at once, nor all at once when the believer has been born of God. Rather, being conformed to the image of the Son, and of the Father, is progressive for the soul, mind, and spirit, unlike the transformation of the body which will occur at once. Notice also how this likeness to the divinity is "in knowledge." This renewal in knowledge is only rudimentary when one is a baby or toddler, and is often merely intuitive at that time. It is only as the child matures that he becomes more like his father, or parents, in thought and action. None will be perfectly like God in their knowledge until they are with God in heaven and perfected.
"And to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness." (Eph. 4:24)
"Therefore be imitators of God as dear children." (Eph. 5: 1 nkjv)
The "spirit of sonship" or "huiothesian spirit" is thus described. It is the desire and attitude that, out of adoration and admiration of one's father, a birth son desires to be "like" his father. In pursuit of this he will imitate his father, the one who begat him.
No comments:
Post a Comment