ECT Sorting out the issue of sons by adoption

[Cross Reference]

Using these scriptures it should not be difficult to understand what God is after when He created Adam:

"But as many as received him [Jesus], to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name" John 1:12 (KJV)

"Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved." Ephesians 1:5–6 (KJV)

This is the end of the matter re all things son-ship in the Father and brotherhood with Christ Jesus. This goes hand in glove with: "I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus." [/I]Php 3:14 (KJV) i.e.,High calling to eternal Glory; Throneship in and with Christ Jesus in the Godhead. This is the sum and substance of the gospel message found is the gospels and the letters.

What I have in Bold yellow is the summation of the Body of Christ I believe is the man-child of Revelation 12:5. But that is just my opinion when studying that out.

 

[Truster]

Adoption is a wrong translation the word is better understood in English as sonship.

 

[Cross Reference]

Adoption is a wrong translation the word is better understood in English as sonship.

That is an opinion, isn't it? ___ I don't agree because it doesn't connect with what the culture was at that time.

 

[Danoh]

That is an opinion, isn't it? ___ I don't agree because it doesn't connect with what the culture was at that time.

The wisdom of men ever wants the world of Scripture to come down to its "more modern" level.

Its been said man is getting dumber, not smarter. Its true. If not careful man is ever spiraling downward in his need to dumb down language to his low level of understanding.

Words derive their intended sense not from a word, but from how words are used together, and within the setting in which they are.

In this, Scripture's sense as to the word "adoption" is similar to the Bar Mitzvah concept.

Not, where someone takes in a stranger as their own child.

And the issue is not even about a child.

Rather, about a son.

That moment where a father acknowledges his own son as his beloved son; as his heir; ready to move forward toward his responsibilities as such - no longer a child, Gal. 4.

In short - Get - In - The - Book!

 

[Truster]

That is an opinion, isn't it? ___ I don't agree because it doesn't connect with what the culture was at that time.

It matters not what you think. I have delivered the fact (not an opinion) of the matter and your not understanding it is no surprise.

 

[Cross Reference]

It matters not what you think. I have delivered the fact (not an opinion) of the matter and your not understanding it is no surprise.

And you not understanding what you have delivered as fact is error/irrelevant is no surprise. Nothing new there.

 

[Cross Reference]

The wisdom of men ever wants the world of Scripture to come down to its "more modern" level.

Its been said man is getting dumber, not smarter. Its true. If not careful man is ever spiraling downward in his need to dumb down language to his low level of understanding.

Words derive their intended sense not from a word, but from how words are used together, and within the setting in which they are.

In this, Scripture's sense as to the word "adoption" is similar to the Bar Mitzvah concept.

Not, where someone takes in a stranger as their own child.

And the issue is not even about a child.

Rather, about a son.

That moment where a father acknowledges his own son as his beloved son; as his heir; ready to move forward toward his responsibilities as such - no longer a child, Gal. 4.

In short - Get - In - The - Book!

Absolutely! __ if I understand you correctly and i believe I do __ and even in this instance the dumbed down version gets it right.

"I mean that the heir, as long as he is a child, is no different from a slave, though he is the owner of everything, but he is under guardians and managers until the date set by his father.
In the same way we also, when we were children, were enslaved to the elementary principles of the world. But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.
And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!”
So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God. Galatians" 4:1-7 (ESV) . .

 

[jamie]

Jesus said we must be born again, not adopted again. Birth requires begettal and then birth.

Israel as a nation was adopted, today we are begotten.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. (1 Peter 1:3 KJV)​

 

[Cross Reference]

Jesus said we must be born again, not adopted again. Birth requires begettal and then birth.

Israel as a nation was adopted, today we are begotten.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. (1 Peter 1:3 KJV)​

Take it up with Paul in Gal 4.

 

[jamie]

Take it up with Paul in Gal 4.

Take it up with Jesus who said we must be born of the Spirit, not adopted by the Spirit.

There is a difference between being born of the Spirit and being adopted by the Spirit. God is our spiritual father not our spiritual stepfather.

 

[Cross Reference]

Take it up with Jesus who said we must be born of the Spirit, not adopted by the Spirit.

There is a difference between being born of the Spirit and being adopted by the Spirit. God is our spiritual father not our spiritual stepfather.

Paul confirmed Jesus. That is why he wrote what he wrote. And if your last here [born of the Spirit, not adopted by the Spirit] your assumption is all wrong. Gal 4 stands as the word of God. Even Jesus was adopted, as already pointed out to you.

 

[Danoh]

Take it up with Jesus who said we must be born of the Spirit, not adopted by the Spirit.

There is a difference between being born of the Spirit and being adopted by the Spirit. God is our spiritual father not our spiritual stepfather.

Let's try this again...

Words derive their intended sense not from a word, but from how words are used together, and within the setting in which they are.

You are applying the present day sense of the word "adoption," thus, your error.

Scripture's sense as to the word "adoption" is similar to the Bar Mitzvah concept.

Not, where someone takes in a stranger as their own child.

And the issue is not even about a child.

Rather, about a son.

That moment where a father acknowledges his own son as his beloved son; as his heir; ready to move forward toward his responsibilities as such - no longer a child, Gal. 4.

Note Christ's "adoption" in this sense - that moment where the Father acknowledged Him as no longer a child, but; His training towards His entry into His responsibilities - as a Son - complete.

From this...

Luke 1:

80. And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his shewing unto Israel.

Luke 2:

40. And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him.

To this, in Luke 3 - some nineteen years later!

21. Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened,
22. And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

John:

29. The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which
taketh away the sin of the world.
30. This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was
before me.
31. And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come
baptizing with water.
32. And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it
abode upon him.
33. And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.
34. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

Ask questions - don't read modern day sense of words into these things.

In short - Stay - In The Book!

 

[Cross Reference]

Let's try this again...

Words derive their intended sense not from a word, but from how words are used together, and within the setting in which they are.

You are applying the present day sense of the word "adoption," thus, your error.

Scripture's sense as to the word "adoption" is similar to the Bar Mitzvah concept.

Not, where someone takes in a stranger as their own child.

And the issue is not even about a child.

Rather, about a son.

That moment where a father acknowledges his own son as his beloved son; as his heir; ready to move forward toward his responsibilities as such - no longer a child, Gal. 4.

Note Christ's "adoption" in this sense - that moment where the Father acknowledged Him as no longer a child, but; His training towards His entry into His responsibilities - as a Son - complete.

From this...

Luke 1:

80. And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his shewing unto Israel.

Luke 2:

40. And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him.

To this, in Luke 3 - some nineteen years later!

21. Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened,
22. And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

John:

29. The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which
taketh away the sin of the world.
30. This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was
before me.
31. And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come
baptizing with water.
32. And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it
abode upon him.
33. And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.
34. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

Ask questions - don't read modern day sense of words into these things.

In short - Stay - In The Book!

The hinderance to the issue is the belief Jesus was God from birth, hence, there was no need for Him to be adopted which makes His Spirit Baptism a mere formality.

 

[Danoh]

The hinderance to the issue is the belief Jesus was God from birth, hence, there was no need for Him to be adopted which makes His Spirit Baptism a mere formality.

You mean the valid "belief Jesus was God from birth" and the confusion of that with this "adoption" issue.

Every time I have dealt with others concerning this issue - theirs always proves the same ignorance - their reading a sense of this word foreign to Scripture's overall narrative.

Israel was not adopted, in the modern sense of the word. Rather, Israel was born of the Spirit "in Isaac."

Isaac's son having been Jacob, who was later named Israel, out of whom came the Twelve Tribes of Israel, Genesis 32:27, 28, Gen. 35: 22-26.

And Israel has yet to receive its adoption. This is what Galatians 4 is talking about - but in light of Israel's fall, and now, yet future recognition [adoption] as Sons of God, John 1; Romans 11.

2 Corinthians 3:

14. But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
15. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.
16. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
17. Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

There is another part of this; which is what throws people off. I'll come back it later.

 

[Cross Reference]

You mean the valid "belief Jesus was God from birth" and the confusion of that with this "adoption" issue.

Every time I have dealt with others concerning this issue - theirs always proves the same ignorance - their reading a sense of this word foreign to Scripture's overall narrative.

Israel was not adopted, in the modern sense of the word. Rather, Israel was born of the Spirit "in Isaac."

Isaac's son having been Jacob, who was later named Israel, out of whom came the Twelve Tribes of Israel, Genesis 32:27, 28, Gen. 35: 22-26.

And Israel has yet to receive its adoption. This is what Galatians 4 is talking about - but in light of Israel's fall, and now, yet future recognition [adoption] as Sons of God, John 1; Romans 11.

2 Corinthians 3:

14. But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
15. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.
16. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
17. Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

There is another part of this; which is what throws people off. I'll come back it later.

My brief summation of Israel, because of God's promise to Abraham, is him to be merely the venue through whom Messiah would come. Sons of God are by Jesus Christ and under a new covenant.

 

[Danoh]

My brief summation of Israel, because of God's promise to Abraham, is him to be merely the venue through whom Messiah would come. Sons of God are by Jesus Christ and under a new covenant.

I was beginning to suspect we were at an impasse given some sort of a difference in our overall perspective.

And there it is. At this point we can only go back and forth to no avail. And that's fine by me; I'm sure better minds than mine have addressed this with you to no avail.

Also, "by faith ye stand."

Think I'll leave you on this there.

 

[jamie]

For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises...
(Romans 9:3-4 NKJV)​

The adoption pertains to the Israelites.

The Greek huiothesia pertains to adoption.

Keep it simple.

 

[Danoh]

For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises...
(Romans 9:3-4 NKJV)​

The adoption pertains to the Israelites.

The Greek huiothesia pertains to adoption.

Keep it simple.

This from you - the person who confused said adoption with its other sense - that of taking in strangers.

Ephesians 2 might lend itself to that, but that is not what I am talking about.

Further, while Israel's adoption of Sons is yet future, the Body's [neither Jew, nor Gentile] is a Sonship of Adult Sons "in the Beloved" in "My Beloved Son" - in Christ - the moment the Spirit places us into Him, this is also Galatians 4.

 

[Cross Reference]

I was beginning to suspect we were at an impasse given some sort of a difference in our overall perspective.

Likewise, after I saw the other shoe fall to the floor.

And there it is. At this point we can only go back and forth to no avail. And that's fine by me; I'm sure better minds than mine have addressed this with you to no avail.

Only if your mind is made up and snapped shut by a cult like influence. I know when that time comes with anyone who runs with the written word without insight.

Also, "by faith ye stand."

Think I'll leave you on this there.

Indeed, "by faith we must stand" because when we can't make the connections and need to be right, we have no recourse, absent the "promise of the Father" being made real in us, but to begin to worship our commentaries.

You wrote this:

"Israel was not adopted, in the modern sense of the word. Rather, Israel was born of the Spirit "in Isaac."

When the Scriptures read it was by faith, the faith of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob:"By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise" . . . "Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,"

Hebrews 11:9 (KJV)
Romans 4:8-16 (KJV)

And then this from you:

Israel's adoption of Sons is yet future,

Since we know that abiding in Christ is the only key to son-ship by adoption [1Cor.8:6 ESV]with the result being per John 17:3,22-23. Nations don't go to heaven, people do. Therefore, Israel as a nation, will not come into such a relationship except on an individual basis we already understand from reading the gospels and letters of the NT. Having said that, Israel, at someone point in time, perhaps upon the sealing of the 144,000, will be grafted back into the Olive tree per Romans 11, God's promise to Abraham.

 

[Cross Reference]

For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises...
(Romans 9:3-4 NKJV)​

The adoption pertains to the Israelites.

The Greek huiothesia pertains to adoption.

Keep it simple.

Keep it accurate, simplicity will take care of itself.