HOPE THROUGH ADOPTION
What do the baseball player Babe Ruth,
Wendy’s founder Dave Thomas, singer Faith Hill, announcer Harry Caray, and
Apple CEO Steve Jobs have in common? Surprisingly, all of these famous people
were adopted. What could have been a short or miserable life for these people
turned out quite well, at least in the eyes of society. Adoption brought them protection,
privileges, and opportunities that they would not have had otherwise. Adoption
gave them hope in life knowing that they were loved and cared for. Famous
people, such as the ones mentioned earlier, are not the only ones who receive
benefits from adoption. The majority of people who are adopted become better
off than they would if they had not been adopted. Adoption is an excellent way
for Christians to show the love of God, and to give hope to the hopeless
through the benefits of adoption. While adoption among humans is a good thing,
adoption in Scripture is a far greater and important concept. J. I. Packer
calls adoption, “The highest privilege that the gospel offers: higher even than
justification.” While the
concept of adoption is hinted at in the Old Testament, it finds its greatest
mention in the New Testament, and specifically in the writings of Paul, where
it provides the Christian with hope and blessings in the present and future to
come. No Christian is exempt from the challenges and discourages of life,
especially during periods of suffering, and therefore a correct understanding
of biblical adoption is vital in maintaining biblical hope and joy. Biblical
adoption provides blessings and hope in several ways, which will be seen as
adoption is examined in more detail in the following.
While almost all people know what
adoption among humans is, not all know how adoption relates to God. Horizontal
adoption would be adoption among humans, while vertical adoption would be
between God and his people. Vertical adoption, while not discussed in a large
number of verses, is still a major concept in Paul’s letters, including Romans
8:15, 8:23, 9:4; Galatians 4:4-6; and Ephesians 1:5. While adoption is different (but connected with) than
justification, it still is just as important, which is why Paul wrote about it
and tied it in with the gospel message. To be sure, adoption is an
underemphasized doctrine that should be studied and taught as much as
justification.
To begin, definition of vertical adoption
needs to be established. Paul is the only New Testament writer who uses the
Greek word for adoption, huiothesia (υἱοθεσία, 5206). This word is from huios, “a son,” and thesis,
“a placing,” and signifies the place and condition of a son given to one to
whom it does not naturally belong.[2] Paul uses huiothesia in
Romans 8:15, 8:23, and 9:4, Galatians 4:5, and Ephesians 1:5. When Paul uses
this word in these verses, he uses it metaphorically, not literally, and in a
way that is unique in the New Testament.
In other words, adoption is an invisible act of God, not a visible one like one
would see in society today, even though God’s act of adoption is even greater
than any human act. What this definition of adoption means in practical terms
can be summed up by Wayne Grudem, who says, “Adoption is an act of God whereby
he makes us members of his family.”
Being members of his family would provide the Christian with not only
blessings, but also, “All the rights, privileges, and responsibilities afforded
to all the children of the family.”
In light of this definition, it is clear that adoption is different than
justification, despite the common confusion between the two. Traver Burke
explains, “To be declared righteous at the bar of God is one thing: It is,
however, quite another to be adopted into God’s family and able to call him
‘Abba, Father’.” Adoption
then, refers to a legal act or transfer from the family outside of God into the family of
God, which highlights the fact that believers become part of God’s family
by adoption.
Since Paul was writing in a different
time and culture, the meaning he intended for adoption must be obtained in
light of the original culture. In other words, a 21st century
understanding of adoption should not be forced upon the text if that meaning
would not have been understood by the original audience of Paul’s letters. A
difficulty arises in knowing what culture Paul uses to explain adoption to his
audience. He was of course, living in the Roman world and would have been
familiar with the Roman understanding of adoption. Not all scholars are
convinced that Paul had the Roman view of adoption primarily in mind though,
arguing that Paul had in mind the Hebrew understanding of adoption when he
wrote.
In defense of the view that Paul had an
Old Testament Hebrew view of adoption in mind, scholars argue that Paul was a
Jew who was writing to Jews, through the use of Jewish Scriptures as support.
In light of this, Paul would not have brought a Roman or Greek view of adoption
to mind since his audience was more Semitic than Roman. Secondly, because Paul
was utilizing the Old Testament, he would have had Old Testament examples of adoption
in mind to support his argument. Moses, Israel, and Eliezer are all examples
used to show that adoption would have been familiar to Old Testament Jews, and
therefore acceptable examples for Paul to have in mind in the New Testament.
Scholars that hold to a Roman background
in view would say that the relationship between Israel and God in the Old
Testament would be better described as one of sonship, rather than adoption.
God was the Father, Israel was the son, and the language to describe this relationship
was different that what Paul used in terms of adoption. The examples of Moses,
Ephraim, Manasseh, and Esther that have been given by those advocating a Jewish
background from the Old Testament in Paul’s writings are brought into question
as well. Hebrew Scripture did not mention adoption or give directions for it,
so it would be questionable to bring in the adoptive practices of the
surrounding neighbors to the text, especially in light of their differences. In
response to the argument that Paul was writing to Jews as a Jew with Jewish
Scripture, these scholars would say that Paul’s use of huiothesia was not to Jews, but only “in
letters to communities directly under the rule of Roman law (Galatia, Rome, Ephesus).”
Furthermore, Paul was in Roman society and utilized the benefits of
citizenship, so there would be no reason why he would not have had a Roman
understanding of adoption in mind. Added to this, many Roman emperors such as
Octavian, Tiberius, Gaius, Claudius, and Nero had adopted sons to continue the
succession of power through family lines. The process of adoption and the legal
ramifications that followed would have been well known and familiar to those
Paul was writing to. Adoption in Paul’s time would have given the adopted son,
“Legal position and privileges [that] were the same as of a legitimate
biological son.”
Having noted
the different views on the background of adoption, can a case be made that one
view is preferable to the other? The answer cannot be strictly limited to
either a Hebrew background or a Roman one, because these two cultures were tied
together in many fashions. While it is true that Paul was a Hebrew, he was also
a Roman citizen in a Roman world. He would have used elements from both
cultures in his teaching, and with adoption, would have not limited his
understanding to just the Roman or Hebrew background. Given the familiarity of
adoption in the Roman world at the time Paul was writing, and the lack of
evidence in the Old Testament that the Old Testament authors were referring to
the relationship between God and Israel in terms of adoption rather than
sonship, it would be better to understand Paul’s view of adoption coming more
from Roman background than Hebrew. Burke remarks:
What remains to be seen is whether
the points elucidated above have influenced or shaped Paul’s huiothesia terminology, and whether
there is any concrete evidence to show Paul is relying on a Roman sociolegal
background. Moreover, even if there are occasions where there are parallels
between the practice of adoption in antiquity and Paul’s use of this in his
letters, there may be times when this is not the case. It may be here that we
are in touch with aspects of Paul’s own unique and creative thinking on
adoption, where he provides novel insights to serve his own theological purposes.
In conclusion to the background of
adoption, aspects of both the Hebrew and Roman understandings will help give
meaning to how Paul uses the term. Care must be taken not to read a meaning
from either background into the text that was not intended. The importance in
Scripture is on the blessings and importance of adoption, and how adoption
relates to the gospel. With the background that aids in understanding what
adoption is, the focus will now shift to the blessings and hope that come
through adoption.
Adoption, as noted before, is referred to
in five places in the New Testament, all in the letters of Paul. While society
today would view adoption as having present value, few would think of it in a
future tense, yet the adoption that Paul speaks of has both present and future
aspects. To begin, adoption gives hope to the believer because adoption
transfers them from one family to another. By nature, believers are “Children
of wrath,” (Eph. 2:3) and not naturally part of the family of God. Adoption
changes the status of the believer, transferring them from the family of the
“Children of wrath” to the family of God, and with the transfer, assurance of
salvation. Romans 8:15-17 notes this transfer with, “But you have received the Spirit of
adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!” The Spirit himself bears
witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then
heirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ.”
This change of position should not be taken lightly, for:
Under
Roman law, the only thing that stood in the way of a person adopting a child
not his own, was the fact that the child did not come of his own flesh and
blood. This obstacle was surmounted by the fact that the law gave him the right
to make the child his own if he fulfilled the proper legal requirements. But
under the divine government of the universe, there were two things that stood
in God’s way of making human beings His children, the fact that they were not
His children by birth and the fact that they were law-breakers. The first could
easily have been remedied by regeneration, but the thing that stood in the way
of this act of mercy on God’s part was the fact that human beings are sinners,
and God’s justice demands that sin be paid for before mercy can be righteously bestowed.[13]
As a result of the change of families,
believers are no longer under God’s curse but now are under God’s blessings,
and are in God’s family with all of the benefits of being in the family. Believers can rejoice and have great
joy in knowing that God wanted them to be a part of his family, and Christ paid
the great price to make this happen. Being rejected is a feeling that no one
enjoys or desires, so while rejection can be a part of the believer’s life in
his or her relationship to the world, it is not in their spiritual life. Just
like children do not need to worry that their parents will remove them from the
family if they mess up or do not live up to their parents expectations, so
believers can have confidence that they will never be rejected by God even if
they mess up or fail. J. I. Packer states:
The depressions, randomnesses and
immaturities that mark the children of broken homes are known to us all. But
things are not like that in God’s family. There you have absolute stability and
security; the parent is entirely wise and good, and the children’s position is
permanently assured. The very concept of adoption is itself a proof and
guarantee of the preservation of the saints, for only bad fathers throw their
children out of the family, even under provocation; and God is not a bad
father, but a good one. When one sees depression, randomness and immaturity in
Christians one cannot but wonder whether they have learned the health-giving
habit of dwelling on the abiding security of true children of God.
Along
with the assurance of salvation, believers find hope and blessings from
adoption in the family of God by being able to relate to God in a personal way.
The same is true with human adoption, as the newly adopted child now has a
father that will bond and communicate with him. It would be a tragedy if this
were not the case, with the father being distant and far off. As mentioned
earlier, God is not the believer’s “natural” father, but because of his love
has chosen the believer and now is their new father. He is then personal and
the believer is able to relate to him in a personal way, even being able to say,
“Abba, Father.” God as Father is a central focus in the letters of Paul, with around
40 references in all of his writings and eight of those references in
Ephesians, giving the Fatherhood of God and adoption a strong connection.
God does not adopt believers and then withhold the blessings and privileges of
being a son or daughter from them, but rather relates to them as their father
who wants the best for them. The believer can have great hope and joy in
knowing that they can approach God with confidence and trust, knowing that God
is the perfect Father who will never fail them, and is always there when they
need him. This means that Christians are the children of God and are cared for
and loved by the creator of the universe, making their status incredibly
special. Douglas Moo notes:
In crying out “Abba, Father,” the
believer not only gives voice to his or her consciousness of belonging to God
as his child but also to having a status comparable to that of Jesus himself.
The Aramaic abba was the term Jesus
himself used in addressing his Father, ….[and] in ascribing to Christians indwelt
by the Spirit the use of this term in addressing God, Paul shows that Christians
have a relationship to God that is like (though, of course not, not exactly
like) Christ’s own relationship to the Father.
Having this special relationship to God
as Father allows Christians, no matter what their sin is or what circumstance
they find themselves in, to turn to and cry to God for his help that will in
turn come because He is Father.
Christians are therefore able to cry out
and pray to God in a personal way. The way that Paul uses abba is significant in understanding the blessings and hope that
the adoption of God gives. In his letters Paul did not explain the meaning of abba, meaning his audience would have
been familiar with the Aramaic word. The word most likely “is a family term
used both by children and adults and expresses intimacy and affection for parents.”
Other than Paul, only Jesus is recorded in the Bible as using it as he prays to
the Father. It follows then, that Paul uses abba
in a way that connects adoption to Christ’s relationship with God.
What significance does abba have in
Paul’s theology of adoption? Burke notes that:
‘Jesus’ usage of the Aramaic term abba is still without parallel, and
because abba is a Jesus word, the
only credible solution as to why Paul retains it in his letters is the fact
that it was an expression of Jesus’ own making that was subsequently
remembered. Jesus is the conduit who enables his disciples to employ the same
language he himself used in addressing God as Father.
Paul picked up on Christ’s use of the
word in his letters, knowing that the audience to whom he wrote would have been
familiar with it as well. The significance for Christians today is that they
too can address God in a similar way that Christ did. It should be noted
however, that rather than to see abba as
meaning “daddy,” in a very informal way as some have suggested, it is better
and far more important to see and use abba
in a way that is both reverent and prayerful in addressing God as Father. Neither
Jesus nor Paul use the word in a way that would fail to respect God, but
instead they both use the word in a way that expresses their trust, hope,
dependence, and thankfulness in Him. All of these elements are present in the
cry of “Abba,” as both Christ and
Paul recognized that the Father was willing and able to sustain them through
the trials that they faced, and was worthy to be praised for being the perfect
Father that He was. Christians therefore, can take hope in knowing that God the
Father who sustained and provided for Christ and Paul will provide for them
through their struggles as well. Burke adds:
Abba
may not only be a prayer
that signals the adopted son’s new status but may also be a cry of dependency
upon God the Father for support and strength in the days ahead. Thus, while abba may be a cry of ‘familial joy,’ the
other side of the coin is our present suffering as part of creation, depicted
by Paul as our groaning and longing for the future and final adoption as sons,
the redemption of the body.
It is an incredible privilege then to be
able to speak to God, the one who created and upholds the universe by the word
of his power, in such a term as abba, Father!
Great blessings are found in this relationship with God as Father and the
believer as an adopted child.
Another hope and blessing that comes
through adoption and the relationship with God as Father comes through the
inheritance that is received by the believers as sons. God gives part of the
inheritance now, but other aspects and blessings are still to come. In Paul’s
letter to the Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians, two benefits of adoption as
relating to an inheritance are found. Paul identifies Christians as “heirs” who
have an inheritance that is given them by God. Before adoption, Christians were
slaves but after adoption, are now sons, and even “fellow heirs with Christ”
(Rom. 8:17). “As sons” is an important phrase in the text because the son
received the inheritance directly, while the daughter received it indirectly.
Paul is not downplaying the importance or worth of women at all. He uses
“sons,” as Russell Moore notes, “not because the gospel is anti-woman, but
because it is not.” In order to
understand what this means, an understanding of inheritance is necessary. This
will be examined in more detail in the following paragraphs. Paul’s audience
would have understood that the son was the primary focus of the father’s
inheritance, not the daughter. Moore notes:
Those reading the apostolic letters for
the first time would have understood completely that an inheritance didn’t go
to the daughter of a tribal patriarch. She received her inheritance through her
husband. That’s why we contemporary Westerners retain the act of a father
“giving away his daughter” at a wedding ceremony. The inheritance, though, went
to the sons, and particularly to the firstborn son.
Paul’s usage of “as sons” is encouraging
then both to men and women because it means no one who is adopted is excluded
from the inheritance. Had Paul added, “and daughters,” the Jews could have
referred to themselves as “sons” and the Gentiles as “daughters.” That would
have made them the heirs of the inheritance instead of the Gentiles. The same
could be said with men in general as well, but when Paul speaks “as sons,”
women are equally included in the inheritance just as the Gentiles are.
The beauty of adoption and the words Paul uses to describe it show that the
inheritance is for all who have been adopted, not just a select few.
As with adoption, the Old Testament
background has relevance in Paul’s understanding of inheritance. While in the
Old Testament the concept of inheritance was understood as a physical blessing
(such as the land) or as a future reward for the godly at the judgment, Paul’s
use of the term in his letters connects sonship and adoption in a way that was
different from anywhere in the Old Testament.
What this means is that Paul draws the importance of the inheritance from the
Old Testament, but shows that adoption is the basis for inheritance, not
inheritance the basis for adoption. Inheritance then, flows from being adopted,
and without being adopted, there would be no inheritance. While this connection
may seem obvious and the argument unnecessary, the Christian can forget that
they receive the inheritance because of adoption. Remembering this connection in the right order provides hope
and comfort because those receive the inheritance are part of God’s family,
with all of the blessings mentioned earlier. Specifically, being adopted
provides the believer with an inheritance that includes everything God has, including God himself. Lest that seem
irreverent or arrogant, consider the statements that Paul makes regarding this.
In 1 Corinthians 3:21, Paul tells the Corinthians, “For all things are yours, whether
Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the
future—all are yours, and you are Christ's, and Christ is God's.” On this
inheritance Grudem remarks, “All the great privileges and blessings of heaven are
laid up for us and put at our disposal because we are children of the King,
members of the royal family, princes and princesses who will reign with Christ
over the new heavens and new earth.”
Interestingly, unlike modern day inheritance terms in which the inheritor
receives the inheritance upon the death of the owner of the estate, and in
which the heir is not considered a real “heir” until the actual death of the
estate holder, Paul’s usage from Roman culture is different. Here, what Paul
(and Roman culture) builds upon is, “The heir was understood to be the
embodiment of the testator-the father lived on, so to speak, in the son-not
from the time of the father’s death but from the time of the son’s… adoption.”
In other words, adoption makes believers heirs, not the death of the father
(who in the case of God would never die).
One part of this inheritance that is
overlooked is God himself. In Romans 8:17, Paul says that believers are “heirs
of God.” Some commentators understand this in the traditional sense of
inheritance, where the believer inherits the promises and blessings of God.
Other scholars though believe that while it is true that believers inherit the
promises of God, they also inherit God himself. Thomas Schreiner states:
Paul asserts that believers have
inherited the promise of Abraham, and this promise is an astounding one, for
Abraham is heir of the world. Here he says something even more stunning:
believers are “heirs of God” himself. The wording suggests not merely that
believers are heirs of what God has promised but of God himself.
What this means, and why inheriting God
is so great, is that God becomes the believer’s God who shares with his
children the glory of himself. Instead of being someone else’s god, or a god
that is far off, God is uniquely the believer’s God that has a connection too
amazing to fully comprehend or explain in terms humans can understand in this
life. God’s glory is part of who God is, and when the believer is connected to
God through adoption and becomes heir, God’s glory is shared in a way that
brings God more glory. In no way is this disrespectful or dishonoring to God,
but the opposite as God’s adoption and the inheritance he gives brings even
more glory to himself. All of this gives great hope and blessing to the
believer, who can look forward to inheriting God himself, as well as his
blessings. As Burke concludes, “Because Abba’s
sons are also Abba’s heirs, the
inheritance believers can look forward to is God himself.”
This is made possible because believers are “fellow-heirs” with Christ, as Paul
notes in 8:17. Christ, through his work, has made adoption possible and cannot
be separated from the believer or God in adoption. In other words, the believer
cannot be adopted or receive the inheritance without Christ. Christ’s work then,
gives the believer great assurance and hope that the adoption or the promises
of the inheritance will never fail.
The
discussion of adoption in Romans comes in the context of Paul’s reminder to the
believer of God’s everlasting love that was demonstrated through Christ’s
suffering and work. When Paul says, “For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor
things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor
depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the
love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord,” he means that nothing will be able to
break or undo the adoption of the believer. Believers do not have to worry
that sin or failing will cause God
to “unadopt” or disinherit them. Daniel Bennett points out:
It is he [God] who foreknows, who plans, who calls, who justifies, and
who glorifies. Our security rests not on our own efforts but on God’s sovereign
oversight. In verses 38-39, based on his confidence in the work of God at every
step, Paul draws this conclusion: There is nothing that can separate us from God.
To have this assurance of God’s never
failing, never ending love that has been shown through his adoption is an
incredible privilege. Despite the challenges and oppositions that Satan and the
world throws at believers, they can always have hope and joy in knowing that
God is always for them, and as their Father will always provide and protect
them.
Not
only is the provision of God the Father for believers in this life, but also in
the life to come. Paul explains that adoption is both a present and future
event. Moo notes, “Christians, at the moment of justification, are adopted into
God’s family; but this adoption is incomplete and partial until we are finally
made like the Son of God himself.”
The final fulfillment of adoption will come in the next life, as God glorifies
his children. In Romans and Ephesians especially, Paul points to the future glorification,
which gives hope through the midst of the struggles in life. Believers may be
frustrated in their struggles with their spiritual life, thinking that they
will never measure up or amount to anything. They also can be frustrated with
how the world views them and perhaps even with a lack a seeing the blessings of
adoption. The final aspect of adoption though shows that God will ultimately
change them so that they will experience and glorify God in the way that God
has always intended. This mindset motivates Christians to keep pressing on
through their struggles and to not give up by knowing their efforts are the
response to God’s grace, and not the basis for it. In other words, knowing what
God has done and will do generates a thankful response in the hearts of
Christians to continue on serving and growing in Christ. How the world views
the Christian or how the Christian view his or herself ultimately will be made
right in the next age when the Christian is glorified. Burke remarks, “In their
present condition, God’s adopted sons may be without honor in the eyes of this
world, but one day this will give way to the honorable disclosure of who they
really are when their huiothesia will
finally be revealed.”
Adoption
provides great blessings and hope for Christians. They can be assured that God
loves them and will sustain and glorify them. Even though they sin and fall
short often, the Christian should never lose assurance and hope because they
are part of God’s family and can never lose that standing. God is giving them
blessings of his inheritance now and in the age to come. Adoption then, brings
God the glory and praise that is rightly due him as He takes sinners that are
outside of his family and makes them heirs of it through Christ. Adoption is a
doctrine that should be more fully explained as it gives much needed hope and
joy to struggling Christians. In light of the wondrous doctrine of adoption as
seen through the letters of Paul, Christians should thankfully and joyfully
live their lives fittingly and to the glory of the most high God as his
children.
[2]W.E
Vine, Merrill F. Unger, and William White, “Adoption,” Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words
(Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1996).
[13]K.S.Wuest,
“The Spirit of Adoption,” Wuest's word
studies from the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997).
