Beyond OSAS

Originally posted by sonship
[b] You know that you are clearly at odds with what the bible claims. It says we are "adopted".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will have to discuss this latter. But to translate the word "sonship" is not "at odds with the Bible". Its a better rendering of the word meaning "the place of a son" - [b ...[text shortened]... of life in New Jerusalem must symbolize not just going back but even going beyond what Adam was.[/b]

And I do agree with you that Adam never ate of the tree of life.

No, because he and his offspring would still be alive in their fallen state.

Originally posted by checkbaiter

Superficial? Then why does the bible say "adopted"?

The less common English rendering of huiothesia is sonship.

Huio means son.
thesia means to place or to set or to put .

Huiothesia - means son - place of or "the place of a son". And "sonship" is less common the rendering than adoption.

Some well meaning Christian teacher prefer adoption and even press the benefits of that more judicial aspect of people being brought into God's family. That might help some.

So to press it dogmatically that adoption is wrong, might be discouraging some Christians who have been helped by that explanation.

However, we hope a day comes when they go on to see that to only speak of the legal aspect of joining God's family is to truncate too much of the real significance of us being SONS of God by BIRTH. And as fully matured sons in life we inherit "the place of a son".

The book published by InterVarsity entitled Adopted into God's Family - Exploring a Pauline Metaphor by Trevor Burke is an example of a Christian teacher of late to emphasize the term "adoption" for all he can to help believers.

You may have heard me say in the past - that any interpretation that causes men to have a warmer heart towards the Lord Jesus is at least "safe" even if it is not that good.

Someone may be blessed by exploring "adopted". I thank God that they were blessed and felt secure in God's love by that kind of exposition. But I would one day help such to see that the so-called "metaphor" is actually more real than any law court could enact.

In latter posts I will make a case for the more organic aspect. You see Paul does say that the spirit is life because of righteousness (Romans 8:10) . Because we have been legally justified by faith in Christ our innermost being is divine zoe life. And that makes us children of God being born of God.

"But if Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, the [human] spirit is life because of righteousness." (Rom 8:10)

So I will write some more on the LIFE relationship which has its legal BASE in our being judicially justified by God.

Sonship is a translation of the compound word HUIOTHESIA.
It means "the place of a son".

In Ephesians chapter 1 sonship is the destiny of those predestinated by God. They will be heirs of God and enjoy the place of a son of God. This inheritance is both legal and organic. It is both positional and dispositional.

As Paul uses sonship in Ephesians 1 he is speaking not of the entrance into the divine family but the result of full maturity of growth. The children of God regenerated by the begetting God will be brought into full inheritance of the place of a son not merely judicially but organically. They bear the divine life in the relationship with their begetting Father.

The full position of the sons of God is grown into.

"Predestinating us unto sonship through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will." (Eph. 1:5, RcV)

This is about consummation.
This is about the climax of the end of a process of growth in life.
Judicially, the spirit is life because of righteousness.
And organically the entire spirit and soul and body of the saved is saturated and permeated with the divine life qualifying the believer to be a co-heir with Christ.

Once Saved we will grow to be the place of a son. It is our destiny.

Originally posted by checkbaiter

While "adopted" may not be not completely wrong, it is superficial.
The sons of God were "BEGOTTEN" of God in a life germination.

The living SEED of God is implanted into their being.

Superficial? Then why does the bible say "adopted"?

If we are to get a more thorough and richer understanding of the bible, we need to step back an ...[text shortened]... s the impact adoption had at the time of the writing of scripture and can still hold true today.

Concerning HUIOTHESIA - as the RcV translate "sonship" Tony Espinosa writes:

With First Corinthians 15:45 we have a stunning declaration that "the last Adam became a life giving Spirit," indicating that Christ in resurrection became not only the firstborn Son of God but also the Spirit who gives life. Existing in this form, the resurrected Christ, with His divinity and uplifted humanity, can now come into the human spirit of the repentant believer to beget him with the divine life and nature (John 3:6). This begetting joins the believer to the Lord to be one spirit with Him (1 Cor. 6:17), this accomplishing the union in life that so evades Adopted's notice

[Meaning the book "Adopted into God's Family" by Trevor
Burke ]

It is in this union of the divine Spirit mingled with the human spirit that believers can worship God, who is Spirit (John 4:24), and enjoy the witnessing of the Spirit that they are indeed children of God by virtue of the organic union with Him (Rom. 8:16).

[ Affirmation & Critique, Volume VII - No.1-Aprill 2007, pg. 92, my bolding ]

Many people complain about not being able to see God. God's eternal purpose involved Him becoming visible.

God desires to become visible by dispensing His life and nature into His lovers that collectively they become a corporate vessel to contain God for His glorious manifestation.

They actually, as sons of God, become God in life and nature but not in His Godhead - in His Fatherhood.

We can see that Jesus came to the earth for a kind of "round trip" journey. He came bringing God into humanity for the ultimate purpose of bringing back humanity into God.

I do not say just into heaven. Heaven is not the final destination. The final destination is a Divine Person - God Himself. That is in the new heaven and new earth God and man are so interwoven, so mingled, so united that God is built into man and man is built into God to be one entity.

This is beyond a sinner's need to be saved from hell. This is indeed why the saving takes place ultimately. That is that God became man so that man might become God in life, nature, expression, but not His Godhead or incommunicable attributes.

In His communicable attributes He died and rose and enters man as " a life giving Spirit " that we may become a corporate incorporation of the eternal Divine Person with the created man.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
[b]And I do agree with you that Adam never ate of the tree of life.

No, because he and his offspring would still be alive in their fallen state.[/b]

Then can you see why it could be said that we are saved above and beyond what Adam had in the garden ?

In the New Jerusalem the saved have right to the tree of life.
This tree you admit Adam never partook of.

I do not think we should consider a physical tree in eternity. Rather Christ is that reality of the "food" man eats that brings the eternal life of God INTO his being.

The kingdom of God is a realm of more than just divine dominion. It is a realm of divine "species".

To be in the vegetable kingdom one must be born of a vegatable.
To be born of the animal kingdom one must be born of an animal
The human kingdom consists of those born of humans.

What about the kingdom of God? John chapter three emphasizes BIRTH is needed to both SEE and ENTER into the kingdom of God. Divine birth brings one into the kingdom of that life. It is more than just a governmental administration. It is a realm of God's life being dispensed into man.

"Jesus answered and said to him, Truly, truly, I say to you, Unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God." (John 3:3)

Unless one is BORN from God in the innermost part of hus being, he cannot see the kingdom of God. He has no apprehension, no appreciation, no comprehension and cannot SEE the realm of God's life shared by men and women.

Now a question for some who are fond of discussion the kingdom of God purely as an administration or government acting UPON man:

When John says the life that was WITH the Father, how do you understand the divine life that was WITH the Father?

"(And the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and report to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us. )" (1 John 1:2)

How do you understand that the divine eternal life was "with the Father" ?

Do you understand that as the Father's life that was with the Father? Or do you understand that as some OTHER life besides the Father that was somehow only along side of the Father ?

roigam ?

The Bible initially reveals Jesus Christ the God-man. Then it reveals God's intention to multiply this "standard model" to be many God-men. That is a duplication. Here is one place we see this.

"Truly, truly, I say to you, Unless the grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it abides alone; but if it dies it bears much fruit." (John 12:24)

That is, unless it goes into the ground to die it remains alone and one of a kind. If it dies the life in it is released and it is multiplied into many grains like it. One God-man is multiplied into many God-men.

The model God-man is the prototype for producing many God-men. All the precious Christians throughout the world are the brother and sister God-men. Regardless of our nationality, ethnicity, color, or even gender - we are God-men if the life of Christ has been dispensed into us. And we are all destined for deification, divinization, glorification to be a corporate expression of the mingling of divinity with humanity.