Being Born of God

27 July, 201326 July, 2013Marissa

In many ways, this is a continuation of two previous posts, but I think it will be the last on this topic (at least for a while). As part of the adoption process that makes us younger brothers and sisters of Jesus Christ, we must go be “born again” (most translations put it).

Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. (1 Pet. 1:22-23)

In James, it is said that the Father “brought us forth by the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of His creatures.” (1:18, NKJV). This verse, along with many verses talking about the change wrought in us by the Holy Spirit, give us an idea of what being “born again”involves.

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God (Rom. 8:14).

Becoming God’s Family

Once we receive the Holy Spirit and God and Christ start working in our lives, we begin the process of becoming part of Their family. Because we have been adopted and redeemed, we are called children of God.

Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew Him not. Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is (1 John 3:1-2)

Though we are considered part of God’s family now, as long as we continue in faith, there is much more promised to us in the future.

Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. … unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.” (John 3:3, 5-8, NKJV)

Being born “of the Spirit” involves a change of heart and character that will allow us to enter the kingdom of God. It is a process that begins with Jesus Christ’s sacrifice making us fit to be adopted into Their family, and continues until our death or Christ’s return.

New Life

The word used to describe us as “born” of God is gennao (G1080). It is a general word for producing offspring, used of both begetting and bearing children. Zodhiates says it is also “spoken of God begetting in a spiritual sense which consists in regenerating, sanctifying, quickening anew, and ennobling the powers of the natural man by imparting to him a new life and a new spirit in Christ (1 John 5:1). Hence, Christians are said to be the sons of God (Rom. 8:14; Gal. 3:26; 4:6).”

Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us, and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. (1 John 4:7)

This new life and new spirit that we partake of when God and Christ begin the process of making us their children transforms our lives. As we become part of God’s family, the characteristics of God will become more and more evident in our lives until we receive “an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. (1 Pet 1:4-5).

Our Elder Brother

20 July, 201320 July, 2013Marissa

Since writing about adoption last week, I’ve been pondering related aspects of becoming children of God. I described what is called “adoption” in Romans 8 and 9, Galatians 4, and Ephesians 1 as “the process by which we become God’s children.” There is much more to it, however, and I’m hoping this post will begin to explore our relationship to God and Christ as people who They want to become members of Their family. To do this, I think it is important to spend time studying our Elder Brother, Jesus Christ (see Hebrews 2:9).

Only Begotten

It should be obvious that our relation to God as His children is different than the relationship Jesus has as His Son. After all, “the Word was with God, and the Word was God” before He became “flesh, and dwelt among us” (John 1:1, 14). As such, John uses a different Greek word to distinguish Jesus Christ from believers who are called children of God. The word is monogenes (G3439), meaning an only child. Zodhiates says the word appears to “serve to distinguish the Sonship of Christ to God from that spoken of other beings, i.g. Adam (Luke 3:38), angels (Job 1:6), or believers (John 1:12).”

For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through Him might be saved. He that believeth on Him is not condemned: but He that believeth not is condemned already, because He hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. (John 3:16-18)

Firstborn

Though He is described as the only begotten Son of God, Christ is not intended to be an only child. Rather, God has predestinated us “to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren” (Rom 8:29). The word for “firstborn” is prototokos (G4416), and it is used as a title of Jesus Christ in five NT passages. In all these cases, Zodhiates points out that the word can mean firstborn child, but also and identifies “Christ as the preeminent or ranking member of the group” in Romans 8, and indicates an “an inherent right [to rule] by virtue of His nature” when the word is used in Colossians 1.

In Whom we have redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: for by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him: and He is before all things, and by Him all things consist. And He is the head of the body, the church: Who is the Beginning, the Firstborn from the dead; that in all things He might have the preeminence. (Colossians 1:14-18)

One meaning Zodhiates does not discuss is the first one that popped into my head. I would be curious to know why it isn’t in his dictionary, simply because it seems to obvious to me and I wanted to at least read a reason for it’s exclusion.

“Firstborn” implies there are other children. If I did not have siblings, I would be an only child. Since I have a younger brother and sister, I am a firstborn. Similarly, Christ being called the “firstborn of the dead” reassures me that He is not the only one who will be resurrected, simply the first. Calling Him the “firstborn among many breathren” gives me hope that I might be counted worthy to be one of His younger siblings.

Adoption

13 July, 201313 July, 2013Marissa

About two years ago I read a booklet that claimed it is a “misunderstanding” to describe Christians as “adopted” children of God “rather than His actual begotten sons.” The bulk of the booklet was excellent and had nothing to do with this topic, but I wanted to bring this up by way of introduction. If I had not felt uncomfortable with the way this part of the booklet was phrased, I probably never would have looked into the concept of “adoption” in the New Testament.

Once I began studying it, I started to think that adoption as presented in the NT is a way of describing the process by which we become God’s children. We were once separated from God by our sins, but because of Christ’s sacrifice we have been brought into God’s family (Col. 1:21-22; 1 Jn. 3:1-2). They are calling people who were once outside Their family and making them children. Sounds like adoption to me.

Romans 8

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: and if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with Him, that we may be also glorified together (Rom 8:14-17)

The word “adoption” used here comes from the Greek word huiothesia (G5206). When looking at the history of this word, there is no question that its intended meaning is adoption. Spiros Zodhiates says it is used “of the state of those whom God through Christ adopts as His sons and thus makes heirs of His covenanted salvation.” He goes on to explain that,

Paul in these passages is alluding to a Greek and Roman custom rather than a Hebrew one. Since huiothesia was a technical term in Roman law for an act that had specific legal and social effects, there is much probability that Paul had some reference to that in his use of the word. Adoption, when thus legally performed, put a man in every respect in the position of a son by birth to him who had adopted him, so that he possessed the same rights and owed the same obligations. Being a huios, a son, involves the conformity of the child that has the life of God in him to the image, purposes, and interests of God and that spiritual family into which he is born.

Several verses later in Romans 8, the same word is used again.

For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body (Rom.8:22-23)

Adoption as Redemption

In Romans 8:23, “adoption” is so important to this process of becoming God’s sons that it is equated with “redemption.” This is not an isolated comparison.

Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: but when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ (Gal. 4:3-7)

These verses tell us that Jesus Christ came with the purpose of redeeming us in order that “we might receive the adoption.” In such a context, adoption sounds like a description of the process by which God takes people who were not part of His family and makes us His children.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: according as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love: 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 (Eph. 1:3-6)

Adoption — being redeemed from sin and placed in God’s family — is something we were predestined to “according to the good pleasure of His will.” Another usage of huiothesia underscores the importance of this concept. In Romans 9:4, adoption is listed alongside “the glory,” “the covenants, “the giving of the law,” “the service,” and “the promises” as something which God gave to Israel (Rom. 9:1-5).

No Longer Orphans

Though Paul is the only New Testament writer to use the Greek word huiothesia in his writings, the concept of adoption is not isolated to his letters. When Jesus Christ promises in John 14:18 “I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you,” the word “comfortless” is translated from orphanos (G3737). In the Septuagint, this same word is used in Psalm 68:5 to describe God as “A father of the fatherless.”

Zodhiates says this word is derived from “an adjective not found in the NT meaning obscure, dark, because the orphan is often little esteemed and neglected and thus forced, as it were, to wander in obscurity and darkness. Orphaned, bereved, spoken particularly of children bereaved of parents (James 1:27).” This darkness and obscurity perfectly describes the state we were in before Jesus Christ rescued us to be His adopted brothers and sisters.

From examining these verses, it seems clear that use of the word “adoption” in no way indicates we are anything less than God’s own children. Like the Roman custom Paul was likely referencing, this adoption takes someone previously not in the position of son and makes them a child in every sense of the word.

Fairy Tales

17 June, 201316 November, 2014Marissa

I love fairy tales. When I was little, my exposure to fairy tales was mostly through Disney films (my favorite is Beauty and the Beast, just in case anyone is wondering). I started seriously reading fairy tales just a few years ago, when my favorite English professor loaned me a collection of Celtic Fairy Tales. Since then, I’ve read all the Brothers Grimm tales, many of Andersen’s fairy tales, more Celtic folklore, and collections of French fairy tales including Perrault’s writings.

I’ve been reading some of C.S. Lewis’s essays collected in the book “Of Other Worlds.” I’ve enjoyed reading his fiction (Narnia and the Space Trilogy), as well as Mere Christianity, so it was nice to get insight into his mind and writing process. For the blogt I wrote to post on my writing website tomorrow (yes, I write under a pen name), I turned to one of these essays for inspiration. I liked writing it so much, that I decided to post it here as well.

C.S. Lewis on Children’s Writings

By tracking down a quote on Pinterest, I came across C.S. Lewis’s essay “On Three Ways of Writing For Children” (full text online here). Though I don’t write specifically for children, I like to think that my fantasy novels would appeal to (and be appropriate for) some young people. After all, I can’t be the only child who was reading Jules Verne by age 10 and searching for other stories of the fantastic.

The essay becomes most interesting to me when Lewis addresses the question of what kinds of stories are worth reading as children. Since he wrote children’s fantasy — not because he set out to write for children, but “because a children’s story is [sometimes] the best art-form for something you have to say” — he spends much of the essay defending fairy tales.

If I have allowed the fantastic type of children’s story to run away with this discussion, that is because it is the kind I know and love best, not because I wish to condemn any other. But the patrons of the other kinds very frequently want to condemn it. About once every hundred years some wiseacre gets up and tries to banish the fairy tale. Perhaps I had better say a few words in its defence, as reading for children.

Just as when Lewis was writing (in 1952), modern parents have been banning classic fairy tales. Hansel and Gretle and Little Red Riding Hood are not read because they are “too scary,” but there are other reasons as well. More than 50% of parents wouldn’t “read their kids Cinderella because the heroine spends her days doing housework. Many felt that this theme of female domesticity didn’t send a good message.” The politically incorrect word “dwarves” disqualifies Snow White from polite society. Rapunzel’s kidnapping and imprisonment is “too dark” a theme (actually, it is darker than they think– in the Grimms version she’s not actually kidnapped. Her father gives her to a witch to save his own life).

Whether or not to read fairy tales (and which ones to read) to children is a choice that will vary from parent to parent and also depends on the child. There are plenty of fairy tales I wouldn’t read to a very young or sensitive child (like The Little Mermaid, where she is in agony the entire time she has legs and dies at the end). But on the whole, I tend to agree with Lewis when he said,

Since it is so likely that they will meet cruel enemies, let them at least have heard of brave knights and heroic courage. Otherwise you are making their destiny not brighter but darker. Nor do most of us find that violence and bloodshed, in a story, produce any haunting dread in the minds of children. As far as that goes, I side impenitently with the human race against the modern reformer. Let there be wicked kings and beheadings, battles and dungeons, giants and dragons, and let villains be soundly killed at the end the book. Nothing will persuade me that this causes an ordinary child any kind or degree of fear beyond what it wants, and needs, to feel. …

It would be nice if no little boy in bed, hearing, or thinking he hears, a sound, were ever at all frightened. But if he is going to be frightened, I think it better that he should think of giants and dragons than merely of burglars. And I think St George, or any bright champion in armour, is a better comfort than the idea of the police.

As a child who was deeply afraid of things that go bump in the night, I can wholeheartedly support Lewis’s claim that a “bright champion in armour” is a far better comforter than the police. And if my mind had not been filled with fairy tales, fantasy, and knights in shining armor I would never have dreamed up Jamen and Karielle or Bryant and Aelis (who now live in my in-progress and finished novels) or invented Ves’endlara.

Which fairy tales would you read, or not read to children? As an adult, do you enjoy reading fairy tales?