Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
Evan, I really wish you take some time to study Paul's use of the Greek word "huiothesia." W. Lee has long used this one truth to condemn all Christians and to exalt his own ministry. We have discussed this repeatedly on the forum, but unfortunately you are so imbibed with Lee-isms that you can no longer hear.
This word huiothesia is unique to Paul, and it emphasizes the legal rights of sons as heirs to our Heavenly Father. Sorry if this is too complicated for you, since you refuse to explore the depths of the riches here. (Rom 11.33-36) Without the Spirit of God inspiring the apostle Paul to " adopt" (pun intended) this unique word, our understanding of the new birth at our regeneration would be extremely limited.
Instead you prefer to run around proclaiming yourself a "baby god," all the while condemning the rest of the body of Christ for reducing their status to the " mere signing of a legal adoption agreement" and worse. Do you really think that your arrogant attitude towards the truths of scripture and the condemnation of all other children of God will help you grow to become a full-grown son, qualifying as a legal heir to all God's wealth?
The following quotation from the above link manifests some of the riches of Christ in Paul's ministry. (Yet completely missed by W. Lee.)
|
The simple reason why the "Roman law" interpretation is wrong (if taken as fact), is that we are not adopted under Roman law and neither has God ever been bound by Roman law. Gentiles especially.
This misunderstanding I believe is because people confuse a fact with the Roman adoption law analogy Paul was making.
The fact is that we are born of incorruptible seed (1 Pet. 1:23).
This misunderstanding is shown in the article I posted previously which says:
"Adoption is a legal act of God on our behalf"
So God, the one who makes the law, had to "do a legal act", doesn't really make sense considering that God is the ultimate authority, not someone bound by Roman adoption law.
Secondly, "adoption.. on our behalf" doesn't make much sense either, because it implies that we had to adopt ourselves?
The blessings of adoption are correct, but people have mistakenly taken the analogy of adoption and misapplied it as fact, suggesting, as that article above does, that God "had to do some legal things on our behalf". God was not doing anything legal - the reality is that believers are reborn (born again) of incorruptable seed by the Holy Spirit, making them sons of God in spiritual reality not merely as an agreement under law.