Question concerning Adoption and Marriage

[Nashdude]

Ever since I first received Christ, salvation has fallen into a kinda strange description for me---not as I understand it, but in how my understanding differs from "conventional church wisdom". As such, I wanted to present a question to the Messianic community here for their take.

First, though, I need a little Old Testament/Judaic Culture background, specifically in regards to adoption and marriage.

1) When a child is adopted, how does he legally relate to the adopted father, and to the other children? Where does he fall legally in respect to the natural children?

2) Is the inheritance equally shared between all siblings---adopted and natural---or is there a line of priority? In other words, can adopted children be considered JOINT-heirs with the firstborn, or are they simply heirs of their adopted father, their inheritance completely separate from that of the firstborn?

3) When a woman gets married, how does she legally relate to the father-in-law? Does she, in becoming "one flesh" with her husband, become heir to all that her husband is---in essence, adopting into the family as a child of the father-in-law and on equal (but dependant) footing with her husband?

I'm sure I'm already playing my hand to some of you, but this definition potentially opens up SO MANY questions concerning salvation that I really had to nail this down. Thanks in advance.

[Nashdude]

Any takers?

[Mark]

An adopted child has equal portion as any natural children. If he is adopted before any natural children are born, he assumes the right of inheritance as firstborn. The inheritance of the firstborn is called the double-portion; but that is really a misnomer. Typically, so that the estate does not become smaller with each generation, the firstborn retains complete control of the estate while the rest of the children get an equal portion of wealth. In the most practical sense, this could be compared to voting rights. The firstborn gets two votes and each of the other children get one vote, when it comes to the decisions of managing the estate.

A daughter-in-law gains all priviledges and responsibilities toward her father-in-law as that of a daughter. She can expect to be cared for within the family.

[Nashdude]

Outstanding! This is EXACTLY what I was looking for (and almost exactly what I thought it would be ). Thanks!

Just to clarify, would "the twain becoming one flesh" unofficially grant the daughter-in-law all the rights and privileges of her husband, so long as her husband remains alive and she acts under her husband's authority?

[Mark]

If you need to ask, you certainly haven't been married long!

[Nashdude]

Jun 19, 2008 16:05:45 GMT -8 Mark said:

If you need to ask, you certainly haven't been married long!

Har har

Actually, I was talking about in ancient Jewish culture. I can only see things from a Western perspective.

[Mark]

Looking especially at the patriarchal wives as example, Hebrew women have always enjoyed a very elevated status compared to what we see in most other Eastern cultures. In fact, she pretty much gets her way. The stereo-typical Jewish Mama seems to date back pretty far.

[Nashdude]

That's kinda what I gathered from the Proverb of the Virtuous Wife. There you have a woman---not the husband, but his WIFE---scoping out a field and buying it for the family, even though SHE would not technically own the field but her HUSBAND.

I think you've given me exactly what I need for my "marital salvation" argument---that our saving relationship is not one of simple adoption to God (as is commonly thought) but one of marriage to Jesus (who's benefits INCLUDE the adoptive benefits, but are governed by different standards).

Thoughts? Or should I explain further?

[Mark]

I could speculate on what conclusions you're making; but I am a bear of very little brain and would appreciate your sharing further what it is you have found.

[Nashdude]

Excellent! Now, let me post a disclaimer real quick that everything that I'm talking about will just be my point of view, as I feel led by the Lord. It's quite possible that He allowed me this point of view for my own growth, only to be elaborated on or corrected when I get to where He wants me. I dunno. This is just where I'm at right now.

Anyway, conventional Christian wisdom states that our relationship with God is one of adoption. When we accept Christ, we become children of God. This is supported by the following verses...

John 1:12-13 -- But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Romans 8:14 -- For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

Galatians 4:6 -- And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

Now, I agree with everything these verses say---how could I not? They are the Word of God!---but I think that they only tell a partial story.

See, some "subsects" of this school of thought see the birth of this initiation as becoming the NATURAL sons of God, supporting their view with verses like "ye must be born again" and the like. Problem with that line of thought is that we're told in many places in the Bible that this is not the case...

Romans 8:15 -- 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.

Galatians 4:4-5 -- 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.

Romans 8:15 -- 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.

In these places and others, the Bible confirms that we are NOT natural born sons, but rather sons by way of adoption---a covenant relationship that at one point in our personal lives did not exist. Before this relationship, we were not sons.

What's more, adoption generally requires no input from the adoptee whatsoever! As the child being adopted is most often a minor, he generally has no say in the matter, one way or the other. Rather, it is a unilateral decision made by the parent(s). Granted, the parent may talk to the child about it, get his input, but legally the child has no say at all. It's all the parent.

This is NOT the case in salvation. While God has indeed done all the work, it is still up to us to accept or reject Him. That is an option not present in adoption.

...but it IS present in marriage!

As it happens, we are given just as many verses about relationship with God being a MARRIAGE as we are about it being an adoption.

Jeremiah 3:14 -- Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I am married unto you: and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion:

Ephesians 5:22-23 -- Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

Ephesians 5:25 -- Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

There's even references in Revelation about New Jerusalem being the Bride of Christ. I didn't add it, however, because there are some that dispute equating places with persons/people. But even leaving that one out, we're given this cool passage in Ephesians that draws the parallel for us even more blatantly!

Ephesians 5:30-31 -- For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

Sounds a lot like another verse talking about marriage...

Genesis 2:24 -- Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

A verse that Jesus referenced when discussing the sanctity of marriage...

Matthew 19:6 -- Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

The final nail in the coffin, in my opinion, is how a marriage occurs. Like adoption, it is a covenant relationship, only it is between the bride and the groom instead of the father and child. But when we get married, adoption takes place AS WELL. The bride becomes a daughter to the father, just as surely as if he had adopted her himself, only instead of this relationship being unilateral on the father's part, it is a FREE WILL decision entered in by the BRIDE, and is set into effect by the SON, not the father!

As it happens, this is exactly the situation laid out for us in the Bible!

Galatians 4:7 -- Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.

See, our relationship with the Father is COMPLETELY DEPENDANT on our relationship with the Son. Without Christ, there is no reaching the Father, period. Even before He was born, Jesus was the promised Messiah, the one in whom Adam and Enoch and Noah and Abraham looked forward to. He was the one that David spoke of when he penned this psalm...

Psalm 110:1 -- The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

Long before Jesus was ever born in the flesh, He was an integral and vital part of the salvation process. Long before there was even a LAW, He was involved. As He said, "NO man cometh unto the father but by me"---past, present, or future.

But Galatians isn't the only verse that supports the idea of marriage-type salvation. The idea of an inheritance causes us to dig even further into this. Look here...

Romans 8:17 -- 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.

Notice the separation there. Heirs of God. Got it---that's a child's privilege, either by natural birth or by adoption. But joint-heirs with Christ?!? This could NOT be a product of adoption, as an heir is privy to their own inheritance. It is not shared. An estate might be broken down and divided, and the WHOLE might be split up between all heirs, but no two heirs will inherit the same piece of property. So how can we be JOINT-heirs with Christ?

Again, by marriage. In marriage, the bride becomes the adopted daughter of the in-laws. The adoption is inexorably tied to their relationship with their husband. So while an adoptee is subject to an inheritance, the bride's inheritance is her HUSBAND'S inheritance!!! As we're told, the two are one flesh. She is, in essence, one with her husband, so anything he inherits, she does as well.

Joint-heirs.

Now, this "marriage-type salvation" line of thought also has implications to the possible loss of salvation, but as that is an EXTREME hot-button topic with many, I won't go into that one right now. Just suffice it to say that, according to the Bible, salvation is not a simple adoption, but rather a marriage.

[Mark]

You do good work and I have really appreciated reading through your explanation.

One of the frustrating things that I have to deal with on a regular basis is the idea that phrases were coined in the New Testament and only have a definition in light of the Christian New Testament understanding. "Sons of God" and "born again" and the like were Jewish idioms long before the New Testament came along. The New Testament writers weren't introducing a new vocabulary to explain what had existed in Adonai's plan since the beginning (See Hebrews 4:2). They were using common phrases that would be normally understood in the context of their audience. "Sons of God" means Israeli. To extend this definition to all men is exactly what Paul is explaining in Ephesians chapter 2.

To be born again is to enter the waters of mikvah (baptism). It is an expression of renewal and serviceability, being made holy and of use for the our Lord.

Both adoption and marriage are great representations of our relationship with Adonai. I don't believe it to be an either/or; but because all analogies break down to some degree (as I believe some denominations have taken one or the other to an extreme) we use both understandings in how they are workably consistent to view our covenant relationship with Him.

Thanks for your post. I will enjoy re-reading it over again from time to time, just to celebrate in worship of His goodness towards us.

[Nashdude]

Thanks for the praise! I do try to take great care with how I study and understand the Word as a whole, both for my own continued growth and to avoid leading others astray, but that's not always recognized on the more "outside the box" points that I make. Far more often than not, if it strays too far from conventional wisdom---what "everybody knows"---it's just chalked up as being wrong without any serious investigation.

I'm glad this study blessed you. Thanks again for giving me an outlet, a place to bounce my ideas off a community more fluent in Jewish culture than my own.