(c) Just as the adoption of Jews was inferior to that of Christians, so that of Christians is not yet fully realized. Adoption is spoken of in Ro 8-^ as something in the future. It is the redemption {aTroXvTpuicris) of our body, and we are still waiting for it; it can be completely attained only at the general resurrection. The thought closely re- sembles that of 1 Jn 3^ ; we are noiv the children of God, but ' if he shall be manifested, we sliall be like him ' ; the sonship will then be {)erfected.
4. Equivalents in other parts of NT.— Although
no NT writer but St. Paul uses the word ' adop- tion,' the idea is found elsewhere, even if expressed diUerently. Thus in Jn l'^*- those who 'receive' the Word and believe on His name are said to be given by Him the right to become children of God. On this passage Athanasius remarks (Orat. c. Arian. ii. 59) that the word ' become ' shows an adoptive, not a natural, sonship ; we are first said to be made (Gn P®), and afterwards, on receiving the grace of the Spirit, to be begotten. As West- cott observes [Corn., in loc), 'this right is not in- herent in man, but "given" by God to him. A shadow of it existed in the relation of Israel to God.' This passage is closely parallel to Gal 3^*', where we are said to be all sons of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus. So in 1 Jn 3\ it is a mark of the love bestowed upon us by the Father that we should be called children of God [the name bestowed by a definite act— KX-qduifiev, aorist] ; and (the Apostle adds) 'such we are.' The promise of Rev 21'' to ' him that overcometh ' equally im- plies adoption, not natural sonship : * I will be his God, and he shall be my son ' ; and so (but less explicitly) do the sayings in He 2"* 12* that Jesus 'brings many sons unto glory' (see below, § 5), and that God deals with us ' as with sons.' The figure of adoption appears as a ' re-begetting ' in 1 P 1'- 23 . yfQ are begotten again unto a living hope by 'the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ' by means of the resurrection of Jesus (see below, § 5), and therefore call on Him as Father (v,"). And, indeed, our Lord's teaching implies adoption, inasmuch as, while He revealed God as Father of all men. He yet uniformly (see next section) diti'erentiates His own Sonship from that of all others.
5. A Son by nature implied by the metaphor. — The use by St. Paul of the figure of adoption in the case of Jews and Christians leads us by a natural consequence to the doctrine that our Lord is the Son of God by nature. In the same con- text the Apostle speaks of Jesus as God's 'own Son' {rbv eavroO vldv), sent in the likeness of sinful flesh, therefore pre-existent (Ro 8* ; cf. v.^^ tov Idiov vlov). In Gal 4*'' he says that God sent forth His Son {rbv vlbv aiiroO) . . . that we might receive adoption ; Jesus did not receive it, because He was God's own Son. And so our Lord explicitly in Jn 20^'' makes a clear distinction between His own sonship (by nature) and our sonship (by adop- tion, by grace): 'my Father and your Father,' ' my God and your God.' He never speaks of God as 'our Father,' though He taught His disciples to do so. Athanasius cites the ordinary usage of our Lord in speaking of ' My Father ' [it is so very frequently in all the Gospels, and in Rev 2-'' 3^ ; cf. also Mk 8^^] as a proof that He is ' Son, or rather that Son, by reason of whom the rest are made sons' (Orat. c. Arian. iv. 21 f.). The same thing follows from the language of those NT writers who use phrases equivalent to those of St. Paul. If Christians become children of God (Jn 1'^ ; see § i above), Christ is the Only-begotten Son of God, who was sent into the world that we might be saved, or live, through Him (Jn 3'^"'^ 1 Jn 4^). If we are the sons brought to glory by Jesus (He 2'"), He is emphatically ' a Son over [God's] house' (He 3" RVm ; cf. Nu 12''). St. Peter speaks of God as the Father of Jesus in the very verse in which he speaks of our being begotten again by Him (1 P P, see § 4 above). It is this distinction between an adoptive and a natural sonship which gives point to the title ' Only-begotten ' (q.v.) ; had Jesus been only one out of many sons, sons in the same sense, this title would be meaningless (for endeavours to evacuate its significance see Pearson, On the Crced^, art. ii. notes 52, 53). The distinc- tion of Jn 20''' is maintained throughout the NT.
ADORNLN-G
ADEIA
43
As Augustine says (Exp. Ep. ad Gal. [4'] § 30, ed. Ben. iii. pt. 2, col. 960), St. Paul 'speaks of adoption, that we may clearly understand the only-begotten (unicum) Son of God." For we are sons of God by His lovingkindness and the favour [dignitate) oi His mercy; He is Son by nature who is one with the Father [qui hoc est quod Pater).''