"You are my Son, with you I am well pleased..."

Matthew, Mark, and Luke all record the baptism of Jesus, that moment when Jesus is baptized in the Jordan, and his messianic task is initiated. There is so much to say about this passage, and so much to wonder about this passage. In Matthew's account, the voice from heaven speaks about Jesus: "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased." The voice of the Father is addressed to those around witnessing the baptism.

Interestingly, in Mark and Luke's telling, the voice speaks not to the surrounding crowd, but to Jesus himself: "You are my beloved Son, with you I am well pleased." (Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).

What is going on here? One of the books I read for class (Michael Peppard's The Son of God in the Roman World) suggests that this is a kind of adoption, a kind of mimicking of the adoption-to-power of the Roman emperor (who, interestingly, was also known as "the son of God").  In other words, Mark is making clear to his Roman readers that Jesus--not Caesar--is the true Son of God.

But then, as Michael Peppard asks: "But if the voice is directed privately to Jesus, and Jesus already was the son of God, and already knew that he was, then why did the scene happen at all?" (pg 97).  It's a good question.

Well, I don't have a good answer to that question, but it reminded me of an provocative thought I heard a couple years back.  I was at a conference on children and divorce, and I heard Lisa Lickona suggest that all children need both to be both "begotten and chosen."

Or, to put it another way, all children need to be both born and adopted.  Birthed and chosen.  Given life and given love.  And so maybe part of what we are seeing here is God the Father doing to his only-begotten Son what all human fathers do (or should do) to their begotten children--not only have them, but choose them.  Adopt them.

Well, part of the reason the blog has been slow is that we've been preparing for the birth of our third child, and Liam was born on Wednesday morning.  So here he is:

My son, with him I am well-pleased.

Adoption Doesn't Mean Adoption

When we think of adoption today, we think of orphans.  People often adopt in order to help a child, place them in a home, provide them with love, family, and a future.  It's a wonderful, beautiful thing and I'm so glad that people adopt, and that it's a prominent thing in the church and in society.

That said, one of the things I've been somewhat surprised to learn as I have been studying the Pauline use of adoption is that when the Bible speaks of adoption, it's not talking about what we are talking about.  That's because adoption in Greco-Roman society was a completely different institution than our modern adoption model.  This is important to clarify if we are going to understand the Bible's message rightly--when the Bible talks about adoption it is NOT talking primarily about the welfare of children.

For one thing, in ancient society, most adoptees were adults, not children.  And the reason you were adopted was not because you were in need but because someone else needed you--to carry on the family name, to inherit and oversee the family estate.  As Michael Peppard puts it in his book The Son of God in the Roman World: Divine Sonship in its Social and Political Context:

"Roman adoption was not for a child to gain a home of love and care but for an adult to gain an inheritance of wealth and status.  Stated another way, it was not enacted to stabilize the life of a child, but to stabilize the future of a father." (pg 60)  For that reason, a person (usually a grown man) would only be adopted after he had proven himself a trustworthy and reliable person.

Why does this matter?  Well, it matters because if we're going to understand the Bible, we need to understand it on its own terms.  Imagine if when we read about Noah's ark, we imagined a big modern-day cruise ship?  Or if everytime we read about a shepherd we imagined a huge New Zealand sheep ranch?  To understand what the Bible is and isn't saying, we need to understand...what the Bible is and isn't saying.

So what does this mean about adoption?  Does it mean that God isn't really our father?  That we aren't supposed to adopt children?  That we shouldn't see glimpses of the gospel in the beauty of an multiethnic adoptive family?  Nope.

Here's just a few implications:

It means that when Jesus came to rescue us, to redeem us for adoption as sons and daughters, we weren't adorable little cherubic children that would tug on anyone's heartstrings. No, we were slaves, Paul says.  We were rebels.  It wasn't that we were so cute and needy and had so much potential.  It was because God is so loving and faithful and powerful to redeem lost sinners.

It also means that our adoption in Christ is due to the fact that Jesus of Nazareth earned the right to his Father's inheritance by his life of perfect obedience and sacrifical death.  Jesus is the only one who earned his place as a Son of God, but by his grace we get to share in that too as we receive his Spirit--what Paul calls "the Spirit of adoption" (Romans 8:15).

So our adoption as sons and daughters of God isn't due to our being just so inherently lovable and needy.  It was and is due to the Faithful Son, Jesus Christ, who has proven himself a worthy heir of all the Father's riches, and who reclaims us from slavery so that we can become sons and daughters.  And through us, adopted sons and daughters, the Father's name, family, and glory are extended throughout the earth.

Huiothesia...(Gesundheit?)

In my last post I mentioned how the idea of adoption shows up very infrequently in the history of theology, far less frequently, than say, ideas like justification and redemption.  You might think, if no one has thought very much of adoption, then is it really such a big deal?

The first thing to say is that it was a big deal to Paul, who wrote much of the New Testament.  The second thing to say, strange as it sounds, is that he only uses the word 5 times.  Stay with me...

The word translated as "adoption" in (most of) our Bibles is a the Greek word "huiothesia," which is a compound of "huios" (son) and "tithemi" (to place or to set).  So the word adoption literally means "to set in the place of a son."  Now I said a moment ago that this word only occurs 5 times in the New Testament, and yet I also said a moment ago that it is still a very big deal.  How?

Well, the amount of times a word is used doesn't necessarily tell you how important it is: the way it is used tells you its significance.  And we find huiothesia being used at very important places in Paul's writings. For example,

When Paul is talking about God's eternal plan to save, way back into the mists of pretemporal eternity, before anything has been made, we find huiothesia: "even as he chose us in him before the foundations of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him.  In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will." (Ephesians 1:4-5)

When Paul is talking about the covenant God made with the people of Israel, which constitutes the basic foundation of the whole Old Testament, we find huiothesia: "They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises."  (Romans 9:4)

When Paul is talking about salvation itself, the sending of Jesus to redeem us, we find huiothesia as the point of it all: "But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons." (Galatians 4:4-5)

When Paul is talking about the work of the Holy Spirit, he calls him the "Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, "Abba, Father!" (Romans 8:15)

When Paul is talking about the resurrection of the body at the end of time, we find huiothesia: "And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies." (Romans 8:23)

So though Paul only uses huiothesia five times, he uses it at crucial moments: when discussing, the eternal plan of God, the outworking of that covenant in Israel and in Jesus, the work of the Spirit, and the consummation of redemption.  Those are huge topics, and the fact that Paul say fit to think about all of those concepts under the umbrella term of adoption means we ought to pay attention to the idea.  After all, it only explains creation, covenant, redemption, and consummation, that's all!

Not only that, adoption/huiothesia helps us understand the Trinity, because as Paul as shown, huiothesia is at the very heart of the plan of God the Father (who determined before time began to adopt us as sons (Eph 1), the work of the Son (who redeemed us for adoption, Gal 4) and the work of the Holy Spirit of adoption (Rom 8).  The whole Trinitarian character of God is described in terms of adoption.

And then of course, there are many other New Testament themes that adoption helps illuminate and make sense of: the whole notion of God as Father, the concept of our eternal inheritance, the church as the family of God, and on and on it goes.

No wonder JI Packer has said that you only understand Christianity as well as you understand adoption.

Sabbatical is Off to a "Smashing" Start!

The word "sabbatical" comes from the word for "sabbath," implying rest.  And so the irony is rich that on the first day of my sabbatical I was awoken with a phone call at 2:00 am from a neighbor letting me know that this had happened:

(Um, no...I did not park the car that way)

Yes, a drunk driver (a celebrating Seahawk fan, no doubt) decided to play a little pinball up and down our street, and managed to hit not only one, but both of our cars...and another car down the street...and a number of trash cans, before getting arrested.  So instead of starting my sabbatical with a contemplative prayer, or a piping hot cup of coffee and profound theological meditation, I began Monday morning at my local auto body shop chatting with an insurance adjuster.

However, I am not to be dissuaded or discouraged!  Tuesday I still trekked up to Philly for my first seminar.  The class looks like it will be great--about 10 students in total in the class so we'll have lots of time for discussion and presentation.  Even the commute was not so bad.  It's true, I'm in the car for about 3 times as long as I am actually in the seminar, but I can also take the train sometimes and sleep/read/sleep.  It's an early morning but one morning a week ain't so bad.  Here's some pictures of the WTS campus:

There's also irony in the fact that I'm studying at Westminster, since WTS was actually a seminary founded by profs that broke off from Princeton Seminary, my alma mater, in the early 1930's.  The history between these two institutions has not always been the friendliest, with PTS generally dismissing WTS as grouchy fundies, and WTS generally disdaining PTS as crazy liberals.  As usual, the truth is more complicated than the labels.

There's lots of reasons why WTS is a great place to study the particular subject I'm interested in.  For one thing, WTS is a place where John Calvin looms large and influential, and as one scholar has written that Calvin (all his caricatures notwithstanding) taught a message that, at its core, was "a gospel of adoption."  Secondly, Westminster is named for and guided by the Westminster Standards, which are the first statements of faith in the history of the church to give the doctrine of adoption special attention.  Thirdly, the professor I'm studying under is an expert on the topic, one of the few people in the country who has written on the theology of adoption on a scholarly level.

As my studies are just starting to get underway, this is the question I'm reading and thinking about: if adoption is such an important theological concept, why are Calvin and the Westminster divines the only folks to have given it much thought?  (And as one scholar I'm reading makes plain, the Reformed tradition influenced by these sources neglects it just as often as everyone else.)

Well, there was one other guy who thought a lot of the idea, and his name was the Apostle Paul.  I'll blog more about how he used the idea later this week.

Books!

During my sabbatical, I'm plannin' to do some fancy book-learnin'.  Here's what's on the reading list:

• Trevor Burke, Adopted Into God's Family: Exploring a Pauline Metaphor 
• Trevor Burke, The Message of Sonship
• Johnny Carr, Orphan Justice: How to Care for Orphans Beyond Adopting
• Michael Peppard, The Son of God in the Roman World: Divine Sonship in its Social and Political Context
• Robert Peterson, Adopted by God: From Wayward Sinners to Cherished Children
• James Scott, Adoption as Sons of God: An Exegetical Investigation into the Background in the Pauline Corpus
• Jeanne Stevenson--Moessnerr, The Spirit of Adoption: At Home in God's Family
• Tim J.R. Trumper, When History Teaches Us Nothing: The Recent Reformed Sonship Debate in Context
• Robert A. Webb, The Reformed Doctrine of Adoption

I know, I know...best sellers, all of 'em!   The plan is to read these books, as well as a handful of articles and essays.   I also brought home some piles of Calvin, Barth and Wright, just to be safe, but I might not read all of those...it depends on the direction I end up going.

These are the books that will be informing the thinking and posting that I'll be doing for the next few months.  When I finish each book, I'll try to post a brief review.  

Sabbatical officially begins tomorrow, with my first seminar on Tuesday!

Sabbatical!

I'm really excited to say that I'm about to start on a 3 month period of study on the theology of adoption.  I'll be blogging through this sabbatical study period, both to help process my thinking but also to keep up to speed the awesome congregation who are so graciously affording me the time.  Here are the details:

As any of the four people who have read this blog know, our family’s experience of pursuing an adoption was a transformative one.  Not only was it an enormously stressful two years, but it was one of profound spiritual growth.  God used the process of adoption to open my eyes to the biblical concept of adoption and I began to investigate this biblical theme to great benefit both personally and vocationally.  I became aware of a doctoral seminar on the doctrine of adoption was offered at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia.  I applied and was accepted as a Special Student. 

I’m really looking forward to digging deep into the theology, but I also plan to use the time to do some writing, both academic and personal.  I have been encouraged by many people to share our adoption story and the theological insights it brought to light.  What will come of it?  The greatest work of theology written in the twenty-first century!  Or, something less.  Who knows.  But, I couldn’t realistically make much progress on any kind of similar project in the midst of daily pastoral work, so I'm immensely grateful to my church for giving me time away to sharpen my understanding of the theology of adoption, reflect theologically on the last couple years, do some writing, and also, welcome a baby that's coming in March!

If you're interested in following along you are welcome!

Our Russian Adoption: The End (and, To Be Continued)

At the end of June we learned some news about our adoption that was very surprising but is ultimately good news, we think: the biological family has stepped forward and is planning to take “our” little boy back to live with them.

It took us some time to wrap our minds around this very unexpected development, but at this point we feel that though it is a loss for us, it is definitely a gain for him.  To live with his own parents and his younger brother could very well be the best possible outcome.  

In the midst of the sadness of this news, we've been comforted by the fact that his parents very likely have stepped forward in part as a result of the media attention our situation has been getting, particularly in the Russian press as a result of being matched with us as his prospective parents.  We’ve often thought of and wondered about his parents: what did they think when thousands marched in January in St Petersburg protesting the ban? Did they see any of the news interviews with his orphanage director, when she discussed his particular situation?  It appears that they did see and felt the need to respond.  And for that we are thankful, even though it still feels like there is a hole in our hearts and in our home.

Nikolsky Cathedral in St Petersburg, where our little guy was claimed by God in baptism.

So the story we've been living in wasn't the story we thought.  Bethany put it this way: our story is no longer (never was) a story of adoption gone wrong, but instead our job was to stand in the gap for this little boy, a world away, and love him until his family could.  Never before have we felt more called to remain with something that seemed more and more impossible. All throughout this crazy rollercoaster process we've been saying to each other "God is up to something here" and now it seems that we can see what that something was.   

It has been a lesson in God’s sovereignty.  One Sunday after worship, after the ban came into effect, I was chatting with folks and a dear woman came up to me and said, “I just want to tell you something.  I’ve been praying for your adoption every day since you announced it, and a very strange thing happened to me that I need to tell you about.  You might think this is crazy, but the other day I was praying for you and I heard a voice--I swear I heard a voice--that said: ‘Timothy will be united with his family.’ I just wanted to tell you that.”  

I was so thankful and encouraged by this, and of course we interpreted it in a certain way at the time.  It seems that it indeed has come true though, in a way more literal than we had thought.  His ways are higher than our ways, and his thoughts higher than our thoughts.

We are in touch with the orphanage director and getting details along the way from her.  We have written a letter to the parents to introduce ourselves, encourage them, and just let them know we'd love to stay in communication with them if they are open to that.  

And after we lick our wounds for a little while and recover from the stress of these last months, we plan to pursue another adoption sometime in the future.  In a way, the “Russian adoption” chapter has closed, but in another sense it continues because it has marked us and changed us in irreversible ways. Thanks to all of you for caring, reading and for praying for us and for the situation.  Those prayers have not been wasted!  Please join us now in praying that the hearts of this little boy and his family would continue to be opened to each other.