Home » Posts tagged '2 Corinthians 6:14-18'

Tag Archives: 2 Corinthians 6:14-18

The Relationship of the Doctrine of Separation to the Doctrine of Adoption

Salvation and Adoption

Under the umbrella of the doctrine of salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone is the doctrine of adoption.  One will see the doctrine of adoption especially in both the books of Galatians and Romans.  God does adopt believers into His family as sons.

Adoption is an only New Testament doctrine.  It begins in the gospels.  You should think 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.

The apostles received this doctrine from God.  Jesus taught:  “Ye must be born again” (John 3:7).  John 1:12 sounds more like adoption than what Jesus said, but both “born again” and “adoption” make someone “sons.”  Both can be true.  Someone can be born again and be an adopted son, since it is a spiritual reality.

The Apostle Paul does not refer back to the Old Testament in his teaching on adoption.  Adoption is not an Old Testament teaching.  Paul uses the Roman understanding of adoption to illustrate what occurs in adoption.  People would have understood it in Rome and in Galatia.  Jews could understand it in their culture too, because of bar mitzvah.  The Romans called it toga virilis and I and others believe that is seen in Galatians 3:27 with the metaphor of “put on Christ,” referring to water baptism.  Immersion in public is putting on the robe, like graduation.

The Portrayal of Adoption in the New Testament

Galatians

I also believe that Paul mixes his metaphors in Galatians.  Paul uses the “schoolmaster” in Galatians 3:24-26 as a portrayal of “the law.”  Adulthood, becoming sons instead of slaves, pictures “faith in Christ.”  In the next chapter of Galatians (4), you can see that the metaphor adds some layers.  Roman patricians would provide guardians for promising plebeian boys for discipline until these boys could become adults.  At least eight of the Caesars did this, including Julius and Augustus Caesar.  Julius adopted Octavian (Augustus) and Augustus adopted Tiberius.

In Galatians 4, the guardian or tutor (4:2) trained the potentially adopted son until adulthood.  Roman patricians may not have sons or they had an unfit one or all inept ones, who were unworthy of leading or taking the reigns of their family.  Paul used these tutors to describe the place of the law in bringing someone to faith in Christ.  The slave would leave one family for another family for the purpose of becoming an heir (Galatians 4:7).  Paul deals with the same in Romans 8:14-17.

Jesus

Jesus tells his Jewish audience, “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do” (John 8:44).  The Lord describes salvation as leaving one family for another.  The only true comparison to that is adoption.  A person is born into one family and then changes families through adoption.  The first family does not have an inheritance and the second one is an heir of all things.

The Holy Spirit’s Witness

Roman adoption and probably most adoption, if not all, required seven witnesses.  This hearkens to the seven seals on the inheritance in Revelation 4-5, seals Jesus undoes in Revelation 6-16.  The Holy Spirit, whom scripture calls the sevenfold Spirit (Isaiah 11:2, Revelation 1:4-5 — 7 witnesses), bears witness that we are the children of God (Galatians 4:6, Romans 8:16).  For the audience of that day, that fulfilled the authority (cf. John 1:12, “power” is exousia, “authority”).  Moving from one family to another meant authority changing someone from one family to another.

What does the Holy Spirit use to bear witness?  A person manifests clear marks of having left one family for the other.  The first family, Satan’s, reveals easily discernable characteristics, that are quite different from those of the second family.  The law would distinguish one kind of behavior from another.  It couldn’t change the behavior, but it differentiated law-breaking from law-keeping.  The guardian or schoolmaster could point out misbehaving not characteristic of the adult or the new family.  It wasn’t just a new family, but also a different way of living.

Adoption and Separation

Leaving One Family for Another Different One

Leaving one family to another was a separation.  By authority, you were not the first hopeless family any more.  When someone left one family to another, he was not moving to the same kind of family.  He was changing to a family with completely different characteristics, goals, purposes, and futures.  The gap between the first family to the adoption family was a vast, incomparable chasm.  The point was not to bring everything about the first family to the second one, the one to whom the father adopted you as a son.  It was leaving behind the first family.

2 Corinthians 6:14-18

With everything I have said so far, look how Paul uses this same picture or depiction in 2 Corinthians 6:14-18:

14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?

16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

When you read this text as a whole, notice how it ends.  Paul says this unrighteousness to righteousness, darkness to light, Belial to Christ, infidel to believer, temple of idols to temple of the living God, and unclean to clean is separating from the first family to the second.  Someone who left the first family, what Jesus calls the one with your Father the devil (John 8:44), separates from that family.

The Changes Between Families in Adoption

Adoption is not just getting all sorts of cool, amazing benefits, like inheriting a great deal of cash.  It is going from a garbage family to a very, very good one.  The second Father is way, way different than the first one and with way greater expectations.  You don’t get adopted if you don’t see the second family as morally and righteously superior than the first.  Adoption is separation.

Salvation does not come by changing your behavior, but by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.  Adoption pictures this authoritative transfer from one family to the other.  You leave the one for the other.  Someone can’t change his own behavior, but adoption expects the change.  Someone knows the change is coming.  That is how the law is the schoolmaster in the portrayal.  It points out a problem you can’t change, but it still implies or assumes change.

People don’t like teaching on separation, but they would say unequivocally that they like adoption.  You can’t and shouldn’t separate those two doctrines.  They are the same.

Not Separating Separation from Adoption and Salvation

Even today, when parents or a family adopt a child.  Adoption services keep the separation between the families.  The second family wants the adopted child to be its child.  It doesn’t want a straddling of two families.  They even know this doesn’t work.  This has always been the case in adoption and is engrained in the concept of adoption.

A salvation that does not include separation is a different one from start to finish than what scripture teaches.  So-called evangelists give the wrong impression that adoption gives eternal life, but doesn’t describe the different life under a new and different Father.  It adds something to the old life, but doesn’t see a change.  You get the old family and the new one.  This is not true.  Adoption brings and is separation.

John MacArthur: A Conservative Evangelical Preaches on Separation

A sermon popped up in the notifications on my phone late last week and it said, “Come Out from Their Midst and Be Ye Separate (2 Corinthians 6:14-18)” by John MacArthur.  Apparently it was something preached earlier in March at his Shepherd’s Conference, but only posted three days before.  I was very surprised to see the text and especially the title with the word “separate” in it.

In the introduction of his sermon, MacArthur was, what I would characterize as, apologetic to the audience for preaching on “separation,” as if merely using the word could trigger them.  He said that he had been thinking about preaching this sermon for a year.   It’s always possible and a rare exception, but evangelicals don’t preach or write on separation, even though its taught in almost every book of the Bible.  I will comment on MacArthur’s sermon, but what caused or motivated him to preach on separation at the Shepherd’s Conference?
What got MacArthur’s attention was at least two things.  The underlying problem was the corruption of the gospel by means of the social gospel.  MacArthur explained his concern.  When the social gospel came on the scene in the 1920s, it ruined churches and Christian institutions through its perversion of the gospel.  Later, he said, in the 1960s evangelicalism rejected liberation theology, another name or form of the social gospel.  Now evangelicalism is not repudiating social justice, which is a later iteration or relabeling of liberation theology and the social gospel.
MacArthur said that evangelicalism has accepted social justice because of pragmatism.  Between the 1960s and now, pragmatism took over evangelicalism.  Evangelicals embraced social justice for perceived success and to ward away the alienation of the world.  I understand what he’s saying, because I’ve witnessed this personally close-up in recent days.
A second aspect, spoken by MacArthur is the ensuing destruction wrought in evangelicalism.  It divided friends.  It devastated churches and institutions.  He mentioned the Southern Baptist Convention as an example.
I could not help but think of the pragmatism of John MacArthur.  His supporters and other evangelicals laugh at this.  The social justice proponents will scorn MacArthur and MacArthur and his advocates do the same with separatists.  I’m not going to explain again all the ways that MacArthur compromised and compromises with the world to keep his audience (see this, this, and this).
MacArthur called the Jesus’ movement of Lonnie Frisbee a true revival.  The immodest dress, worldly music, worldly entertainment, and lack of ecclesiastical separation all mark pragmatism.  Relying on naturalistic, rationalistic secular, unbelieving textual criticism to modify the Bible fits within the description of an unequal yoke in the very context of 2 Corinthians 6:14-18.
I shared the youtube of MacArthur’s sermon, because from a sheer exegetical standpoint, he gives the passage a good treatment.  He used the outline of past, present, and future.  The past looked at Old Testament revelation of separation and how Israel lost because it didn’t obey God’s command to separate.  The present looked at the first half of the text and the future the eschatological hope for separatists.  The world has no future, so why yoke with such a sinking failure?  For what he said, I didn’t disagree with MacArthur’s interpretation.
In the end, MacArthur said nothing about applying 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1 (read A Pure Church).  Sure, it teaches separation.  He got that right.  How does a church practice that passage?  What does it require?  He said nothing.  This itself is a form of pragmatism.  That isn’t good preaching either.
Why do evangelicals ignore ecclesiastical separation?  Besides the pragmatism, they do it because of their wrong view of the church.  Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 12:25 “that there should be no schism in the body.”  If the true church is all believers, like MacArthur teaches, how can the church separate?  It would disobey 1 Corinthians 12:25.  With the massive amount of teaching on separation in the Bible, its practice is ignored to keep unity between all believers.  The only true view of the church must harmonize what scripture teaches on unity and separation.
The teaching and preaching of MacArthur will not preserve the gospel.  Evangelicals will need to do more than preach a sermon on separation.  They need to repent for not separating and then begin applying those passages on separation, unlike what MacArthur has done or does.

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives