Heirs of God - Part 2

All right, so this is a section today entitled, now, Sons and Heirs, compared to the concept of children that Randy kind of dealt with last time. And so let's read Galatians 4, 1 through 7, because that really captures the transition from, in fact, being children as servants versus being sons and heirs.

All right. Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, differs nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all. But as under tutors and governors, until the time appointed of the father, even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world. But when the fullness 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. And because you are sons, God hath sent forth the spirit of a son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore, thou art no more a servant, but a son, and if a son, then heir of God through Christ."

Wow! I mean, it's hard to and certifying than this text of Galatians. So let's proceed here. The first verse, But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law. Notice the condition here. Born unto a woman and born under the law. Note verse 2 reflects on verse 4. And then in verse 2 it says, But under tutors and governors until the time appointed. And the point I just want to make here is God's not really haphazard, is he, in terms of his plan.

Let's look at Ephesians 1.10.

Roy and Bud, could you read Psalm 102.13?

These are two examples of God's intricate detail in terms of time, Ephesians 1.10. And focus in on the lack of coincidentality. coincidentality in terms of the Lord and His planning not being at the edge of their very purpose.

Right. That in the dispensation of the fullness of times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are in earth, even in Him. Okay, so the fullness of times dispensation, clearly time Even if God is eternal, time is not an issue to him. In terms of his earthly events, he's clearly purposed a time at the right period of history.

I was opening to Ephesians at the same time. What was the other one? Psalm 102.13.

Psalm 102.13. These are two of many examples of God's timing.

Just like the time of the rapture, right? We anticipate it, we know his timing is perfect, we have no idea when it's going to be, but he stated that there is a time that he knew that Christ did not go and walk the paths of this earth. Bud, how are you doing? Oh God, I'm coming to God. Okay. I'll make sure we have it before the class is up. Okay, here we are. For a pleasure. Okay. Praise ye the Lord. O ye servants of the Lord, praise the name of the Lord. Blessed be the name of the Lord, from this time forth and for evermore. From the rising of the sun until the going down of the sun.

So David's here is reflecting on time that is nigh, in terms of his period on the earth. Now, 13, is that the one I started on? Correct. Alright, here we go. Thou shall arise and have mercy upon Zion for the time to favor her, yea, The set time is come. The nice servants take pleasure in her storms. OK, we're fine.

The concept here is that in the Old Testament, just as a verse to document the fact that time is not haphazard, David knew that there was a set time. When, in fact, God would come and rescue Zion. So the point here is that this fullness of time thing is just not by happenstance or haphazard. In fact, the Lord is clear in his prophecies and consider the plethora of our prophecy related to this time, this timing of the Lord Jesus Christ's coming. Then we can look at the Old Testament ad nauseam and see prophetic passages related to the coming of Christ. Just a thought, we've been talking a lot about time in relation to God.

When we think of Him, He's outside of time. He's always now. So how do we put that in perspective, the idea that Bern does, your dad does so well in this time, I mean God's timelessness in terms of eternity, he really does a nice job describing that, and I can't even come close to describing it as well as Bern does, but this issue of him assigning times in terms of his earthly existence, how do we reconcile this, that God is without time, but yet we're looking at examples of set times, or fullness of times?

I mean, we're earthly beings, are we not? Yeah, the Lord knows we are on a time. We have a clock and it's 9.12 right now, right? The day of July the 11th, I believe, 2010. Are we correct there? In fact, the guilty party of the murder that was being attempted to be solved by Crow, in fact, turned the clock back a half hour. It is 912. Yeah.

I would say in your field, you probably see this more. than most people do because doctors see how things are early and how things have to happen in specific periods of time like a pregnancy is nine months generally and certain things happen through that course of that pregnancy that the development of the child or the embryo make certain steps and certain things happen I mean this is all been planned by God as part of this particular universe and so a lot of things are timed I mean there is, God has, He's a God of order. That's about all you can say. He's a God of order and things happen when they're supposed to happen. You know some people reflect on this fullness of time.

Is Christ coming at a time when the Roman roads were paved? The Greek language was all over the world. And the timing from an earthly perspective was perfect to align the gospel to be shared after the crucifixion and resurrection. So from an earthly perspective the time was the fullness of time in terms of the gospel.

Well, and this is kind of a wild thought too, but when God created us with a time limitation, without that, we wouldn't be able to exercise faith. If we perceived everything from an eternal viewpoint, like God does, without the restraint of time, you would know that. You would know all the time. So it's kind of interesting that he did it that way. Yeah, that's true.

Has anybody thought about their own mortality? I remember my late wife saying, you know, I just want to be with the Lord, but I'm kind of fearful how I'm going to get out of here, but I don't want to be with him. And since we all have this kind of anticipation and fear of how we're going to get out of here, right? You know, Miles, praise the Lord, just didn't wake up. He just wanted to be with the Lord and there was no pain, no suffering. Not that he didn't have some before he went to be with the Lord with his heart failure.

But nevertheless, I mean, the point is we all kind of have this earthly anxiety and that relates to the temporal sequence of the fullness of time for each one, each and every one of us. Bob, Jesus said, why worry? Can you add one day to your life? Why worry? So welcome to the earth.

And God became proactive. So when the fullness of time had come, God sent his son. This is not kind of passive stuff. It always just happened to show up. And in verse 6 it says, God sent forth the spirit of his son. So, again, this is God acting at the fullness of times to make his truth known for all of mankind. So, what does sent forth or sent out, or ex apostello, really imply? Think of the verb sent out or sent forth, what does that imply? go from one place to another. Okay, so does it imply pre-existence?

I think so. His son already existed. So it's not like I'm going to create my son to become the God-man and he's going to be born of a woman into a time that's full, that ultimately is going to meet my purpose. We've got evidence here that his son already existed. Of course we know that in a biblical way without doubt. Let's just look at a couple of verses to document that.

John Philippians 2.6.

Donna, please, and John 8.42. Stan, can you do that one for us? Sent forth, meaning already there, kind of like my sending forth Margaret to But you know, she'll get there without me anyway, right? I play no role in this.

Okay, Philippians 2, 6. Who, being in the form of God, thought it not right to be equal with God. Okay, do a couple more verses. Who made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men. pre-existent, 8th himself, the form of the serpent, came to earth. Okay. You said 842. I think that's correct. Okay. Jesus said to them, if God were your father, you would love me, for I came from God and now I am here. I have not come on my own, but he sent me. Alright.

Two verses that pretty much indicate his pre-existence. Of course, we know he created the heavens and the earth in Colossians 1, right? So, we've got somebody who's been there Not done that in terms of the god man, but in fact came to earth as a pre-existent entity and born of a woman. And out of a woman means born or made anew. In some texts it says made, not born. And this made in the Greek indicates made anew. So here's the god man now becoming man as an infant. Made anew in a different form. So, born in this earthly sphere of time. And under the demanding system of bondage, born under the law. Interesting, isn't it? Because the grace principle puts law in the back seat. Relevant and true, but no longer applicable.

Galatians 3.10.13. Let's look back into the last chapter. Roger, could you do this for us, please? Remember, under the law.

For as many as are of the works of the law are under a curse, for it is written, Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law to perform them. Now that no one is justified by the law before God is evident, for the righteous man shall live by faith. However, the law is not of faith. On the contrary, he who practices them shall live by them. Christ's redeemed redeem us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us, for it is written, Cursed is everyone who hangs on the truth. And like every other Jew, was Christ born under the law like every other Jew?

We just heard from Galatians 3.10.13 what the requirements were. Is Christ of the same nature as the Jewish nation to which he was born?

No. No. What's different here? No sin. in terms of Christ being born under the redemption principle of the law versus every other Jew that had ever been born before him. He came to fulfill it. Alright, perfect. Isn't he also not only come to fulfill it, but he's able to do that. Right. Okay, so there's the sinless nature and the idea he came to fulfill.

Let's look at Matthew 5.17, a beautiful verse for this. Do not think that I came to abolish the law or the prophets. I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. So again, a different principle of the Christ man, the God man coming to fulfill, not to simply obey the law. The true God man, the Lord Jesus Christ. All right, moving on to five now. We've got to redeem those who are under the law that we might receive the adoption as sons. Two purposes here. The first is to redeem them that are under the law. So here we're thinking about Jews or Gentiles too. What do we think about Jews? Jews. All right. What if I tell you that there's no article before law? A different interpretation? Are we going to say that it's Jews only?

Outside of the Jewish nation, it was under the law of his own conscience. I think we've got to broadly apply this. Even though the book of Galatians is written to the Jew, ultimately this has more breadth in terms of its application. I mean, we're all under legal systems to respond to our conscience, if you will, of God's law written in the heart. Remember, Romans 2 is entirely appealing to the person who is not Jewish.

It's a Gentile world, the unbelieving world, who is under a legal system of some sort. And I think here we can't think that he came only to save the Jew. The principle of legal systems to which we are to obey is not simply a Jewish principle, although in context it was probably directed to the Jew primarily, but clearly Gentiles are saved by the same principle of grace. So I've got a quote from JFB, the commentary. Here he changed from them, the third person, to we.

The first person, so in Galatians 4.6, changes from ye, the second person, to our, and the first person. This he does to identify their case as Gentiles, with his own and that of his believing fellow countrymen as Jews. The Jason Fossett Brown interpretation of this is that it's more broadly applied. Again, the changing from the third person to we, the first person.

So in Galatians 4.6, he changes from ye to the second person to our. So I think the point of the commentation here is that he's more broadly applying this concept of under law being only to the Jew, to the Gentile, and the whole world beforehand. Redeem.

Again, back to Galatians 3.13 that Roger just wrote. The principle of redemption. What do we think of here?

Well, the term redeem means to buy out. It means to rescue from loss. It can mean to purchase out of a condition with no idea. Or pay a price to recover from the power of another. So, which one do you like best here in terms of redeem? I think they're all probably relevant. Buyout seems a little bit of an underestimate of what we think about godly redemption. Rescue from loss. The loss of salvation, if you will. The loss of a relationship. Purchase out of a condition with no idea of selling back. The idea it's done once and for all. A little weak, I think.

Pay a price to recover from the power of another. all applicable in one way or the other. So we're redeemed by these kinds of processes of buying out, rescuing from loss, et cetera, from under the law, those who are under the law. Again, the law being used broadly here in terms of legal principles or the Jewish law. And we're redeemed so that we might receive the adoption of signs. So Rayleigh kind of dealt with this to some extent last week in terms of getting us into the concept of adoption.

But adoption signifies the place and condition of a son given to one whom it does not naturally belong. So think of that in earthly terms. When a couple or an individual adopts a son or a daughter, ultimately they have all the parental and legal rights of being the parent to that child. So in a sense, scripturally is probably even a stronger relationship, at least equally as strong. Thoughts, comments about adoption?

One of the things that I, and maybe I didn't enunciate this clearly last week, is that actually in the Roman culture there was an official, even if they were your biological children, there was an official adoption concept. that you were officially as an adult parent telling this child as an adult or declaring this child an adult and legally an heir as well.

So it could even extend in certain circumstances. beyond just those who were, not just those who were your non-biological children, but those who were your biological children as well. The ceremony could actually go to them as well. Which would mean that you were sometimes cutting off other people. If you had several heirs, you'd say, and not for you, this guy's getting a medal, or something to that effect. It was actually a more binding.

It was a legally binding thing, so Whereas they could disown their own children. Once they adopted a child legally under the Roman system, they could never undo that legal contract. So that's a nice interpretation, scripturally, in terms of this relationship between God and the sons. The sons. Without gender. All right, good points. Now, the concept here is not as infants or small children, but sons or full grown heirs. And why? Why would God adopt us as fully grown heirs and not as children? Because infants and small children didn't have all the rights. Only full grown children had the full legal right under the Roman system. Yeah, I mean, you think about children who are not of age in our own last wills and testaments, right?

Ultimately, there has to be a certain age achieved before that inheritance would be made known. It might be made known indirectly through a guardian, right? Or through the living parent, or an uncle, or an aunt. But the point is, until age, those dollars would not be ultimately made available to the child.

And here, we're talking about a fully established relationship at the time of salvation. The other thing is we wouldn't need a guardian. Underage children need a guardian, someone to watch over them. We have direct access to the father and the son. Does this in any way reflect the age of accountability, do you think? What about the five year old who comes to the Lord? Is his or her perception of the extent of adoption described here It looks like God's definition of adulthood here, as an adult son, is that you can believe on his son and enter into a relationship with him as an adult, even though you're a child, you're aware. He looks at children as adults, sons and daughters. Positionally no difference, right? Understanding, clearly different. A child's understanding is not that of an adult.

But whether we are mature believers or immature believers, He still takes us. And if you want to put this in earthly terms, the legal nature of that adoption is the same for a 5-year-old as it is for a 55-year-old, right? Well, that's why the Lord said, you know, it's faith as like a child. So it doesn't have to be a lofty faith to gain that right of adoption. It's, as Roy said, all you have to do is just simple believe.

Doesn't it point out a difference in our Lord's perspective of what is adulthood compared to ours? He's looking for maturity, I think, Roy. Adulthood is not an important issue. He's focused on maturity. But here on earth, we look at a son as, you know, he's got to be 18 or 21 or something. but not in God's perspective. Yeah, Randy, you dealt with that last week. That was graphic. It was good. Good discussion.

Let's look at Ephesians 1.5.

I was just going to say, doesn't God look at the spiritual and the physical is more earthly and so when you're talking about earthly maturity and age and all these other sort of things. Once you say the words and once you accept Christ as your Lord, then that's a spiritual truth and He accepts that. Yeah, good. I think that's the differences between God's eternal nature and our temporal relationships here on earth. Good point.

I'm just thinking of accountability aspect and if you're talking about a five-year-old, we don't think of them as being accountable and yet even at that age, I think they can understand their accountability to the Lord in regard to their own sins, if not other kinds of things in life. Okay, but the child tends to put more of a legal principle around their sins, right? And not have the understanding of the grace principle. But nevertheless, yes, they know they've learned another sin. They need a Savior. The Lord will know the path that child is going to walk into adulthood, into what we consider adulthood. Right.

But you know in Ephesians 1 we're told that we were blessed with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places from eternity past, right? So this concept of, again, that divorces us from the temporal time sequences in which we live day to day. If God has adopted His sons blessed with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places from time, eternity past to the future, He has no sense of time. Yet we still live by the clock and go through this birth-weak-growth process of spiritual understanding and acceptance of all that God has offered us as adoptive sons. Yes, hey, welcome. Good to see you again. How are you?

It seems to me that it could be like in paradox, but when you imagine Jesus as a baby, that, you know, because when you are a child, of course you tend to live under the principles of law, because you disobey, disobey, your parents have to discipline you all the time.

So you can get mixed in that spiritual realm as well, unless you know the Lord very well. But when Mary was raising Jesus, that was like the perfect baby. I think in terms of parenting, this is a very good point, but in terms of parenting, I've said this so many times, children are under law until the principle of grace ultimately is understood and becomes mandatory. different ages by which the grace principle starts to enter in we're in replacing law but keep in mind the principle Galatians 324 that the law is the schoolmaster to bring us to Christ and children understand law there are limits and you go past that you've sinned quote-unquote that's not really of sinners saved by grace all of us from the beginning of our conception to the time we leave these earthly bodies, but the law being our schoolmaster, just as adults, think of that. How many times do you place yourself back into legal systems and you ultimately realize that by God's great grace and the Spirit working through Christ reminds us that grace is the principle of existence no longer. that it is the Holy Spirit showing us Christ. Versus under the law, it's the codified system showing us Christ. Or the temple, or the rituals, all of that.

And you're so appropriate in anticipation of verse 6. Oh, I'm sorry. No, but remember, He sent forth His Son to redeem us and to have us become adopted children. But yet, He also sent His Spirit We're not going to read Ephesians 1, 5, or 12 just because of time. Let's move on to 6 because Roy set the stage for that. And because your son, God has sent forth the spirit of his son, and our heart is crying, Abba, Father.

Positional truth. Let's do a look at John 1, 12. And it's interesting here because the term in 112 is not adopted sons, but hekton, or small children. So whoever gets John 112, let's read this. How interesting that positionally he's accepted us as children of God, but yet here we're told adopted sons.

Why the difference between John 1 and Galatians 4 here. By the way, being children of God is the same concept as young children in 1 John. Remember there are the technod, or young children, then there's the young men, and then there's the mature, the more fatherly types among the believers? Would it be that in John's case he's looking at us as being born of God, and in Paul's case he's looking at us as being adopted? And I think in general John deals with simple principles of faith, whereas Paul's building us up into adult relationships.

They're not contradictory here. You also have some cultural nuance in the sense that to a Jew, being born of Abraham or being born as a descendant of something or someone is a big deal. So for John, he says, hey my Jewish readers, Ah, you guys are of this Roman mindset, because the Roman Galatians were a Roman colony. They would be more familiar with the Roman concept. He uses a Roman analogy to reach to their understanding in a different nuance.

But in John 1.12, it says, as many as received him, to them gave him power to become the children of God, even to them that believe on his name.

Positional truth. In other words, once we're in Christ, we're all prepared for everything to follow. You've got to begin here in positional truth. God sent forth the Spirit of the Son into your hearts because you're sons. You begin positionally to allow the Spirit of the heart. And not as to an infant or children.

Galatians 4.1 deals again with small children. We're talking about now a mature relationship. And notice that the sending forth of the Spirit is conditional. What do we mean by that? What's the condition of receiving the Spirit? Being a son, right? Being a son. So to be a son you have to believe. Are you a son? If you're a son, you have the Spirit. If you're not a son, you don't have the Spirit. Pretty important stuff here.

And if there's a concept that Trident God is most poorly understood, it's the Holy Spirit. Why is the Holy Spirit such a vague concept to so many believers? I think they don't understand the purpose of the Holy Spirit. Well, how about if we look at the verses we're looking at right now, what do many believers miss that is the topic of today's lesson?

The adoption as sons, right? I mean, they may have an intellectual knowledge of that, But to be adopted as a son means we have everything that relates to the sonship, legally, spiritually. People want to put to work what you have to do, I'll become a really good son, or a better son, by doing all these things. Why don't they think the spirit's purpose is in their life, if they're living under legal principles, rather than positional?

Exactly. There's this constant guilt trip. The Spirit's there to convict me of my sin. Yes, the Spirit is there in part for us to convict us of our sin. But the purpose of the Spirit is what? To show us Christ. What's the principal role of the Spirit?

Let's look at a couple of verses here. John 15-26 and chapters 16, 13, and 14. So, Andrew, could you get John 15-26 And let's have Pat, can you get the chapter 16, 13 and 14 for us? Boy, this sure changes the spirit, but at least it's the principal role. Bob, real quick, it's what Margaret said earlier about the faith of the child. When Billy Graham was in town and my son Brian, he and I went, and when he asked for people to go forward, Brian wanted to, and he was only six. And I decided in my wisdom that he wasn't old enough.

Well, he didn't know anything about law. He didn't know anything about position or condition. He had no rules around the house? Yeah. Not my law, but not God's law. He knew nothing about scripture, and he could barely read at that point in time. And I thought, how is this possible?

See, he was obedient to the calling. That's what all Christians have to do. You have to be obedient to that calling. It says in Hebrews that God draws you. There's a calling. You have the faith of a child and you respond. And then everything begins after that. Which is really cool because you don't have to understand all this stuff. You don't have to be knowledgeable. You don't have to be a PhD. It's better if you aren't. Listen everybody, this is critically important.

When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of Truth, who goes out from the Father, He will testify about me. Testify about me, okay? The other verses? However, when He, the Spirit of Truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth. For he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will tell you things to come. He will glorify me, and he will take of what is mine and declare it to you.

Under legal principles, the job of the Holy Spirit is only to reveal the sin nature and convict us of the sin that we exist in from birth going forward. In the eyes of the Adopted Son, the principle of the Spirit is to uplift us in the new nature, in the Lord Jesus Christ, the life we have in Christ. The purpose of the Spirit, entirely, is to reveal Christ in us.

Yes, bud? This is a term he's referring to as the Comforter. Come into that picture as far as what it would speak to comforting you in every reassurance, That's what I think comes into that. And what you just said reminds me, what's the will of God for our lives? Very simple. What's the will of God? For each and every one. Oh, is it to have a black Ford or a white Chevy? The purpose, the entire will of God is to be conformed to the image of the Lord Jesus Christ. It's that simple.

Look, we stop here sometimes. that relationship. But don't you think that the fellowship with him is part of the whole process? I do. I'm just saying that we tend to think, okay I'm going to look like him, I'm going to act like him. But it's more a relational intimacy that is developed. Good question. And that fellowship breeds actually the confirmation process. So it feeds it and breeds it.

Okay, crying out. Are we thinking about tearfulness here? No, this isn't tears, but it's actually, you know, it's interesting as I look this up in terms of the Greek, it's really, and this is coming from the Greek thesaurus, Zodiatus, it's croaking like a raven, being vociferous, or proclaiming. So this is, you know, crying out, Abba, Father, is not just, anyway, this is kind of a whole different principle.

Abba, Father. In fact, in our Bible study of Fragment dealing with Daniel, in fact, Roy and Kort had a nice dialogue on this issue. So Abba is simply the Syriac for Father. And in the Aramaic, it means Papa. It's kind of this really comforting, informal relationship that we have with the Heavenly Father. And this is because of the adoption. It kind of goes back to Roy's point. That speaks of this relationship thing. Intimacy. You say, Papa, or Father, that's a very intimate thing that you only have with an earth and a blood relative, but your Heavenly Father. It's incredible. If you look at what cults and legalistic people have done, they've taken things like, why is it the Jehovah's Witnesses? Because God's only name is Jehovah. You would never call him Abba. You would never call him Father. You don't have the right to do that.

And we were looking at Daniel's prayer in chapter 9 on Friday night, and there was Yahweh. God, Jehovah, Almighty. You know, it's something they rarely say. This is different. Actually, this is a total sidelight, but my son Ryan called from Fort Collins the other day, and he was asking for some help in a Bible study. So he said, where are the 613 laws? So I found a website by a Jewish guy.

What was remarkable about that, they did not spell the name of God. They are so focused that they had G underscore D. They would not spell the name of God through all these 613... I just... Wow, I've heard that before where they break their pens when they don't they will not write Jehovah They'll break their pen and do it.

Yeah, this guy. He always says I'm 13 laws there But it was G underscore D never never writing God's name By the way, the Ephesians 1 5 through 12 passage that we did not read really entitles you to everything that God has for the adopted son, I Mean all the power all the truth all kind of things the eternal view that is totally unavailable to someone without this relationship. So we didn't read that because of time, but I encourage everybody to go back and do this. So as Merriman so nicely said, the identity trust expression is of a feeble infant. But we're not sons.

So I think the Abba implies the intimacy. And Christ declared this relationship himself. If you look at Mark 14, 36, he says Abba, Father. So this kind of being brought into this type of relationship that Christ had with the Heavenly Father is the same relationship we have with him too. The same relationship, Abba, Father, that we're called to by Paul. in this adopted son relationship is the same thing that Christ had with his heavenly father. And the father.

Identity confidence expression that springs from a knowledgeable, intelligent understanding of identity is the way Merriman describes it. So let's go back to where we were before. So Merriman said the identity trust expression is of a feeble infant. But the identity confidence expression springs from a knowledgeable, intelligent understanding of identity. So again, this begins with position and identification truth. You can't have this adopted sun view of who we are until you identify yourself and position yourself with the right hand.

It stems from our eternal position. JFB says, by faith you're one with the Son, so that what is His is yours. His Sonship ensures your Sonship, and His Spirit ensures for you a share of the same. JFB, Commentation. Romans 8, let's look at this, 15 through 17. And I will read this for you. Another rich area. of the adopted sonship. Let's start at 14. For as many of you as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. Remember the condition of having the Spirit as being a son. So it says here, for as many of you are led by the Spirit, you're sons.

And if you're not led by the Spirit, you lose the sonship relationship intellectually. For if you have not received the Spirit of bondage again to fear, but you've received the spirit of adoption whereby we cry Abba Father. By the way, having intellectually and positionally understood that we have the spirit of adoption, that's when we cry Abba Father. We really don't have this opportunity until we understand.

The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we're the children of God. And if children then heirs and heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, it so be that we suffer with them. that we may be also glorified together. So, Romans 8, the spirit led life, in fact, reveals this truth to be what Paul claims it to be. And the application, what's the application?

Can anybody remember what Hebrews 4.16 says without even going there?

How do we approach the throne of grace? With boldness. Can you approach the throne of grace with boldness without having this relationship with an adopted son? Clearly not. And when we think about approaching the throne with boldness, what do we think about? How do you think about approaching, is that demanding? What's this ability to approach the throne with boldness indicate? Well, first of all, it indicates to me, the person on the throne, I mean, there's a reason that he's saying you need to approach it boldly. I mean, you would only approach something boldly that is great and magnificent and sovereign and gracious.

And it stands somewhere between what Roger said where they don't spell the word of God and Abba Father. So it stands somewhere in between because He is what the Jewish people saw Him as which is magnificent and magnanimous and sovereign and all those other powerful words. He is that. and he will never change. I mean he created this universe and we are his creation.

So with that thought in mind you enter boldly to that. Okay so boldly, let's describe boldly to someone who has no clue what this is all about. Is this cockiness? No. What is it though? It's also a confidence. I like the term confidence. Is going to the throne totally comfortable and confident that our approach is heard? Just because we know him. Yeah, I was going to say that.

The only way you can do that is to have that intimate relationship with him. So it's not out of fear or anything like that. It's because you have a great relationship, very intimate, that you can have that confidence. But again, it's because of his son, not because of anything we did. No, it's the relationship we have with his son that we can approach that.

Right. Yeah. All right. We're called to finish up here. Let's turn to seven now. You're no longer a slave, but a son, and a son, then an heir of God through Christ. So this sonship implies the heirship. And Randy likes to refer to it as the heirship. This is not some sort of heavenly vessel that's in fact traveling in the atmosphere above us. OK, so it's Jabra and Magioth that says, therefore, what's it therefore? So what's it therefore?

Why do we have therefore introduced in verse 7? It's conclusive, is it not? And what's it conclusive of? Verses 1 through 6. By the way, the therefores and the wherefores in scripture are very, very important. Because it's conclusive and summarial. And we have to really see what's it there for? What's it there for because of what preceded it? It also asserts the truthfulness and reliability of the statements performed as well.

OK, good. So the slave here is to the law. And by the way, this is not a slave to sin, as we all are under this earthly umbrella that we inherited called life. The slave here is to the law. The slave to the law is ultimately because of the sin. But the slave here is under a legal system. We're not a slave under a legal system. We're a son of God, an adopted son.

This is not law works merit, but grace promised faith. Look, Merriman's done a great job with this. Law works merit, which is a equation for failure. This is grace promised faith. God's grace gives us promises that we respond to by faith. Whole different deal here. Not law works merit, where we're going to fail. that grace, promise and faith.

Galatians 3.18, Galatians 5.1. Let's just look at 5.1 because it's right around the corner and easy for me to find other Galatians. Anybody find these verses for me? They're close by. I was in Romans. It was for freedom that Christ set us free. Therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.

That's Galatians 5.3.18 says, For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more a promise, but God gave it to Abraham by promise. So again, the grace principle with promise that we respond to by faith. Second Corinthians, I love it. I will be a father to you, and you shall be my sons and daughters, says the Lord God Almighty.

So let's kind of look at this in this therefore seclusive manner. He shows us that we are free and set at liberty in such a way that while we're governed by the Spirit of Christ, who while reigning in our hearts may teach us true service of the Father, a different kind of service, not a service of slaves under law, but a different kind of service governed by the Spirit to the Father. And this is not the service of slave. who can rather enjoy true liberty as it's fitting for sons and heirs. But that which follows, he gathers that which went before, for instance Calvary. For if we have his spirit, we're sons. And if we're sons, we're free.

All the privileges, all the power, all the acceptance. So what's the bottom line? Keep looking down. That's where it all begins. And that freedom and liberty we have is a rest. It's not a works. And by the way, this rest that we have allows us to be not only free, but encouraged and uplifted in the faith or politics. not a burden, but a life, right? A life. And that life is a Christ life declared to each one of us as adopted sons. Beautiful, isn't it? A whole different thing, a whole different body. Enjoy your Christianity.

Randy, close us in prayer, please. Heavenly Father, thank you so much for the opportunity we have together here. the conditional process of being conformed to your image with the great costs of reminder and comfort that we are positionally in you and that we do have confidence in our relationship. We pray for a fruitful time in the name service and a good time of fellowship in the fellowship hall of your power. We just thank you in Jesus' name. Amen.