Adonis (Hastings' Dictionary)

Strictly not a name but a title, I'nij 'Adun, ' Lord,' of the god Tauimuz (which see). Is 17'° RVm ' plantings of Adonis ' (D-j;y 'y.:] nit's naamanlm, text 'pleasant plants') and the setting of ' vine slips of a stranger ' (strange god), is mentioned as the result of having ' forgotten the God of thy salvation.' So Ewald, Lagarde, Cheyne. With ' plantings of Adonis,' cf. the Gr. 'ASuiyiSos <o?7roi, quick-growing plants reared in pota or baskets (Plato, Phxedr.

276 B), and olVered to Aphrodite as emblems of her lover's beauty and earl-y death (Theocr. 15. 113). The meaning of na'amdni/n is, however, doubtfuL Na'aman \aprobably the name of a god ; cf. the name of the Syrian general (2 K 5'), and Ar. Numftn, a kind's name (Tebrizi's scholia to Ilamdsa). The river Belus is now called Nahr Na'amdn. Lagarde (Sem. i. 32) quotes Arab, name of the red anemone, Shaka'iku-n-Nu'mdn, explaining as ' the wound of Adonis ' ; but see Wellhausen, S/dzzen, iii. p. 7.

C. F. BURNEY. ADONI-ZEDEK (pix 'jnt; 'Lord of righteousness,' AV Adoni-zedec), king of Jerusalem at the time of the Invasion of Canaan by the Israelites under Joshua. After the Gibeonites had succeeded in making a league with Israel, he Induced four other kings, those of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish, and Eglon, to unite ^vith him against the invaders. First they attacked, as traitors to the common cause, the Gibeonites, who appealed to Joshua for help.

By a rapid night march from Gil"al, Joshua came unexpectedly upon the allied kings, and utterly routed them [Joshua, Beth-hokon]. Adoni-zedek and his associates sought refuge in a cave at Makkedah, but were taken and brought before Joshua. The Heb. chiefs set their feet upon their necks in token of triumph. They were then slain, and their bodies hung up until the evening, when they were taken down and flung into the cave where they had hid them.

selves, the moutli of which was filled up with great stones (Jos 10'-'-''). In Jos 10='- LXX retids 'ASuvi^iicK, and some have identified the latter with Adonibezek of Jg 1». (See Kittel, Hist, of Heb. i. 307 ; Budde, Richt. u. Sam. 63 f. ; Wellh. Einleit.* [Bleek] 182.) R. M. Boyd. ADOPTION {vloBeirla) is a word used by St. Paul to desirrnate the privilege of sonship bestowed by God on His people.

While Jesus Himself and the New Testament writers all speak frequently and emphatically of our blessings and duties as sons or children of God, no other of them employs this special term, which occurs in five places in the Epistles of St. Paul (Gal 4», Ro S"- ^^ 9^, Eph l"). It seems to express a distinct and definite ide.

T in that apostle s mind ; and since adoption was, in Roman law, a technical term for an tict that had specific legal and social eflects, there is much probability that he had some reference to that in his use of the word. The Romans maintained in a very extreme way the rights of fathers over their children as practically despotic ; and these did not cea.

se when the sons came of age, or had families of their own, but while the father lived could only be terminated by certain legal proceedings, analogous to those by which slaves were sold or redeemed. The same term {manci- 7)a^io) was applied to a process of this kind, whether a man parted with his son, or his slave, or his goods.

Hence a man could not be transferred from one family to another, or put into the position of a son to any Roman citizen, without a formal legal act, which was a quasi sale by his natural fatlio'-, and buying out by the person who adopted ADOPTION ADOi'TIOX 4i him. If he waa not in the power of a natural father, bnt independent {sui Juris), as, e.g.

, if his father were dead, tlien he could only be put in the place of 8on to another by a solemn act of the sovereign people assembled in their religious capacity (c(miitia curiata). For each family had its own religious rites, and he must be freed by public authority from the obligation to fulfil those of one, and taken bound to observe those of another.

That transaction was, however, properly called arrogatio, while adoptio strictly denoted the taking, by one man, of a son of another to bo his son. This, though not requiring an act of legislation, had to be regularly attested by wit- nesses ; and in old form one struck a pair of scales with a piece of copper as an emblem of the primitive process of sale.

Adoption, when thus legally performed, put a man in every respect in the position of a son by birth of him who had adopted him, so that he possessed the same rights and owed the same obligations. No such legal and complete transference of filial rights and <luties seems to have existed in the law of Israel ; though there may have been many ca-ses of the informal adoption known among us, as when Mordecai took the orphan Esther, his uncle's daughter, to be his (Est 2').

The failure of heirs was provided for by the leWrate law. Now, since St. Paul represents the Christian's adoption as carrying with it certain definite privi- leges which would not be involved in such an act as Mordecai's, and since he may well have been cu;qnainted with the Roman practice in this matter, it seems probable that he may have had it in view. (See Dr. \V. E. Ball in Contemp. Rev., Aug. 1891).

The earliest instance of his use of the word is in liis Epistle to the Galatians, in a passage in which ■everal names of huiuan relations are u.sed to illus- trate those between God and man, and where the apostle expressly says, ' I speak after the manner of men ' (3^*), i.e. I use a human analogy to make my argument plain. The terra that he first employs after this remark is that rendereil covenant, or testament (6ia^i)«r7j), here probably in the general sense of di.

sposition, without emphasis on the peculiarities either of a covenant or of a testament. In virtue of this disposition, which was one of promise, given to Abraham and his seed, the blessing comes to all who are united to Christ by faith ; for the promise, St. I'aul argues, was not to the physical descendants of the patriarch as a multitude, but to a unity, the one Messiah, who was to gather all nations to Himself. According to this disposition of Go<I, believers are sons and heirs (S'-"- ^).

But before their faith in Christ they were kept in ward under the law, which was not intended to add a condition to the covenant of promise, but to bring their latent sin to a head in transgressions (3"), so that they might not seek to be justified by works, but mi^ht accept the ble-ssing as of God's free grace througn Christ, who became a curse for us that He might redeem us from the curse of the law (3'^- '^'''*). This seems to bo clearly the general line of the argument.

But the position of men under the law appears to be roprc- sented by St. I'aul in twodilferent wavs, sometimes as bond -servants under the curse (."j^"- " 4'- '), and sometimes as children under age (4'"'). The ex- planation of this may be found in the consideration that St. Paul never meant to deny that Abraham, Darid, and other believers in OT times were really justified (see Ro 4'"') ; while as many as were of the works of the law were under the curse.

The former were like children under age, not j-ot enjoying the full privileges of sonship ; tlie latter were like bond-servants. To both alike the blessing brought by Christ in the fulness of the time is called adoption 'Gal 4'), and this sei-ins to indicate that St. Paul holds the sonship, of which he is speakini;, to he founded on the covenant promise of God, and not on the natural relation to God of all men as such.

We must not therefore lower the meaning of a<loption, in his mind, to the confer- ring of the full privileges of sons on those who are children by birth. It is, as the whole context shows, a position bestowed by a disposition or covenant of God, and through a redemption by Christ. This probably led St. Paul to the u.se of the word ; for the Roman adoption was effected by a legal act. which involved a quasi buying-out.

He also plainly regards it as like the adoption of Roman hiw in this, that it ^ives not merely paternal care, but the complete rights of sonship, the gift of the Spirit of God s Son, and the inheritance. No doubt this legal analogy may be pressed too far ; and St.

Paul plainly indicates that what he means is really sometliing far deeper ; for it is founded upon a spiritual union to God's Son, which is described as ' putting on Christ ' (3") ; so that our adoption is not a mere formal or legal act, though it may be compared to such in respect of its authoritative and abiding nature. Some theologians of difTerent schools (e.g.

Turretin, Schleiermacher) have inferred from the connexion between redemption and adoption, in (ial 4', that adoption is tlie positive part of the complete blessing of justification, of which re- demption or forgiveness is the negative jiart. But this is a very precarious inference ; and the two terms are so different in their meaning, that it is far more probable that St.

Paul meant by adoption a blessing distinct from our having peace with God and access into His favour, which he describes in Ro 5' as the positive fruits of our justification. These blessings, indeed, cannot be sejjarated in reality ; they are only different aspects of the one great gift of life in Christ ; but in order to understand clearly the evangelical doctrine of the NT, it is necessary to look at them separately. The next place where St. Paul speaks about adoption is in Ro S'"-^.

Here he is speaking of the believer's new walk of holiness, .and he has saiil, ' If by the spirit ye mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live ' (8"). In proof of this he asserts that ' as many as are led by the Spirit of (iod are the sons of God ' (8") ; and then he proves this in turn by saj-ing, ' Ye received not the (or, a) spirit of bondage again unto fear, but ye received tlie spirit of atloption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.'

The line of reasoning is the same a-s in Galatians, but put in the inverse order. The pro- mise of life is proved by the fact of our being sons of God ; and that, again, because the spirit that He has given us is that of adoption, enabling us to a<lilre3sGod as our Father, and so (8'") witnes.sing with our spirit that we are children of (Iod. In this possibly there may be some allusion to the witnesses wliich were necessary to the solemn act of adoption according to Roman law and custom.

Then, as in the earlier Epistle, it is stated that this ado]ition carries with it all the rights of true son- ship, ' If children, then heirs,' etc. (8"). St. Paul next proceeds to contra.Ht this glorious prospect >dtli the present sufferings of the people of (ioil. These sullcrings are shared by all creation ; and the deliverance is to be at the revealing of the sons of God (8'"), when creation itself shall share tlu' liberty of the glory of the sons of God (8-').

So in 8^ he says, ' we wait for our adojition, the redemption of our body.' It is the resurrection of life at the coming of the Lord that is un- doubtedly meant; and that is called here the adoption, because it will be the full revelation of our sonship. Now are we sons of (loil, as St. lolin puts it; but the world knoweth us not, and it doth not j'et appear what we shall be ; but « hen it shall 42 ADOEA ADOEATION appear, we shall be like Him (1 Jn 3''').

Another striking parallel is to be found in our Lord's words, as recorded by St. Luke (20'*-'^), of those that are accounted worthy to attain to the resurrection from the dead, ' Neither can they die any more, for they are equal xinto the angels, and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.' As salvation is sometimes spoken of as a thing perfect here and now, and sometimes as only to be completed at the last, so St. Paul speaks of adoption.

It belongs to the believer really and certainly now, but perfectly only at the resurrection. In Ro 9* St. Paul mentions 'the adoption' first among the privileges of Israel, which he there enumerates. 1 his is in accordance with tlie fact that the nation as a whole is called in the OT God's son, and individual members of it His children, sons and daughters.

The term implies further, what is also taught in OT, that they had tills relation, not through physical descent or creation, but by an act of gracious love on God's part. And in 9''*, St. Paul teaches that not all the children of Abraham and Jacob are children of God, but they who are of the promise, i.e., as he put it before, they who accept the promise by faith. It is not necessary to suppose tliat St.

Paul speaks here of another adoption, quite distinct from the Christian one ; it is, indeed, an earlier and less perfect phase of it, but he regards it as essentially the same ; since the gospel was preached before to Abraham, and justifacation, though founded on the actual redemption of Christ, was by anticipation applied to him and many others before Christ came. The last place where St.

Paul uses the term adoption is Eph 1', where he says that God eternally foreordained believers unto adoption as sons through Jesus Christ unto Himself. This refers to the eternal purpose, in accordance with which God does all His works in time, and corre- sponds to what he had said in Ro 8^, that ' whom He foreknew He also foreordained to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first- bom among many brethren.'

The conformity liere mentioned probably includes moral likeness ; but the ultimate end is stated to be that there might be many brethren of Christ, among whom He is the firstborn. Our Lord, according to St.

Paul, is, in a peculiar sense, God's Son, His own proper Son, begotten before all creation (Col 1"), and the grace of adoption makes believers truly His brethren and joint-heirs with Him, though He has ever and in all things the pre-eminence as Son of God from eternity, by nature and not merely by grace. For a fuller account of the Biblical doctrine of Divine Sonship, see God, Sons of ; Children of. LrrsRATims. — Comm. on tbe Pauline Epp.

by Calvin, Meyer, Alford, Ellicott, Lightfoot, Sanday-Headlam ; works on NT Theology by Schmid, Weiss, Beyechlaff, Bovon ; studied in Pauline Theolog)- by Pfleiderer, Sabatier, Bruce. (See Lit. under God, Sons op ; CniLDasH op.) J. S. Candlish. ADORA CAJupd) in Idnmaea {Ant. XIII. ix. 1), noticed in I Mac 13*". The same as Adoraim. ADORAIM (d:i\-i!<), 2 Ch 11'.— A city of Judah fortified by Rehoboam on the S.W. of his mountain kingdom, now Dtlra, at the edge of the moun- tains W.

of Hebron— a small village. SWP vol. iii. sheet xiL C. K. Condeb.