ber of that of his adopter, losing all rights as his
father's son. If he was adopted while his adopter
was still living, and sons were afterwards born to the
latter, he ranked equally with them ; he could not be
disinherited against his will. Roman adoption was
founded on the same general ideas ; it was called arro-
gatio if the person adopted was suijiiris, but adoptio
if he was under his own father's potestas (Wood-
house, loc. cit. ). In the latter case he came under the
adopter's potestas as if he were his son by nature.
It appears, then, that St. Paul in the five pass-
ages named above is taking up an entirely non-
Jewish position ; so much so that some have
doubted whether a Jew, even after he had become
a Christian, could have written Epistles which con-
tained such statements (cf. Ramsay, Galatians, p.
342). This, however, is one of the many instances
of the influence of Greek and Roman ideas on St.
Paul. W. M. Ramsay has endeavoured to show
that, in so far as these differed from one another
in the matter under discussion, it is to Greek
custom rather than to ' the Roman law of adoption
in its original and primitive form ' that the Apostle
refers in dealing with Gal 3 6ff -, but that he uses a
metaphor dependent on Roman law when writing
to the Romans in Ro 4 11 (ib. pp. 339, 343 ; see also
art. HEIR). But this has been disputed.
3. St. Paul's metaphor of adoption. The Apostle
applies the metaphor to the relation of both Jews
and Christians to the Father, (a) Somewhat em-
phatically he applies it to the Jews in Ro 9 4 . The
adoption, the glory [the visible presence of God],
the covenants [often repeated], the giving of the
Law, the service [of the Temple], the promises, the
fathers, all belonged to the Israelites, ' my kinsmen
according to the flesh,' of whom is Christ concern-
ing the flesh a passage showing the intense Jew-
ish feeling of St. Paul, combined with the broader
outlook due to his Greece-Roman surroundings
(see above, 2). Here the sonship of Israel, for
which see Ex 4- 2 (' Israel, my son, my first-born'),
Dt 14 1 32 s - 19f -, Ps 68 8 103 18 , Jer 31 9 , Hos II 1 ,
Mai 2 10 , etc., is described as 'adoption.' It is
noteworthy that the adoption is before the Incar-
nation, although it could only be ' in Christ.'
Lightfoot (on Gal 4 5 ) observes that before Christ's
coming men were potentially sons, though actually
they were only slaves (v. 8 ). Athanasius argues
that, since before the Incarnation the Jews were
sons [by adoption], and since no one could be a son
except through our Lord [cf. Jn 14 8 , Gal S 26 ,
Eph I 5 , and see below, 5], therefore He was a Son
before He became incarnate (Orat. c. Arian. i. 39,
iv. 23, 29).
(b) But more frequently St. Paul applies the
metaphor of adoption to Christians. ' Sonship in
the completest sense could not be proclaimed be-
fore the manifestation of the Divine Son in the
flesh' (Robinson, Eph., p. 27 f.). We Christians
' received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry,
Abba, Father,' for 'we are children of God'
(Ro 8 15fi ). It was not till the fullness (rb
for the word see Robinson, pp. 42, 255) of the time
came that God sent forth His Son that we might
receive adoption (Gal 4 4t ). In its highest sense
adoption could not be received under the Law, but
only under the Gospel. The context in these
passages shows that the Spirit leads us to the
Father by making us realize our sonship ; He
teaches us how to pray, and puts into our mouth
the words ' Abba, Father ' (cf. Kpa^ov Gal 4 6 with
Ro 8 15 ). We notice that St. Paul, though
addressing those who were not by any means all
Jewish Christians, but many of whom, being
Gentiles, had come directly into the Church, yet
seems at first sight to speak as if Christ's coming
was only to give adoption to those whom, being
under the Law, He redeemed. But, as Lightfoot
remarks (Com. in loc.), the phrase used is TOI>S birt>
v6fj.oi>, not 71-6 rbv vofjiov ; the reference is not only
to those who were under the Mosaic Law, but to
all subject to any system of positive ordinances
(so perhaps in 1 Co 9*). The phrase 'redeem . . .'
is thought to reflect the Roman idea that the
adopter purchased a son from the father by nature ;
adoption was effected before a praetor and five
witnesses, by a simulated sale.
(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
(dTroXirr/jwcm) 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 2 ; we are now the children
of God, but ' if he shall be manifested, we shall be
like him ' ; the sonship will then be perfected.
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
differently. Thus in Jn I 12ft those who 'receive'
the Woru 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 I 28 ), and afterwards, on receiving
the grace of the Spirit, to be begotten. As West-
cott observes (Com., 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 26 ,
where we are said to be all sons of God, through
faith, in Christ Jesus. So in 1 Jn 3 1 , 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 K\t]dG>fj.et>, aorist] ; and
(the Apostle adds) 'such we are.' The promise
of Rev 21 7 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 10 12 9 that Jesus
'brings many sons unto glory' (see below, 5),
and that Goa deals with us 'as with sons.' The
figure of adoption appears as a 're-begetting' in
1 P I*- 38 ; we 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, 8), and therefore call on Him as Father
(v. 17 ). 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) differentiates 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 iavrov vl6v), sent in the likeness of sinful
flesh, therefore pre-existent (Ro 8 3 ; cf. v. 82 TOV
ISlov vlov). In Gal 4 4f - he says that God sent forth
His Son (rbv vlbv afrrov) . . . 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 17 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 OT 3 s ;
cf. also Mk 8 s8 ] 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 I 12 ;
see 4 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' 6 " 18 , 1 Jn 4 9 ).
If we are the sons brought to glory by Jesus
(He 2 10 ), He is emphatically 'a Son over [God's]
house' (He 3 6 RVm ; cf. Nu 12 7 ). 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 (IP I 8 , 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 Creed*, art. ii. notes 52, 53). The distinc-
tion of Jn 20 17 is maintained throughout the NT.
As Augustine says (Exp. Ep. ad Gal. [4 B ] 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) of His mercy; He is Son by nature who
is one with the Father (qui hoc est quod Pater).'
6. Adoption and baptism. We may in conclu-
sion consider at what period of our lives we are
adopted by God as His sons. In one sense it was
an act of God in eternity ; we were foreordained
unto adoption (Eph I 8 ). But in another sense St.
Paul speaks of it as a definite act at some definite
moment of our lives : ' Ye received ( Ad/3rre : aorist,
not perfect) the spirit of adoption ' (Ro 8 1B ). This
points to the adoption being given on the admis-
sion of the person to the Christian body, in his
baptism. And so Sanday - Head lam paraphrase
v. 1 * thus : 'When you were first baptized, and the
communication of the Holy Spirit sealed your ad-
mission into the Christian fold,' etc. We may
compare Ac 19 2 RV : ' Did ye receive (Adhere) the
Holy Ghost when ye believed (irwreifo-avrej)?' a
passage in which the tenses 'describe neither a
gradual process nor a reception at some interval
after believing, but a definite gift at a definite
moment ' (Rackham, Com. , in loc. ; cf . Swete, Holy
Spirit in NT, 1909, pp. 204, 342). The aorists can
mean nothing else. In the case of the ' potential '
adoption of the Jews (to borrow Lightfoot's
phrase), it is the expression of the covenant be-
tween God and His people, and therefore must be
ascribed to the moment of entering into the cove-
nant at circumcision, the analogue of baptism.
Yet in neither case is the adoption fully realized
till the future (above, 3 (c)). In view of what
has been said, we can understand how ' adoption '
came in later times to be an equivalent term for
'baptism.' Thus Payne Smith (Thesaur. Syr.,
Oxford, 1879-1901, ii. 2564) quotes a Syriac phrase
to the effect that 'the baptism of John was of
water unto repentance, but the baptism of our
Lord [i.e. that ordained by Him] is of water and
fire unto adoption.' And in the later Christian
writers vloQeaLa. became a synonym for ' baptism '
(Suicer, Thes.*, 1846, s.v.).
LITERATURE. Athanasius, Orationes contra Arianos, passim
(the general subject of this magnificent work is the Sonship of
Christ) ; J. Pearson, On the Creed (ed. Burton, Oxford, 1864),
art. i. p. 49, art. ii. note 57, p. 250 ; W. M. Ramsay, Hist.
Com. on the Galatians, London, 1899, xxxi. ; G. H. Box, in
ERE, art. 'Adoption (Semitic)' ; W. J. Woodhouse, ib., artt.
' Adoption (Greek) ' and ' Adoption (Roman) ' ; J. S. Candlish,
in HDB, art. 'Adoption'; H. G. Wood, in SDB, art. 'Adop-
tion.' See also J. B. Lightfoot, Com. on Galatians (1st ed.,
1865, many subsequent edd.) ; Sanday- Headlam, Com. on
Romans (1st ed., 1895); J. Armitage Robinson, Com. on
Ephesians (1st ed., 1903). A. J. MACLEAN.
ADORNING. Simplicity of personal attire has
been no infrequent accompaniment of moral and
religious earnestness, even when not matter of pre-
scription. Two passages of the NT (1 Ti 2 9 - 10 ,
1 P 3 s - 4 ) warn Christian women against excessive
display in dress, fashion of the hair (see the art.
HAIR), and use of ornaments, and contrast it with the
superior adornment of the Christian virtues. At
the end of the 2nd cent, both Clement Alex. (Peed.
ii. 10 f. [Eng. tr. 11 f.]) and Tertullian (de Cultu
Feminarum) found it necessary to protest in much
detail against the luxurious attire, etc., prevalent
even amongst Christians of their day. The better
adornment is frequently named in the intervening
literature. The righteous, like their Lord, are
adorned with good works (1 Clem, xxxiii. 7), and
with a virtuous and honourable life (ii. 8). Ignatius
contrasts the adornment of obedience to Christ with
that of a festal procession to some heathen shrine
The reference to the subject in 1 P 3*- * has some
psychological interest. The adornment which is
praised is that of 'the hidden man of the heart,'
the meek and quiet spirit which is precious in God's
sight, and incorruptible. This use of ' man ' in the
sense of personality suggests the well-known Pauline
contrast between the inner and the outer man (2 Co
4 16 ; cf . Ro 7 22 , Eph 3 16 ), and may be a further
example of that dependence of 1 Peter on Pauline
writings which is now generally recognized (Moflatt,
LNT*, p. 330). It has often been maintained (e.g.
by Holtzmann, Lehrbuch der NT Theol. ii. 14, 15)
that this contrast is aproduct of Hellenistic dualism.
But it can be adequately explained from that Heb-
rew psychology which is the real basis of the Pauline
and Petrine ideas of personality. The heart (or,
in Pauline terminology, the ' mind ' [Ro 7 23 ]) is the
inner personality, as the apparelled members are
the outer personality. Both are necessary, accord-
ing to Hebrew thought, to make the unity of the
whole man. See further on this point the article
MAN. H. WHEELER ROBINSON.
ADRAMYTTIUM ('Adpantmov ; in the NT only
the adjective ' A5pa/j.vrTT)t>6s [Ac 27 2 ] is found ; WH
'Adpapwrqvds). This flourishing seaport of Mysia
was situated at the head of the Adramyttian Gulf,
opposite the island of Lesbos, in the shelter of the
southern side of Mt. Ida, after which the Gulf was
also called the ' Idaean.'
Its name and origin were probably Phoenician, but Strabo
describes it as ' a city founded by a colony of Athenians, with
a harbour and roadstead* (xin. i. 61). Rising to importance
under the Attalids, it became the metropolis of the N.W.
district of the Roman province of Asia, and the head of a
conventus juridicus. Through it passed the coast-road which
connected Ephesus with Troy and the Hellespont, while an
inland highway linked it with Pergamoa.
It was in ' a ship of Adramyttium ' larger than
a mere coasting vessel probably making for her own
port, that St. Paul and St. Luke sailed from Caesarea
by Sidon and under the lee (to the east) of Cyprus
to Myra in Lycia, where they joined a corn-ship
of Alexandria bound for Italy (Ac 27 2 * 8 ). The
modern town of Edremid, which inherits the name
and much of the prosperity of Adramyttium, is 5
miles from the coast.
LITERATURE. Conybeare-Howson, St. Paul, 1877, ii. 881 f. ;
J. Smith, Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul*, 1880, p. 62 ff. ;
W. M. Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman
Citizen, 1895, p. 316. JAMES STRAHAN.
ADRIA (6 'Adplas [WH'Afyfej], ' the Adrias,' RV
' the [sea of] Adria'). The name was derived from
the important Tuscan town of Atria, near the
mouths of the Padus, and was originally (Herod,
vi. 127, vii. 20, ix. 92) confined to the northern
part of the gulf now called the Adriatic, the lower
part of which was known as the ' Ionian Sea.' In
later times the name ' Adria ' was applied to the
whole basin between Italy and Illyria, while the
' Ionian Sea' came to mean the outer basin, south
of the Strait of Otranto. Strabo, in the beginning
of our era, says : ' The mouth (strait) is common
to both ; but this difference is to be observed, that
the name " Ionian" is applied to the first part of
the gulf only, and " Adriatic " to the interior sea
up to the farthest end ' (vn. v. 9). Strabo, how-
ever, indicates a wider extension of the meaning
by adding that ' the name "Adrias " is now applied
to the whole sea,' so that, as he says elsewhere,
' the Ionian Gulf forms part of what we now call
" Adrias " ' (II. v. 20). Finally, in popular usage,
which is followed by St. Luke (Ac 27 27 ), the term
'Adria 'was still further extended to signify the
whole expanse between Crete and Sicily.
This is confirmed by Ptolemy, who wrote about the middle of
the 2nd cent. A.D. 'With the accuracy of a geographer, he
distinguishes the Gulf of Adria from the Sea of Adria ; thus, in
enumerating the boundaries of Italy, he tells us that it is
bounded on one side by the shores of the Gulf of Adria, and
on the south by the shores of the Adria (iii. 1) ; and that Sicily
is bounded on the east by the Sea of Adria (4). He further
informs us that Italy is bounded on the south by the Adriatic
Sea (14), that the Peloponnesus is bounded on the west and
south by the Adriatic Sea (16), and that Crete is bounded on the
west by the Adriatic Sea (17)' (Smith, Voyage and Shipurreck oj
St. Paul*, 163 f.).
The usage current in the tirst and second
centuries is similarly reflected by Pausanias, who
speaks of Alpheus flowing under Adria from
Greece to Ortygia in Syracuse (viii. 54. 2), and of
the Straits of Messina as communicating with the
Adriatic and the Tyrrhenian Sea (v. 25. 3). Pro-
copius (Bel. Vand. i. 14) makes the islands of
Gaulos and Melita (Gozo and Malta) the boundary
between tlie Adriatic and the Tyrrhenian Sea.
The meaning of the term 'Adria' was the debat-
able point of the once famous controversy as to
whether St. Paul suffered shipwreck on the lllyrian
or the Sicilian Melita, i.e. on Meleda or Malta
(see MELITA). His ship was ' driven through
Adria' (dia<f>epofj.evwv i]/jiwt> ev T<$ 'Adpla, Ac 2T 27 ) ;
perhaps not ' driven to and fro in the sea of Adria '
(RV) (unless St. Luke made a landsman's mistake),
but slowly carried forward in one direction, for
probably ' she had storm sails set, and was on the
starboard tack, which was the only course by
which she could avoid falling into the Syrtis '
(Smith, op. cit. 114). An interesting parallel to St.
Paul's experience is found in the life of Josephus,
who relates that his ship foundered in the midst
of the same sea (xarA neaov rbv 'Adpiav), and that
he and some companions, saving themselves by
swimming, were picked up by a vessel sailing
from Gyrene to Puteoli ( Vit. 3).
LITERATURE. J. Smith, The Voyage and Shipwreck of St.
Paul*, 1880, p. 162 ff. ; W. M. Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller
and the Roman Citizen, 1895, p. 334.
ADULTERY. See MARRIAGE.
ADVENT. See PAROUSIA.
ADVERSARY. This renders three Greek words
in the NT : 1. avrfSiicos, properly an adversary in
a lawsuit, and used of an earthly adversary in
Mt 5, Lk 12 58 18 s all these with a legal reference.
It is used of an enemy of God in 1 S 2 10 (LXX),
and in 1 P 5 8 of ' the enemy,' Satan ; in this last
passage didfioXos is anarthrous, as a proper name,
while dvrldiKos has the article (see DEVIL and
2. dvTtKifivos, used in Lk 13 17 of our Lord's
Jewish opponents, and in 21 18 of all adversaries of
the disciples, is employed by St. Paul to denote
those who oppose the Christian religion, probably
in all cases with the suggestion that the devil is
working through them. Such are the ' adversaries '
of 1 Co 16 9 , Ph I 28 ; in 1 Ti 5 14 Chrysostom takes
the ' adversary ' to be Satan, the ' reviler ' (cf. v. 15 ),
or he may be the human enemy as prompted by
Satan. In 2 Th 2 4 ' he that opposeth ' (6 dvTiKtl/j.evos)
is Antichrist (q.v.), whose parousia is according to
the working of Satan (v. 9 ) ; and it is interesting to
note that the letter of the Churches of Vienne and
Lyons (Euseb. HE V. i. 5) uses this expression
absolutely of Satan, or of Antichrist, working
through the persecutors, and ' giving us a fore taste
of his unbridled activity at his future coming.'
3. virevavrios is used in He 10 27 of the adver-
saries of God, apostates from Christ, probably with
reference to Is 26 11 , where the LXX has the same
word. A similar phrase in Tit 2 s is ' he that is of
the contrary part,' an opponent, 6 <? tvavrias. In
Col 2 14 the word virevavrlos is used of an inanimate
object : ' the bond . . . which was contrary to us.'
A. J. MACLEAN.
ADVOCATE. See PARACLETE.
JENEAS (A.lveas). The name occurs only once in
the NT (Ac 9 s3 - 34 ). The person so called was a
dweller in Lydda or Lod, a town on the plain of
Sharon about ten miles south of Joppa, to which
many of the Christians had tied after the persecu-
tion which dispersed the apostles and the church
of Jerusalem. On a visit of St. Peter to tSe place,
^Eneas, who had for eight years been confined to
bed as a paralytic, was healed by the Apostle.
The cure seems to have had a very remarkable
influence in the district, causing many of the
dwellers in Sharon and Lydda to accept Christi-
anity. Nothing further is known of the man.
Probably he became a Christian at the date of his
cure. W. F. BOYD.
JEON (a.l(S>v, alwves, 'age,' 'ages'). There is
some uncertainty as to the derivation of the word
aldjv. Some relate it with &r)fj.i, ' to breathe,' but
modern opinion connects it with del, aiet ( = alF&v),
and finds as other derivatives the Latin cevum
and the English 'aye.' In the LXX aiuv is used
to translate cViy in various forms, as o^iyo, Gn 6 4 ;
D^iy ny, 1 K I 31 '; oViy "?x, Gn 21 s3 ; nViyn, Ec3". It is
of frequent occurrence in the NT. The instances
number 125 in TR, and 120 in critical editions.
Following these, it is noteworthy that in the
Gospels and Acts, where it occurs 34 times, it is
only once used in the plural (Lk I 33 ). In the rest
of the NT the use of the plural predominates (54
out of 86 instances). In Rev. the word occurs with
great frequency (26 times). In every case it is
used in the plural, and, except in two places, in the
intensive formula els robs alwvas T&V aiwvuv a form
which is never found in the Gospels or Acts, aluv
is variously translated as ' age,' ' for ever,' ' world,'
'course,' 'eternal.' It expresses a time-concept,
and under all uses of the word that concept remains
in a more or less definite degree.
1. It expresses the idea of long or indefinite past
time, dir alwvos, ' since the world began ' (EV ; Lk I 70 ,
Ac 3 21 15 18 ; cf. oV-iyD, Gn 6 4 , Is 64 4 , tic rov alwvos, Jn
9 s2 ). In these instances, the phrases express what
we mean when, speaking generally and indefinitely
of time past, we say ' from of old ' or ' from the
most ancient time.'
2. The common classical use of aidiv for ' lifetime'
is not found in the NT ; but there are instances
where the phrase els rbv aluva seems to have that
significance ; e.g. ' The servant abideth not in the
house for life, but the son abideth for life,' Jn 8 s5
(also Mt 21 19 , Jn 13 8 , 1 Co 8 13 ).
3. Tlie phrase els rbv alCiva. or robs al&vas is
frequently found in the NT as a time-concept for
a period or 'age' of indefinite futurity, and may
be translated 'for ever.' Strictly speaking, in
accordance with the root idea of al&v, the phrase
indicates futurity or continuance as long as the
' age ' lasts to which the matter referred to belongs.
The use of the intensive form els TOVS aldvas ru>v
aMvuv (Gal I 5 , Eph 3 21 , He 13 21 , and Rev. passim)
indicates the effort of Christian faith to give
expression to its larger conception of the ' ages ' as
extending to the limits of human thought, by-
duplicating and reduplicating the original word.
The larger vision gave the larger meaning; but it
cannot be said that the fundamental idea of ' age,'
as an epoch or dispensation with an end, is lost.
In the Fourth Gospel the phrase is sometimes
employed as a synonym for ' eternal life ' ( Jn 6 S1> M ).
4. The plural aiuwes expresses the time-idea as
consisting of or embracing many ages aeons,
periods of vast extent ' from all ages' (RV, Eph
3 9 ), ' the ages to come ' (Eph 2 7 , etc.). Some of these
' ages ' are regarded as having come to an end ' but
now once in the end of the world ( ' at the end of the
ages' RV) hath he appeared to put away sin' (He
9'-' 6 ). The idea of one age succeeding another as
under ordered rule is provided for in the suggestive
title 'the king eternal' (EV ' the king of the ages')
(1 Ti 1" ; cf. D^iy ^x, Gn 21 83 ). In He I 2 ' through
whom also he made the worlds' (ages), and He II 3