Stages of development in Greek

[Screaming Eagle]

These are the words I've been able to come up with that indicate 'stages' of development. While they did certainly refer to Greek words used describing 'age', the function of the words seems to indicate 'stages' of development independent from chronological age (with one exception).

1064. gaster, child (indicating fetus);
of uncertain derivation; the stomach; by analogy, the matrix; figuratively, a gourmand:--belly, + with child, womb en gaster 'be pregnant with' Ma 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as hs mother Mary was espoused to Joseph before they came together, she was found 'with child' (en gaster echo) of the Holy Ghost; Ma 1:23 Behold, a virgn shall be 'with child' (en gaster echo), and shall bring forth a huios son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel; which being interpreted is God with us; Ma 24:19 And woe to them that are (echo en gaster) with child, and to them that give suck in those days; Mk 13:17 But woe to them that (echo en gaster) are with 'child', and to them that give suck in those days!; Lk 1:31 And, behold, you shall conceive in your womb (en gaster), and bring forth (produce from seed) a huios son, and shall call his name Jesus; Lk 21:23 But woe to them that are with 'child' (gaster echo), and to them that give suck in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people; 1 th 5:3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety, then sudden destruction comes upon them, as travail upon a woman with 'child' (gaster echo) and they shall not escape; Titus 1:12 The Cretans are always liars, evil beast, slow 'bellies' (gaster); Rev 12:2 And she being (echo) with (en) 'child' (gaster) cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered (produced from seed).

5040. teknion,
diminutive of 5043; an infant, i.e. (plural figuratively) darlings (Christian converts):--little children. Gal 4:19, John 13:33, Johns letters 'little children'
See Greek 5043 (teknon) produced child;

3813. paidion,
neuter diminutive of 3816; a childling (of either sex), i.e. (properly), an infant, or (by extension) a half-grown boy or girl; figuratively, an immature Christian:--(little, young) child, damsel. minister to a king; 1J 2:13 'little children'

See Greek 3816 (pais) young servant, (often beaten with impunity) perhaps from 3817 paio to hit with a single blow, sting as a scorpion but without violence, strike, smite without a weapon or stick

Ma 11:25
3516. nepios,
from an obsolete particle ne- (implying negation) and 2031; not speaking, i.e. an infant (minor); figuratively, a simple-minded person, an immature Christian:--babe, child (+ -ish). Ma 21:16 out of the mouth of babes; Lk 10:21 have revealed them to 'babes': 1 Cor 3:1, 13:11 When I was a 'child', I spoke as a 'child', I understood as a nepios child, I thought as a nepios child: but when I became a aner man (fellow, husband, individual male), I put away nepios 'childish' things; Gal 4:1 Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a 'child', differs nothing from a doulos servant, though he be lord of all, Gal 4:3 Even so we, wehn we were 'children' (nepios), were in bondage under the elements of the kosmos world, Eph 4:14 That we henceforth be no more 'children' (nepios), tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of anthropos men, and cunning craftiness (trickery), whereby they lie in wait to deceive; Heb 5:13 For every one t hat uses milk is unskillful in the word of righteousness: for he is a 'babe' (nepios)
See Greek 2031 (epos) a word, speak or say

5043. teknon, Eph 5:8
from the base of 5098; a child (as produced):--child, daughter, son. Ma 9:2 (man with palsy lying on a bed), Ma 10:21 'children' shall rise up, Ma 11:19 But wisdom is justified of her 'children', Ma 15:26 it is not good to take the 'children's' bread, and to cast it to dogs, Acts 2:39 and to your 'children', Ro 8:16 that we are the 'children' of God, and if 'children', then heirs; Ro 8:21 Because the creature itself (original creation) also shall be delivered from the bondage of (decay) corruption into the glorious liberty of the 'children' of God; Ro 9:7 are they all 'children' 9:8 That is, they which are the 'children' of the flesh, these are not the 'children' of God: but the 'children' of the promise (announcement) are counted for the seed; Eph 5:1 Be therefore (imitators, mimicers) followers of God, as dear 'children', Eph 5:8; Eph 6:1 'Children', obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right, Eph 6:4 And, you fathers, provoke not your 'children' to wrath; Php 2:15 That you may be blameless nad harmless, the 'sons' of God,without rebuke; 1 Thess 2:7, 2:11, 1P 1:14 As obedient 'children', not fashioning yourselves; 1P 3:6; 1J 3:1 that we should be called the 'sons' of God; 3:2 Beloved, now we are the 'sons' of God 3:10 In this the 'children' of God are manifest, and the 'children' of the devil: 1J 5:2 By this we know that we love the 'children' of God, when we love God, and keep His commandments; Rev 2:23 kill her 'children'; Rev 12:4 to devour her 'child' as soon as it was born (produce from seed; Rev 12:5 And she brought forth (tikto, produced seed, travailed) a man (male, strong for lifting) huios (mature son of kinship), who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her 'child' was caught up (seize, pluck, take by force) to (toward, destination of relation, motion toward) God, and to his throne;

See Greek 5098 (timoria) vindication, implying a penalty or punishment; from root meaning 'to protect one's honor, to avenge or inflict a penalty or punish; implies value or money or esteem or dignity of self


5207. huios, mature sons; 'Son' of anthropos man
apparently a primary word; a "son" (sometimes of animals), used very widely of immediate, remote or figuratively, kinship:--child, foal, son. Gal 3:26, Ro 8:14, Ro 8:19; 1 Thess 5:5, Heb 2:10, Heb 5:8, Rev 7:4, Rev 12:5, Rev 21:7, 21:12; 'Son of David', 'Son of Abraham' Indicates kinship;

What's most interesting to me here is Ma 1:23; bring forth a 'huios'; the virgin will be pregnant with and bring forth a 'huios' mature son who shall be called Emmanuel;
Mt 1:23 Behold <idou>, a virgin <parthenos> shall be with child <en> <gaster> <echo>, and <kai> shall bring forth <tikto> a son <huios>, and <kai> they shall call <kaleo> his <autos> name <onoma> Emmanuel <Emmanouel>, which <hos> being interpreted <methermeneuo> is <esti>, God <theos> with <meta> us <hemon>. {they...: or, his name shall be called} (KJV)

3495. neaniskos,
from the same as 3494; a youth (under forty):--young man.
1J 2:13 among other uses;
See Greek 3494 (neanias) Acts 7:58 of Saul;
from neos 3501 'new', regenerate


5206. huiothesia,
from a presumed compound of 5207 and a derivative of 5087; the placing as a son, i.e. adoption (figuratively, Christian sonship in respect to God):--adoption (of children, of sons). Romans 8:15 Spirit of 'adoption', Ro 8:23 waiting for the 'adoption', to wit, the redemption of our bodies; Ro 9:4 who are Israelites, to whom pertains the 'adoption', and the glory and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Gal 4:5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of 'sons'; Eph 1:5 Having predestined us to the 'adoption of children' by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will;
See Greek 5207 (huios) kinship, used 348 times; Son of David, Son of Abraham, And she shall bring forth a 'son' and you shall call his name Jesus;
See Greek 5087 (tithemi) worshipping, bowing, commit, ordain for purpose, set forth, settled; 'Put'; 'make', 'appoint' 'Place'

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hey there Screaming Eagle,

I think the first item in the list should be brephos which means "baby" and often refers to the child in the womb:
Luke 1:41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe [brephos] leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
It can also refer to a newborn, as in this verse:
Luke 2:16 And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe [brephos] lying in a manger.
The word "gaster" refers to the mother's stomach area. It does not designate the baby itself. In Greek, "en gastri" means "pregnant" not "baby." It does not seem to fit in the list.

The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament indicates the next stage is called paidion which means "new born" or "infant." Literally it means "small pais" - which is the next stage described as "Pais can be used for a boy of 7–14 as distinct from one not yet 7 (paidion) or the adolescent (meirakion). Here's an example of paidion eight days old:
Luke 1:59 And it came to pass, that on the eighth day they came to circumcise the child [paidion]; and they called him Zacharias, after the name of his father.
And when Jesus was 12 he was called pais in this verse:
Luke 2:43 And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child [pais] Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it.
These words are not precise. They overlap a lot, so I'm not sure that they can be used as a foundation for a systematic understanding.

The most interesting word is HUIOS which is used for Christ, for believers, for students of Rabbis, but it is often used interchangeably with teknon, so gain, I doubt we will be able to develop a systematic understanding based on these words. For example, believers are called both "huioi theou" and "tekna theou."
Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God [uioi theou].

1 John 3:1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God [tekna theou]: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
Richard

[joel]

These are the words I've been able to come up with that indicate 'stages' of development. While they did certainly refer to Greek words used describing 'age', the function of the words seems to indicate 'stages' of development independent from chronological age (with one exception).

1064. gaster, child (indicating fetus);
of uncertain derivation; the stomach; by analogy, the matrix; figuratively, a gourmand:--belly, + with child, womb en gaster 'be pregnant with' Ma 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as hs mother Mary was espoused to Joseph before they came together, she was found 'with child' (en gaster echo) of the Holy Ghost; Ma 1:23 Behold, a virgn shall be 'with child' (en gaster echo), and shall bring forth a huios son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel; which being interpreted is God with us; Ma 24:19 And woe to them that are (echo en gaster) with child, and to them that give suck in those days; Mk 13:17 But woe to them that (echo en gaster) are with 'child', and to them that give suck in those days!; Lk 1:31 And, behold, you shall conceive in your womb (en gaster), and bring forth (produce from seed) a huios son, and shall call his name Jesus; Lk 21:23 But woe to them that are with 'child' (gaster echo), and to them that give suck in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people; 1 th 5:3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety, then sudden destruction comes upon them, as travail upon a woman with 'child' (gaster echo) and they shall not escape; Titus 1:12 The Cretans are always liars, evil beast, slow 'bellies' (gaster); Rev 12:2 And she being (echo) with (en) 'child' (gaster) cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered (produced from seed).

5040. teknion,
diminutive of 5043; an infant, i.e. (plural figuratively) darlings (Christian converts):--little children. Gal 4:19, John 13:33, Johns letters 'little children'
See Greek 5043 (teknon) produced child;

3813. paidion,
neuter diminutive of 3816; a childling (of either sex), i.e. (properly), an infant, or (by extension) a half-grown boy or girl; figuratively, an immature Christian:--(little, young) child, damsel. minister to a king; 1J 2:13 'little children'

See Greek 3816 (pais) young servant, (often beaten with impunity) perhaps from 3817 paio to hit with a single blow, sting as a scorpion but without violence, strike, smite without a weapon or stick

Ma 11:25
3516. nepios,
from an obsolete particle ne- (implying negation) and 2031; not speaking, i.e. an infant (minor); figuratively, a simple-minded person, an immature Christian:--babe, child (+ -ish). Ma 21:16 out of the mouth of babes; Lk 10:21 have revealed them to 'babes': 1 Cor 3:1, 13:11 When I was a 'child', I spoke as a 'child', I understood as a nepios child, I thought as a nepios child: but when I became a aner man (fellow, husband, individual male), I put away nepios 'childish' things; Gal 4:1 Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a 'child', differs nothing from a doulos servant, though he be lord of all, Gal 4:3 Even so we, wehn we were 'children' (nepios), were in bondage under the elements of the kosmos world, Eph 4:14 That we henceforth be no more 'children' (nepios), tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of anthropos men, and cunning craftiness (trickery), whereby they lie in wait to deceive; Heb 5:13 For every one t hat uses milk is unskillful in the word of righteousness: for he is a 'babe' (nepios)
See Greek 2031 (epos) a word, speak or say

5043. teknon, Eph 5:8
from the base of 5098; a child (as produced):--child, daughter, son. Ma 9:2 (man with palsy lying on a bed), Ma 10:21 'children' shall rise up, Ma 11:19 But wisdom is justified of her 'children', Ma 15:26 it is not good to take the 'children's' bread, and to cast it to dogs, Acts 2:39 and to your 'children', Ro 8:16 that we are the 'children' of God, and if 'children', then heirs; Ro 8:21 Because the creature itself (original creation) also shall be delivered from the bondage of (decay) corruption into the glorious liberty of the 'children' of God; Ro 9:7 are they all 'children' 9:8 That is, they which are the 'children' of the flesh, these are not the 'children' of God: but the 'children' of the promise (announcement) are counted for the seed; Eph 5:1 Be therefore (imitators, mimicers) followers of God, as dear 'children', Eph 5:8; Eph 6:1 'Children', obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right, Eph 6:4 And, you fathers, provoke not your 'children' to wrath; Php 2:15 That you may be blameless nad harmless, the 'sons' of God,without rebuke; 1 Thess 2:7, 2:11, 1P 1:14 As obedient 'children', not fashioning yourselves; 1P 3:6; 1J 3:1 that we should be called the 'sons' of God; 3:2 Beloved, now we are the 'sons' of God 3:10 In this the 'children' of God are manifest, and the 'children' of the devil: 1J 5:2 By this we know that we love the 'children' of God, when we love God, and keep His commandments; Rev 2:23 kill her 'children'; Rev 12:4 to devour her 'child' as soon as it was born (produce from seed; Rev 12:5 And she brought forth (tikto, produced seed, travailed) a man (male, strong for lifting) huios (mature son of kinship), who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her 'child' was caught up (seize, pluck, take by force) to (toward, destination of relation, motion toward) God, and to his throne;

See Greek 5098 (timoria) vindication, implying a penalty or punishment; from root meaning 'to protect one's honor, to avenge or inflict a penalty or punish; implies value or money or esteem or dignity of self


5207. huios, mature sons; 'Son' of anthropos man
apparently a primary word; a "son" (sometimes of animals), used very widely of immediate, remote or figuratively, kinship:--child, foal, son. Gal 3:26, Ro 8:14, Ro 8:19; 1 Thess 5:5, Heb 2:10, Heb 5:8, Rev 7:4, Rev 12:5, Rev 21:7, 21:12; 'Son of David', 'Son of Abraham' Indicates kinship;

What's most interesting to me here is Ma 1:23; bring forth a 'huios'; the virgin will be pregnant with and bring forth a 'huios' mature son who shall be called Emmanuel;
Mt 1:23 Behold <idou>, a virgin <parthenos> shall be with child <en> <gaster> <echo>, and <kai> shall bring forth <tikto> a son <huios>, and <kai> they shall call <kaleo> his <autos> name <onoma> Emmanuel <Emmanouel>, which <hos> being interpreted <methermeneuo> is <esti>, God <theos> with <meta> us <hemon>. {they...: or, his name shall be called} (KJV)

3495. neaniskos,
from the same as 3494; a youth (under forty):--young man.
1J 2:13 among other uses;
See Greek 3494 (neanias) Acts 7:58 of Saul;
from neos 3501 'new', regenerate


5206. huiothesia,
from a presumed compound of 5207 and a derivative of 5087; the placing as a son, i.e. adoption (figuratively, Christian sonship in respect to God):--adoption (of children, of sons). Romans 8:15 Spirit of 'adoption', Ro 8:23 waiting for the 'adoption', to wit, the redemption of our bodies; Ro 9:4 who are Israelites, to whom pertains the 'adoption', and the glory and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Gal 4:5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of 'sons'; Eph 1:5 Having predestined us to the 'adoption of children' by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will;
See Greek 5207 (huios) kinship, used 348 times; Son of David, Son of Abraham, And she shall bring forth a 'son' and you shall call his name Jesus;
See Greek 5087 (tithemi) worshipping, bowing, commit, ordain for purpose, set forth, settled; 'Put'; 'make', 'appoint' 'Place'

Thanks, Screaming Eagle, for the list. When you add Richard's suggestion, you'll have the basis of a solid study.

Revelation 12:5 has an interesting contrast which I trust you will appreciate;

And και G2532 kai 31
she brought forth τικτω G5088 tikto 1430
a man αρρην G0730 arrhen 259
child, υιος G5207 huios 680
who ος G3739 hos 270
was μελλω G3195 mello 905
to rule ποιμαινω G4165 poimaino 1061
all πας G3956 pas 281
nations εθνος G1484 ethnos 334
with εν G1722 en 55
a rod ραβδος G4464 rhabdos 377
of iron: σιδηρεος G4603 sidereos 597
and και G2532 kai 31
her αυτος G0846 autos 971
child τεκνον G5043 teknon 495
was caught up αρπαζω G0726 harpazo 989
unto προς G4314 pros 450
God, θεος G2316 theos 284
and και G2532 kai 31
[to] his αυτος G0846 autos 971
throne. θρονος G2362 thronos 499

Total = 9215
Original Text
Greek Value Inc
και 31
ετεκεν 385
υιον 530
αρρενα 257
ος 270
μελλει 120
ποιμαινειν 326
παντα 432
τα 301
εθνη 72
εν 55
ραβδωι 917
σιδηραι 333
και 31
ηρπασθη 406
το 370
τεκνον 495
αυτης 909
προς 450
τον 420
θεον 134
και 31
τον 420
θρονον 349
αυτου 1171
----------------------------

Her child (autos teknon) is "manchild", arrhen huios.

Joel

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Her child (autos teknon) is "manchild", arrhen huios.

Joel
Excellent example Joel. It shows how teknon and huios are used interchangeably in the same verse to refer to the same person.

[Screaming Eagle]

I'm understanding that they are not talking about the same child. Teknon essentially means 'produced' (with potential) but does not necessarily move to maturity as a huios son. There's also the nepios which is unable to 'speak' as a sign of maturity (by the words of your own mouth). Also, the 1J 3:1 has teknon and God as separate words. Huiothesia is a compound 'new' word that combines huios and thesia. Almost like in the language itself it's declaring a 'different' kind of man/being.

Wasn't there a cultural tradition in Judaism back in the day that really didn't recognize a child as 'alive' until it was 8 days old? Seems like I heard or read that somewhere once upon a time. It was because of the potential for newborn deaths from what I recall. Maybe something about not even naming a child until it was 8 days old? I dunno for sure but it comes to mind.

Thanks for that addition of brephos. I'd missed that.

[HaShaliach]

Wasn't there a cultural tradition in Judaism back in the day that really didn't recognize a child as 'alive' until it was 8 days old? Seems like I heard or read that somewhere once upon a time. It was because of the potential for newborn deaths from what I recall. Maybe something about not even naming a child until it was 8 days old? I dunno for sure but it comes to mind.

Thanks for that addition of brephos. I'd missed that.

I think your talking about the traditional "naming" ceremony of 8 days old. It was also when the male children were circumcised. A child was considered a life when it drew its first breath, based on the verse in Gen. where God breathed on Adam and he became a living soul. Same reason why today that some people in Jewish religion do not oppose abortion; the fetus has not drawn the "breath of life." Dumb IMHO.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I'm understanding that they are not talking about the same child. Teknon essentially means 'produced' (with potential) but does not necessarily move to maturity as a huios son. There's also the nepios which is unable to 'speak' as a sign of maturity (by the words of your own mouth). Also, the 1J 3:1 has teknon and God as separate words. Huiothesia is a compound 'new' word that combines huios and thesia. Almost like in the language itself it's declaring a 'different' kind of man/being.

Not talking about the same child?

Revelation 12:5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.

Are you saying that the child she brought forth is different that "her child" that was caught up?

Richard

[Screaming Eagle]

In the language, the 'manchild' is different from the teknon (produced) child.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

In the language, the 'manchild' is different from the teknon (produced) child.
There are two problems here.

1) The word "huios" can be used to describe every aspect of the idea of a "son" or "child" from birth unto maturity. And it has many other meanings too.

2) The word "huios" is often used synonymously with "teknon."

What is motivating you to pursue this idea?

Are you suggesting that the first child "huios" is Christ, and the second child "teknon" is the church?

Richard

[Screaming Eagle]

RAM, My pursuit is always Truth. THAT is my motivation and not the doctrines of any man.

Where is teknon used interchangeably/synonymously with huios?

[Richard Amiel McGough]

RAM, My pursuit is always Truth. THAT is my motivation and not the doctrines of any man.

Where is teknon used interchangeably/synonymously with huios?

Hey there bro,

I already gave an example in post #2. Christians are called God's "huios" and and God's "teknon" -

Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God [uioi theou].

1 John 3:1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God [tekna theou]: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
And now as I looked more closely at Romans 8:14, I found both terms used synonymously in the same context:

Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God [huios theou]. 15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. 16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God [tekna theou]:
It seems to me that the terms are essentially synonymous and it would be folly to establish a doctrine upon any difference between these two words. There is a subtle distinction in meaning, but one thing is certain. Any person called a "huios" of God is also a "teknon" of God, and vice-versa. These words do not divide Christians into two groups, and do not indicate different stages of development.

All the best,

Richard

[Screaming Eagle]

I'd agree that any person that is a 'huios' mature child was at one time a 'teknon' produced child. It was 'teknon' (produced) and grew (spiritually) into a huios mature child. There are clear differences. You can ignore the clear differences in the words to hold onto your pet doctrine if you like, but you're missing exactly what's being said there.

[Screaming Eagle]

Let's look at Romans 8 for a clear description of what I'm talking about.

Ro 8:15 For <gar> ye have <lambano> not <ou> received <lambano> the spirit <pneuma> of bondage <douleia> again <palin> to <eis> fear <phobos>; but <alla> ye have received <lambano> the Spirit <pneuma> of adoption <huiothesia>, whereby <en> <hos> we cry <krazo>, Abba <Abba>, Father <pater>. (KJV)

We have received THE Spirit of adoption (huiothesia which is a clear manifestation (even by the word itself) of God in man and there will be no mistake. How do we know that? Read on;
Ro 8:16 The Spirit <pneuma> itself <autos> beareth witness <summartureo> with our <hemon> spirit <pneuma>, that <hoti> we are <esmen> the children <teknon> of God <theos>: (KJV)

THE Spirit bears witness that we are teknon produced children with the complete potential of Him.

Ro 8:17 ¶ And <de> if <ei> children <teknon>, then <kai> heirs <kleronomos>; heirs <kleronomos> of God <men> <theos>, and <de> joint-heirs <sugkleronomos> with Christ <Christos>; if so be <ei per> that we suffer with <sumpascho> him, that <hina> we may be <sundoxazo> also <kai> glorified together <sundoxazo>. (KJV)

Heirs 'even' 'indeed' (men); heirs and joint-heirs (participants with, co-heirs); IF we SUFFER WITH Him, that we may be glorified together with Him. (conditional IF) even though the potential is there for all);

Then Paul talks about the Glory (which he had certainly seen in order to be able to even faintly describe it) that matters not and that the intense anticipation of

the creature <ktisis> waiteth <apekdechomai> for the manifestation <apokalupsis> of the sons <huios> of God <theos>. (KJV)

Ktisis means the original formation and act of creation ALL of it waits for the manifestation of the huios sons of God. Created nature itself waits in eager anticipation for this 'huios' of God Almighty Himself. Teknon have been by faith and will be everywhere. Huios is anticipated as all creation itself GROANS in anticipation of the Sons of God. It's so that Creation itself will be delivered completely from the bondage of corruption (doesn't have to be twisted any longer). And it travails in pain together (every creature) in this anticipation.

we <hemeis> ourselves <autos> groan <stenazo> within <en> ourselves <heautou>, waiting <apekdechomai> for the adoption <huiothesia>, to wit, the redemption <apolutrosis> of our <hemon> body <soma>. (KJV)

And WE (most emphatic tenses used here) groan waiting for this huiothesia man/God that is immediately connected with the redemption of our soma body. Paul elaborates on this in other places (transformed/transfigured) and it is accord with the description in Hebrew of 'quickened' or 'enlivened'. The downpayment of Spirit is now testifying that this is the great potential and glory that we have been teknon produced to be. Huios seems to be more of a statement of 'in His Name' truly (ask whatsoever you will) rather than having huge houses (either large buildings or puffed up hearts of arrogance; they seem to go hand in hand) or ministries.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I'd agree that any person that is a 'huios' mature child was at one time a 'teknon' produced child. It was 'teknon' (produced) and grew (spiritually) into a huios mature child. There are clear differences. You can ignore the clear differences in the words to hold onto your pet doctrine if you like, but you're missing exactly what's being said there.
Hey dude,

I don't think you want to throw around accusations of folks holding to "pet doctrines." If anyone is pushing a "pet doctrine" in this thread it ain't me. You are the one attempting to establish a doctrine upon the fallacious idea of differences between synonyms in a language that you don't even speak.

I have given you plenty of evidence that huios and teknon are generally used interchangeably but it doesn't seem to matter. Perhaps this explanation from an acknowledged Greek expert (who also happens to speak Greek) will help. It is from The Complete Word Study Dictionary by Spiros Zodhiates:
(IV) On rare occasions, a distinction between téknon and huiós (5207), son, can be noted. Huiós at times refers to a legal heir and thus, by implication, an adult. It seems to underscore the character or maturity of the individual. Téknon is a more general designation for offspring and contemplates the individual as one who is parented, one who has been born to another. Nevertheless, because these words often overlap and are used without discrimination, it is unwise to press their semantic difference and make it the basis of an interpretation or doctrine. For example, Jesus is never designated as téknon or téknon Theoú (gen. of Theós [2316], God), Son of God, but always ho huiós, the Son, the Son of God or the Son of Man. Some have attributed this to what they perceive to be a real difference between the two words. It is contended that the former points to Christ’s origin (speaking of Him as one born of God) and that the latter points to Christ’s character or status (speaking of Him as one who possesses God’s full likeness or as His heir). However, this is artificial and unnecessary. Still, the absence of the expression téknon Theoú would certainly not be due to its theological impropriety. The Scripture bears ample testimony to the eternal generation of the Son. The exclusion of téknon Theoú in favor of huiós Theoú is doubtless due to the authors’ stylistic preferences.

(V) Believers are called both tékna Theoú, children of God (John 1:12; Rom. 8:16, 17, 21; 9:8; Eph. 5:1; 1 John 3:1, 2, 10; 5:2), and huioÃ* (5207), sons (Rom. 8:14, 19; Gal. 3:26; 4:6, 7; Heb. 12:7).
Now besides these facts, there is also the obvious contextual problem with your assertion that the teknon and huios of Rev 12 are different. Consider:
Rev 12:4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child [teknon] as soon as it was born. 5 And she brought forth a man child [huios], who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child [teknon] was caught up unto God, and to his throne.
So now do you really believe that there are two different children in view in this passage? If so, please identify them.


Child 1: Her teknon about to be delivered, threatened by the dragon
Child 2: Her huios that she brought forth
Child 3: Her teknon that was caught up to God and his throne.

Thanks,

Richard

[Screaming Eagle]

Yep I do. The dragon wants to destroy everything produced of the Lord whether mature or not. It's the arrhen manchild that is capable of lifting and obviously mature. That arrhen manchild came from what was 'once' a teknon but matured. The ones that did not die to themselves and remained 'teknon' were caught up just like the tares that are taken away from the wheat.

[Screaming Eagle]

RAM wrote:
The most interesting word is HUIOS which is used for Christ, for believers, for students of Rabbis, but it is often used interchangeably with teknon, so gain, I doubt we will be able to develop a systematic understanding based on these words. For example, believers are called both "huioi theou" and "tekna theou."
Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God [uioi theou].

1 John 3:1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God [tekna theou]: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

Richard, all this proves is that the translators used the same word (sons) to inaccurately convey exactly what those words mean. God does not use words willy nilly. People who speak Greek on the streets might, but God does not.

[Screaming Eagle]

RAM wrote:
I don't think you want to throw around accusations of folks holding to "pet doctrines."

I did not say one word about you having pet doctrines or accusing you of anything. Nothing.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

RAM wrote:
I don't think you want to throw around accusations of folks holding to "pet doctrines."

I did not say one word about you having pet doctrines or accusing you of anything. Nothing.
I was just responding to this comment you wrote in Post #12:



You can ignore the clear differences in the words to hold onto your pet doctrine if you like, but you're missing exactly what's being said there.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

RAM wrote:
The most interesting word is HUIOS which is used for Christ, for believers, for students of Rabbis, but it is often used interchangeably with teknon, so gain, I doubt we will be able to develop a systematic understanding based on these words. For example, believers are called both "huioi theou" and "tekna theou."
Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God [uioi theou].

1 John 3:1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God [tekna theou]: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

Richard, all this proves is that the translators used the same word (sons) to inaccurately convey exactly what those words mean. God does not use words willy nilly. People who speak Greek on the streets might, but God does not.
You don't know Greek, so who are you to judge the translators?

The translators are correct. They know that the words huios and teknon are synonyms, so they translated accordingly. Your theory that those words represent different "stages of development" has no foundation in the Greek language or in Scripture. I have given you the evidence, why do you ignore it?

Now as for why God used arsen huion in Rev 12: To understand this, you need to look at Isa 66:7 (LXX) which uses the phrase eteken arsen (brought forth a man child). Exactly the same phrase is used in Rev 12:5, except that the word huios is included (eteken huion arsen). Scholars discuss the various possible reasons for this. The most obvious reason is because it is a Hebraicism that mimics ben zakar (a son, a male). There is absolutely nothing in this that suggests a "mature male" vs. an "immature child."

You still have not identified the "three children" in Rev 12:4-6


Child 1: Her teknon about to be delivered, threatened by the dragon
Child 2: Her huios that she brought forth
Child 3: Her teknon that was caught up to God and his throne.

And have you considered the fact that the fully mature and resurrected Lord Jesus Christ is called a "pais" in Acts?

Acts 4:27 For of a truth against thy holy child [pais] Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,
I would like an explanation of this from your "stages of development" viewpoint.

All the very best,

Richard

[Screaming Eagle]

It's really pretty simple. The teknon was a produced child that was about to be born. No mystery there. The enemy would love to devour the produced ones before they ever mature. The huios is a child that was brought forth and matured. The teknon (as I already said) is the 'produced' child that never died to himself. It's the same ones in Is 4 that want to eat 'their own' bread, wear 'their own' apparel and just be called by His name. They never really surrender to Him to be clothed by Him. It's the tares that were taken up before the wheat like I said in post 15. They could have become huios but did not. Note the : in v5; it's a separation that is there for a reason. It's a distinction between two groups of people.

Pais is defined as a young servant to a King that is severely disciplined, even beaten. I'd never noticed that before. Thanks for pointing it out.

There is a clear difference in the definition of the words. I can promise you I did not come to the conclusions that I have by any worldly 'scholar'. No man taught me anything to do with this. It was a result of years of asking and prayer and prompting by the Lord. He'd already given me part of it in other ways and led me to Rev 12 to confirm what He'd already showed me. There is clear mention of the 1260 days that is a clear repetition. It just happens to be 3 1/2 years or a time, times and half a time.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

It's really pretty simple. The teknon was a produced child that was about to be born. The huios is a child that was brought forth and matured. The teknon (as I already said) is the 'produced' child that never died to himself.

Where did you get those definitions? Neither the dictionaries nor the lexicons support your theory. I can not see any basis in Scripture or the Greek lanugage for the the distinctions you are suggesting.

[joel]

Richard,

I ask you to consider from another perspective what Screaming Eagle is asserting regarding the differences between 'tecknon, teckna" and "huios", both of which refer to "sons" in various scriptures.

Both come from parents as being generated. Can we say that all children are
"tecknon,.... teckna"? Yes, I believe we can.

But, can we say that all children are "huios"?

I don't see it that way. This distinction comes from the act of the Father "placing" the progeny.

This differs from being generated. In this sense, the generated progeny is being recognized in a new position, being placed as a son, huios. This placing is the meaning of the word, huiosthesia, "son-placing".

Abraham had two sons.....one of a bondmaid......and one of the free.

But only one, Isaac, was recognized as Abraham's heir.

The act of son-placing may be seen as Abraham took Isaac to the mountain,.......and there.....he placed him on the altar, an act reflective of the future event when the Father sent His only begotten Son to be the sacrifice for us all.

Joel

[Screaming Eagle]

Richard,
I want to ask you to be completely honest. In your looking at these words, how many commentators/sources pointed to a contrast between those two words as indicating 'difference' in their meaning? Be honest.

[Rose]

Richard,

I ask you to consider from another perspective what Screaming Eagle is asserting regarding the differences between 'tecknon, teckna" and "huios", both of which refer to "sons" in various scriptures.

Both come from parents as being generated. Can we say that all children are
"tecknon,.... teckna"? Yes, I believe we can.

But, can we say that all children are "huios"?

I don't see it that way. This distinction comes from the act of the Father "placing" the progeny.

This differs from being generated. In this sense, the generated progeny is being recognized in a new position, being placed as a son, huios. This placing is the meaning of the word, huiosthesia, "son-placing".

Abraham had two sons.....one of a bondmaid......and one of the free.

But only one, Isaac, was recognized as Abraham's heir.

The act of son-placing may be seen as Abraham took Isaac to the mountain,.......and there.....he placed him on the altar, an act reflective of the future event when the Father sent His only begotten Son to be the sacrifice for us all.

Joel

Hi Joel,

May I ask you why in your opinion sons of God are also called "teknon", if "huios" is the "son placing" name?
.
John 11:52 And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children (teknon) of God that were scattered abroad.

1John 3:1-2 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons (teknon) of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. Beloved, now are we the sons (teknon) of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.him not.
.
Also, children of God and children of the devil are both called "teknon".

John 3:10 In this the children (teknon) of God are manifest, and the children (teknon) of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
.
Rose

[joel]

Does "tecknon, teckna" have more to do with "being generated",
whereas, "huios" has more to do with "being placed"?

I believe the distinction is appropriate.

Joel

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard,
I want to ask you to be completely honest. In your looking at these words, how many commentators/sources pointed to a contrast between those two words as indicating 'difference' in their meaning? Be honest.
Your admonition that I "be honest" is a great insult because it suggests that I have not been honest.

Will you "be honest" and admit that your theory based on the "difference" between huios and teknon has no foundation in either Scripture or the Greek language? Why have you not presented any evidence to support your theory? Why have you not quoted any lexicons or Scriptures that show you are correct?

The evidence is total, absolute, and incontrovertible. I have ten Greek lexicons and they all agree that huios and teknon are synonyms. I already posted Zodiates comments on their difference and how it applies only on "rare occasions." And of these ten, I found only one other that commented on the difference (Thayer's). I have found absolutely no support for any consistent or systematic difference that would support your doctrine.

It appears you are willfully ignorant concerning the range of meanings of huios. It describes the offspring of a ass in Matthew 21:5!

Any attempt to build a doctrine on subtle differences between synonyms in a language that you do not understand is absurd in the extreme.

Why are you holding to this doctrine?

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Does "tecknon, teckna" have more to do with "being generated",
whereas, "huios" has more to do with "being placed"?

I believe the distinction is appropriate.

Joel
That is correct etymologically, but it does not describe how the words are used in Scripture.

Except in rare instances, any huios is a teknon, and any teknon is a huios. The words are fundamentally synonymous.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard,

I ask you to consider from another perspective what Screaming Eagle is asserting regarding the differences between 'tecknon, teckna" and "huios", both of which refer to "sons" in various scriptures.

Both come from parents as being generated. Can we say that all children are
"tecknon,.... teckna"? Yes, I believe we can.

But, can we say that all children are "huios"?

I don't see it that way. This distinction comes from the act of the Father "placing" the progeny.

Hey Joel,

Your assertion that "this distinction comes from the act of the Father "placing" the progeny" is false. Where did you get that idea? A quick glance at the wide range of contexts in which huios occurs immediately shows that it has nothing to do with "placing the progeny" in general. For example, the word "huios" describes the offspring of an ass in Matthew 21:5. And there are countless examples where huios simpy denotes "offspring." There is a HUGE range of meanings of this word. There is no reason whatsoever to think that it is consistently distinguished from teknon the way you suggest.




Abraham had two sons.....one of a bondmaid......and one of the free.

But only one, Isaac, was recognized as Abraham's heir.


And they are BOTH called huios!

Does this not contradict your primary thesis?

[Screaming Eagle]

Richard,
That 'ass' was specifically chosen by Him...

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard,
That 'ass' was specifically chosen by Him...
And that means what? The word huios indicates the relation between the colt and its mother. It has nothing to do with whether Christ chose them.

Do you have any evidence from Scripture or Greek Lexicons that supports your thesis?

[joel]

Richard;

Teknon, tekna....refers to generated.......whether male or female.

All teknon, tekna......begin as nepios.

At a certain point in time, there is a transition.

A huios is related to the word which applies to inheritance, kleronomos.

The distinction is in whether a generated person, a teknon or teckna, is of a state of maturity that the Father places the Son, huios, into a position of authority within the family and the family's assets.

All which are generated may not become those which function in the capacity of joint participants in the management of the household.

What you are saying.....is....there is no distinction.

Do you really believe that?

Joel

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard;

Teknon, tekna....refers to generated.......whether male or female.

All teknon, tekna......begin as nepios.

At a certain point in time, there is a transition.

You are treating these words as if they were technical terms with strict non-overlapping definitions. That is a false view. The words for children are all synonyms with variations of overtones.

In general, any huios is a teknon and any teknon is a huios.

This is common knowledge. All lexicons explain this.

Where are you getting your ideas from?



A huios is related to the word which applies to inheritance, kleronomos.

Where did you get this idea from?



The distinction is in whether a generated person, a teknon or teckna, is of a state of maturity that the Father places the Son, huios, into a position of authority within the family and the family's assets.

Where did you get this idea from?



All which are generated may not become those which function in the capacity of joint participants in the management of the household.

What you are saying.....is....there is no distinction.

Do you really believe that?

Joel
The words huios and teknon have a wide variety of meanings in specific contexts, but they are largely synonymous. There is absolutely no basis in the Bible or the Greek lexicons for inventing doctrines based on the differences between them.

[joel]

The words huios and teknon have a wide variety of meanings in specific contexts, but they are largely synonymous. There is absolutely no basis in the Bible or the Greek lexicons for inventing doctrines based on the differences between them.
__________________


An "invented doctrine".......so this is what we come down to..............
Such may be the case.

You are saying........."huios and teknon have a wide variety of meanings in specific contexts, but they are largely synonomous. There is absolutely no basis in the Bible or the Greek lexicons for inventing doctrines based on the differences between them.".............

That is a very important statement.

That is a part of your profession of faith. So, I must conclude based on what your have stated. Right?

Joel

[Richard Amiel McGough]

An "invented doctrine".......so this is what we come down to..............
Such may be the case.

You are saying........."huios and teknon have a wide variety of meanings in specific contexts, but they are largely synonomous. There is absolutely no basis in the Bible or the Greek lexicons for inventing doctrines based on the differences between them.".............

That is a very important statement.

That is a part of your profession of faith. So, I must conclude based on what your have stated. Right?

Joel
Up to this point we have been discussing the question of whether or not there is a systematic or consistent difference between the general meaning of the words huios and teknon, and if we can use these differences to establish a doctrine. The answer is an unequivocal "no."

But now you are introducing the idea of a "statement of faith." This touches upon an interesting fact relating to Christ. Unlike believers who are called both "huios theou" and "teknon theou," the latter term is never used for Christ himself. Folks can speculate about the reason for this, but I do not see how it impacts the questions currently being discussed. For example, Christ is called "pais" in Acts 4:27, and pais is just another synonym for "child" though it can also mean "servant."

It would be good if you would simply state what doctrine you are trying to derive from the differences between these words, and what Scriptures and lexicons you are using for support.

Richard

[joel]

Unlike believers who are called both "huios theou" and "teknon theou," the latter term is never used for Christ himself.

Now, then, maybe we have something that is unique.

Can we look at these; "huios theou"...and "teknon theou"?.....what are the specific verses?

Joel

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Now, then, maybe we have something that is unique.

Can we look at these; "huios theou"...and "teknon theou"?.....what are the specific verses?

Joel
As noted in Post #11 (http://biblewheel.com/forum/showpost.php?p=19290&postcount=11), we see believers called both huioi theou and tekna theou in the same context:

Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God [huioi theou]. 15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. 16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God [tekna theou]:
And here is a list of verses provided by Zodhiates in Post #14 (http://biblewheel.com/forum/showpost.php?p=19305&postcount=14):

(V) Believers are called both tékna Theoú, children of God (John 1:12; Rom. 8:16, 17, 21; 9:8; Eph. 5:1; 1 John 3:1, 2, 10; 5:2), and huioÃ* (5207), sons (Rom. 8:14, 19; Gal. 3:26; 4:6, 7; Heb. 12:7).
Richard

[joel]

(V) Believers are called both tékna Theoú, children of God (John 1:12; Rom. 8:16, 17, 21; 9:8; Eph. 5:1; 1 John 3:1, 2, 10; 5:2), and huioÃ* (5207), sons (Rom. 8:14, 19; Gal. 3:26; 4:6, 7; Heb. 12:7).



Amen. There is no disputing that.

Tekna Theou= generated by God, from God. Believers find their source in God.

Huioi Theou= believers who are led by God's spirit (Romans 8:14).

Are you saying that because you are tekna Theou you are automatically huioi theou?

As His offsprings, we are also to led by His Spirit as sons.

Joel

Except in rare instances, any huios is a teknon, and any teknon is a huios. The words are fundamentally synonymous.

Maybe fundamentally, but spiritually, they are not synonymous.

To be led by the spirit characterized the huioi Theou. Just as the donkey in one of your earlier posts is led by its master, and is not meant to wander on its own without its owner's guidance, we, as believers, are to be led by God's Spirit.

If you think that this occurs automatically, then, you are ignoring the essential truths that Paul has stated prior to Romans 8:14.

Paul explains here in these verses (Romans 8:14-16), that as God's generated ones, we are also to be led by His Spirit, as His sons (huioi). This is so because we have received "the spirit of adoption" (son-placing).

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Amen. There is no disputing that.

Tekna Theou= generated by God, from God. Believers find their source in God.

Huioi Theou= believers who are led by God's spirit (Romans 8:14).

Are you saying that because you are tekna Theou you are automatically huioi theou?

As His offsprings, we are also to led by His Spirit as sons.

Joel

Hey there Joel,

Where do you get that distinction from? Are you saying that the Bible calls folks "tekna theou" even though they do not follow the Spirit of God?
Ephesians 5:1 Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children [tekna]; 2 And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour. 3 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints; 4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks. 5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. 6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. 7 Be not ye therefore partakers with them. 8 For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children [tekna] of light: 9 (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth) 10 Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.
It seems clear that being "led by the Spirit" does not distinguish between those called "huioi theou" and those called "tekna theou."

Can you give me any example of any person in the Bible who is called a tekon theou who is not a huios theou?



Maybe fundamentally, but spiritually, they are not synonymous.

To be led by the spirit characterized the huioi Theou. Just as the donkey in one of your earlier posts is led by its master, and is not meant to wander on its own without its owner's guidance, we, as believers, are to be led by God's Spirit.

Please show me one verse that calls someone a "teknon theou" who is not led by God's Spirit.



If you think that this occurs automatically, then, you are ignoring the essential truths that Paul has stated prior to Romans 8:14.

Paul explains here in these verses (Romans 8:14-16), that as God's generated ones, we are also to be led by His Spirit, as His sons (huioi). This is so because we have received "the spirit of adoption" (son-placing).
Yep - those verses show that the tekna theou = the huioi theou.

[joel]

It would be good if you would simply state what doctrine you are trying to derive from the differences between these words, and what Scriptures and lexicons you are using for support.



Richard........any doctrine.....which has been established.......is to be first, aligned with what Paul taught to the churches, the doctrine which he expressed in his letters. I don't study lexicons....so, I cannot speak to that part of your statement. Let's leave them out if that's o.k.

Do you agree?

Joel

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard........any doctrine.....which has been established.......is to be first, aligned with what Paul taught to the churches, the doctrine which he expressed in his letters. I don't study lexicons....so, I cannot speak to that part of your statement. Let's leave them out if that's o.k.

Do you agree?

Joel
How do you understand Greek without a Lexicon? Do you read Greek?

[joel]

No, I do not read Greek.

I use the tools available to all of us who are blessed with the internet.

I use programs which display the words in the KJV, and then, display the words as they appeared in the original Greek.

Then, ......if I want a definition according to Strong....that's available.

If I want to see if the use in the original is tied to any other verse, using the same word or a variation of that word, then I can compare, and seek an understanding.

I do not believe that we, who are blessed with the internet tools available today, must first learn to speak koine Greek to understand what is being said.

As I have experienced, most believers have no concept whatsoever as to what the original says and explains. That is lazy, fleshly faith.

I have encountered many believers who do not think it important to pursue an understanding of the original. That too is according to flesh and not to spriit.

Because of that "paradigm" we all lose.

Joel

[Richard Amiel McGough]

No, I do not read Greek.

I use the tools available to all of us who are blessed with the internet.

I use programs which display the words in the KJV, and then, display the words as they appeared in the original Greek.

Then, ......if I want a definition according to Strong....that's available.

If I want to see if the use in the original is tied to any other verse, using the same word or a variation of that word, then I can compare, and seek an understanding.

I do not believe that we, who are blessed with the internet tools available today, must first learn to speak koine Greek to understand what is being said.

As I have experienced, most believers have no concept whatsoever as to what the original says and explains. That is lazy, fleshly faith.

I have encountered many believers who do not think it important to pursue an understanding of the original. That too is according to flesh and not to spriit.

Because of that "paradigm" we all lose.

Joel
Hi Joel,

The word "lexicon" is just a fancy word for "dictionary." That's what you are using (in conjunction with online concordances) when you study the Greek text. I asked how you study the Greek Scriptures because you said that you "don't study lexicons." As it turns out, the lexicons (dictionaries) are your primary source of knowledge of Greek and Hebrew.

So ... back to the question that started this little digression - I had written:
It would be good if you would simply state what doctrine you are trying to derive from the differences between these words, and what Scriptures and lexicons you are using for support.
You see, this is the fundamental issue. It seems you are basing your doctrine concerning "tekna" and "huios" on the dictionary definitions of those words, but the dictionaries do not support your assertions. I have presented a lot of evidence that the words "huios" and "teknon" are generally synonymous, and that there is no systematic or consistent difference that would support your doctrine that only a "huios theou" and not a "teknon theou" are "led by the Spirit of God."

That's why I asked if you could state "what Scriptures and lexicons you are using for support" this doctrine.

All the very best,

Richard