I never used to think about inheriting anything.

And I’m sure that’s because I never had to want for the necessities of life growing up. But even as a young adult, the hope of inheriting a vast fortune never really crossed my mind. I suppose that was a good thing, because it never happened.

As a result, I spent the better part of my life pursuing wealth from the variety of methods at my disposal, resolving to make the most from what I could accumulate while it lasted.

So it’s no wonder any references to “inheriting” or “becoming an heir” recorded in the Bible went right over my head. Besides that, my attitude about somebody inheriting something was often built around negative character roles depicted by news media and movie productions. An heir was usually portrayed as an undeserving parasite, often a prisoner to his circumstances.

This false understanding likely prevented me from correctly understanding the significance of what it meant to be an heir in the minds of the Biblical authors. Oddly enough though, they never attempted to define exactly what inheritance was. Their focus was always about who was destined to eventually receive it.

So what’s the Biblical understanding of being an heir?

It happens that the words often translated as “inherit” in the Hebrew manuscripts are יָרַשׁ [yarash] or יָרֵשׁ [yaresh], meaning to take possession of, inherit, dispossess, and נָחַל [nachal], meaning to get or take as a possession. The word translated as “inherit” in the Greek manuscripts is κληρονομέω [klā-rôn-ô-mêō], meaning to receive, gain possession of, share in, or be given something. These all agree somewhat with the current day meaning listed in the Merriam Webster Dictionary:

INHERIT: to get [a personal quality, interest, etc.] because of the influence or example of your parents or other relatives [emphasis mine]

Historically, the criteria for determining who was to be the heir of an estate was vested in blood lines or as an act of generosity in behalf of a benefactor. Furthermore, any prerogative for the benefactor to nullify the arrangement was both legitimate and binding.

Continued lineage and prosperity are intrinsic ambitions of the human male. The Lord first promised these to the man Abraham because of the belief he demonstrated to Him through obedience. So, it’s no coincidence that God also inspired the authors of the Bible to portray sharing in promised wealth as a paradigm for the deserving children in His “family.”

And most cultures today have adopted a similar standard for the sensible and equitable transfer of assets from one generation to the next. But the real value of being an heir is not realized simply by its designation, but through its eventual materialization. And whether or not a man acquires the title of heir by natural birth through the efforts of his Earthly father, or through the miracle of his Heavenly Father [that is, through redemption], the anticipated outcome of the one making the investiture is identical.

[What does “redemption” mean? see: Different fruit, same good news.]

Either is confident that his [or His] influence will be a determining factor toward the goal of his [or His] beneficence. However, both history and the Biblical record are replete with examples of an heir actually having to forfeit what has been bequeathed to him as a result of disregarding the influence of his father [or Father].

Nevertheless, many of God’s people today are convinced that merely being His heir somehow guarantees the realization of their inheritance.

But the Bible says no such thing.

The conditions for actually acquiring and experiencing God’s inheritance are neither vague nor disputable concepts. The apostle Paul’s letter to the saints who [were] at Ephesus and who [were] faithful in Christ Jesus confirmed that the hope of inheriting what was promised to their ancestor, Abraham, was still a reality:

“(I pray that) the eyes of your heart(s) have been enlightened, so that you know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance among the saints, and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who are believing.” (Eph. 1:18-19) [my emphasis]

This passage clearly defines the goal of a saint’s [or faithful disciple of Christ] redemption by God. Paul obviously recognized their need for being brought up to speed [or enlightened] concerning the blessings of their newfound birthright.

[What was the promise given to Abraham? see: It’s All About Also.]

Paul’s letter to the called saints in Rome helps bring clarity to the meaning of inheritance —and, specifically, co-inheritance with Christ. He also confirms the significance of what was a familiar Palestinian understanding of sonship, a term which signified the primary legitimate heir to a father’s wealth:

“So then, brethren, we are under obligation, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh— for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you shall live. For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these…they are sons of God.” (Rom. 8:12-14) (my emphasis]

His choice of the Greek word υἱός [(whee-ôs) son, descendant, offspring, heir] used with the Genitive Case in this sentence suggests a category of people who share a special relationship with or a likeness to someone or something, as in a disciple or follower.

At this point, Paul seems to be leading into a point he makes later in the same chapter. The faithful heirs of God shall inherit together with the Firstborn of many brothers [Rom. 8:29]:

“The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and If children, also heirs, heirs indeed of God, and co-heirs with Christ, if it is true that we do suffer with Him in order that we might also be exalted together.” (Rom. 8:16-17) [my emphasis]

The word translated as “exalted together,” συνδοξάζω [(soon-dox-sáws-oh) to be glorified with, share glory with] is recorded in the Greek Subjunctive Mood in this sentence, suggesting the potential for actualization rather than the certainty of it.

So if there were ever a concept for the Lord’s people to get their heads around, this is the one.

Understanding what inheritance is isn’t rocket science. The faithful bond-servant of Jesus Christ inherently knows that the very best God has to offer him demands the very best he himself can give.

He doesn’t want to lose it.

It’s not enough for me just to acknowledge that evil exists in the world.

Because I’ve learned that ignorance is often what breeds reprehensible conduct. As a result, many arguments in support of allowing unborn children to be killed is very likely rooted in a flawed understanding of exactly what a living, breathing human being consists of.

In spite of the warped logic insisting that a woman has the right to destroy life being developed in her womb, perhaps the most tolerant argument in defense of this behavior is the belief that a human fetus is nothing more than a hunk of flesh, devoid of intellect, emotion or comprehension.

Of course, if the fetus is indeed lacking these critical capabilities, the logic would follow that no semblance of human worth could exist in it either. It wouldn’t even have a “soul” at this point. So, if this “soul” had not yet been given to it by its Creator, it couldn’t qualify as human life, and no offense could be imputed to the sustainer [mother] of its development.

Hence, this clump of fetal tissue could be discarded like an unwanted malignancy.  No worries.

Interestingly enough though, the issue of ensoulment is nothing new. The matter of exactly when a human fetus becomes a living person [or somehow “receives its soul”] was the subject of passionate debate among many early congregational leaders. However, it seems there was no lasting consensus.

But how could there have been?

To say that a “soul” actually is some distinct immaterial part of the human makeup would only complicate matters for anyone attempting to document exactly when it comes into existence. More importantly, what mortal wisdom or cutting edge technology can redefine what has already been clarified in the Scriptures?

“Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and [the] man became a living being.” [Gen.2:7] [my emphasis] [נֶפֶשׁ nephesh: a soul, living being, life, self, person]

[Do I have a“soul?” see: Everybody’s got one?]

A common argument is that a human fetus doesn’t possess the ability to breath on its own and, as such, cannot really be considered to be alive. In other words, there’s no evidence of the “breath of life” having been given by God as it was to the first man, Adam. But the breath of life is indeed present in the human fetus. Its ability to sustain life through its heart and lungs is generated and maintained through the mother’s blood supply—who already is a living, breathing “soul.”

I’m saddened to suggest that ignorance about what makes up a created human being is just one of many accelerants fueling the wholesale tolerance of killing unborn babies.

But Biblical literacy is the tool of effective resistance to evil.

And we would do well to remember that our voices resonate much louder in defense of innocent life than they do over petty squabbles about verb forms, semantics or doctrinal differences.

The men of Jesus Christ’s congregations are called to lead and protect, yet helpless, unborn voices continue to cry out from the womb.

Are any of them listening?

A man satisfies an inherent need to fix something by tearing it apart.

Even replacing a spark plug on a lawnmower or changing a drive belt just feels good. But experience has taught me that the root of mechanical failure is often the result of dirt buildup, sawdust or residue—usually a filter or something that keeps dust and dirt from causing a problem.

And that’s boring. It’s also embarrassing.

It reminds me that I haven’t been a good steward of my equipment. So, it’s no wonder I used to have a similar perspective of my obligation to Jesus Christ who sacrificed everything in order that I might be kept clean in His sight. I considered myself to remain clean forever because He had saved me.

[What does it mean to be “saved?” see: Different fruit, same good news.]

In my mind, Christianity was a maintenance-free phenomenon—a gift of the Lord’s free will, granted with nothing expected in return. For that reason, the idea of becoming His committed disciple also made no sense to me in light of the diminished obligation.

As a result, my relationship with Christ was casual, at best.

But, I’m not any different than my lawnmower in some respects. I have to be kept clean to function the way God needs for me to. Yet, I’m also the one responsible for maintaining my own dependability and faithfulness.  So, I’m the only one who can set myself apart from sin.

On the other hand, there’s only One who can truly clean:

“Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful… ” [Heb. 10:19-23] [my emphasis]

The hope of the apostolic authors of the New Testament was grounded in a promise. The realization of that promise was contingent upon a steadfast belief—that is, demonstrating obedience to the only One who was able to purge the wicked heart.

[Promise? What promise? see: It’s All About Also, Common Threads are Common]

If I hope to inherit and reign with Christ in God’s Kingdom of the coming age, I need to be aware of the filth and slime attempting to build up in my life, [see: Eph. 5:5]

But then I have to act upon that understanding.

By confessing my sins to my High Priest, Jesus Christ, daily—even hourly, if necessary, I can be kept clean. Because just like my lawnmower, nothing’s gonna work like it’s supposed to until all the dirt is removed.

“Therefore, do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward. For you have need of endurance, so that when you have done the will of God, you may receive what was promised.”  [Heb. 10:35-36]

I’ve certainly been skeptical about a lot of things, but I’ve never doubted what the word “if” meant.

In other words, I’ve learned that, if I didn’t meet the conditions required to either correct or achieve the desired result of any stipulation, then it wasn’t gonna’ happen.

But when I used to read the Bible, seeing this word in the text never raised any flags for me. And I’d never heard anybody suggest that “if” had any significance to the things Jesus Christ or His apostles taught. However, after learning to study the Scriptures inductively, I developed a skill for extracting its meaning based completely on the text rather than on any particular doctrine.

And if I can learn to do that, anybody can.

The Greek Particle “εἰ” [meaning “if,”or sometimes “since”] forms the basis for First Class Conditional sentences in the Greek New Testament. Of the over 500 occurrences of “εἰ,” approximately 300 function as the protasis of those conditional sentences. The protasis is the “if” in a conditional sentence that reads, “If…then…” “Then” is called the apodosis in the conditional sentence, and is commonly implied rather than actually used.

In his letter to all who [were] beloved of God in Rome, called as saints, the apostle Paul’s use of the word “if” was fundamental to establishing the significance of the concept of “Christ being in you” for the reader:

“However, you are not [then] in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells In you. But if anyone does not possess the spirit of Christ, [then] he does not belong to Him. If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, [then] the Spirit [is] alive because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, [then] He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead shall also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.” [Rom. 8:9-11] [brackets mine] [my emphasis]

[Is being “in” Christ that important? see: [Getting the Most Out of In]

He then reminded them that they were not in debt to their flesh—that their actions must bear witness to their ownership in the Lord:

“So then, brethren, we are under obligation, not to the flesh, [that is], to live according to the flesh. For if you are living according to the flesh, [then] you are destined to die. But if, by the Spirit, you are putting to death the deeds of the body, [then] you shall live. For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.” [Rom. 8:12-14] [brackets mine] [my emphasis]

So why is it important to be able to recognize conditional sentences in the Bible?

Because conditional expectations aren’t exclusive to this life only. Note the conditions that Paul places upon the brothers in Rome for “belonging” to Christ, or the penalty awaiting them if they continued to live “according to the flesh.”

And remember that his letter was written to the saints. They were already “saved.”

[ἅγιος: (hâ’-gee-âs) a saint; someone set apart to or by God; consecrated; holy; morally pure; upright]

“If” is a little word with big consequences.

The preposition “in” is a term we don’t often give much thought.

And the semantic range of the Greek word ἐν [meaning in, on or among] was extensive in the minds of the apostolic authors of the First Century. But most uses weren’t critical to understanding Jesus Christ’s good news about God’s kingdom.

However, when it was recorded to describe a position of close affiliation and structured grammatically as a conditional sentence, the implications were crucial for the Biblical reader to grasp.

For example, what does it actually mean to be “in Christ?”

In the seventh chapter of the apostle Paul’s letter to all who [were] beloved of God in Rome, called as saints, he illustrated the complex nature of the struggle between the flesh and the spiritual Law embedded in every man or woman called to obedience in the Lord Jesus Christ:

“For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I am of flesh, having been sold into bondage to sin.” [Rom. 7; 14]

And in Paul’s mind, this conflict between the will of the flesh and a man’s desire to live righteously had only one solution:

“Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin. Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” [Rom. 7:24-8:1] [my emphasis]

This is an interesting statement.

Because ἐν was always expressed in the Dative case, typically suggesting proximity, both spatially as well as in the context of association. And it seems highly unlikely that I could realistically reflect the character of anybody I wasn’t actually close to.

So, is being “in Christ” just an issue of semantics?

You bet it is. Any serious relationship requires a lot of hard work. It takes a commitment of time and effort to get to know someone well—even Jesus. His death unshackled me from the bondage of my sin, but my resulting relationship with Him won’t mean much if it’s only sought as an occasional necessity.

To be “in Christ” demands a healthy extent of personal, determined involvement in what the text of the Scriptures confirms were His priorities.

In order to do that, I’ve gotta be all in.

“…but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him.” [1Jn. 2:5]

.