[drstevej]

***I commended Drstevej's honesty when he changed his position on a Hosea interpretation. ***

Actually, I changed my view that Israel is better called a child through adoption and the Church called a child through birth and not the reverse.

My family illustration likened by adopted son to the Church and my natural born daughter to Israel in one family. My admission was that it would be better to see my son representing Israel and daughter the Church.

My interpretation of Hosea remains the same. Israel is a unfaithful wife awaiting future reconcilliation. The Church is a expectant Bride seeking to be spotless for her Groom.

[xzins]

Exactly....I was going by memory. I was impressed that you had no qualms with going back and saying, "Yep. On reflection, I want to change this."

I don't want this to become a DrJ Admiration Society....but you done good. Thanks.

[RnMomof7]

My interpretation of Hosea remains the same. Israel is a unfaithful wife awaiting future reconcilliation. The Church is a expectant Bride seeking to be spotless for her Groom. Jospeh Smith agrees

[Seven_0]

"Actually, I changed my view that Israel is better called a child through adoption and the Church called a child through birth and not the reverse.
My family illustration likened by adopted son to the Church and my natural born daughter to Israel in one family. My admission was that it would be better to see my son representing Israel and daughter the Church"

Good illustration, we see the benefits to the children being the same, but if we change the players we may see differences. Chirst was born of Mary, adopted by Joseph. I think that there are a few things that he did not inherit in from Joseph because he was not related to Joseph by blood.