How much more when the first born turns from the plough to Christ?

One of the passages that has always touched me deeply is that of Luke 9:62 (And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.)
On the surface, as I used to read it, it was always simple enough: Jesus wants servants who are not like Lot's wife, who will be steadfast and follow through. And that interpretation, I believe, is not invalid or void.
But I think there is another, deeper message. And I have heard hints of it throughout the Bible, the suggestion that only an elect few were chosen, and we see evidence of who those chosen are not by followers who will go back and put their hand to the plough. Obvious resolution to this is the fact that many change in worship and service to Jesus, who can and often does change the heart of those His followers, as well as the hearts of others, through the an assumed "yet" before the fit. In application, this would look like " ... having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is YET fit for the kingdom of God". But this, as so many other things, takes prayer to truly apply, for it might be an unintentional altering of God's will, something I would be fain to do.

Something else is that of the nature of the first born.
Who is the first born? Is it only ever the first-born male? What of those families that only bare women?
What of families who have half-adoptions or full adoptions? Clearly the genealogical first-born of note would be the easiest standard election, but what of families who believe they should adopt for their first five years of marriage, and the year following their adoption, they conceive - which is the first born, if both the adopted child, and the child by birth, are male? Or if the position is that only that child BORN into a family can be a first-BORN ... then what of families who take new-born children off young mothers who cannot support a family?

I cannot even begin to suggest I have wisdom enough to interpret this passage. But as a half-adopted child, I have to wonder if I am the first-born, and if the rules of the first-born having spiritual responsibilities and claim to that which is the first-born's right even APPLY to this day and age. Regardless, it IS something to think about - for every promise that God has shared in His word, a great number of them (if not ALL of them) are still true for followers of Christ, and so there is a spiritual resonance to them.

So today's call to action:
Discover what role do you have to play with respect to your family's first born!
If you're the first born
What are your responsibilities and privileges? (aka Have you ever considered what your birth-obligation and birth-rights were?)
Have you ever delved into what God intended as your birthright?
Do you feel that you have any kind of special anointing to be of particular service?
Are you led to lead others in some particular way?

If you're NOT the first born
What are YOUR responsibilities and privileges?
Have you ever delved into what God intended for you?
Do you feel that you are supposed to be particularly supportive of the first born in your family?
Are you led to follow in a way for which you are uniquely designed?

Regardless, I challenge you to discover your particular role in your own birth-family, as well as your spiritual family. Just being aware of your role can often enlighten you as to the what and why of the experiences you have had and are having.