The rising popularity of reformed theology at the present makes the topic of regeneration a timely one. For those unfamiliar with the teaching of Calvin and others, let me briefly explain how reformed Christians typically use the word.

They define regeneration as the act of God which makes a person spiritually alive prior to faith. It allows the individual to "see" and respond to God’s grace in Jesus Christ. Those who are not regenerate can never have faith and be saved.

I don’t want to get derailed here so let me just say that God obviously makes the first steps of our salvation possible. We are totally helpless. Indeed we are dead and unable to act on our own behalf. The issue at hand is, however, "Is that action of God biblical regeneration" or is the word being misapplied?

The verse above is one of only two places in the NT that uses palingenesia - regeneration. Literally, we might understand the word to mean "repeat of genesis" or "genesis again."

We should note the punctuation in the text is not contained in the original. The placement of the commas is the interpreter’s attempt to help the reader understand which words belong in each phrase. Not being proficient in such things, I rely on the accuracy of the interpreter. Nevertheless, it is obvious that significantly different meanings could result if the commas were placed differently. That aside ...

In the text, we get the idea that regeneration is an event or specific period of time rather than a personal experience. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (ISBE) makes a distinction between this passage and the only other place the word is used in scripture, Titus 3:3-7:

"But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life." (NKJV)

At this point we need to chase a rabbit very briefly. Some see Paul as saying that "the washing of regeneration" and "renewing of the Holy Spirit" are the same thing. This suggests that regeneration occurred at Pentecost. That is something of a problem but there may be some truth contained in the idea.

We know from scripture that the Holy Spirit was given as an earnest of the regeneration promised. He was the seal which marked people of faith and assured them they would be beneficiaries of all the fullness that was yet to come. Though the promise was guaranteed at Pentecost it was not fulfilled at that time. Here is the core of the "already but not yet" sense of fulfillment that runs throughout the New Testament. We are reminded again that just because events were future to the original audience does not mean they are future to us.

The ISBE article attempts to deal with the problem by understanding the Matthew usage as referring to the restoration of all things at the end of the age, and the Titus passage as referring to the experience of the individual. Once again we see the importance of getting a handle on eschatology.

If the Parousia of Christ is yet future, such a distinction might be possible. On the other hand, if the consummation of the ages is a reality, that interpretation leaves considerable room for discussion. Contrary to the conventional wisdom of most Christians, it does matter what eschatological view you hold.

Let’s remember that in Matthew Jesus is speaking to His disciples, not us. He is very specific in saying "you who have followed me" not "all those who follow me" will rule over the tribes of Israel. When? In the regeneration. When was that? When Jesus took His seat on His glorious throne. When was that? "But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified." (John 7:39 NASB)  It had to be after the ascension and after Pentecost.

We’ve ripped this passage from its context but that doesn’t impact the point being made. The giving of the Holy Spirit signified that Christ had been glorified. The stage was set for the regeneration.

The question remains then, when did it occur (or, for the futurist, when will it)? Those holding a future view of eschatology necessarily hold that regeneration is future because they understand its fruition is inseparable from the Parousia.

Where does that leave us? As we’ve discussed previously, those given faith in Christ certainly become new creatures, but is it proper to refer to that embryonic state as regeneration? Only in the most limited sense possible. Those living prior to the consummation of all things in Christ eagerly anticipated the completion of that transformation at the end of the age.

They were repeatedly encouraged to remain faithful because it would only be a very short while until that which they longed for would appear. Their vindication came in AD 70 when Christ put down His enemies, obliterated the old world and ushered in the kingdom. It was indeed a palingenesia!

What about those of us living post AD 70? We are not waiting for regeneration as those in "that generation" were. Our faith in Christ immediately identifies us with the ongoing new creation. Though we continue in the flesh and wrestle with all the practical implications of doing so, we are eternally alive and dwell spiritually in the presence of the Father in Christ.

At death, we exchange this fleshly body and are given a spiritual one suitable for that realm: a regenerated body for a regenerated creation.

Much more could be said, but this broader perspective of regeneration seems to me to conform to the biblical text best.

© Copyright 2003 - Jim Wade

Updated 07/07/03