Matthew 19:28 and the coming New Age

[The Biblicist]

Mt. 25:31 ¶ When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

In Matthew 19:27 Peter asks the question concerning what they will recieve if in this life they forsake houses, lands and gain for the sake of Christ:

Mt. 19:27 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?

Christ responds by first defining the TIME when they will be rewarded and then the NATURE of their rewards AT THAT TIME:

Mt 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
29 And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.
30 But many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first.

1. The TIME (v. 28) follows their present life as described in verse 29. This did not occur after the Lord ascended into heaven to sit at the "right hand" of the throne of His Father. Their forsaking of houses, brethren, family continued right up to their own death.

2. The TIME requires the judgement day of rewards when many who thought they were "first" shall discover they are "last" - v. 30.

3. The TIME would be when the apostles "sit upon thrones" in the same manner as Christ sits upon "the throne of His glory." Can't spiritualize one and not the other and cannot literalize one without the other as they are both spoken of together. The apostles did not sit upon any literal thrones after the ascension of Christ into heaven.

CONCLUSION: Jesus defines the precise time WHEN he comes to sit upon "the throne of his glory" in Matthew 25:31 at his Second advent. Hence, "the regeneration" has nothing to do with this present time or Christ's rule in heaven but the NEW AGE to come when Christ returns. So it has absolutely NOTHING to do with Titus 3:5 which concerns our present salvation.

 

[David Michael Harris]

And the point and meaning is what of this post?

 

[The Biblicist]

And the point and meaning is what of this post?

SBM in the previous thread on regeneration has defended Titus 3:5 and "regeneration" in that verse along with Matthew 19:28 and the word "regeneration" in that verse to refer to ascension of Christ to heaven and the apostolic RULE over spiritual Israel during the first century.

His interpretation of both texts and his use of "regeneration" is wrong. In this post I am provided the contextual backdrop of Matthw 19:28 and its appropriate time of fulfillment. It is not then or now but "when" He comes from heaven and the "regeneration" refers to the New age to come rather than corporate regeneration of all the elect by Christ from heaven.

 

[David Michael Harris]

Bit beyond me. Titus 3:5 is talking about what happens when we are born again by the Grace of God. Looked at the verses and still do not see anything interesting here, I was on a irc site the other day where people were getting heated on that Michael the angel is actually Jesus, to be honest I keep out of stuff like this.

 

[The Biblicist]

Bit beyond me. Titus 3:5 is talking about what happens when we are born again by the Grace of God. Looked at the verses and still do not see anything interesting here, I was on a irc site the other day where people were getting heated on that Michael the angel is actually Jesus, to be honest I keep out of stuff like this.

SBM was trying to intepret "regeneration" in Titus 3:5 as a corporate act by Christ at his ascension into heaven prior to Pentecost. He denied that Titus 3:5 describes individual personal new birth. He distinguishes between "new birth" and "regeneration." He claims that regeneration is an act of Christ, not the Holy Spirit, in heaven, not on earth, while on the other hand, he believes the new birth is the act of the Holy Spirit on earth within the individual.

In order to support his interpretation of "regeneration" in Titus 3:5 as an act IN HEAVEN by Christ he then quoted Matthew 19:28 and interpreted "regeneration" in this text as occurring at the ascension of Christ in heaven which he interpreted Christ to be seated on His own throne in glory and that the apostles sitting on their thrones reigning over "spiritual" Israel on earth which occurred at Pentecost. This reigning over the twelve tribes of Israel he interprets as "the keys" of the kingdom given to them by Christ.

All of this is complete 100% hogwash and misinterpretation of both of these texts as well as the doctrine of new birth.

 

[David Michael Harris]

What does Paul say on this?

 

[The Biblicist]

What does Paul say on this?

The problem is that the actual term "regeneration" is only found twice in the New Testament (Mt. 19:28; Titus 3:5). In the former it is talking about the Second coming of Christ and descriptive of the NEW age in contrast to the present age or a "regeneration" of the old earth in the age to come, while in the second passage it is used by Paul to describe the NEW birth in contrast to the first birth in regard to our personal salvation here and now.

SBM attempts to confine "regeneration" to a corporate regeneration of all the elect in heaven by Christ while admitting "renewing of the Holy Ghost" has to do with personal new birth because Paul identifies "renewing" by the Holy Spirit as the creative work of God in new birth (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10).

However, "washing of regeneration" is the prerequisite negative side of "renewing of the Holy Ghost. The moral image of man is cleansed from its defilement of sin (washing) and renewed in true holiness and righteousness in this creative (regenerate) work of the Holy Spirit (Eph. 2:20; 4:24; Col. 3:10)

By robbing "washing of regeneration" from Titus 3:10 as the individual and internal removal of the defilement of sin within the spirit of man perverts the two fold work of regeneration/new birth to merely an re-establishment of being renewed in true holiness and righteousness without dealing with the defilement of sin.

 

[David Michael Harris]

Thanks, I need to read up a bit, thanks. SBM you bad dude man

David

 

[billwald]

The "New Age" came about 2000 years ago.

 

[The Biblicist]

The "New Age" came about 2000 years ago.

Bill, why muddy the water? Matthew 25:31 explicilty gives the precise time "WHEN" Christ sits upon "the throne of his glory" and it is at His second coming not at His first coming. Matthew 19:28 uses the exact same language and refers to His second coming not his first coming.

Matthew 12 and the reference to the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit speaks of "this world (Gr. aeon = Age)" and "the world (Gr. aeon = Age) to come when judgement will be administered for even the words of your mouth. The new age, regeneration is always linked with the day of judgment and that did not occur 2000 years ago.

Peter's question (Mt. 19:27) was in regard to forsaking house, lands, and families DURING THEIR PRESENT LIVES in regard to FUTURE REWARDS at judgement day and the response of Jesus was in regard to FUTURE REWARDS at Judgment day (Mt. 19:28-31) which did not occur 2000 years ago.

 

[David Michael Harris]

The "New Age" came about 2000 years ago.

Agreed, it's the New and Living Way.

 

[The Biblicist]

Agreed, it's the New and Living Way.

Not entirely correct! There has only been ONE WAY from Genesis 3:15 to Revelation 14:6 and only ONE GOSPEL. The same way prior to Pentecost (Mt. 7:13-14; Jn. 14:6; Acts 2:43) is the same way after Pentecost (Acts 4:12) as the same gospel was preached unto them as well as unto us (Heb. 4:2).

The New and Living way is a phrase that contrasts the OLD TESTAMENT TYPE as seen in the Tabernacle/Temple with the New Testament antitype - the cross. That is a matter of type fulfilled by antitype. However, that is not descriptive of actual non-figurative salvation of individuals previous to the cross as they were justified by faith in the coming Christ (Acts 10:43; Rom. 3:24-26; 4:1-11; 4:22-25).
.
They looked forward by faith to the cross while we look back by faith to the SAME WAY, SAME GOSPEL, for the SAME PROBLEM.

Their gospel first given in Genesis 3:15 was progressively revealed until full revelation in the gospels while we look back to a fulfilled gospel, but the same gospel, same way, same Savior, same salvation that the Old Covenant displayed in a "SHADOW" (Heb. 10:1; Col. 2:15) to what is fulfilled in the cross and thus a "new and better way" than provided in anticipatory symbolisms which could never take away sin (Heb. 10:4) and were never designed to literally remove sin. Sin was removed by faith in Christ to come fulfill the types or justification by faith (Gal. 3:6-8; Rom. 3:25).

The words "new and living way" have direct reference to the contrast between the old covenant TYPE and fulfillment of that type but never a contrast between actual personal salvation prior to the cross to after the cross.

 

[The Biblicist]

Not entirely correct! There has only been ONE WAY from Genesis 3:15 to Revelation 14:6 and only ONE GOSPEL. The same way prior to Pentecost (Mt. 7:13-14; Jn. 14:6; Acts 2:43) is the same way after Pentecost (Acts 4:12) as the same gospel was preached unto them as well as unto us (Heb. 4:2).

The New and Living way is a phrase that contrasts the OLD TESTAMENT TYPE as seen in the Tabernacle/Temple with the New Testament antitype - the cross. That is a matter of type fulfilled by antitype. However, that is not descriptive of actual non-figurative salvation of individuals previous to the cross as they were justified by faith in the coming Christ (Acts 10:43; Rom. 3:24-26; 4:1-11; 4:22-25).
.
They looked forward by faith to the cross while we look back by faith to the SAME WAY, SAME GOSPEL, for the SAME PROBLEM.

Their gospel first given in Genesis 3:15 was progressively revealed until full revelation in the gospels while we look back to a fulfilled gospel, but the same gospel, same way, same Savior, same salvation that the Old Covenant displayed in a "SHADOW" (Heb. 10:1; Col. 2:15) to what is fulfilled in the cross and thus a "new and better way" than provided in anticipatory symbolisms which could never take away sin (Heb. 10:4) and were never designed to literally remove sin. Sin was removed by faith in Christ to come fulfill the types or justification by faith (Gal. 3:6-8; Rom. 3:25).

The words "new and living way" have direct reference to the contrast between the old covenant TYPE and fulfillment of that type but never a contrast between actual personal salvation prior to the cross to after the cross.

19 ¶ Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;
21 And having an high priest over the house of God;
22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.
23 Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised
24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

Paul is writing to Jewish believers who were contemplating on returning to Judaism and the Old system of PUBLIC worship.

The old system of PUBLIC worship denied the ordinary participation of the believer further the brazen altar. He could not enter into the holy place or the holiest of holies where God's manifest presence existed in THE TEMPLE worship.

However, in regard to the new system of PUBLIC worship - the church (Heb. 10:21-25) of which they were exhorted not to forsake such PUBLIC assemblying all believers joined together in PUBLIC worship on EQUAL grounds before God as the assembly of believers was the "temple of God" (1 Cor. 3:16; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Cor. 12:27).

The cross did away with the whole PUBLIC system of worship and replaced it by a "new and better" SYSTEM OF PUBLIC WORSHIP. The difference is between the Old Covenant PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORSHIP and the NEW COVENANT PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION FOR PUBLIC WORSHIP established by Christ.

 

[The Biblicist]

19 ¶ Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,
20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;
21 And having an high priest over the house of God;
22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.
23 Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised
24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

Paul is writing to Jewish believers who were contemplating on returning to Judaism and the Old system of PUBLIC worship.

The old system of PUBLIC worship denied the ordinary participation of the believer further the brazen altar. He could not enter into the holy place or the holiest of holies where God's manifest presence existed in THE TEMPLE worship.

However, in regard to the new system of PUBLIC worship - the church (Heb. 10:21-25) of which they were exhorted not to forsake such PUBLIC assemblying all believers joined together in PUBLIC worship on EQUAL grounds before God as the assembly of believers was the "temple of God" (1 Cor. 3:16; 1 Tim. 3:15; 1 Cor. 12:27).

The cross did away with the whole PUBLIC system of worship and replaced it by a "new and better" SYSTEM OF PUBLIC WORSHIP. The difference is between the Old Covenant PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC WORSHIP and the NEW COVENANT PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION FOR PUBLIC WORSHIP established by Christ.

Heb. 9:1 ¶ Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.

The contrast is between the New Covenant Public Administration for Public worship and its ordinances as contrasted with the OLD COVENANT public administration for public worship and its ordinances.

The New Covenant Public Administration was establised by Christ whereby the "keys" of the kingdom were taken from Israel and given to His church (Mt. 16:18-19; 18:17-18).

The "new covenant" is the "everlasting covenant" (Heb. 13:20) but only "new" in the sense of its PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION established by Christ in His personal ministry (Mt. 1618-19; 18:17-18; 28:19-20) but in regard to its gospel administration by God from heaven it has been administered from Genesis 3:15 "by faith" in God's promise of the cross (Rom. 3:35).

 

[billwald]

>Paul is writing to Jewish believers who were contemplating on returning to Judaism and the Old system of PUBLIC worship.

Probably correct. Jesus and HIS followers expected Christians to reform rabbinical Judaism from the inside. After 70AD Paul's gentile church took control because the Jerusalem Church was destroyed by the war. It was Paul's gentile religion which edited the NT, not the Jewish Christians.

 

[Yeshua1]

>Paul is writing to Jewish believers who were contemplating on returning to Judaism and the Old system of PUBLIC worship.

Probably correct. Jesus and HIS followers expected Christians to reform rabbinical Judaism from the inside. After 70AD Paul's gentile church took control because the Jerusalem Church was destroyed by the war. It was Paul's gentile religion which edited the NT, not the Jewish Christians.

jesus knew that he was establishing a NEW "religion", as His death ushered in a new era of God dealing with man!

Jesus gave Paul and ALL other Apsotles their revelations, and the Spirit made sure EXACTLY what God wanted to get recorded was written!

paul did NOT invent Christianity, as SAME Jesus of peter was the one of paul!

 

[The Biblicist]

>Paul is writing to Jewish believers who were contemplating on returning to Judaism and the Old system of PUBLIC worship.

Probably correct. Jesus and HIS followers expected Christians to reform rabbinical Judaism from the inside.

No he did not! The disciples of John believed that they were to reform Judaism from the inside but Jesus rebuked that idea as an attempt to put new wine in old bottles or a new cloth on old materials:

Mark 2:21 No man also seweth a piece of new cloth on an old garment: else the new piece that filled it up taketh away from the old, and the rent is made worse. 22 And no man putteth new wine into old bottles: else the new wine doth burst the bottles, and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be marred: but new wine must be put into new bottles.

Jesus built a NEW HOUSE of God called the "church" and claimed that God would remove Himself from the "YOUR house" (Mt. 23:39). He established NEW ordinances and gave a NEW commission (Mt. 28:19-20).

Indeed, the whole thesis of the book of Hebrews is that they must LEAVE and FORSAKE the Old Covenant administration and ordinances for the NEW which is BETTER.

AD 70 was God's complete removal of the OLD system so that it was not possible for Jewish beleivers to return to the OLD.

 

[savedbymercy]

Mt. 25:31 ¶ When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

He is in His Glory Now, and sits now upon His Throne of Glory, it is not yet manifested, but its true nevertheless !

It was written that He should die and after that enter into His Glory Lk 24:46

Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?

 

[The Biblicist]

He is in His Glory Now, and sits now upon His Throne of Glory, it is not yet manifested, but its true nevertheless !

It was written that He should die and after that enter into His Glory Lk 24:46

Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?

Nowhere in scripture does it say that he now sits upon "the throne of his glory" - NOWHERE! Of course reentered the "glory" he left to become man but he sits NOT ON HIS THRONE but at THE RIGHT HAND of the Father Who sits upon that throne.

Matthew 25:31 explicitly says "WHEN" he will sit upon "

Mt. 25:31 ¶ When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, THEN shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

Moreover, Matthew 19:28 is referring to his office as the Christ and in that office he left glory to become a man in order to restore what Adam lost. Adam did no loose the throne in glory but the throne on earth or the rule over all the earth. As the Christ, it is the THRONE ON EARTH that is the throne of "his glory" and the fulfillment of his work as Christ - the Second Adam.

 

[savedbymercy]

the bib

Nowhere in scripture does it say that he now sits upon "the throne of his glory

Nowhere in scripture does it say he does not now sit upon His Throne of Glory.

But scripture does say this Zech 6:13

13 Even he shall build the temple of the Lord; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.


The Temple of the Lord being built here is this One Eph 2:21

In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: