Few Greek words in the New Testament have given translation teams as many fits as the one used by the Lord Jesus in Matthew 19 to describe our world’s future:
“Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, I say to you, in the new world, when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.’ ”
That’s the ESV. The NIV calls it “the renewal of all things”. The New Living translators went with “when the world is made new”. The KJV, among numerous others, calls it “the regeneration”. Holman goes with “the Messianic Age”, which is interpretation, not translation (though I think he is correct). The CEV says, “in the future world”. The Good News Translation calls it the “new age”, and GOD’S WORD® (how did they ever get that trademark registered?) calls it “the world to come”. The ISV calls it “the renewed creation” and Weymouth goes with “New Creation”.
Talk about variety! But you get the idea, I’m sure.
Restored to a Pristine State
The Greek word all these English translators are struggling with is palingenesia, a compound created by combining palin, which means “again”, with genesis, meaning “source” or “origin”. It’s only used twice in the New Testament, once by Jesus in Matthew and once by Paul, but it was probably coined by Homer as early as 800 BC in The Iliad. Strong’s says in common usage it refers to “the restoration of a thing to its pristine state”.
Paul used the word in Titus to describe the salvation of individuals: Christ has returned us to the state in which we should always have been, making us alive through his Spirit, regenerating us. But Titus is one of the later books of the NT, which means Matthew actually used the expression first, and he also used it to describe something much bigger and more momentous for our planet than the salvation of a comparatively small subset of its population. In Matthew, the Lord Jesus was talking about the regeneration of everything, returning the natural world, human culture and governance to the state God always intended.
In Matthew, the Lord locates the time when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne with this single word, palingenesia. “When we go back to conditions like those at the beginning,” he says, “I [he uses the third person, but that’s the force of it] will sit on my throne and you [his disciples] will sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” There are a limited number of thrones available, so I take it the promise of judging the tribes of Israel is for the original twelve disciples and Judas’s replacement, not for all the Lord’s followers down through history. Frankly, I don’t mind. I’m not sure I’d be qualified to judge Jews anyway.
Interpretation Clash
Premillennial dispensationalists have no difficulty with taking the picture the Lord describes here quite literally. We anticipate a future thousand-year reign of Christ on earth in which conditions will be remarkably like those prior to the fall of mankind, a literal “regeneration”. Satan will be bound for the entire period. In that respect at least, things will be better than in the Garden of Eden: no supernatural sources of temptation. Sin and temptation will still exist, of course, but nobody will be able to say, “The devil made me do it.” The Old Testament prophets tell us that in this period nature will return to its original idyllic state; the wolf will dwell with the lamb and calves and bear cubs will curl up together at bedtime. The Jews will have come to repentance, recognized their Messiah, and been fully restored to the place of world prominence and blessing that God always intended for them. The nations of the earth, having been judged for their rebellion in the great tribulation, will worship at Jerusalem along with Israel. In such a context, to have the original disciples acting as judges of the twelve tribes of a revived Israel seems entirely appropriate.
That said, I’d love to know what amillennialists do with the concept of a “regeneration” as the Lord describes it here. For that, we must turn to the writings of Kim Riddlebarger. 2013’s A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times introduced readers to the “two-age model” as an “interpretive grid” for prophetic study, and has since become, in the words of Matt Weymeyer, “the primary argument for the amillennial view”. Let’s just see how Riddlebarger’s two-age model squares up with the text.
The Two-Age Model Explained
A few quotes from the book to set out the characteristics of the two-age model:
“Much of the structure of New Testament eschatology is to be understood in terms of the contrast between ‘this age,’ ushered in by Christ and marked by the redemptive fullness of the Holy Spirit, and ‘the age to come’ after the eschatos or ‘the end,’ which will bring an end to the course of history as God finally destroys the presence of sin in the universe.”
“The so-called millennium is a present reality and not a future hope. The events depicted in Revelation 20 refer not to the future but to the present.”
“In marked contrast to this age, the qualities assigned to the age to come are all eternal (or nontemporal) in nature. These references clearly describe the future eschatological state of believers (and nonbelievers if you factor in the references to judgment). The contrast between the two ages could not be greater.”
“The return of Christ in his second advent is the event that marks the end of this age as we know it (with all of its temporal qualities) and commences the age to come (with its eternal qualities).”
“The age to come is the glorious age of consummation and can have no evil in it.”
That should suffice for our purposes.
The Virtue of Simplicity
Riddlebarger’s interpretive grid has the virtue of simplicity. From his perspective, everything we read about in the New Testament fits into one of two eras: “this age” or “the age to come”:
- This age, currently in progress, is the millennial reign of Christ on earth, and the dead in Christ are currently reigning with him, as Riddlebarger says explicitly in his introduction. This age is temporal and characterized by the presence of sin.
- The age to come takes place after this world’s history has concluded. Sin is forever banished. It is non-temporal, or eternal.
The dividing line between the two ages is the return of Christ and the judgment of believers and unbelievers.
A Simple Question
So then, how does such a streamlined eschatological system handle the concept of the regeneration and the role of the Twelve in it? A simple question should do it: In Matthew 19, is the Lord talking about this age or the age to come? After all, in the two-age model, there are no other options available.
Here’s the quote again:
“Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, I say to you, in the new world, when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.’ ”
Surely this “new world” is Riddlebarger’s “age to come”, no? The Son of Man is sitting on his glorious throne. The world is new. The whole concept of regeneration strongly suggests a huge difference from the present state of affairs, and in Riddlebarger’s “age to come”, that is definitely the case. Sin is banished forever, and we are basically into the eternal state. But if that is the case, why does Israel need judges? For that matter, why is there a national “Israel” at all? Isn’t Israel the Church? Doesn’t the age to come do away with nations forever?
Anyway, whoever these mysterious subjects of the kingdom may be, we have a bigger problem. The Lord doesn’t say his disciples will “judge” Israel, as in a one-time action at the dividing line between this age and the age to come. Rather, he says his disciples will “sit judging”. This is an ongoing responsibility, almost as if the people of God (whoever they may be) will still have disputes that need to be addressed. That can’t be Riddlebarger’s “age to come” surely!
Which Age?
Well, if it’s not “the age to come”, then the disciples, like Kim Riddlebarger’s generations of godly dead relatives, are reigning with Christ for 1,000 years right now. But that means the new world is presently underway. The regeneration to which the Lord looked forward must be the same regeneration described by Paul, and therefore the disciples are currently judging the twelve tribes of Israel from their thrones in heaven. Really? How exactly might that work? What kind of judge doesn’t get to make any actual judgments? Perhaps someone could please tell Mr. Netanyahu that Peter would like a word with him. Or perhaps in Mr. Riddlebarger’s view, this role of “spiritual” judge is something no more authoritative than a heavenly color commentator?
The premillennial dispensationalist has no problem locating the regeneration. He simply says, “Oh, that’s the future thousand year reign of Christ on earth he’s talking about.” Done and dusted. But you can see the problem for the amillennial two-age model. No matter whether you place these verses in “this age” or “the age to come”, they just don’t fit. Not coherently, at least.
The Riddlebarger Response
To be fair, we should let Mr. Riddlebarger speak to the matter himself. The book has a Scripture Index to every passage in the Bible quoted in his 300-page definitive defense of the amillennial position, so I should be able to turn to it and find exactly what I’m looking for. Ah, here’s the section for Matthew now. Let’s see … chapter 19, verses 28 and 29 …
Oh well, looks like the definitive defense of amillennialism doesn’t cover anything the Lord Jesus said about the future between Matthew 16 and 21. A search of the e-book for “Matt. 19” is equally unhelpful. I’m profoundly curious as to whether Riddlebarger or any other amillennial expositor has ever set forth his understanding of this passage. It seems highly relevant to defending the two-age model.
If anybody knows, the comments, as always, are open.
No comments :
Post a Comment