1. Regeneration

• "I create New Heavens and a New Earth." Isa 65:18.
• "Behold, I make all things new." Rev. 21:5.

We intend an essay on "the seeds of things." The topic is a common one, a familiar one, and yet an interesting one. Much has been said, much has been written about it; and yet it is no better understood than it should be. Few take the trouble to think deeply about the things they believe they understand; and many would rather follow the thoughts of others than think for themselves. Uncertainty is painful, much study is a weariness of the flesh; and, therefore, the majority are content with the views and opinions passed down from those who have gone before.

We wish to treat this subject as if it were new; and to examine it now, as if we had never examined it before. It deserves that. Generation is full of wonders, for it is full of God's physical grandeur; yet regeneration is even more admirable, for in it the moral attributes of Jehovah are displayed. But we do not aim to develop its wonders, but to provide a plain, common-sense scriptural explanation of its meaning.

We have not learned our theology from Athanasius, nor our morality from Seneca; and, therefore, we will not call upon them for illustration, argument, or proof. To the Sacred Scriptures, in which alone Christianity still remains in all its freshness, we look for light; and there we would direct the eyes of the readers. It is not the regeneration of the schools where Christianity has been lowered, misunderstood, obscured, and adulterated, of which we are to write; but that regeneration of which Jesus spoke, and the Apostles wrote.

A few things must be stated first—a few general views expressed—before we, or our readers, are prepared for the more detailed discussion: and to approach the subject without delay, we observe that—

Man unregenerate is ruined in body, soul, and spirit; a frail and mortal creature. From Adam his father he inherits a broken constitution. He is the child of a fallen ancestor; a branch from a degenerate stock.

Superior to Adam, the exile from Eden, in physical, intellectual, and moral nature, none of his descendants can rise. It is not in nature to improve itself; for the stream cannot rise above its source. Cain, the firstborn of Eve, was by nature the image and likeness of his father. Education failed to improve him, while Abel, his younger brother, obtained the excellence that faith in God's promise alone bestows. The firstborn, it will be conceded, was at least equal to his younger brother: and who can claim that by nature he surpasses Eve's eldest son?

Man in his ruins is, however, a proper subject of a remedial system. He is capable of renovation. Therefore God has placed him under a regenerating system. This system contemplates the regeneration of the whole human constitution, and proposes as its goal the transformation of spirit, soul, and body. The destiny of the regenerate is described by Paul in one sentence: "As we now bear the image of the earthly Adam, we shall then bear the image of the heavenly Adam."

God's own Son is presented as a model. Conformity to him in glory, honor, and immortality, as the perfection of the regenerate, is the predestination of the one who speaks of things that are not, as though they were.

Regeneration is, therefore, moral and physical: or, in other words, there is now a renovation of the mind—of the understanding, will, and affections;—and there will later be a renovation of the body: "For this corruptible body shall put on incorruption, and this mortal body shall put on immortality."

The renovation of the mind and character is, therefore, that moral regeneration which is to be accomplished in this life; for which the remedial system, or kingdom of heaven, was established on earth; and this, therefore, first of all, demands our attention.

Before we attempt a detailed answer to the question, How is this moral regeneration accomplished? we shall consider the principle on which the whole remedial system operates. The grand principle, or means which God has chosen for the accomplishment of this moral regeneration, is the full demonstration and proof of a single proposition addressed to the reason of man. This sublime proposition is, that God is love.

The reason and wisdom of this approach will be clear to anyone who can understand the views and feelings of all unregenerate man. Man in a state of alienation and rebellion naturally suspects that if he is a sinner, and if God hates sin, then God must hate him. As love begets love; so hatred begets hatred; and if a sinner suspects that God hates him, he cannot love God. He must know that God loves him before he can begin to love God. "We," says an Apostle, "love God because he first loved us." — While alienated in heart, through the native darkness of his understanding, the sinner misinterprets every restraint God has placed in his way to prevent his total ruin as signs of the wrath of Heaven. His violation of these restraints, and his awareness of having defied the truthfulness and power of God, only increase his hostility and push him further into apostasy and wandering from his Creator. The goodness of God being misunderstood gives him no incentive to repentance and change. Guilt, fear, and shame, the fruits of his apostasy, cloud his understanding and hide from his eyes all the demonstrations of kindness and goodness with which creation abounds. Adam under a tree, hiding from God, trembling with fear, suspicious of the movements of every leaf, and covered with shame as a garment, is both an illustration and proof of these views of the state of mind that exists in the unregenerate.

Neither the volume of creation nor that of God's providence is sufficient to remove from the natural man these misconceptions and the resulting alienation of heart. The best proof that these two volumes cannot do this is that they never have, in any one case, yet done it. From the nature of things, it is indeed clear that they cannot do it. The elements are too often at war with the happiness of man. The ever-changing condition of the natural world regarding health, life, and comfort makes it doubtful whether the laws of nature, which ultimately bring man down to the grave, are the result of kindness or hostility toward mankind. A third volume explaining both, and also filled with supernatural revelations, is needed to provide the most diligent student of nature and providence with the means of learning the true and full character of the one against whom we have rebelled.

That volume is the Bible. Holy Prophets and Apostles spoke as they were moved by the Spirit of Knowledge and Revelation. Its records, its history, its prophecy, its precepts, its laws, its ordinances, and its examples, all develop and reveal God to man, and man to himself.

But it is in the person and mission of the Incarnate Word that we learn that God is love. That God gave his Son for us, and still gives his Spirit to us—and this gives us himself—are the mysterious and transcendent proofs of the most majestic proposition in the universe. The gospel, Heaven's wisdom and power combined, God's own plan for the renovation of human nature, is neither more nor less than the illustration and proof of this regenerating proposition.

Thus we move quickly to our subject. Having glanced at the great landmarks of the realms of nature and grace, now that we may, in the light of truth, determine the true and heaven-taught doctrine of regeneration, we will carefully examine the whole process, as revealed by the commissioned teachers of the deep counsels of the only true God.

The certain elements, parts of this great progress, may be well understood; certain terms, which are commonly used to represent them, must be well defined and clearly understood. These terms are Fact, Testimony, Faith, Repentance, Reformation, Bath of Regeneration, New Birth, Renewing of the Holy Spirit, Newness of Life.^1

"All things are of God" in the regeneration of man, is our motto; because our Apostle affirmed this as a fundamental truth. He is the author of the facts and of the testimony that declares them; and being the author of these, he is the author of all the effects produced by these facts. The Christian is a new creation, of which God is the Creator. The change of heart and character, which constitute moral regeneration, is the natural result of the facts, or things, which God has accomplished. The facts form the moral seal that stamps the image of God upon man. In the natural order, we must place them first, and, therefore, we must first define the term.

Repentance

Repentance is usually defined as sorrow for anything that is past; and in religious language it is simply sorrow for sin. This is one aspect, but it is only one of the natural effects of believing the testimony of God. The gospel facts, testimony, and faith, involve more than this. But still it is necessary that this point of faith be clearly understood, especially in this age, when it occupies so large a place in theological systems.

Repentance, as we currently understand it, is sorrow for sin; and certainly no one who believes the revealed facts found in God's testimony will fail to be sorry for their sins. But simple sorrow for the past is just a feeling of the heart; which, unless it leads to reformation or the abandonment of sin, is no more useful than Judas's regrets after he sold his Master for fifteen dollars. Repentance must, however, come before reformation; for unless we are sorry for the past and grieved with ourselves, we will not consider changing our behavior. Repentance is to reformation what motive is to action, or resolution to any undertaking. It was good for David to resolve to build the temple; and so it is good to form any good plan; but it is much better to carry it out. To feel sorry for the poor and the afflicted, and to resolve to help and comfort them, is good; but to go and do it is better: and indeed, unless our sorrow for the past leads to reformation for the future, it is useless in the eyes of heaven and earth; as useless as telling the hungry, "Be filled," or the naked, "Be clothed." Genuine repentance does not always result in reformation. Judas was sorrowful even to death but could not reform. Many have been so genuinely sorry for their sins that they became suicides. Do we speak of "a godly sorrow?" No: this is not to be expected from unconverted and ungodly people. Christians, Paul teaches, when they sin, may repent with a godly sorrow; but this is not to be expected from the unregenerate or from those who have not reformed. It is not, then, the genuineness of repentance that is to be valued, unless by genuine repentance is meant more than simple sorrow for the past—unless by genuine repentance is meant reformation. Yet without sincere or genuine repentance, there cannot be real or genuine reformation.

This leads us to observe that the only clear evidence of sincere repentance is the actual correction of the wrong done; not only stopping the sin but making restitution for the sin, as far as restitution can possibly be made. No restitution, no repentance—provided restitution can be made. And I may be allowed to add, that without repentance and restitution, when possible, there can be no forgiveness.

Preachers of repentance—the necessity of repentance for forgiveness—ought to present this matter fairly and fully to sinners. Do they represent repentance as sorrow for the past and a determination to reform? How then will the sinner know that he is sorry for his sins against others, or how will the community know that he has repented of such sins, unless full restitution is made? It is impossible for either the sinner himself or the community who know his sins against others to have any certain evidence that he is penitent unless he makes all possible restitution.

Peccator damaged the reputation of his neighbor Hermas and on another occasion defrauded him of ten pounds. Some of the neighborhood were aware that he had done both. Peccator was converted under the preaching of Paulinus and, when giving an account of his sorrow for his sins, spoke of the depth of his convictions and his abhorrence of his wrongdoing. He was received into the congregation and sat down with the faithful to commemorate the great sin offering. Hermas and his neighbors witnessed all this. They saw that Peccator was penitent and much reformed in his behavior, but they could not believe him sincere because he had made no restitution. They regarded him either as a hypocrite or self-deceived because, having it in his power, he did not repay the ten pounds nor once contradicted the slanders he had spread. Peccator, however, felt little joy in his profession and soon fell back into his former habits. He became penitent again and, on examining the reasons for his falling away, discovered that he had never truly turned away from his sins. Overwhelmed with sorrow for the past, he resolved to give himself up to the Lord; and, reflecting on his past life, set about the work of reformation in earnest. He called on Hermas, paid him the ten pounds and the interest for every day he had kept it back, went to all the people to whom he had slandered him, told them the injustice he had done, and asked them, if they had told it to others, to correct it. Several other people whom he had wronged in his dealings also received visits from him, and he fully redressed all these wrongs against his neighbors. He also confessed them to the Lord and asked for forgiveness. Peccator was then restored to the church; and better still, he enjoyed peace of mind and confidence in God, which was a continual joy. His example, moreover, did more to grow the congregation at the Crossroads than the preaching of Paulinus did in a whole year. This was, without a doubt, sincere repentance.

This is the repentance that Moses preached and that Jesus approved. Under the law, confession to the priest and presenting a trespass offering availed nothing for forgiveness without restitution. But the law went into even more detailed provisions; for it provided for the case in which the sinner could not find the person he had wronged. In such a case, the penitent sinner was to seek out the relatives of the injured party, and if he could find any kinsman, he was to compensate this kinsman; but if he could not find a kinsman, he had to compensate the Lord, in addition to offering his trespass offering. It was to go into the Lord's treasury.^2 The principle was consistent in all cases of sin against others: the sinner "shall make amends for the harm he has done, and shall add a fifth part to it."^3

If anyone thinks that repentance is to be less sincere or clear under the gospel, let him remember that Zacchaeus proposed more than adding a fifth; he would restore fourfold, and Jesus approved of this. Indeed, John the Baptist demanded fruits worthy of repentance or reformation, and Paul proclaimed that those who turned to God should do works fitting for, or worthy of, repentance.^4

"Works worthy of repentance" is a phrase that can only be understood as those works that make amends for the harm done to others and the dishonor done to God, as far as both are possible. Can anyone think he is sorry for the sin or wrong he has done when he makes no effort to make amends to the person who was injured in person, character, or property? Works worthy of his professed repentance are missing as long as anyone he has injured in person, property, or reputation remains unrepaired to the fullest extent of his ability.

One of our most popular commentators says—and with much truth—"No one should expect mercy from God who, having wronged his neighbor, refuses, when he has the power, to make restitution. Even if he were to weep tears of blood, both the justice and mercy of God would shut out his prayer if he does not make amends to his neighbor for the injury he has done. He is dishonest who illegally holds another’s property in his hands."^5

Every preacher of repentance should insist on these evidences of sincerity both for the satisfaction of the penitent himself and for the good of the community. "Many who believed came and confessed, and showed their deeds; many of them also who practiced magic arts brought their books together and burned them before all; and they calculated the value of them and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver."^6 This was making restitution, in their case, as far as possible; and the principle here shown applies in every other case.

But in pursuing this subject so far, we have crossed the boundaries of repentance and sometimes confused it with reformation. This is due to the loose use of language, to which modern theology has contributed greatly. We will, however, correct this misunderstanding as far as possible by a few remarks on

Reformation

The word metanoia, used by the sacred writers and divinely inspired preachers of the New Covenant as indicative of the first effect of faith, as has often been shown, is different from what our word repentance properly represents. It literally means a change of mind; but, as Parkhurst, Campbell, and many others say, "such a change of mind as influences one's subsequent behavior for the better." "It has been observed by some, and, I think with reason, that the former (metanoeo) properly denotes a change to the better: the latter (metamelomai) merely a change, whether for better or worse; that the former marks a change of mind that is lasting and produces consequences; the latter expresses only a present uneasy feeling of regret, without regard to duration or effects: in short, the first may be translated into English as I reform; the second, I repent, in the familiar sense of the words." Now, since everyone who reforms repents; but not everyone who repents reforms, this distinction is necessary and proper; and there is nothing risky, nothing lost by translating the former as I reform, and the latter as I repent. There is something gained, especially where the word is in the imperative mood, because then it is important to know precisely what is intended. If we are commanded only to change our mind or to be sorry for the past, we have obeyed when we feel regret; but if more than a mere change of mind or regret is intended, we have not obeyed the command until we change for the better. Now it is, we think, very clear from various passages of the sacred writings of the Apostles and from their speeches that they commanded more than a simple change of mind regarding past conduct or mere sorrow for the past. Peter commanded the thousands gathered on the day of Pentecost, who had changed their minds and were sorry for the past, to do something they had not yet done; and that something is rendered in the common version as repent; in the new version, reform; and in the old English Bible, amend your lives. The word used here is the imperative of metanoeo. Judas repented, and many like him, who never reformed; and therefore, it is important that this distinction be kept in mind.^7

Repentance is not reformation, but it is necessary for it; for whoever reforms must first repent. Reformation is, indeed, the carrying out of the purpose in our conduct. But since reformation belongs more properly to another part of our essay than the present one, we will pause here and offer a few reflections based on what we have already discussed.

In the preceding definitions of words and ideas, it appears that we have a literal and straightforward representation of the whole process of what is figuratively called regeneration. For, as we will soon see, the term regeneration is a figure of speech that very appropriately, though analogically, represents the reformation or renewal of life we have now described. That the preceding arrangement is not arbitrary, but natural and necessary, the reader will perceive, when he reflects, that the thing done, or the fact, must precede the report or testimony concerning it; that the testimony concerning it must precede the belief of it; that belief of the testimony must precede any feeling in correspondence with the fact testified; and that feeling must precede action in conformity to it. Fact, testimony, faith, feeling, action, are therefore bound together by a natural and gracious necessity, which no ingenuity can separate. And will not every Christian say, that when a person feels and acts according to the faith, or the testimony of God, he is a new creature — regenerate — truly converted to God? He who believes the facts testified in the record of God, understands them, feels according to their nature and meaning, and acts in correspondence with them — has undergone a change of heart and life which makes him a new person.

This is that moral change of heart and life, which is figuratively called regeneration. We are not to suppose that regeneration is something which must be added to the faith, the feeling, and the action or behavior, which are the effects of the testimony of God understood and embraced; or which are the impression of the divine facts attested by Prophets and Apostles. It is only another name for the same process in all its parts.

It may also be observed that numerous figures and analogies are used by the inspired writers to set forth this change, as well as other leading truths and lessons in the Bible. In their collective capacity, Christians are called a kingdom, a nation, a generation, a family, a house, a flock, a city, a temple, a priesthood, etc. In their individual capacity they are called kings, priests, soldiers, citizens, children, sheep, branches, stones, etc. They are said to be begotten, born, regenerated, built, engrafted, converted, created, planted. Now, under whatever figure they are considered or introduced, reason argues that everything said of them should be expressed in conformity with the figure under which they are presented. Are they called sheep? — then he who presides over them is called a Shepherd; their enemies are wolves and dogs; their sustenance is the green pasture; their place of safety and rest, the sheepfold; their errors are wanderings and strayings; their conversion, a return; and their good behavior a hearing of the voice, or a following, of the Shepherd. Are they called children? — then collectively they are a family; they are begotten and born again; God is their Father; their separation is an adoption; Jesus is their elder brother; they are heirs of God; they live and walk with God. Are they priests? — Jesus is their High Priest; the church their temple; the Savior is their altar; their songs, their praises, are incense ascending to heaven; and their offerings to the poor, their works of love, are sacrifices most acceptable to God. Are they called citizens? — the church is then the kingdom of heaven; Jerusalem is the mother of them all; formerly they were aliens, and their naturalization is regeneration. Are they called branches? — then Jesus is the true vine; his Father the vine dresser; their union with Christ, an engrafting; the discipline of the gospel, a pruning; and their good works are fruits of righteousness.

Thus there is no confusion of metaphor in the Scriptures of truth — in the dialect of heaven. It is the language of Ashdod; it belongs to the confusion of Babel, to mingle and confound all figures and analogies. Hence we so often hear of being born again, without any allusion to a family or a kingdom! and of regeneration as antecedent to faith or repentance! Had a modern assembly of Divines been employed to accommodate the scripture style to their orthodox sentiments, we would not have had to read all the Old Testament and all the historic books of the New, to find the subject of regeneration but once proposed to an outsider, as the fact is; but then we would have found it in the history of Abel, of Enoch, of Noah, and of Abraham, if not in every section of the law of Moses, in the Prophets, and in the Psalms. John the Baptist, Jesus, and the Holy Twelve, would have had it in every sermon; and true faith would have been always defined as the fruit of regeneration.

But Jesus had a kingdom in his mind and in his discourse before he ever mentioned being 'born again' to Nicodemus; for unless there was a family, a state, or a kingdom to be born into, it is impossible for anyone to be born into it. And if the kingdom of heaven only began to be after Jesus entered into heaven; or, if it was only approaching from the ministry of John to the day of Pentecost, then it would have been preposterous indeed — an incongruity of which no inspired man was ever guilty — to call any change of heart or life, a regeneration, or a new birth. It is true that good men in all ages were made such by facts, testimony, faith, and feeling, by a change of heart, by the Spirit of God; but the analogy or figure of being born, or of being regenerated, only began to be preached, and when men began to press into it.

We are now, perhaps, better prepared to consider the proper import and meaning of 'regeneration' in general, and of 'the bath of regeneration' in particular.

Regeneration

This word is found but twice in all the oracles of God — once in Matt. 19:28 and once in Titus 3:5. In the former it is almost universally understood to mean a new state of things, not of persons — a particular era, in which all things are made new: — such as the formation of a new church on the day of Pentecost, or the beginning of the Millennium, or the general resurrection. The biblical critics of eminence have assigned it to one or another of these great changes in the state of things. So we use the word revolution, and the phrase the Revolution, to express a change in the political state of things. The most approved punctuation and version of this passage makes it clear that a new era is alluded to. 'Jesus answered, Indeed, I say to you, that at the renewal when the Son of Man shall be seated on his glorious throne, you, my followers, sitting also upon twelve thrones, shall judge the twelve tribes of Israel.' This being so evident, and so often alluded to in our former writings, we will proceed to the remaining occurrence, Titus 3:5.

All the new light which we propose to shed on this passage will be gathered from an examination of the meaning of the word generation in the sacred writings. Our reason for this is that we object to a peremptory decision of the meaning of a word which occurs only in the passage under discussion, based on our reasoning upon the isolated passages in which it is found. In such a case, if we cannot find the whole word in any parallel passages, the proper substitute is the root or branches of that word, so far as they are used by the same writers. Moreover, we think it will be granted that, whatever may be the scriptural meaning of the word generation, regeneration is only the repetition of that act or process.

After a close examination of the passages in which generation occurs in the writings of the Hebrew Prophets and Apostles, we find it used only in two meanings — as descriptive of the whole process of creation and of the thing created. A race of man, or a particular class of men, is called a generation; but this is its figurative, rather than its literal meaning. Its literal meaning is the formation or creation of anything. Thus it is first used in the Holy Scriptures. Moses calls the creation, or whole process of formation of the heavens and the earth, 'The generations of the heavens and the earth.'^8 The account of the formation of Adam and Eve, and also the account of the creations of Adam and Eve, are, by the same writer, called 'The book or record of the generations of Adam.'^9 This is the literal meaning of the word; consequently, regeneration literally indicates the whole process of renovating or newly creating man.

This process may consist of numerous distinct acts; but it is in accordance with the general usage to give to the beginning, or final act, the name of the whole process. For the most part, however, the name of the whole process is given to the final act, because the process is always supposed incomplete until that act is performed. For example: In the process of tanning, fulling, forging, etc., the subject of these operations is not supposed to be tanned, fulled, forged, until the last act is performed. So in all the processes of nature — in the animal, vegetable, and mineral kingdoms, the last act completes the process. To all familiar with the process of animalization, germination, crystallization, etc., no further argument is needed. But in the style of our American farmers, no crop nor animal is made until it reaches maturity. We often hear them say of a good shower, or a few clear days, "This is the making of the wheat or corn." In the same sense it is that most Christians call regeneration the new birth; though being born is only the last act in natural generation, and the last act in regeneration.

In this way the new birth and regeneration are used interchangeably by commentators and writers on theology, and by a figure of speech, it is justified on well-established principles of rhetoric. This leads us to speak particularly of (the next chapter)