Separating Sheep and Goats Misunderstood

[mikesw]

This passage in Matt 25:31-46 provides a good example of interpretation based on stuff like confirmation bias, tradition, and basic neglect. The first thing to note is this passage has been a challenge. I recall J. Vernon McGee saying he did not understand it. Part of the difficulty might be of the timing found in v 31 "When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne." I don't quite have a sequence of events in mind right now, but it may seem this happens after other things have been judged.

This passage speaks of a judgment of nations where "nations" is used instead of "gentiles" in the translations of v32. If this were all people instead, then we would have a different message conveyed -- but the NRSV and ESV inappropriately inserts "people" in the verse. That insertion then biases the reading -- but is just something that happens when trying to make a translation readable.

Another problem that happens is that verse 46 is used to interpret the passage in view of people: "these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." The topic has remained about the nations. But nations (people groups) normally do not seem to be eternally punished. Two things can be considered here. One is that cities (people groups) are judged (Matt 11:23 of Capernaum). Cities also have been said to suffer eternal punishment, especially Sodom and Gomorrah (Jude 7). The punishment of the cities or people groups is for their treatment of the King's brothers. That is where interpretations get messier.

One out that people have taken here is to say that every injured or hungry person is a brother/sister here. That point neglects the distinction that these are Christians, not some general aid to the poor. The best reading then is that the sheep are specific cities or nations who have encountered Christians and treated them well. The goats are the "people groups" that persecuted the Christians or otherwise treated them harshly. The key then is that the places had specific contact with Christians and the judgment is based on that. Excluded from this are places where Christians were not in these places within prisons or sick or unclothed (while probably including other lacking).

I think any interpretation that misses these details has been affected by confirmation bias (toward other theories), tradition, and insufficient exegesis. Hopefully this quick analysis provides something to think about when fitting Matt 25:31-46 within one's eschatological concepts.

 

[Dizerner]

It's a well known literary device referring to the parts by the whole whole, a synecdoche.

Cities and nations are referring to the individuals that compose them at the Final Judgment.

This is the opposite of a metonymy, referring to a whole by the part.

Examples:

Your car being called your "wheels."

The police being called "the law."

 

[mikesw]

It's a well known literary device referring to the parts by the whole whole, a synecdoche.

Cities and nations are referring to the individuals that compose them at the Final Judgment.

This is the opposite of a metonymy, referring to a whole by the part.

Examples:

Your car being called your "wheels."

The police being called "the law."

Even if a person considers that in the interpretation, the difficulties of the passage remain. But it also is seen that cities or places can be said to face eternal punishment. We could possibly see both happening --where the cities face eternal punishment and the people of those cities are condemned. It remains that the judgment concerns the treatment of Christians.

 

[Dizerner]

Even if a person considers that in the interpretation, the difficulties of the passage remain. But it also is seen that cities or places can be said to face eternal punishment. We could possibly see both happening --where the cities face eternal punishment and the people of those cities are condemned. It remains that the judgment concerns the treatment of Christians.

Scripture is clear that individuals are judged at the Final Judgment.

There may be some sense of corporate guilt or shared participation in a certain sin, but individuals are judged.

Yes, this passage shows us that faith without works is dead, and works do play a part in final judgment.

 

[mikesw]

Scripture is clear that individuals are judged at the Final Judgment.

There may be some sense of corporate guilt or shared participation in a certain sin, but individuals are judged.

Yes, this passage shows us that faith without works is dead, and works do play a part in final judgment.

I just suggest that this passage be considered more carefully and with consideration that nothing is addressed of people or cities not in contact with Christians. Otherwise, the text may simply be read with confirmation bias to the preconceived ideas rather than the context of the passage. But thanks for sharing ideas here.

 

[atpollard]

What if there are only TWO “nations” whose members are hopelessly intermixed (like a giant flock comprised of both sheep and goats mixed together). One “nation” is the Kingdom of God and comprised of the people of God. The other “nation” is everyone else as the people of the world.

Geographically, the Kingdom of God is scattered among the nations of the world as wanderers … those most vulnerable to being hungry or naked or in prison.

Just a thought.

 

[mikesw]

What if there are only TWO “nations” whose members are hopelessly intermixed (like a giant flock comprised of both sheep and goats mixed together). One “nation” is the Kingdom of God and comprised of the people of God. The other “nation” is everyone else as the people of the world.

Geographically, the Kingdom of God is scattered among the nations of the world as wanderers … those most vulnerable to being hungry or naked or in prison.

Just a thought.

First you can learn the way the pieces fit together in the passage to form a certain message and then consequently to make some interpretations implausible. The next step is to figure out how the passage affects one's reading of the broader context.

Different concepts of the passage can be shared but maybe should consider some of the obstacles facing interpretations previously made.

Here's a commentary that mentions the shift to a focus on nations in this passage:
More recent interpreters have insisted, however, that such an interpretation does not do justice to the description of those in need as Jesus’ brothers, nor to the use elsewhere in Matthew of language about ‘these little ones’ (see below, on v. 40). It is therefore increasingly accepted that the criterion of judgment is not kindness to the needy in general, but the response of the nations to disciples in need. The passage is sometimes described as an expansion of the theme of 10:40–42, where the gift of a cup of water is specifically ‘because he is a disciple’, so that ‘he who receives you receives me’.
R. T. France, Matthew: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 1, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1985), 358.

He mentions that this still causes confusion as to the situation of disciples that makes nations guilty. I just share this as info ( and just an example) without finding his detailed comments helpful.

 

[Dizerner]

not in contact with Christians.

It would be a logical mistake to assume this is the only basis people are judged on.

The parable had one emphasis.

 

[mikesw]

It would be a logical mistake to assume this is the only basis people are judged on.

The parable had one emphasis.

That could be true. But the passage is how various nations treat the Christians. The key then is to figure out how to resolve all the issues that cause confusion rather than disregarding the wording of the passage. Sometimes people can just place a passage in the wrong context, which certainly can make the passage seem ill fitting within that wrong context.

I tend to hope the details I shared make other interpretations seem incomplete. There really has been no settled view of this passage. That often means that the ideas being proposed were not fully convincing.

 

[mikesw]

One principle that I started following years ago and is a bit more instinctive is to make sure to consider each word in a passage when interpreting something. A word that is overlooked can change the meaning of the passage. I probably am missing some details in this Matt 25 passage since I just was focused on the broad issue.

 

[Selah]

This passage in Matt 25:31-46 provides a good example of interpretation based on stuff like confirmation bias, tradition, and basic neglect. The first thing to note is this passage has been a challenge. I recall J. Vernon McGee saying he did not understand it. Part of the difficulty might be of the timing found in v 31 "When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne." I don't quite have a sequence of events in mind right now, but it may seem this happens after other things have been judged.

Hey Mike. I believe Matthew 25:31 takes place in the Millennium after Jesus returns, which will be His Second Coming at the 7th trump.
Matthew 25:31 (KJV) 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:

Now back in Matthew chapter 19:28, Jesus told His disciples that when He comes in His glory, they shall also sit upon twelve thrones with Him:
Matthew 19:28 (KJV) 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.

And it is also written in the book of Revelation:
Revelation 20:4 (KJV) And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and [I saw] the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received [his] mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
This thousand years is the Millennium.

s e l a h

 

[Selah]

The Great White Throne Judgment happens after the Millennium.

s e l a h

 

[Selah]

Matthew 25:31-46 (KJV) 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: 33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. 34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed [thee]? or thirsty, and gave [thee] drink? 38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took [thee] in? or naked, and clothed [thee]? 39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done [it] unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done [it] unto me. 41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did [it] not to one of the least of these, ye did [it] not to me. 46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

I believe that the separation will be individually, as a shepherd would separate his flock, one at a time.

s e l a h

 

[mikesw]

I believe that the separation will be individually, as a shepherd would separate his flock, one at a time.

That is acceptable to find the King judging each nation individually. Are you taking into account that this passage judges each nation for how it treated Christians in its midst? That is part of why this passage has been difficult to interpret.

Three interpretations common over the last 2000 years per Ulrich Luz have been

1. Universal people judged for treatment of the marginal, the poor, the suffering [Luz, 267]
2. Classic interpretation [Luz, 271] judgment of Christians based on works of compassion
3. Exclusive interpretation [Luz 273] where all pagans are judged

Ulrich Luz, Matthew 21–28: A Commentary, Augsburg, 2005), 282.

The first one neglects the emphasis on treatment of brothers of the King. The second tries to treat Christians as nations. The last one becomes difficult to define a pagan nation and what Christians were in their midst.

In your interpretation, why are individuals only separated based on their treatment of Christians -- if that is what you mean?

 

[mikesw]

Hey Mike. I believe Matthew 25:31 takes place in the Millennium after Jesus returns, which will be His Second Coming at the 7th trump.
Matthew 25:31 (KJV) 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:

Now back in Matthew chapter 19:28, Jesus told His disciples that when He comes in His glory, they shall also sit upon twelve thrones with Him:
Matthew 19:28 (KJV) 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.

And it is also written in the book of Revelation:
Revelation 20:4 (KJV) And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and [I saw] the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received [his] mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
This thousand years is the Millennium.

s e l a h

Thanks for sharing.
I have never tried to clarify the sequence of progression of events in Matt 24-25 to differentiate why certain sections are happening. I have been finding Daniel as helpful to define the skeleton upon which Matt 24-25 and Revelation are built, but this is not fully developed.

 

[Selah]

That is acceptable to find the King judging each nation individually. Are you taking into account that this passage judges each nation for how it treated Christians in its midst? That is part of why this passage has been difficult to interpret.

Three interpretations common over the last 2000 years per Ulrich Luz have been

1. Universal people judged for treatment of the marginal, the poor, the suffering [Luz, 267]
2. Classic interpretation [Luz, 271] judgment of Christians based on works of compassion
3. Exclusive interpretation [Luz 273] where all pagans are judged

Ulrich Luz, Matthew 21–28: A Commentary, Augsburg, 2005), 282.

The first one neglects the emphasis on treatment of brothers of the King. The second tries to treat Christians as nations. The last one becomes difficult to define a pagan nation and what Christians were in their midst.

In your interpretation, why are individuals only separated based on their treatment of Christians -- if that is what you mean?

You misunderstood me, Mike. I believe Jesus will separate the sheep (believers) and goats (unbelievers) as individual people—one by one (each person separately).

 

[Complete]

This passage in Matt 25:31-46 provides a good example of interpretation based on stuff like confirmation bias, tradition, and basic neglect. The first thing to note is this passage has been a challenge. I recall J. Vernon McGee saying he did not understand it. Part of the difficulty might be of the timing found in v 31 "When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne." I don't quite have a sequence of events in mind right now, but it may seem this happens after other things have been judged.

This passage speaks of a judgment of nations where "nations" is used instead of "gentiles" in the translations of v32. If this were all people instead, then we would have a different message conveyed -- but the NRSV and ESV inappropriately inserts "people" in the verse. That insertion then biases the reading -- but is just something that happens when trying to make a translation readable.

Another problem that happens is that verse 46 is used to interpret the passage in view of people: "these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." The topic has remained about the nations. But nations (people groups) normally do not seem to be eternally punished. Two things can be considered here. One is that cities (people groups) are judged (Matt 11:23 of Capernaum). Cities also have been said to suffer eternal punishment, especially Sodom and Gomorrah (Jude 7). The punishment of the cities or people groups is for their treatment of the King's brothers. That is where interpretations get messier.

One out that people have taken here is to say that every injured or hungry person is a brother/sister here. That point neglects the distinction that these are Christians, not some general aid to the poor. The best reading then is that the sheep are specific cities or nations who have encountered Christians and treated them well. The goats are the "people groups" that persecuted the Christians or otherwise treated them harshly. The key then is that the places had specific contact with Christians and the judgment is based on that. Excluded from this are places where Christians were not in these places within prisons or sick or unclothed (while probably including other lacking).

I think any interpretation that misses these details has been affected by confirmation bias (toward other theories), tradition, and insufficient exegesis. Hopefully this quick analysis provides something to think about when fitting Matt 25:31-46 within one's eschatological concepts.

'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:'
(Mat 25:31)

Hello @mikesw,

The verse at the beginning of the verses you have referenced (Matt, 25:31-46) give the occasion upon which this will take place. 'When the Son of Man shall have come in His glory'. 'then shall He sit upon the throne of His glory'. That is the throne of His Father David (Luke 1:32). Compare also, Psa. 47:8; Jer. 3:17; Jer. 14:21; Zeph. 3:8. These verses are referenced in the margin of my Bible, in relation to this verse, and I find them very illuminating, regarding the time of fulfilment and the events surrounding it.

* The Lord Jesus Christ, (in the flesh), is the One Who only has the right to the throne of David. 'Praise His Holy Name'.

'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:'
(Mat 25:32)

'shall be gathered all nations.' There is no resurrection here. Therefore no reference to Rev 20. The gathering is to be on earth (Isa. 34:1, Isa, 34:2. Joe, 3:1, Joe. 3:2, Joe. 3:11, Joe. 3:12). There are three classes here, not two. The test is not even "works", but the treatment of the "brethren" by the other two. No believer, i.e. those who "received the word" (Act. 2:41. 1Thess. 2:13): for these were (and will yet he)"taken out of all nations", Act. 15:14, Israel not gathered here, because "not reckoned among the nations" (Num. 23:9). The Church of the Mystery (Eph 3) not here, because the reward here is "from the foundation of the world" (Mat. 25:34); while the Church was chosen "before" that (Mat.1:4). 'all nations' = all the nations. 'them'. Refers to individuals, because it is Masc, while "nations" are Neuter, and therefore are regarded collectively - 'goats'. Greek. eriphion. (Occurs only here).

* These notes relating to Mat. 25:32 (quoted) are from my Bible, but I thought you may find them useful.

Thank you.
In Christ Jesus
Chris