 |
| "As a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats." Sheep and goats belong to one flock of the shepherd; that's the most obvious sense. Some insist that the goats are not part of the flock! Then why the need do separate them Of course, some think the wild GOATS strayed into the flock, and got mixed up with the flock of sheep that belongs to the shepherd. Laban had a flock made up of sheep and goats (and cattle). Gen 30:31. |
https://www.facebook.com/sing.f.lau/posts/10203026549440153
October 20, 2014
It is a common and popular notion to see the sheep and goats as representing
the elect and non-elect, respectively.
Let me suggest these for your consideration:
1. All
three parables in Mt 25 are about the same theme...
- the wise and foolish virgins of the One Bridegroom,
- the faithful and unfaithful servants of the One same Master,
- the sheep and the goats of one flock of the One Shepherd.
Does this suggestion help to direct your thought on the sheep and the goats a
bit?
2. Look at
Mt 25:31 again... WITHOUT the coloured glasses given to us. Just look again
what is plainly stated there...
- v32 reads "as a shepherd divideth HIS HIS HIS sheep from the
goats." This informs us that both the goats and the sheep make up the ONE
flock which belongs to the shepherd. So it makes more sense to differentiate
the sheep and the goats as obedient and disobedient among the redeemed, rather
than elect and non-elect. (BUT prejudiced unthinking mind is hard to convince
otherwise!)
- The need to divide the sheep from the goats plainly presupposes that there
are sheep and goats in the one flock of the shepherd. Both the sheep and goats
are His!
- Next, it is clearly stated that the inheritance of the kingdom mentioned
(v35... "for ye did this, this, this, this ...") is BASED on the
works and merits of the sheep. That can't be the eternal glory after the
resurrection... which is determined solely whether their names were written in
the Lamb's book of life! The opposite is true of the goats, i.e. because they
didn't do what the shepherd expected them to do, they suffer their just due.
- Then, we see the obvious indication that the goats DO KNOW the Lord who
judges them... see v44. They are obviously people who were DESIROUS to minister
to the Lord. The non-elect are POSITIVELY hostile and in enmity against the
Lord. The goats are believers, but disobedient believers... [They most probably
represent God's children among the Jews who failed to recognize Jesus was the
very Messiah they were waiting for, thus failing to minister to believers in
Jesus Christ.]
- Finally, verse 41 "ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the
devil and his angels." This can't possibly be the final lake of fire.
- Rev 20:10 "And the devil... was cast into the lake of fire." Where
was the devil before he was cast into the lake of fire on the great judgment
day? Hell... everlasting fire... UNTIL delivered up on the resurrection day to
be cast into the lake of fire.
- Jude 6 "And the angels which kept not their first estate, but
left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains
under darkness unto the judgment of the great day." This is
distinct from the lake of fire. The everlasting chains under darkness is ONLY
unto the judgment of the great day. After the judgment of the great day is the
Lake of Fire!
Even clever people insist that everlasting fire is the same as the lake of
fire. Not necessarily. 'Everlasting' is just that - it lasts and endures until
God's appointed time, even to the day of judgment.
3. And just
one more thing:
Mt 25:42-3 "For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty,
and ye gave me no drink: 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."
With these words, did Jesus find faults with the elect or non-elect?
Did Jesus EXPECT the non-elect to do such things to Him, for His sake???
Just from WHOM did Jesus EXPECT such deeds of kindness to Him, for His sake?
I would like to hear some reasoned answers! Thanks.
4. Let me
go on record on the basic truth
Jesus Christ paid the sin debt of all those whose names were written in the
book of life, I included. And that GUARANTEES our deliverance from the eternal
lake of fire. Christ redemptive works delivered His people from the like of
fire... which explains why there was NEVER a single warning against the lake of
fire addressed to the redeemed.
I also put on record that the Lord's solemn and repeated warning against hell
to His redeemed people can so easily be repudiated, nullified, and made of none
effect by the same!
Did you note the clear distinction between "hell" and the "lake
of fire"?
Hell is between death and the resurrection.
Lake of fire begins at the resurrection.
Thanks for listening.
Go here to read the exchanges... if you are interested...frivolous
objections are raised, and dealt with!
https://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/pj.walters.9/posts/10201646711862495
The exchanges are posted below
Pj
All of the sheep of God are going to heaven: the goats are going to hell; and
neither goats, nor sheep evolve into one of the other.
Charles
but the goats are going to heaven after the bodily resurrection, yes? Are you
certain that they may not evolve? we need to be certain!
Pj
My understanding of the goats is that they are non-elect.
Charles
Pj, if they are non elect then Christ is demanding the same things from them as
he demands of the sheep! The expectations are the same for sheep and goats. One
is faithful and obedient and the other rebellious. That is not consistent
non-elect, unregenerate people. Otherwise, seems you have a works salvation.
Cindy
Exactly .. one is covered by the blood of Christ while the other is not.
Charles
does Matt 25 say that? if one is covered by the blood and yet the Son of man
expects the same for both of them.
Cindy
Sheep cannot become goats nor goats sheep ... baaah ...
Charles
does Matt 25 say that?
Felipe
AMEN PREACH IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Desolatite
Charles are so mad that he cannot even tell left from right and male from
female. Just sad.
[This is the GREATEST contribution to the discussion- sing]
Charles
LOL!!!
Sing F Lau
Let me suggest that the three parables in Mt 25 are all about the same theme...
- the wise and foolish virgins, representing believing and unbelieving children
of God among the Jews.
- the faithful and unfaithful servants, representing believing and unbelieving
children of God among the Jews.
- the sheep and the goats, representing believing and unbelieving children of
God among the Jews.
Sing F Lau
Let me suggest that we look at Mt 25: again... WITHOUT the coloured glasses
given to us.
Just look again what is plainly stated there...
v32 reads "as a shepherd divideth HIS HIS HIS sheep from the goats."
- This informs us that both the goats and the sheep belong to the shepherd. So
it makes more sense to differentiate the sheep and the goats as obedient and
disobedient among the redeemed, rather than elect and non elect. (BUT
indoctrinated unthinking mind is hard to convince otherwise!)
Next, it is clearly stated that the inheritance of the kingdom mentioned
(v35... "for ye did this, this, this, this ...") is BASED on the
works and merits of the sheep. That can't be the eternal glory after the
resurrection... which is determined solely whether their names were written in
the Lamb's book of life!
Then, we see the obvious indication that the goats DO KNOW the Lord who judges
them... see v44. They are obviously people who were DESIROUS to minister to the
Lord. The non-elect are POSITIVELY hostile and in enmity against the Lord. The
goats are believers, but disobedient believers... [They most probably represent
God's children among the Jews who failed to recognize Jesus was the very
Messiah they were waiting for.]
Finally, verse 41 "ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the
devil and his angels." This can't possibly be the final lake of fire.
- Rev 20:10 "And the devil... was cast into the lake of fire." Where
was the devil before he was cast into the late of fire on the great judgment day?
Hell... everlasting fire... UNTIL delivered up on the resurrection day to be
cast into the lake of fire.
Even clever people insist that everlasting fire is the same as the lake of
fire. Not necessarily. 'Everlasting' is just that - it last until the appointed
time, that the day of judgment.
Let me go on record that Jesus Christ paid the sin debt of all those whose
names were written in the book of life, I included. And that GUARANTEES our
deliverance from the eternal lake of fire. Christ redemptive works delivered
His people from the like of fire... which explains why there was NEVER a single
warning against the lake of fire addressed to the redeemed.
I also put on record that the Lord's solemn and repeated warning against hell
to His redeemed people can so easily be repudiated, nullified, and made of none
effect by the same!
Sing F Lau
And just one more thought and I will shut up:
Mt 25:
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.
Does Jesus EXPECT of the non-elect to do such things to Him, for His sake???
Apparently VERY MANY DO! What kind of Jesus do they believe?
From/of WHOM does Jesus EXPECT such deeds of kindness to Him, for His sake?
Those dead in trespasses and sins? Or of His redeemed people?
I would like an answer! Thanks.
Dan
Some thoughts on Matt. 25
1. The possessive pronoun/adjective HIS in v.32 does not necessarily mean the
goats are also His. Notice the determiner THE (not possessive).
2. The sheep are blessed to inherit the kingdom prepared from the foundation of
the world (not inclusive of goats). What's the point of pointing out this
sheep's inheritance if goat's where simply disobedient elects? (v.34).
3. By contrast, the sheep (righteous) shall go into life eternal or eternal
life while the goats (cursed) into everlasting punishment (v.46). Here eternal
and everlasting are synonymous.
4. The good deeds are not imperative or expected at all from both sheep and
goats but indicative (as evidences) of what they truly are: righteous or
accursed.
So, it does not suggest works salvation but simply declaring the kinds of works
each may produce (v. 31-46).
These are just my thoughts.
Primitive Baptist
John 10:23" And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch.
24.''Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou
make us to doubt? If thou be Christ, tell us plainly.
25."Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believe not: the works that I
do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
26."But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto
you.
27."My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28."And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish,
neither shall any man pluck them out of my Father's hand.
29."My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able
to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
30."I and my Father are one.
Karen
Charles is a day late and a dollar short again.....poor baby.
Sing F Lau
Thanks, Brother Dan.
Let me see... will take point 4 first...
Read these and compare...
Mt 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous
into life eternal.
Joh 4:36 And he that reapeth receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life
eternal: that both he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together.
Joh 12:25 He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in
this world shall keep it unto life eternal.
Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God,
and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
These are the 4 occasions the term "life eternal" is used in the KJB.
It looks quite definite that life eternal is not the equivalent of eternal
life.
It seems quite clearly that life eternal is conditioned upon some actions of
those who enter into life eternal.
What do you think?
Sing F Lau
Dan, your point 3...
Everlasting is not the same as eternal.
Everlasting means it remains as long as God has determined until He ALONE does
away with it.
Here is one example. Equating everlasting as eternal will lead us into a
serious problem.
Ge 17:8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein
thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and
I will be their God.
That everlasting possession was theirs UNTIL God Himself abrogated it! Absolutely no one can dispossess them until God permitted it.
Sing F Lau
Dan, your point 2...
2. The sheep are blessed to inherit the kingdom prepared from the foundation of
the world (not inclusive of goats). What's the point of pointing out this
sheep's inheritance if goat's where simply disobedient elects? (v.34).
What is that kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the earth? Is it
eternal heaven after the resurrection?
What's the point of pointing the goats' failure to do what IS EXPECTED of them
by their Shepherd if they were simple NON-elect?
Do you seriously believe that Christ EXPECTED such deeds UNTO HIM and for HIS
SAKE from the non-elect? Honest question.
Sing F Lau
Dan, your point 1...
"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."
Please enlighten us concerning the significance of the determiner THE (not
possessive). Thanks.
If the goats do not belong to the shepherd, then it is strange that they are
found among His flock, and that He has the need to separate them. Am I mistaken
somewhere?
I THANK YOU for interacting intelligently. THANKS.
Thanks. Got to run for errands.
Charles
"The good deeds are not imperative or expected at all from both sheep and
goats but indicative (as evidences) of what they truly are: righteous or
accursed.
So, it does not suggest works salvation but simply declaring the kinds of works
each may produce (v. 31-46)"
That statement would be said by a reformed Calvinist, perhaps John MacArthur!
God's election does not determine if one is righteous or accursed, the reformed
community make that claim not scripture.
Sing F Lau
Primitive Baptist (i.e. the brother who commented above - WEIRD, why can't a
man identify himself with the name his father has given him, I know not!)
said...
"And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither
shall any man pluck them out of my Father's hand."
If by this he implies that some elect have been plucked out of Jesus' hand,
then he should prove it.
Goats, disobedient children of God shall be resurrected to glory, though they
may suffer TEMPORAL punishments between death and resurrection to glory. No redeemed of
the Lord will end up in the lake of fire. NONE shall be lost... all shall enter
eternal glory. Some will suffer corrective punishment between death and
resurrection to glory.
Quick
This is timely in my humble opinion, and I do not believe the goats are bound
for an eternity in Hell. I believe sheep and goats are children if God. The
sheep are obedient members of the kingdom, while the goats are those who do not
perceive the kingdom and remain in outer darkness.
Charles
The goats and the sheep are in the Father's hand and they have eternal life.
The fact that they belong to the Father is they are given demands and what
distinguishes the difference between the sheep and goats is their response.
It is inconsistent to say the sheep are the elect and goats are the non-elect.
Our job is to lead them out of darkness!
Sheep are lead and goats are driven!
Sing F Lau
Brother Quick most certainly lives up to his name... he is quick to see the
truth... "this is timely."
Dan
1. Nothing in the passage (Matt.25 31-46) where Jesus Christ expressed his
EXPECTATION of both the sheep and the goats to do good works (note I don’t
advocate antinomianism); instead, he simply stated the evident difference of
the works of the ‘righteous” from that of the “accursed (v.41&46). The
passage has no imperative tone where Jesus expected anything – it is
DESCRIPTIVE, He simply stated declaratively the difference.
2. I strongly believe that the LIFE ETERNAL (or eternal life) and EVERLASTING
LIFE are synonymous. Since the gospel of John has been involved, please allow
me to quote John 3:15 & 16 (KJV)…
“… should not perish, but have eternal life.” (v.15)
“… should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (v.16)
The expression “…UNTO life eternal…” in John 4:36, John 12:25, etc. is not the
same as “…TO HAVE life eternal…”. The former is reflective of life eternal, the
latter is causative.
[sing: Both are used not because they are interchangeable; both are used because both are true. A biblical distinction is the essence of sound theology.
"Both everlasting life and eternal life are spoken of concerning Christ’s redeemed people. The two terms are not synonymous even though many wish to insist otherwise. One or two passages from the KJT are enough to debunk such notion.
- It is everlasting life because it shall be preserved by God till the end of time; it began at some point in time and last until the end of time for glorification. 1Pet 1:4."
It's eternal life because it's a life that has been made fit to inhibit eternity... which shall only be consummated through glorification at the end of time.
I hope I make sense.]
-------+++++++++++
3. I believe the “kingdom” prepared from the foundation of the world is the
eternal abode of the righteous (v.34). Jesus calls it an “inheritance”
something one does not work for but is had by right as His fellow or joint
heirs. This cannot be something temporal but eternal.
Chase
Brother Sing, why do you keep saying they are all of one "flock"?
Where do you get that in the context?
The purpose of using the sheep and goat contrast is to demonstrate that sheep
are members of the shepherd's flock and goats are not, thus the division. The
general setting of the passage is all of humanity is gathered before the Son of
Man as He sits on His throne. Nothing in the context indicates that ONLY
children of God are gathered before the Son of Man. It says all nations are
gathered before Him. So unless you are a Universalist that believes every
single human being is a child of God, then your position doesn't make sense to
me.
Also, if goats are children of God here and belonging to the shepherd's flock,
then it is the ONLY place in Scripture where goats are used to represent
children of God. The rest of the Scripture categorically uses sheep to
represent children of God, never goats. Read John 10 about the Good Shepherd
and His sheep..... funny there's no mention of goats there, or defining "sheep
and goats" as both belonging to the same Shepherd, which would be
consistent with you interpretation.
Brother Dan has the nailed down the proper distinction..... HIS sheep from THE
goats........ one possessive showing ownership, and the other generic showing
no ownership (in contrast). It does not say HIS sheep from HIS goats..... If
words and language mean anything, then I think this distinction must be taken
into consideration. There is an obvious difference in the language used to
describe the sheep versus the language used to describe the goats, in this
sentence.
AND, the context of the passage ends with the last verse of Mat 25, talking
about the sheep GO AWAY into ETERNAL life and the goats GO AWAY into
everlasting punishment. It clearly tells us here the primary reason and end
result of why the Son of Man separates the sheep from the goats (v.32)......
Hardly talking about temporal judgment here, when it explicitly mentions
"eternal"!
[The text doesn't say ETERNAL life; it says life eternal. They are not the
same. Time in hell is still in the real of the temporal; eternity begins after
the great judgment. Between death and resurrection, we are still in the realm
of time. ~~ sing]
Sing F Lau
Brother Dan,
2. I strongly believe that the LIFE ETERNAL (or eternal life) and
EVERLASTING LIFE are synonymous. Since the gospel of John has been involved,
please allow me to quote John 3:15 & 16 (KJV)…
“… should not perish, but have eternal life.” (v.15)
“… should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (v.16)
The expression “…UNTO life eternal…” in John 4:36, John 12:25, etc. is not the
same as “…TO HAVE life eternal…”. The former is reflective of life eternal, the
latter is causative.
====================
Here the 4 usage of the term "life eternal"
Mt 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous
into life eternal.
Joh 4:36 And he that reapeth receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life
eternal: that both he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together.
Joh 12:25 He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in
this world shall keep it unto life eternal.
Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God,
and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
From these 4 usages, it seems clear that:
- Eternal life is a present possession through the begetting activity of the
Triune God, making a man fit for eternal glory after the resurrection.
- Life eternal is the blessed state to be entered into by those that possessed
eternal life... and requires effort there INTO / UNTO.
Eternal as an adjective speaks of the divine quality of the life begotten by
God.
I do agree that eternal and everlasting are sometimes used synonymously. Still,
eternal speaks of the divine quality, which is necessarily everlasting.
Sing F Lau
Brother Dan
1. Nothing in the passage (Matt.25 31-46) where Jesus Christ expressed his
EXPECTATION of both the sheep and the goats to do good works (note I don’t
advocate antinomianism); instead, he simply stated the evident difference of
the works of the ‘righteous” from that of the “accursed (v.41&46). The
passage has no imperative tone where Jesus expected anything – it is
DESCRIPTIVE, He simply stated declaratively the difference.
================
These are the words of the King to those represented by goats...
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.
If there were no expectation, then the complaints of "ye gave me no
meat... ye gave me no drink... ye took me not in... ye visited me not" are
groundless!
There is no need for imperative to validate legitimate complaint against the
failure to meet the expected duties.
No just expectation, no just BASIS of complaint.
Sing F Lau
Brother Dan,
3. I believe the “kingdom” prepared from the foundation of the world is the
eternal abode of the righteous (v.34). Jesus calls it an “inheritance”
something one does not work for but is had by right as His fellow or joint
heirs. This cannot be something temporal but eternal.
==========
There is NOT the slightest hint that what is recorded here happens at the
resurrection.
I have said the three parables speak of the SAME EVENT...
- the wise and foolish virgins
- the faithful and unfaithful servants
- the sheep and the goats; the obedient and disobedient.
The foolish virgins, unfaithful servants and the goats are in the SAME
category, and the SAME event is spoken of.
Therefore the kingdom spoken of CANNOT be the eternal abode when the children
of God enter after the resurrection.
The non-elect are condemned to the lake of fire for their COMMISSIONS of sins
These goats are judged for their failure to do the just duties expected of
them.
The GOATS just DO NOT fit the Scriptures' own description of the non-elect.
Thanks.
Sing F Lau
Brother Chase,
"Nothing
in the context indicates that ONLY children of God are gathered before the Son
of Man. It says all nations are gathered before Him. So unless you are a Universalist
that believes every single human being is a child of God, then your position
doesn't make sense to me."
=========
The mud of universalist won't stick on my dirty singlet!
Mt 25:32 - "And before him shall be gathered all nations...."
Compare this with Mt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in
all the world for a witness unto ALL NATIONS; and then shall the end come.
The obvious reference in Mt 24:14 is that the gospel of the kingdom shall be
preached in all the world for a witness unto all the nations in which the JEWS
were scattered up to 70AD, and then the end shall come (the end of the old
earthly theocratic Israel.)
Ro 16:26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets,
according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to ALL NATIONS
for the obedience of faith:
Ac 2:5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of EVERY
NATION under heaven.
Col 1:6 Which is come unto you, as it is in ALL THE WORLD; and bringeth forth
fruit, as it doth also in you, since the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace
of God in truth:
Consider the goats... look at them carefully. If you believe they fit the
Scriptures' own description of the dead in trespasses and sins, remain in what
you believe. I have been there for MANY years too until I begin reading the
Scriptures myself. I concede I may still be wrong... I do that especially when
PBs disagree with me!
The picture of ONE shepherd having one flock of sheep and goats is used to
illustrate the obedient and disobedient among His flock. That's simple enough
for me. A shepherd having goats in his flock that are not his that he needs to
separate from his sheep is at best a FICTION, a good fable.
Thanks.
Sing F Lau
Brother Chase,
Also, if goats are children of God here and belonging to the shepherd's
flock, then it is the ONLY place in Scripture where goats are used to represent
children of God. The rest of the Scripture categorically uses sheep to
represent children of God, never goats.
=======
Put the three stories side by side...
- the wise and foolish virgins
- the faithful and unfaithful servants
- the sheep and the goats.
You have a point... ONE point only.
The rest of Scripture categorically uses sheep to represent children of God,
never goats.
Here the Scriptures uses the goats to represent DISOBEDIENT children of God.
Goats are in the category of foolish and unfaithful among God's children.
Chase
Brother Sing,
I wasn't trying to throw mud at you... Just trying to understand....
Can you at least admit that the context doesn't explicitly define the goats as
being part of the "flock"?
[If the
goats are not part of the flock, then why the need to separate/divide them from
the sheep? I fear you have thrown away common sense. sing] That's a conclusion based
upon your own reasoning, which is based upon other positions different than my
own. We are never going to agree on the details of this passage because we
don't agree on the overall context and basic setting of the passage. (And by
the passage I mean Mat 25:31-46 only.) You believe it is referring to the
events leading up to and including 70 AD of how God judged natural Israel. I
believe it is referring to the End Time judgment when all of humanity stands
before God, and then are separated, and then are sent to their respective
eternal states, as the last verse of Mat 25 states.
Please allow me to try to illustrate what I mean:
1) End Time Judgment View -- Since we both agree (I think) that there will be
an end time judgment in which all of humanity will
stand before God, I think we can at least agree in principle that this is the
only time ever in human history in which it could be said that all of humanity
stood before God at one time, in one setting, at one event. So if one takes
this view of the Mat 25 passage above, then they are forced to interpret His
sheep and the goats as elect and non-elect, respectively. Else, you've got a
Universalist monstrosity in which only children of God are present at the end
time judgment, obedient and disobedient. (This is why I brought up Universalist
earlier..... Not to throw mud, but to try and point out the logical conclusion
of this position if taking sheep and goat as both being elect.) So, as you can
see, under this view the idea of there being one big "flock" in which
both sheep and goat belong to makes no sense, because the flock would then have
to be all of humanity, which would mean the Shepherd's flock is all of
humanity, which would mean everyone's a child of God, which is Universalist.
(Remember, all of this is dependent upon and relative to an End Time Judgment
view of Mat 25:31-46.)
2) 70 AD Judgment of Israel View -- This view is obviously quite different than
the previous one, so it's logical flow and logical end will be quite different
also. Since the 70 AD view has nothing to do with the End Time Judgment,
"all of humanity" is removed from the thought process. So if
"And before him shall be gathered all nations" is not referring to
all of humanity, then what is it referring to in this view? It must be
referring to believers from OUT OF every nation (Jew AND Gentile) that have
part in the New Testament Kingdom of Christ here on earth. Thus, under this
view, the only interpretation of sheep and goat that makes sense is obedient
children of God and disobedient children of God, respectively. Else, you would
have a monstrosity in which the non-elect would have a part in the New
Testament Kingdom of Christ. (A monstrosity, indeed!) So, if one takes this
view, I would say that it would be correct to interpret sheep and goat as
obedient and disobedient children of God, because that would be the best
interpretation that this view allows.
My point is this: Our disagreement is not really over the interpretation of
sheep and goat. That is merely a symptom of a deeper, more underlying
disagreement. Our real disagreement is over the basic context and setting of
the overall passage. And, as demonstrated above, what we believe about the
basic context and overall setting of this passage determines what we believe
about all the details of that passage. Based upon which view you hold, your
logical conclusions will come out quite differently.
If you would like more info and reasoning as to why I personally hold View #1
-- "The End Time Judgment" view, then please consult the following
article:
http://marchtozion.com/.../661-comments-on-matthew-2531-46
[sing: "all
nations" is conveniently equated as all humanity.
That's wrongly dividing the word of truth. Check here:
Mat 24:9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall
kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's
sake. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world
for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end
come.
Mat 25
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.
Julius
Oh jerualem...how I woud have "GATHERED" but you would not. Was this
gathering to the eternal heaven? Could disobedience affect their eternal
destination? No. Matthew 24 deals with the destruction of jerusalem. Matthen 25
begins with then. Matthew 25 is the kingdom after the Day of Judgment. Matthew
25 wise and foolish virgins is the kingdom after. The time world is still
advancing. Matthew 24 is not the end of the time world. It is the end of the
Jewish world.
[ sing -
Matthew 25 speaks of the judgment of the Jewish world, a continuation of the
end of the Jewish world spoken in Matt 24! Isn't it so obvious? Why do you want
to push Matt 25 few thousands years forward into the future? The obedient and
the disobedient of God's children among them are judged.
Sing F Lau
Brother Chase, consider this then for the overall setting and basic context...
Matthew 25:6 And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom
cometh; go ye out to meet him.
Matthew 25:19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and
reckoneth with them.
Matthew 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..
Are these three speaking of the same PERSON (the bridegroom, the lord, and Son
of man/king) and the same COMING and the same PEOPLE that belongs to Him. This
would give a good overall setting and basic context.
What is so hard to accept when the Bible uses goats to represent disobedient
children of God?
In any case, where does the Bible ever use goats to represent the non-elect?
Sing F Lau
Brother Dan,
There are sheep... there are lost sheep... there are sheep that are found
(salvation already applied)... of the found sheep there are they that have gone
astray and make shipwreck of the faith, there are those that are obedient, and
there are disobedient, there are UNbelieving ones... In Matt 25 goats are used
to describe the unbelieving ones!
Charles
Chase, are you advocating a premillennial position rather than an a-millennial?
I discovered last Sunday that many PB preachers hold to a premillennial view.
When I inquired of the preacher he said the Sonny and David Pyles were
pre-millenial, but not the typical pre-mil we know of today.
Sing F Lau
Brother Chase, let me suggest that your view is similar to the very popular
reformed calvinistic view... the sheep are the elect, and ALL of them are
believing and faithful and obedient... they persevered in a life of faith and
holiness, evidenced in serving the Lord so gladly but so unconsciously!!! All
those who don't CANNOT possibly be God's children at all.
No, I don't believe that the sheep and goats speak of the End Time Judgment.
Keep speaking... we will get close to the truth if students of God's word just
grill each other tenderly! Good night.
Charles
Sing, are they preserved or are they persevering?
Sing F Lau
Charles, I see why you asked. I meant "they persevered in a life of faith
and holiness..." That's a popular reformed and calvinistic doctrine. See
sheep and goats in term of the elect and non-elect, and all the elect
persevering in a life of faith and holiness fit that calvinistic doctrine just
right.
God's act of calling a man into the state of grace and salvation is an
immutable act.
I'm not sure if any preservation is needed. Preservation is needed only if
there are real forces that can cause to reverse or undo what God has done.
[no further comment]
