Separation of the Sheep and Goats: A National, Not Worldwide, Judgment

Separation of the Sheep and the Goats: A National, Not Worldwide, Judgment

Below is the ninth of multiple excerpts of commentary from The Parousia, the late 19th-century masterpiece on the Second Coming by James Stuart Russell. [Note: In preceding excerpts that have been posted on this blog, Russell has been setting forth his argument that Jesus' apocalyptic prophecy on the Mount of Olives in Matthew 24 (with parallels at Mark 13 and Luke 21) is a continuous whole---one that cannot be broken into artificial time divisions that allegedly distinguish between near and distant events. Russell contends that Jesus' prophecy, made in A.D. 30, was fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, which occurred in A.D. 70. Russell has argued that both chapters 24 and 25 of Matthew "form one continuous, consecutive, and homogeneous discourse. So it must have been regarded by the disciples, to whom it was addressed...." In the excerpt below, Russell deals with the well-known parable-like account of the separation of the sheep and the goats.] "The Sheep and the Goats. "MATT. XXV. 31-46 [Matt. 25:31-46]---'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: and before him shall be gathered all (the) nations; and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats; and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. ...' "Up to this point we have found the discourse of Jesus on the Mount of Olives one connected and continuous prophecy, having sole reference to the great catastrophe impending over the Jewish nation, and which was to take place, according, to our Lord's prediction, before the existing generation should pass away [Matt. 24:34]. Now, however, we encounter a passage which, in the opinion of almost all commentators, cannot be understood as referring to Jerusalem or Israel, but to the whole human race and the consummation of all things. If the consensus of expositors can establish [prove] an interpretation, no doubt this passage must be regarded as wholly quitting the subject of the disciples' interrogatory [Matt. 24:3---"Tell us, when shall these things be?..."] and [apparently] describing the last scene of all in this world's history. "It may be freely admitted that this parable, or parabolic description, has many points of difference from the preceding portion of our Lord's discourse. It seems to stand separate and distinct from the rest, [seemingly] without the connecting links which we have found in other sections. Still more, it seems to take a wider range than Jerusalem and Israel; it reads like the judgment, not of a nation, but of all nations; not of a city or a country, but of a world; not a passing crisis, but final consummation. "It is therefore with a deep sense of the difficulty of the task that we venture to impugn [call into question] the interpretation of so many wise and good men, and to contend that the passage is not only an integral part of the prophecy, but also belongs wholly to the subject of our Lord's discourse,---the judgment of [1st-century] Israel and the end of the (Jewish) [or Old Covenant] age [in A.D. 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple]. "1. This parable, though in our [King James] English version [appears to be] standing apart and unconnected with the context [Matt. 25:31---"When the Son of man..."], is really connected by a very sufficient link with what goes before. This is apparent in the [original] Greek, where we find the particle [small word] de, the force of which is to indicate transition and connection,---transition to a new illustration, and connection with the foregoing context. [Henry] Alford, in his revised New Testament [translation], preserves the continuative particle---'But when the Son of man shall have come in his glory,' etc. It might with equal propriety be rendered -- And when,' etc. "2. This 'coming of the Son of man' has already been predicted by our Lord (Matt. xxiv. 30 [Matt. 24:30], and parallel passages), and the time expressly defined, being included in the comprehensive declaration, 'Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled' (Matt. xxiv. 34) [Matt. 24:34]. "3. It deserves particular notice that the description of the coming of the Son of man in his glory' given in this parable tallies in all points with that in Matt. xvi. 27, 28 [Matt. 16:27-28], of which it is expressly affirmed that it would be witnessed by some then present when the prediction was made. "It may be well to compare the two descriptions [in Matt. 16:27-28 and Matt. 25:31-33].... "Here the reader will note "(a) That in both passages the subject referred to is the same, viz. [that is] the coming of the Son of man---the Parousia [Second Coming]. "(b) In both passages He is described as coming in glory. "(c) In both He is attended by the holy angels. "(d) In both He comes as a King. 'Coming in his kingdom; ' He shall sit upon his throne; Then shall the King,' etc. "(e) 'In both He comes to judgment. "(f) In both the judgment is represented as in some sense universal. 'He shall reward every man;' 'Before him shall be gathered all the nations.' "(g) In Matt. xvi. 28 [Matt. 16:28] it is expressly stated that this coming in glory, etc., was to take place in the lifetime of some then present. This fixes the occurrence of the Parousia within the limit of a human life, thus being in perfect accord with the period defined by our Lord in His prophetic discourse. 'This generation shall not pass,' [Matt. 24:34] etc. "We are fully warranted, therefore, in regarding the coming of the Son of man in Matt. xxv. [25] as identical with that referred to in Matt. xvi. [16], which some of the disciples were to live to witness. "Thus, notwithstanding the words 'all the nations' in Matt. xxv. 32 [Matt. 25:32], we are brought to the conclusion that it is not the 'final consummation of all things' which is there spoken of, but the judgment of Israel at the close of the (Jewish) aeon or [Old Covenant] age. "4. But it will still be objected that a very formidable difficulty remains in the expression 'all the nations.' The difficulty, however, is more apparent than real; for--- "(1) It is not at all uncommon to find in Scripture universal propositions which must be understood in a qualified or restricted sense. ... "(2) There is great probability in the opinion that the phrase 'all the nations' is equivalent to 'all the tribes of the land' [Greek: pasai hai phulai tes ges] (Matt. xxiv. 30) [Matt. 24:30]. There is no impropriety in designating the tribes as nations. ... "In our Lord's time it was usual to speak of the inhabitants of Palestine as consisting of several nations. [The 1st-century Jewish historian] Josephus speaks of 'the nation of the Samaritans,' 'the nation of the Batanaeans,' 'the nation of the Galileans,'---using the very word (Greek: ethnos) which we find in the passage before us. Judea was a distinct nation, often with a king of its own; so also was Samaria; and so with Idumea, Galilee, Paraea, Batanea, Trachonitis, Ituraea, Abilene,---all of which had at different times princes with the title of Ethnarch, a name which signifies the ruler of a nation. It is doing no violence, then, to the language to understand panta ta ethne as referring to 'all the nations' of Palestine, or 'all the tribes of the land.' "(3) This view receives strong confirmation from the fact that the same phrase in the apostolic commission (Matt. xxviii. 19) [Matt. 28:19], 'Go and teach all the nations,' does not seem to have been understood by the disciples as referring to the whole population of the globe, or to any nations beyond Palestine. It is commonly supposed that the apostles knew that they had received a charge to evangelise the world. If they did know it, they were culpably remiss in not acting upon it. But it is presumable that the words of our Lord did not convey any such idea to their mind. The learned Professor [Edward] Burton observes : "It was not until fourteen years after our Lord's ascension that St. Paul travelled for the first time, and preached the gospel to the Gentiles. Nor is there any evidence that during that period the other apostles passed the confines of Judea.' "The fact seems to be that the language of the apostolic commission [also known as the Great Commission] did not convey to the minds of the apostles any such ecumenical ideas. Nothing more astonished them than the discovery that 'God had granted to the Gentiles also repentance unto life' (Acts xi. 18) [Acts 11:18]. When St. Peter was challenged for going in 'to men uncircumcised, and eating with them,' [Acts 11:3] it does not appear that he vindicated his conduct by an appeal to the terms of the apostolic commission. If the phrase 'all the nations' had been understood by the disciples in its literal and most comprehensive sense, it is difficult to imagine bow they could have failed to recognise at once the universal character of the gospel, and their commission to preach it alike to Jew and Gentile. It required a distinct revelation from heaven to overcome the Jewish prejudices of the apostles, and to make known to them the mystery 'that the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ by the gospel ' (Ephes. iii. 6) [Ephesians 3:6]. "In view of these considerations we hold it reasonable and warrantable to give the phrase 'all the nations' a restricted signification, and to limit it to the nations of Palestine. In this sense it harmonises well with the words of our Lord, 'Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of man be come' (Matt. x. 23) [Matt. 10:23]. "5. Once more, the peculiar test of character which is applied by the Judge in this parabolic description is strongly opposed to the notion that this scene represents the final judgment of the whole human race. It will be observed that the destiny of the righteous and the wicked is made to turn on the treatment which they respectively offered to the suffering disciples of Christ. All moral qualities, all virtuous conduct, all true faith, are apparently thrown out of the reckoning, and acts of charity and beneficence to distressed disciples are alone taken into account. ...Is this the doctrine of St. Paul? Is this the ground of justification before God set forth in the New Testament? Are we to conclude that the everlasting destiny of the whole human race, from Adam to the last man, will finally turn on their charity and sympathy towards the persecuted and suffering disciples of Christ? "The difficulty is a grave one, on the supposition that we have here a description of 'the general judgment at the last day,' and ought not to be slurred over, as commonly it is. How could the nations which existed before the time of Christ be tried by such a standard? How could the nations which never heard of Christ...be tried by such a standard? It is manifestly inappropriate and inapplicable. But the difficulty is easily and completely solved if we regard this judicial transaction [concerning the sheep and goats] as the judgment of Israel at the close of the Jewish aeon [in A.D 70]. It is the rejected King of Israel who is the judge: it is the hostile and unbelieving generation, the last and worst of the nation, that is arraigned before His tribunal. Their treatment of His disciples, especially of His apostles, might most fitly and justly be made the criterion of character in 'discerning between the righteous and the wicked.' Such a test would be most appropriate in an age when Christianity was a persecuted faith, and this is evidently supposed by the very terms of the King's address: --- 'I was hungry, thirsty, a stranger, was naked, sick, and in prison.' The persons designated as 'these my brethren [Matt. 25:40],' and who are taken as the representatives of Christ Himself, are evidently [i.e., in an evident or clear manner] the apostles of our Lord, in whom He hungered, and thirsted, was naked, sick, and in prison. All this is in perfect harmony with the words of Christ to His disciples, when He sent them forth to preach---'He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me. ...And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward' (Matt. x. 40-42) [Matt. 10:40-42]."