CORRECTING MISUNDERSTANDINGS ABOUT THE “PARABLE” OF THE SHEEP AND GOATS

Several passages in the Gospels can be difficult to understand; as a result some are often misinterpreted. One such passage is the “Parable of the Sheep and Goats” (Matthew 25.31-46).  The problem concerning this passage is that some approach it as if it simply provides general instructions about how believers should behave, which is inaccurate because it is very imprecise. I hesitate to even refer to it as a “parable” because of this common misconception; nonetheless, it is regularly listed among the parables contained in the Gospels. Before continuing it may be helpful to explain a common purpose for many of Jesus’ parables. K. R. Snodgrass described the primary function of parables as follows: “Parables demand interpretation; they point to something else. They are not merely stories to enjoy. They hold up one reality to serve as a mirror of another . . . They are avenues to understanding, handles by which one can grasp the kingdom. Jesus told parables to confront people with the character of God’s kingdom and to invite them to participate in it and to live in accordance with it.” This explanation sufficiently explains the general purpose of many parables found in the Gospels; however, concerning the parable of the sheep and goats it provides an opportunity for significant misinterpretations, one to which many have fallen victim. Consequently, the following is a discussion of some of the more common misinterpretations of this passage.

1. The passage does not describe a “characteristic” of the Kingdom of God; instead it describes an actual future global event involving the physical governing presence of the Kingdom of God upon the Earth. The specific event is identified in the passage’s introduction, which is the coming of the “Son of Man” (i.e., the literal return of the Lord Jesus Christ to establish his geo-political messianic kingdom). Failing to observe that verse 31 foretells of an actual future event means that some will misunderstand this passage. Jesus often promised that he would return to earth (Matt 16.27, 24.30; Lk 21.27-28; Rev 3.11, 22.7, 12, and 20). Likewise, he also foretold of a great future judgment that will separate all unbelievers from the people of God (Matt 13.24-30, 47-50, 25.1-13). However, nowhere else than in this passage did he explain with such precision the timing and method of the judgment that will occur after his return and before the commencement of his Millennial Kingdom. Consequently, the rest of the passage describes this singular major event that will occur immediately after he returns and gains control of over the world’s population. The purpose of this event will be to determine who will inherit the benefits of his Millennial Kingdom, and who will be reserved in death for the final “White Throne” judgment.

2. The separation of the sheep from the goats in verses 32-33 is the definitive judgment concerning survival and entrance into Jesus’ kingdom. This judgment involves a great division, and this bi-polar separation is determined according to one’s spiritual state of being; specifically, whether or not they have been united with Christ through spiritual rebirth. One should note that this division occurs before there is any discussion concerning an individual’s works, deeds, or transgressions. Jesus’ use of animals is why the passage is often categorized as a parable, because within it he used an agricultural practice of his day as an analogy describing this great separation of humanity. However, the rest of the passage does not discuss general “characteristics” of godliness, but of a real individual accounting of every person that survives the Great Tribulation. Everyone from around the entire world that survives the dreadful seven-year Tribulation period will have a moment of personal evaluation before the Lord Jesus Christ as described in verses 32-33. This judgment will identify whether one truly has been born again through the spiritual rebirth that is found only in the Lord Jesus Christ (John 3.16, 36, 14.6; Acts 4.12), or if they are an unbeliever and thus unregenerate (John 3.36; Heb 2.3). Simply put, in order for anyone to be recognized as a “sheep” that one must have been born a sheep. In other words, a goat can’t become a sheep by behaving like a sheep. Sheep are sheep through their birth not their behavior. An animal’s behavior does not determine its nature, its nature is determined by its birth.

3. Verses 34-45 do not explain what is required for one to “become” a sheep. This is by far the greatest misunderstanding of this passage. Many have been taught that if they do what Jesus commended his sheep for doing in verses 35-40, then those “good deeds” will turn them into sheep. In other words, if they do these specific good works, then they will earn entrance into Jesus’ Millennial Kingdom. Nothing can be further from the truth. It is important to remember that the decisive identification and separation of the goats from the sheep has already occurred at the initial judgment. The decisive nature of this judgment is also observable by the type of evaluation that occurs afterwards in verses 34-45. In order to comprehend the significance of this initial judgment, one must recognize who the sheep and goats represent. The sheep are obviously those who entrusted themselves to the Lord Jesus Christ, and the goats are those that rejected him. And it is this clear identification that is the determinative factor with respect to the types of evaluations the two species receive. For the sheep, there is only commendation for what they did to benefit the cause of Christ (35-40). Conversely, the goats are punished for their apathetic rejection of the Lord Jesus Christ (41-45). A critical observation concerning Jesus’ evaluation is that he only commends the sheep while making no mention of any of their iniquities, while the goats are only punished for their iniquities with no reference to any of their good deeds. This clear judicial differential should be extremely enlightening. Christians commit the same exact sins that the goats are condemned for every day, and every day unbelievers conduct sacrificial acts of mercy and compassion toward others. Nevertheless, none of the good deeds performed by goats will have any impact upon why they are prevented from entering the Millennial Kingdom. Moreover, all sheep will be allowed to enter the kingdom in spite of their sins precisely because they were all paid for by the Lord Jesus Christ. Similarly, all the goats will be rejected despite their acts of compassion precisely because they rejected the gift of salvation that God graciously offers all through the cross of Jesus Christ. There will be no goats that are so good that they enter the Millennial Kingdom, and not one sheep will be relegated to the fate of the goats (Jn 10.25-30). As previously stated, their different destinies will be determined by their birth, not their behavior. Sheep will be only commended for their faith and loyalty to Christ, and goats will suffer because of their rejection and apathy towards Christ.

4. Lastly, the acts that Jesus commends or condemns throughout the passage are not simply general acts of compassion, but specific acts that come with great risk, which is the danger that those who perform them may be associated with the Lord Jesus Christ. Anyone using this particular passage to teach that Jesus has called his followers to engage in general acts of compassion do not fully comprehend the world’s spiritual climate just before his return, which will be an atmosphere that is globally anti-Christian and Anti-Semitic. Consequently, when Jesus commends his sheep for supporting, harboring, or advocating for his impoverished or imprisoned “brothers,” he is referring to believing Jews and Gentiles that are committed to spreading the gospel throughout the world (Mk 3.35; Jn 6.29; Matt 24.14). In case you are unaware, the final years leading up to Jesus’ return will be one in which the universal distribution and management of the world’s diminishing resources will be controlled by a universal centralized government, one in which the Anti-Christ will inevitably ascend to power (Rev 13.15-17). This global government will progressively and incrementally classify the prophetic identification of sin as hate speech that promotes sedition and encourage anarchy. In short, any religion that does not promote diversity and inclusivism, but claims exclusivity with respect to God, heaven, or salvation will be systematically repressed, condemned, and inevitably outlawed. Consequently, anyone publicly proclaiming the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ during that time will be viewed by the global community as “the least of these.” This is understood by Jesus’ repetitive use of first person pronouns in verses 42-43, in which he identifies the great sin of the goats as their rejection of him and his gospel. For centuries many people have interpreted verses 42-45 as Jesus’ identification with the poor, oppressed, and needy, but this is not what this passage teaches. To be sure, Jesus instructed his followers to care for the poor, oppressed, and needy whenever possible. However, during the final few years leading up to his return, anyone that proclaims that salvation is found only in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ will be socially rejected and legally persecuted. Failing to recognize this observation demonstrates that one has little understanding of the global climate of the “last days” before Jesus’ return, which is a critical element to properly interpreting this passage.

The parable of the Sheep and Goats is in many ways not a typical parable. Consequently, it may be better to describe it simply as an “illustration,” one in which Jesus used an agricultural analogy to describe a literal future event. Therefore, this parable’s primary purpose is not to teach about a general “characteristic” of the Kingdom of God. Instead, it foretells and explains a real and great future judgment and division that will determine who enters Jesus’ Millennial Kingdom. The primary purpose of the Parable of the Sheep and Goats is to foretell of a wonderful future for believers and a terrible end for all unbelievers. This assured future is why the church must be fiercely dedicated to proclaiming the gospel and the ministry of discipleship. If she loses this essential and central focus, then Jesus’ premonition about his impending arrival will become reality, which was “However, when the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on the earth?” (Lk 18.8).

1. K. R. Snodgrass, “Parables,” in Dictionary of the Jesus and the Gospels, ed. Joel B. Green and Scot McKnight (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1992), 596-97.

Monte Shanks Copyright © 2019

 

Read Full Post »

THE BIBLE, THE “CULTURAL MANDATE,” AND LIBERAL CREEP

This past summer I had to get rid of an uninvited resident in our home, which was a 3 1/2 foot snake.  It had lived with us for 3 or 4 years.  How do I know? I know because I counted at least 5 skin sheds in our basement.  I discovered that mice were entering our house through a hole in our external wall that was meant for the utilities.  Apparently a young snake also had crept through it, and once inside it began feeding on a steady diet of mice.  It eventually outgrew the hole; consequently, it became a permanent resident.  If you didn’t know, snakes have a foul odor, leave feces, and would make my wife sell our home if she knew we had one living with us.  Sure, it was solving the mouse problem, but snakes present greater threats, such as Salmonella, viruses, and parasites.  Snakes usually arrive through small cracks, but little snakes become big snakes, and once established they are difficult to catch and cause extensive damage well before it is visually obvious.  A friend helped me to catch it, and later that day he released it into the wild.  Afterwards, I had to remove all the insulation, thoroughly clean and disinfect the entire wall, and then install new insulation.  The entire experience was nerve racking, costly, and messy to say the least.

Unfortunately, there is a serpent-inspired deception that often creeps into Christian organizations and churches. It’s the deception that Christianity’s focus should be on “culture” instead of making worshipers of the Lord (Jn 4.23-24), disciples of Christ (Matt 28.18-20), and proclaiming that salvation is found in no other name than Jesus (Luke 24.45-48; Jn 14.6; Acts 4.12).  I bring this up because I recently received a disturbing email from an “Evangelical leader” explaining that at creation humanity received a “Cultural Mandate,” which she claims is found in Gen 1.28; consequently, the organization that she is president of was to embrace this mandate.  First, it needs to be stated that this is patently flawed interpretation of what the passage actually communicates, or a complete misunderstanding of what the terms “cultural” and “mandate” emphasize, or both.  Regrettably, I’ve seen this misdirection before in other ministries with which I was involved.  This focus is how liberalism creeps into the church, and when established inevitably leads to more liberalism, which always causes damage in whatever Christian institutions it takes up residence, and the results are usually catastrophic.

First, it is necessary to address the assertion that Gen 1.28 reveals that God gave humanity a mandate that is culturally focused.  Before doing it is important to define the terms “culture” and “mandate.” When used as a noun the word “mandate” means: “the authority to carry out a policy or course of action”; or when a verb as: “to give (someone) authority to act in a certain way.”  And culture is simply defined as: “the arts and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement regarded collectively.”  With these definitions in mind, it is clear that God did not give Adam and Eve a cultural mandate in Genesis 1.28; he did not tell them to “go and act a certain way,” and to do so in a manner that would be “regarded collectively.”  Instead, he gave Adam and Eve the “Human Commission” to procreate so as to fill the earth, and to properly manage it.  How they did so was up to them, and they were free to fulfill God’s commission in whatever manner they chose, that is so long as they did not break the singular prohibition ordained by him.  In fact, as humanity expanded they were free to fulfill this commission in different ways with different values and methods.  Consequently, diverse cultures are the natural by-products of human communities and their collective free will.  Consequently, God did not give Adam and Eve a mandate to produce a specific culture, and there is a simple reason why his commission did not require the creation of a specific type of culture.  God did not focus on culture because it is impossible for humanity to live by the same cultural values and behaviors everywhere on this ecologically and geographically diverse planet.  People in Alaska don’t and can’t act like people in the Caribbean, and people in Afghanistan don’t and can’t act like people in Boston, and people in Sweden don’t and can’t act like people in Venezuela—I think you get the point.  Moreover, communities even have subcultures within them, and they often disagree about what is the best way for individuals to act within their greater societies.  Furthermore, there is nothing in the Bible “mandating” that the world’s diverse people groups behave and act in the same manner.  For example, the Mosaic Covenant found in the Old Testament was to a significant degree a “cultural mandate” that God gave to the Jews while they lived in the Promise Land—now to be clear, it was not just a cultural mandate.  Nevertheless, God did not give this same covenant to the Egyptians, the Chinese, or the Africans.  Were these gentile people groups obligated to obey the universal moral commandments that God has implanted within the human conscience (Rom 2.14-16), commandments that are also codified in the Mosaic Covenant (e.g., do not murder, do not steal, etc.)? Of course they were.  Nevertheless, Gentiles were not expected to implement and abide by the Mosaic Covenant.  Consequently, God has not given to humanity a cultural mandate, and to suggest otherwise is to invite misdirection, deception, and inevitably liberalism into Christian organizations.

Why am I so disturbed by this email, because it reveals that the same liberalism that I’ve witnessed time and time before has once again successfully crept into another Christian organization through its leadership.  The frustrating question is why does liberalism and this type of deception continually slither its way into historically Christian institutions?  It occurs simply because carnal leaders turn their attention from trusting God and focusing on his commission to the church to being oriented towards results and controlling human behavior.  Leaders feel the pressure to produce results, and if spiritual conversion and growth are slow in being realized, then they feel the need to manipulate human behavior in the hopes that doing so will promote a specific type of growth that they envision and value.  And once you start trying to control how people act it becomes necessary to control how they think.  Once Christian institutions or churches begin to bring in leaders who approach ministry in this manner, then liberalism is the inevitable outcome.  It occurs because leaders expect those under them to validate, accept, and disseminate their values, many of which are simply cultural or social in nature, and tragically are scripturally invalid because they are the products of poor hermeneutics.  And people that don’t share or promote these same values are purged from the organization because they do not adhere to the new liberal orthodoxy. Inevitably, the cultural and social values of the leaders become the goal of the organization, even if they are contrary to the scriptures.  Afterwards, a type of constriction begins, in which more and more biblically grounded people are squeezed out and replaced with those that are socially and politically minded.  The end results are ministries that seek more participants regardless of their spiritual worldview or commitment to the scriptures.  It is then that a tipping point is passed where the participants begin educating their leaders about what they will tolerate.  When that occurs, then the leaders stop leading and become “community organizers” that move to the will of the collective culture of the organization.  They become “servants” of the community rather than biblical leaders.  Once this transition occurs, then liberalism has matured and is entrenched.  The despicable truth is that liberals attract other liberals, promote liberalism, produce more liberals, all of whom advocate for greater liberalism, and they inevitably reject biblically grounded believers just as surely as snakes eat mice.

God did not give humanity a cultural mandate; instead, he commissioned it with the goal of global population and the responsibility to properly and efficiently manage the earth.  God has not commissioned humanity to think, behave, and embrace a monolithic culture throughout the planet.  And most importantly, culture is certainly not the focus of the church—its focus should be on the Great Commission. And a characteristic of all authentic believers is the Great Commandment, which is to love the Lord with all you are and all you have.  If Christians genuinely internalized this command, then we will authentically live out the Lord’s love to those around us.  And if the church and Christians passionately embrace the Great Commission and Great Commandment, then we will impact cultures all across our world.  How will this impact look? That depends, but it will look differently in Mobile, in Moscow, in Mumbai, in Maracay, in Mombasa, in Marrakesh, and in Manila.  And even though these cultures will have different behaviors, tastes, and laws, Christians within them will have the same fundamental beliefs, as well as eerily similar ethics, values, attitudes, and behaviors, all of which are grounded in the scriptures and biblical orthodoxy. Our focus should not be on emphasizing and creating a specific culture, but lovingly reaching people for Christ and discipling them so that they worship the Lord, glorify God, and reach others for Christ.  But if we are misdirected by carnal and misguided leaders into focusing on a culture that they believe produces a certain type of collective social behavior, values, and political groupthink, then we are being deceived by serpents that have come among us, which is to the delight of the great serpent himself.

Monte Shanks, Copyright © 2017

Read Full Post »