Latest / Reformed Thinking / The Judgment of the Nations (Matthew 25:34-40)

Transcript

The Judgment of the Nations (Matthew 25:34-40) · Reformed Thinking

0:00
Usually when we discuss something like a medical
0:03
diagnosis, there's this there's a clear expectation of
0:06
precision. You know, right?
0:08
Yeah. Like you want hard facts?
0:10
Yes. If you fall and say you hurt
0:12
your arm, you go to the hospital.
0:14
The technician takes an X-ray and the doctor points to this
0:18
this jagged white line on the film.
0:20
Yeah, the diagnosis is totally visible right there.
0:22
Right. And the treatment plan is
0:23
obvious too. You see the break, You cast the
0:26
arm. You're looking for a totally
0:28
binary result. The bone is either fractured or
0:31
it's whole. There's really no no Gray area.
0:34
Yeah. And that visible proof is, well,
0:37
it's comforting. We want to place things into
0:39
neat categories like that. But then, you know, you step
0:41
into the world of human motivations or spiritual
0:44
realities and final judgments, and that X-ray machine just
0:48
stops working entirely. Yeah, it breaks down.
0:50
It totally breaks down. We're looking at a diagnostic
0:52
landscape that is just incredibly murky because we want
0:56
to know where people stand. We want a simple test to
0:59
separate the good from the bad. But parsing that out from the
1:02
outside looking in is, I mean, it's incredibly difficult.
1:05
It is the absolute definition of like diagnostic Muddy Waters.
1:10
Most of the time, we're really just guessing at what's actually
1:14
happening beneath the surface of a person's actions.
1:16
Yeah, because we can't see the heart.
1:18
Right. I mean, two people can perform
1:20
the exact well, the very same charitable deed, you know, yet
1:24
possess entirely different internal motivations.
1:27
Welcome to Reformed thinking. Today we are taking an ancient
1:30
text that claims to possess the perfect diagnostic scan of
1:35
humanity. We're doing a deep dive into two
1:37
highly rigorous exegetical sources that breakdown Matthew
1:41
25, specifically verses 34 through 46.
1:44
Yeah, this is the famous passage detailing the final judgment
1:48
separation of humanity into the the sheep and the goats, and the
1:51
reality of eternal punishment. Right, Heavy stuff.
1:54
And these sources, they approach the text with a level of
1:57
scrutiny that really forces the reader to confront some very
2:00
polarizing concepts. Oh, absolutely.
2:02
They leave no room for comfortable ambiguity.
2:04
Not at all. No, they really don't.
2:06
We're dealing with concepts debated for centuries here, but
2:11
before we move into the text, I need to make a really clear
2:14
disclaimer for you listening today.
2:15
Yeah, this is a necessary baseline to establish.
2:18
Right. So the sources are analyzing
2:21
today. They contain strong ideological
2:23
and political critiques. The authors specifically target
2:27
modern liberal theology. They criticize what's known as
2:30
the social Gospel, and they take direct aim at frameworks like
2:33
critical race theory. They are very upfront about that
2:36
in the text. They are.
2:38
So our mission today, just to be crystal clear, is entirely
2:42
neutral. We are not taking sides in any
2:44
of these contemporary political debates.
2:46
We are not endorsing the viewpoints of the original
2:48
authors, nor are we, you know, arguing against them.
2:51
Right. Our job as your guides on this
2:54
deep dive is simply to impartially report on the
2:56
arguments presented in these texts.
2:58
Yeah, just to unpack the exegesis and help you understand
3:00
the precise theological case these authors are building.
3:03
Because to understand the arguments in these sources, we
3:06
really have to look closely at the mechanics of the text
3:09
itself. The authors.
3:11
They rely heavily on 1st century historical context, a very
3:14
specific timeline of biblical prophecy, and the granular
3:19
details of Greek grammar. Yeah, you really can't grasp
3:23
their theological conclusions without understanding the syntax
3:26
the original author used. No, you can't.
3:29
So let's start with the setting, the when and the where, because
3:32
before we can look at the judgment itself, the sources
3:35
insist we establish the scene. So picture the physical
3:39
environment for a second. It's Tuesday evening of Passion
3:42
Week. Yeah, and that timing
3:43
establishes immediate tension because in just a matter of
3:46
days, the crucifixion is going to take place.
3:49
Right. Jesus is sitting on the Mount of
3:50
Olives, the text points out. The sun is setting and he's
3:53
looking down across the Kidron Valley at the Herodian Temple.
3:56
The physical atmosphere there is just thick.
3:58
Oh yeah, Israel is occupied by the Roman Empire.
4:01
There's massive political tension and the religious
4:04
leaders of the day have entirely rejected him.
4:06
He's just left the temple compound for the final time,
4:08
pronouncing desolation upon it, and he sits down with Peter,
4:12
James, John, and Andrew in private.
4:16
So paint the picture for me. Why does this specific
4:21
geographical location the Mount of Olives, why does that matter
4:25
so much to the authors of our sources?
4:27
The geography carries immense theological weight according to
4:31
the Old Testament prophet Zechariah.
4:33
Specifically in chapter 14, the Mount of Olives is the exact
4:36
location where the Messiahs feet are prophesied to touchdown at
4:40
his second coming. Oh wow, yeah, Zechariah
4:42
describes the mountain literally splitting in two.
4:45
So delivering A discourse about the end of the age from this
4:48
specific mountain creates a highly localized resonance for
4:51
those 1st century Jewish listeners.
4:53
Because they knew the prophecies.
4:54
Right. They knew this mountain was
4:55
deeply associated with final deliverance and, you know,
4:58
cosmic judgment. OK, so the sources build a very
5:01
specific theological framework on top of this geography.
5:05
They argue you must view this event through what they call
5:09
this is a mouthful, a dispensational premillennial and
5:13
pre tribulational framework. Yeah, those are some heavy
5:16
academic terms. Very heavy.
5:17
So how do these concepts alter the timeline of the passage?
5:21
Like what does that actually mean?
5:22
So those terms establish A strict sequence of events for
5:27
the author's theology. Dispensational means the authors
5:30
draw a hard distinction between the Church and the nation of
5:33
Israel. Like they're two separate
5:34
tracks. Right, two distinct entities in
5:37
God's administrative plan across history.
5:39
Then pre tribulational means they argue the church will be
5:42
removed from the earth prior to a period of unprecedented global
5:47
suffering known as the Great Tribulation.
5:49
OK and premillennial indicates their belief that Jesus will
5:53
return to earth literally and physically to establish 1000
5:57
year Kingdom. OK.
5:58
So based on that specific sequence, who is actually
6:01
standing in front of the judge in Matthew 25?
6:04
Because, I mean, the common assumption is that this is the
6:07
very end of time and every human who has ever lived is standing
6:10
in line. Yeah, and according to our
6:11
sources, that common assumption is entirely incorrect.
6:14
Wait, really? Yeah, this is not a general
6:17
judgment of humanity. The authors explicitly state
6:20
This is not the Bema Seat judgment.
6:22
In their framework, the Bema Seat is an evaluation of Church
6:26
Age believers for rewards. Right, based on the cultural
6:29
concept of the raised platform in Corinth where athletes
6:33
receive their garlands. Yes, they also clarify this is
6:36
not the Great White Throne Judgment which they place at the
6:38
very end of the thousand Year Kingdom specifically for the
6:42
resurrection of the wicked dead. So what is this then?
6:44
What we are looking at in Matthew 25, they argue, is the
6:47
judgment of the living nations. The living nations?
6:50
So you mean the people who are physically live on earth at the
6:54
end of this tribulation period? Yes, exactly.
6:57
I mean, this event occurs immediately after the Great
7:00
Tribulation, right? When Christ returns to establish
7:04
his earthly Kingdom, the nations of the earth have been gathered
7:08
and they are standing before him in their natural bodies, having
7:11
survived a global cataclysm. Wow.
7:14
You know, I think about like walking into a theater during
7:17
the final act of a really complex stage play.
7:19
Oh, that's a good way to look at.
7:21
It right because you see characters shouting, you see
7:23
this intense drama, but you have no idea what the stakes are
7:26
because you missed the first two hours of the plot.
7:28
If you walk in at the very end, you might assume it's just a
7:31
play about, I don't know, general human kindness.
7:33
Yeah, you totally misread it, right?
7:36
But if the author's timeline is correct, the plot is vastly more
7:40
specific. If we miss the preceding plot of
7:42
the tribulation, the global deception, the intense
7:45
persecution, we might misinterpret the nature of the
7:48
judgment entirely. That analogy hits the mark.
7:51
If you ignore the preceding tribulation, you just strip the
7:54
judgment of its historical and prophetic context.
7:57
Let me push back on behalf of the listener, though.
8:00
Why does the author insist so strongly that this is a literal
8:03
future event? I mean, why couldn't this simply
8:06
be a generalized moral fable, like a parable meant to teach us
8:10
to be good people and care for the poor in our everyday lives?
8:14
Well, the author points directly to the literal language used in
8:16
the opening of the passage. Verse 31 says when the Son of
8:20
Man comes in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then
8:24
he will sit on the throne of his glory.
8:26
So it's not metaphoric language. Right.
8:29
The text argues this indicates A definitive temporal and spatial
8:32
reality. It is a specific when and a
8:35
specific where. And the title Son of Man ties
8:38
directly back to Daniel Chapter 7, which describes A cosmic
8:41
sovereign figure receiving an everlasting diminishing.
8:44
Oh, OK. Furthermore, the text states,
8:46
all the nations will be gathered before him, so the author argues
8:50
that treating this as a mere fable strips Christ of his
8:52
actual, literal judicial authority.
8:55
It kind of reduces him from a judge to a philosopher.
8:57
Yes, it reduces A cosmic sovereign declaring final
9:01
justice into a philosopher offering life advice and to the
9:05
author. That is a severe error that
9:08
undermines the authority of Scripture.
9:10
OK, so we have the stage set. The timeline is fixed.
9:13
At the end of the tribulation, the judge is seated.
9:16
The passage describes the judge dividing the people into two
9:18
groups, the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
9:22
Let's look at how he evaluates that first group, the sheep.
9:25
So the evaluation begins with what the text calls the
9:28
sovereigns invitation. In verse 34 the king says, come,
9:32
you blessed of my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for
9:35
you from the foundation of the world.
9:36
Inherit. That is a very specific legal
9:38
concept. It is, and the source leans
9:41
heavily into the legal mechanics of that word.
9:43
The author aligns this verse directly with the Westminster
9:46
Confession of Faith, specifically chapter 3, which
9:49
deals with God's eternal decrees.
9:51
Oh OK. The argument is that an
9:53
inheritance is based on birthright and sonship.
9:56
It's determined by the father's will.
9:58
You do not earn an inheritance by clocking in and working for
10:01
hourly wages. Right in ancient Near Eastern
10:04
culture, promogeniture and sonship dictated the transfer of
10:07
wealth and land. You read a born into the family
10:10
or legally adopted into it? Exactly.
10:11
You don't submit an invoice for an inheritance, you receive it
10:15
because of your status within the family.
10:17
So it's not a transaction. No, not at all.
10:19
And the text notes this inheritance was prepared for.
10:23
I go from the foundation of the world.
10:25
The source argues. This is massive proof of
10:28
unconditional election and predestination.
10:30
Because it happened before they even existed.
10:32
Yes, the Kingdom was prepared for them before they could
10:36
perform a single good deed or bad deed.
10:39
The blessed state of the sheep is an action completed in the
10:41
past by the Father. Their salvation rests entirely
10:45
on the sovereign decree of God. But that brings up a massive
10:49
tension in the text, doesn't it? Because in the very next breath,
10:52
in verses 35 and 36, Jesus lists a series of actions.
10:56
Right, the feeding and clothing, yeah.
10:58
He says For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and
11:01
you gave me drink. I was a stranger and you took me
11:04
in. So if the inheritance was
11:07
already prepared from the foundation of the world, and
11:09
their salvation is based on birthright, why does Jesus list
11:14
all their good works as the reason they are being welcomed?
11:16
I mean, it sounds like they earned their spot.
11:18
Well, this raises a critical point regarding the grammar of
11:20
evidence. The source analyzes the specific
11:24
Greek causal conjunction used in that sentence.
11:27
The word is gar, which is translated As for.
11:31
The author argues that in this Greek syntax, the word gar
11:34
functions evidentially, not causatively, regarding their
11:38
salvation. Breakdown the difference between
11:40
evidential and causative for me. How does that practically change
11:43
the meaning of the sentence? Sure.
11:44
Think of it like a thermometer. Imagine a person who is sick.
11:48
A thermometer gives you visible, undeniable proof that the
11:51
patient has a fever, right? It reads 102°.
11:54
The high reading on the glass is the evidence of the fever.
11:57
But the thermometer didn't cause the fever.
12:00
A viral infection caused the internal temperature to rise.
12:04
The thermometer just proves the heat is present.
12:06
Oh, that's a great analogy. So according to the source, the
12:09
actions of the sheep, the feeding, the clothing, the
12:12
visiting are the visible proof of their internal salvation.
12:16
Those actions did not purchase the salvation.
12:18
The works of the fruit, not the root.
12:20
Yes, the works are the fruit of a regenerated nature, not the
12:25
root of their justification before God.
12:28
They provide proof of their blessed state.
12:30
That makes the distinction really clear.
12:33
The works validate the internal reality, and the source points
12:36
out another structural element to prove this right.
12:39
The psychological reaction of the sheep themselves, yes.
12:42
Look at verses 37 through 39. The sheep answer the king and
12:45
say, Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty
12:49
and give you drink? They're completely bewildered.
12:52
They have no idea what the king is talking about.
12:54
Right, and that surprise structurally proves to the
12:57
author that their motives were not mercenary.
12:59
Because if they were keeping score.
13:01
Exactly. If they had been doing these
13:03
good deeds as part of a checklist to earn their way into
13:06
heaven, they would have been keeping a meticulous Ledger.
13:08
They would have stepped up to the throne and presented their
13:11
receipts. Here's my invoice for five meals
13:13
and three prison visits. Yeah, they would have demanded
13:16
entrance based on their performance, but because they
13:19
are shocked, it proves they were not performing works to earn
13:22
merit. They were acting out of a
13:24
transformed nature. They loved because they had been
13:28
given a new heart that naturally produces love.
13:31
So it counters any system of works righteousness.
13:33
Completely, the author insists this utterly dismantles that
13:36
idea. Their actions with a natural
13:38
byproduct of who they had become.
13:40
But here is where the sources draw a massive line in the sand.
13:44
We have to talk about who these sheep were actually feeding and
13:46
clothing. This is a huge point.
13:48
Because Jesus praises them for their treatment of the least of
13:52
these my brethren. And the modern widespread
13:55
interpretation of that phrase is that brethren means anyone who
13:58
is poor, anyone who's marginalized, or anyone
14:01
suffering in general humanity. But our sources aggressively
14:04
reject that idea. They reject it thoroughly.
14:08
As we noted at the beginning, the author explicitly critiques
14:11
the modern liberal church and the Social Gospel for hijacking
14:14
these verses right. They argue that turning this
14:17
passage into a mandate for general philanthropic endeavors,
14:21
soup kitchens, or political activism is a severe exegetical
14:25
error. And again, to you listening, we
14:27
are just reporting the author's critique here, taking no stance
14:30
on the social Gospel itself. But we really need to understand
14:34
the linguistic argument the author uses to tear down that
14:37
widespread interpretation. Yeah, it's.
14:39
Fascinating. Because it comes down to the
14:41
Greek words Jesus chose to use, and more importantly, the words
14:44
he deliberately avoided. The linguistic breakdown is
14:47
rigorous. The author asks why did Jesus
14:50
avoid the Greek word plunician, that is the word for neighbor.
14:54
Jesus used pledgeon very deliberately in the parable of
14:57
the Good Samaritan. In that parable, he used it to
15:00
describe general humanity, transcending ethnic and
15:03
religious lines to define anyone in need as a neighbor.
15:06
So if he meant general humanity in Matthew 25, he could have
15:09
easily used collision. What about the word for poor?
15:12
I mean, there are plenty of verses about caring for the
15:14
poor. The Greek word for poor is
15:17
chichos. He did not use that either.
15:19
So what did he use? Instead, he specifically chose
15:23
the word adelphon, which translates to brother or
15:26
brethren. OK, but couldn't brother just
15:29
mean like the brotherhood of mankind?
15:31
Well, the source argues that in ancient Near Eastern extra
15:35
biblical usage, as well as Greco Roman literature, adelphos
15:38
overwhelmingly denotes a literal blood relative or a specific
15:43
member of an exclusive fraternity.
15:45
Exclusive Group. Right.
15:47
In the Roman world, a fraternity was a tight knit Guild or
15:50
association bound by strict oaths.
15:52
It wasn't just everybody. And the author also looks at how
15:55
Matthew defines that word elsewhere in his own Gospel,
15:58
right? Yes, in Matthew 1250, Jesus
16:00
explicitly defines his adelphos. He says, For whoever does the
16:04
will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and
16:07
mother. Oh wow, so he puts a boundary
16:09
around the term. The author uses this to prove
16:11
that adelphon is an exclusive group.
16:14
It is restricted to those who are doing the will of the
16:16
father. It is not a blanket term for all
16:19
of humanity. So if it does not mean general
16:22
humanity and we are placing this event at the end of the Great
16:25
Tribulation, who exactly are the brethren in this specific
16:29
scenario? In the context of the
16:31
Tribulation, the source strictly identifies these brethren as the
16:35
Jewish Remnant, the 144,000 mentioned in Revelation, and the
16:39
persecuted Tribulation Saints. The believers.
16:42
Yes, these are the specific emissaries bringing the gospel
16:46
of the Kingdom during a time of unprecedented global terror.
16:50
Let's look at the stakes of this action then.
16:52
Because if the Brethren are specifically Christian and
16:55
Jewish believers being hunted during the Tribulation, well,
16:58
giving them a cup of water or visiting them in prison takes
17:01
out a completely different meaning.
17:02
Oh, absolutely. It's not dropping off canned
17:04
goods at a local charity drive. No.
17:07
The author describes it as high treason against the Antichrist's
17:10
global system. During this prophetic timeline,
17:13
the Antichrist has established A worldwide economic and political
17:17
system. People are required to take the
17:19
mark of the beast to buy or sell.
17:21
The true followers of Yahweh are being hunted, starved, and
17:25
slaughtered. The state has criminalized their
17:27
very existence. Think about the modern analogs
17:31
the author alludes to here. Imagine the scenario where a
17:34
global government freezes your bank accounts because you handed
17:38
a sandwich to a religious dissident.
17:40
It's a terrifying thought. Right.
17:42
Imagine the kind of terror that would instill in the general
17:44
populace. If you're a gentile living in
17:47
that time and you find a starving, persecuted St. hiding
17:50
in an alley. Giving them food is a capital
17:53
offense, yes. It marks you as an enemy of the
17:56
state. It means risking your life, your
17:58
freedom, your ability to feed your own family.
18:00
You become an accessory to their so-called crimes.
18:03
And that's why feeding these specific people during the
18:06
tribulation is the ultimate test allegiance to the true King.
18:11
You are risking everything because you recognize the King's
18:14
authority in the faces of his persecuted messenger.
18:17
So that's why the King accepts those actions as undeniable
18:20
proof of saving faith. Yes, you would never risk the
18:24
wrath of the Antichrist unless you truly feared and loved the
18:27
King of Kings more. The sheer danger of the ACT
18:31
validates the internal regeneration of the person
18:34
performing it. When you frame it like that, the
18:37
gravity of the passage shifts entirely.
18:39
It moves from, you know, a civic duty to a life or death
18:42
declaration of allegiance. It's.
18:43
Radical obedience. It is which leads us to the
18:46
terrifying other side of this judgement, because if the sheep
18:49
are welcomed based on their dangerous allegiance to the
18:51
brethren, what is the legal ground for the condemnation of
18:54
the goats on the left? The tone of the passage becomes
18:57
incredibly severe in verses 41 through 46.
19:00
The king turns to the goats and issues the decree.
19:03
Depart from me, you cursed into the everlasting fire, prepared
19:06
for the devil and his angels. Depart from me, the text notes.
19:10
This is the ultimate, irreversible severance of all
19:12
common grace. It plunges them into absolute
19:15
darkness. But what I find so arresting is
19:19
the reason given for their condemnation.
19:21
Yeah, it's not what people usually expect, no.
19:24
When you look at the legal grounds the judge uses, the
19:26
goats are not condemned for committing murder.
19:29
They're not condemned for theft, adultery or extortion.
19:32
They are condemned for sins of omission.
19:34
It is a rapid staccato list of 6 specific failures.
19:38
I was hungry and you gave me no food.
19:40
I was thirsty and you gave me no drink.
19:42
I was a stranger, and you did not take me in naked, and you
19:45
did not clothe me sick and in prison, and he did not visit.
19:48
Me. So the indictment focuses
19:50
entirely on what they failed to do.
19:52
Yes, that is a terrifying standard.
19:54
It means you can live a life where you never actively harm
19:56
anyone. You keep your head down.
19:57
You do not commit any Major Crimes and yet still find
20:00
yourself on the left hand of the judge because you lacked active,
20:03
sacrificial love for his people. The author points out that this
20:05
exposes the antinomian error. Antinomianism.
20:08
Yeah. Antinomianism is the false
20:11
assumption that a person can claim Jesus as Savior but reject
20:15
him as Lord, living entirely for themselves without manifesting
20:20
any fruit. The goats likely possessed A
20:22
nominal religion. Right, they called him Lord in
20:24
verse 44. Exactly, showing they had an
20:27
orthodox vocabulary. They knew the right religious
20:29
terms, but their lack of affection for the people of God
20:33
proved their hearts were unregenerate.
20:35
They were spiritual corpses. They talked to talk but didn't
20:38
walk the walk. Right.
20:39
They felt no compulsion to risk their safety for the messengers
20:43
of the King, which proved they had no genuine love for the king
20:46
himself. I want to look closely at verse
20:48
41 again though. Everlasting fire prepared for of
20:51
the devil and his angels. The source is a real deep dive
20:54
into the grammatical precision of that phrase.
20:56
The author analyzes the perfect passive participle used for the
21:00
word prepared, the Greek word hutto imus manon.
21:03
Hutto, imus Manon. This grammatical form indicates
21:06
a past completed action with abiding ongoing results.
21:09
So it was done in the past, but the effect continues.
21:12
Yes, and the theological point here is that Hell was not
21:15
initially designed for mankind. God created it specifically for
21:20
the angelic rebellion for the devil and his host following
21:23
their cosmic treason. So if the fire was prepared
21:26
specifically for rebellious angels, why do human beings end
21:29
up there? The argument is that the
21:32
unregenerate human remains in spiritual bondage because they
21:36
allied themselves with the Prince of the power of the Air
21:39
during their earthly lives, rejecting the sovereign King
21:42
they share in that demonic inheritance and eternity.
21:45
Oh, I see. God is the author of salvation
21:47
for the sheep, but creatures are the authors of their own
21:50
rebellion, leading to their shared torment.
21:52
The text insists. God does not actively curse them
21:55
in the same way he actively blesses the sheep.
21:58
Rather, he hands them over to the curse they have embraced.
22:01
Wow. But if this text is absolutely
22:04
rigid that hell is eternal. That puts this ancient text on a
22:07
direct collision course with modern culture.
22:09
A massive collision course. Because looking at the data from
22:12
the source, modern people, even religious people, are actively
22:16
rejecting this idea. The text cites a 2021 Pew
22:20
Research statistic regarding beliefs in the United States.
22:24
The numbers are pretty revealing.
22:26
Very revealing. It shows 73% of US adults
22:29
believe in heaven, but only 62% believe in hell.
22:33
There is a strong modern movement, even within
22:35
conservative theological circles, arguing for
22:38
annihilationism. Right.
22:39
The idea that the wicked simply cease to exist.
22:42
Yeah. Or they argue for a temporary
22:44
purgatorial punishment where everyone is eventually saved.
22:47
So how does the author counter those modern arguments?
22:50
The author counters them with absolute linguistic rigidity.
22:53
They bypass the emotional arguments completely and go
22:55
straight to the Greek phrase used in verse 46.
22:58
Kalasson. Ionia.
22:59
Kalasson. Ionia.
23:00
The word Kalasson in Greco Roman extra Biblical usage, originally
23:04
referred to pruning trees like cutting off dead branches.
23:06
However, over centuries it evolved into a strict legal
23:10
term. The author insists it means
23:12
penal infliction, retribution and conscious torment.
23:15
So it's not a corrective timeout or a rehabilitative process.
23:18
No, it's punishment, and the word modifying that penal
23:21
infliction is Ionian. Yes, Ionian means eternal
23:25
everlasting without end, but the liberal Academy often argues
23:30
that Ionian just means pertaining to an age, suggesting
23:34
a temporary epical state that will eventually conclude.
23:37
Right, they try to limit its duration.
23:40
But the author has a structural rebuttal for that correct the
23:43
parallelism argument. Yes, the author's absolute
23:45
linguistic proof lies in the parallel structure of the verse
23:48
itself. Jesus uses the exact same word,
23:51
Ionian, to describe the life of the righteous in the second-half
23:54
of the sentence, but the righteous into eternal life.
23:58
The Greek is Zoen I onion. So if you attempt to say the
24:02
punishment is only temporary, you accidentally destroy the
24:06
permanence of heaven too. That is the crux of the
24:08
exegetical argument. If the punishment of the wicked
24:11
is temporary, then by the strict laws of Greek syntax, the
24:14
eternal life of the believer must also be temporary.
24:17
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
24:19
Right. The grammatical parallelism
24:21
makes it impossible to limit the duration of hell without
24:24
simultaneously limiting the duration of Evan.
24:26
You cannot have one word mean 2, two entirely different things in
24:29
the same breath, the source argues.
24:31
The justice of God is an eternal attribute.
24:34
A sin committed against an infinitely holy, eternal God
24:38
requires an infinite eternal punishment to satisfy the
24:42
demands of cosmic justice. So we have the absolute finality
24:45
of the judgment rendered. The separation is irreversible.
24:49
Want to zoom out for a second and look at how this passage
24:52
fundamentally defines the identity of Jesus Christ?
24:55
It's a breathtaking revelation. Because picture the scene again.
24:59
Jesus is sitting in the dust of the Mount of Olives.
25:02
He's a Jewish Carpenter wearing dusty sandals, days away from
25:05
being humiliated, beaten and crucified by the Roman
25:08
authorities. Yet he's claiming something
25:10
staggering. He is claiming the absolute
25:13
divine prerogative to divide all of humanity, the author notes.
25:17
This is a blazing revelation of Christ's Exalted.
25:20
Glory because in the Old Testament.
25:21
Right, according to the Old Testament, specifically Genesis
25:24
18.25, Aberdowing asks, Shall not the judge of all the earth
25:29
do? Right.
25:31
The established theology of Israel was that Yahweh alone is
25:34
the judge of all the earth. So for Jesus to sit on a
25:36
hillside and claim that he will sit on the throne of glory and
25:40
judge all the nations. It is an absolute assertion of
25:43
His deity. The Source argues this proves
25:46
Christ is Yahweh in human flesh. And the way he executes that
25:50
judgment is deeply personal, he says.
25:53
In as much as you did it to one of the least of these, my
25:55
brethren, you did it to me. Yeah, think of an ambassador
25:59
representing a sovereign nation in a foreign country.
26:01
OK, that ambassador carries the full weight, dignity and
26:04
authority of their homeland. If you are representing your
26:07
country and someone attacks you on the street, the host country
26:10
does not treat it as a random localized assault.
26:12
Right, it's an international incident.
26:14
Exactly. It is legally treated as a
26:16
direct declaration of war against the sovereign nation you
26:19
represent. Jesus is stating that his
26:22
persecuted messengers carry His full weight and authority.
26:25
How you treat the emissary is legally and spiritually
26:29
identical to how you treat the King.
26:31
That concept really forces us to reckon with how closely Jesus
26:34
aligns himself with his followers.
26:36
The author refers to this as the concept of mystical union.
26:40
We see this play out vividly later in the New Testament.
26:43
The source references Acts Chapter 9, verse 4.
26:45
With Saul of Tarsus. Yes, Saul is on the road to
26:48
Damascus aggressively hunting and killing Christians.
26:51
He is throwing them in prison. The ascended Christ intercepts
26:54
him with a blinding light, knocking him to the ground.
26:57
And Christ asks a very specific question.
27:00
Why are you persecuting me? Right, he doesn't say, Saul, why
27:02
are you persecuting my church or why are you hurting my
27:05
followers? He asks.
27:06
Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?
27:08
He takes the assault personally. To touch the believers is to
27:11
touch Christ Himself. The author argues Christ
27:14
identifies so intimately with his persecuted brethren that an
27:18
offense against them is a direct assault against the throne of
27:21
heaven. The union between the head and
27:23
the body is inseparable. OK, but this raises a massive
27:27
theological tension in the text. Let's look at the sheep again.
27:31
If God's infinite justice requires infinite payment, and
27:35
if any sin is worthy of eternal punishment, why aren't the sheep
27:39
cast into the fire too? That's the logical question.
27:42
Right. Are we supposed to believe they
27:44
never sinned? Do they earn their way out of
27:46
hell simply by feeding some hungry people?
27:49
Emphatically no. If their work saved them, it
27:51
would contradict the entire premise of the inheritance given
27:54
from the foundation of the world.
27:56
Because it's not a wage. Exactly.
27:58
The source argues that every single human standing in that
28:01
valley would be a goat if not for the doctrine of
28:03
substitutionary tournament. The text serves as a severe
28:06
schoolmaster, exposing the standard of perfection and
28:09
leading the listener directly to the cross.
28:12
Explain the mechanics of that Where's the cross in Matthew 25?
28:15
Because Jesus doesn't explicitly mention the crucifixion in these
28:19
specific verses. The cross is the implied
28:22
necessity beneath the entire scene.
28:24
The sheep are spared the wrath of the king only because the
28:27
king himself became a curse for them.
28:30
The source argues that on the cross Jesus Christ absorbed the
28:34
colosin Ionian, the eternal punishment that was due to the
28:37
elect. Wow.
28:38
He took the infinite wrath of God compressed into finite hours
28:42
by his infinite divine nature. The author phrases it in a
28:45
striking way. Jesus Christ heard the Father
28:48
say depart from me when he cried out, My God, my God, why have
28:51
you forsaken me on the cross? He took the rejection for them.
28:54
Yes, he heard those words of cosmic rejection, so the sheep
28:58
could hear the Father say, Come, you blessed.
29:00
Without the cross, everyone is a goat.
29:02
Everyone. The works of the sheep didn't
29:04
save them. The works prove they had
29:06
received the saving grace of the King's sacrifice.
29:08
His righteousness was imputed to them, and their sins were
29:11
imputed to him. That is the core of reformed
29:14
soteriology. The judgement scene validates
29:17
the success of the cross in creating a transformed people.
29:20
So let's consider how this staggering theological reality
29:23
impacted the people who originally heard it, and how the
29:26
author applies it to day. Matthew is writing this Gospel
29:29
down. Who is he writing it to?
29:31
And what is happening in their world?
29:33
The Apostle Matthew was addressing a 1st century Jewish
29:36
Christian audience and the historical reality for them was
29:40
grim. These early believers were
29:42
facing brutal excommunication from their local synagogues.
29:45
They were losing everything. Everything They were being
29:48
ostracized by their families, losing their livelihoods, their
29:51
businesses, and their social standing.
29:53
And soon they would face the horrific imperial might of Roman
29:57
persecution under emperors like Nero, who would use Christians
30:00
as human torches to light his gardens.
30:03
When a community facing that level of terror hears a sermon
30:06
about the judgement of the sheep and the goats, what is the
30:09
intended effect on them? The author argues the intended
30:12
effect was twofold. First, it provided immense rock
30:16
solid comfort for the suffering St.
30:18
By portraying Christ as the ultimate sovereign king who will
30:21
execute infallible justice, Matthew was assuring them their
30:25
suffering was not unseen. Rome might be in charge now,
30:27
but. Rome might possess a temporary
30:30
throne, but the true king would vindicate them.
30:34
Every act of kindness they showed to a fellow believer in
30:37
hiding was seen and recorded by heaven.
30:39
Second, the text was meant to produce holy terror, to unmask
30:44
the hypocrite within their own ranks.
30:47
The person who claims to be a Christian but flees the moment
30:50
it costs them their safety. The false professor who
30:54
possesses an Orthodox vocabulary but no true faith.
30:57
Matthew intended to unify the covenant community.
31:00
He wanted to ensure they would care for their own imprisoned
31:03
and impoverished members during times of intense persecution,
31:06
knowing that to minister to a suffering St. was to minister to
31:10
Jesus himself. It was a call to absolute
31:12
solidarity. And the sources don't leave this
31:15
as a 1st century historical event, they bring it right into
31:17
the present day. The author uses what is called
31:19
the third use of the law. Yes.
31:21
Can you breakdown what the three uses are and why the third use
31:24
is relevant here? Sure.
31:25
In Reformed theology, the moral law of God has three distinct
31:29
uses. The first use is civil.
31:31
It restrains sin in society through the threat of
31:34
punishment. The second use is pedagogical.
31:37
It acts as a mirror to expose our sin and drive us to Christ
31:40
for salvation, showing us we cannot save ourselves.
31:43
OK, so restraint and a mirror. Right, and the third use of the
31:46
law is normative. It acts as a guide for the
31:49
believer. It shows those who are already
31:51
saved how to live in grateful obedience and please God.
31:54
I see the author applies Matthew 25 as a diagnostic test of
31:57
faith. Under this third use.
31:59
It echoes first John 3.14, which says we know we have passed from
32:03
death to life because we love the brothers.
32:05
The real world context the source provides for this is
32:08
chilling. The text cites the Open Doors
32:10
2024 World Watch List. According to the source, there
32:14
are 365,000,000 Christians facing high levels of
32:17
persecution and discrimination today.
32:19
The source points to sub-Saharan Africa, where thousands are
32:22
martyred annually. It points to close nations in
32:25
Asia and the Middle East, where casters rot in prisons for
32:28
holding secret church services. 365,000,000 That's a staggering
32:32
number. It really is, and the author
32:34
challenges the modern reader directly.
32:37
What is your response to this reality?
32:39
Will you risk your wealth, your reputation and your comfort to
32:42
stand and with them, to advocate for them?
32:45
Or will you turn a blind eye like the goats?
32:47
The author pulls no punches here.
32:49
They issue a stark warning against what they call carnal
32:52
Christianity and the prosperity gospel.
32:54
The critique is severe, the author argues.
32:57
The prosperity gospel teaches that Christ exists to give you
33:00
earthly wealth, health and comfort.
33:02
It centers religion on the individual's material success.
33:05
But the Christ of Matthew 25. The Christ of Matthew 25
33:09
identifies with the starving, the naked, and the imprisoned,
33:12
the text argues. If your religion only works in
33:14
an air conditioned suburb and demands no sacrifice for the
33:17
brethren, it is a false religion.
33:19
It is a fabricated system that bears no resemblance to the
33:22
historic Christian faith. Wow.
33:24
It is a severe test of profession.
33:26
It exposes our apathy. It demands we look at the
33:29
battered, despised members of the faith across the globe and
33:33
see the face of the Lord Jesus. It really does.
33:35
Let's step back and summarize the massive landscape we've
33:38
covered through these sources. Today we started on the dusty
33:42
slopes of the Mount of Olives, establishing a specific pre
33:46
tribulational and pre millennial timeline for this final
33:49
judgement. Setting the stage.
33:51
Right. We watched the judge take his
33:53
seat and examine the legal inheritance of the sheep.
33:56
We proved through the Greek word gar that their actions were the
33:59
visible thermometer of their salvation, not the purchase
34:02
price. The fruit, not the root.
34:04
Exactly. We waited through the
34:06
controversy of the word Adelphan, seeing how the author
34:09
restricts the brethren to persecuted believers rather than
34:12
general humanity, making charity an act of high treason against a
34:15
global Antichrist system. High stakes allegiance.
34:19
Then we looked at the terrifying reality of the goats condemned
34:22
to eternal fire, clothes and I onion, not for their active
34:25
crimes, but for their sins of omission.
34:28
We saw Christ claiming the authority of Yahweh, and we
34:31
unpacked the absolute necessity of His substitutionary death on
34:34
the cross to save the sheep from the flames.
34:36
The. Core of the Gospel.
34:37
And finally, we brought it home to the 1st century martyrs and
34:41
the 365,000,000 persecuted believers today, challenging the
34:45
comfortable suburban church to examine its own fruit.
34:49
It is a theological framework that demands a response.
34:52
It leaves no room for neutrality.
34:55
It really doesn't. We talked at the beginning about
34:57
how much we want a clean, simple X-ray to diagnose the human
35:01
soul. We want to know who is good and
35:03
who is bad with a quick scan. But these texts argue the
35:07
ultimate diagnostic test is not found in a simple scan, and it
35:10
certainly isn't found in what we claim with our mouths.
35:13
Right words are cheap. So I want to leave you with a
35:16
final thought to ponder based on everything we have unpacked
35:18
today. If the ultimate test of
35:20
allegiance to the King isn't found in what we claim, but
35:23
rather in what we are willing to risk for his most vulnerable,
35:27
persecuted representatives, how does that entirely redefine the
35:31
way you look at the people you will interact with tomorrow?
35:33
That's a challenging thought. Thank you for joining us as we
35:36
work through this material. We will see you next time on the
35:38
Deep Dive.