Hey Sandy, although I’m not Peter Bolt, I still have a comment. In fact, because I’m Gordon Cheng, I have a comment—a universal blogging truth if ever there was one.

I think you are on your strongest ground when you look to other parts of Matthew to provide the key to unlock the meaning of Matthew (which you do when you refer to Matt 25 and Matt 16).

So let me question you where I think you’re at your strongest, then, and ask why these references also are not explained in terms of an allusion to Dan 7:13,

“I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him.”

That is, with our ‘night vision’ goggles on, we see that the ‘coming’ is from the perspective of the heavenly throne, so that the Son of Man is coming from earth to heaven, and not the other way ‘round. And if the coming is from earth to heaven, it is actually a going away (from earth), which most naturally fits with the idea of Jesus’ ascension.

(I know you alluded to this in your previous post, but I think it is such a spiffing point that I am dredging it up all over again).

Dan 7:13 is clearly a scene of universal judgement, so the fact that Mt 25 and Mt 16 are also scenes of universal judgement is hardly surprising, is it? They need not be final judgement, so much as the beginning of it.

And the Boltian interpretation—that these references to Jesus’ ‘coming’ are still (at heart) about the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ—emerges unscathed.

I deliberately pass over your references to the epistles, in the hope that Peter will at some stage emerge from his Underworld to offer some further comment.

Dear Sandy;
I’m not persuaded that the “telescope” view is all that helpful. I still incline very much to the view that Jesus’ words refer to his death, resurrection and ascension (with Gordon’s view on the “coming” being a coming to heavenly power at the right side of God.)
I take your point about interpreting the passage by other references to the event in the Gospel of Matthew. But let’s take this one you quoted:
Matthew 25:31-32: “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.”
I’d never thought of this before, but could this not be a very good description (in symbolism) of what is happening now that Jesus has risen? From his throne in heaven the whole world is spread out before him. They are being separated into two groups by the act of gospel preaching which is now happening. This view is supported by the fact that (as has often been pointed out) the differentiating criterion is how the world responds to Jesus’ “brothers” ie the disciples who are preaching the gospel.
In other words, rather than the sheep and goats passage illuminating the apocalyptic comments, those comments actually illuminate the sheep and goats passage.
Worth considering, anyway.
Regards
Neil Foster

Neil, thanks for commenting.

I have to say that I think you are drawing a long bow to suggest Matthew 25:31ff begins after the resurrection and ascension of Jesus and applies to the present age of gospel preaching.

Here are some reasons:

1. V31 refers to the Son of Man coming in glory and sitting on the throne in heavenly glory. Certainly Jesus’ death was a key moment of glory - especially in John’s Gospel - although this glory was veiled. But it appears most natural to me to see his glory in the parable of the sheep and goats as being completely manifest and public here. I.e. his glory here is obvious.

2. V32 suggests that all the nations are gathered before him rather than scattered throughout the world as they now are.

3. What is on view is not only separation into the two categories of sheep and goat, but also the immediate entry into two alternatives:
- the inheritance prepared since the creation of the world (v34), or
- departure into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels (v41).

4. I do not doubt that this parable is about how people have reacted to Christians and particularly to Christians preachers (the least of the King’s brothers) as they visit and as they suffer. However, it pictures people looking back to how they have treated such people as the explanation for their immediate fate.

All this seems very consistent to me with picturing the final and great day of judgment (though of course it teaches us how to prepare for that day).

So I am not persuaded yet by this re-reading of Matthew 25:31ff.

Dear Sandy;
I am happy to be corrected, and I see the force of the points you make about the passage following Matt 25:31 seeming to a final judgment where people immediately go to one fate or the other. But I am still unsure- after all, on what is probably too much of a tangent, what does it mean when we are told that Jesus’ disciples will “sit on thrones” and judge Israel? (Matt 19:28) I think this makes most sense when it refers to the act of “judging” as the act of gospel preaching. It seems to me possible that the metaphors of ruling and judging can be used for the divisive act of gospel preaching (as Peter, of course, is said to be given the power of the keys in a similar context (Matt 16:19). Still thinking it through.
Regards
Neil F