Brief Study of the GOLDEN RULE

The Golden Rule brings “to a climax the entire central core of the sermon on the mount.”[1] It is also the logical conclusion[2] of the disciples’ perspective and action toward the world. “Therefore” (oun) is a conjunction of inference or conclusion. Lenski says its consequence is that “instead of judging others falsely, we shall do to them what we would that they should do to us.”[3] What is this conclusion? “Whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets” (7:12 NKJV). It speaks to our social responsibility as the righteous, not the means of salvation. It is the summation of the Law, as well as Biblical ethics. This is the very heart of the Law (Lev. 19:18), which underlies the ethical demands of the Law and the prophets.[4] Baker notes, “Scripture is clear that no flesh will ever be justified by keeping the Law. The law demanded that you do unto others what you would have them do unto you.”[5] In essence it is a statement concerning the second greatest commandment stated by Jesus in Matthew 22:37: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” “Jesus’ teaching it is axiomatic that the second will never be obeyed with the first: we will never love our neighbors in the way we would like to be loved until we love God with hearth and soul and mind” observes Carson.[6]

The Golden Rule summarizes not only the teaching of Jesus, but the Law and the Prophets as well. Today, in Christ the requirements of the Law are fulfilled in the believer (Rom. 8:2-4). Like the Law, the Golden Rule is good, the practice of which is interdispensational. It’s only fault is our sinfulness (Rom. 7:12-18).  Paul endorses this ethical demand as the essence of grace as well (Gal. 5:14; cf. Rom. 13:8-10). How we want to be treated should be the standard of conduct toward others.

---

[1]  Davis and Allison, MATTHEW, 1:685.

[2] Guelich, SERMON ON THE MOUNT, 361.

[3]  Lenski, MATTHEW, 295.

[4]  France, TNCNT: MATTHEW, 283.            

[5]  Baker, GOSPELS, 93.

[6]  Carson, SERMON, 113.

Thoughts on the so-called Lord's Prayer: Matthew 6

Jesus gives a sample prayer (Matthew 6:9-13). This is commonly called “The Lord’s Prayer;” however, it is not really an accurate description. As English points out, “This is not the Lord’s Prayer; He never offered this prayer. He could not, for He had no sins to be forgiven.”[1] The true “Lord’s Prayer” is found in John 17:1-26, for it is a prayer Jesus prayed for His own. Here in Matthew is the Model or Disciples’ Prayer. Jesus gives it as a model of how to pray—neither too long and ostentatious, nor unnecessarily repetitious. One of the sad things is that some have turned it into a repetitious prayer, repeating it in every service. It was never meant to be. He says, “In this manner, therefore, pray.” The word translated “in this manner” is the Greek word houtos, meaning “like this,” not “pray this prayer.” It clearly denotes that this is a model or guide, rather than a set prayer to be repeated.[2] There are three reasons we should not make this a repetitious prayer:

• The language does not support it. He does not tell them to prayer this prayer.
• The context does not support it, for it is in the context against repetition as the Gentiles do (Matthew 6:7)
• It violates the principle of progressive revelation. Clearly Jesus Himself gave new and additional instruction about prayer in John 16:23, 24 indicating that prayer is to be asked in His name. There is no such request in this prayer.

The prayer is “neither personal nor liturgical,”[3] however it is dispensational in its nature. There are six requests in this prayer; all of them have a link with the promised earthly kingdom. Three are appeals for the Kingdom to come; the last three requests are to be given in the light of the coming Kingdom. While many scholars do not use the word dispensational, they do seem to uphold the eschatological (end-time) theme of the prayer. Davies and Allison (non-dispensationalists) observe, “…the eschatological interpretation gives the text a pleasing thematic unity.”[4]

---

[1]  E. Schuyler English, STUDIES IN THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW,  (Zondervan, Grand Rapids, 1938), 53.

[2]  C.R. Stam asks two valid questions in this regard.  “Our Lord first uttered this prayer to His disciples, but have you ever read of their repeating it?  If He meant it to be repeated, should we not have at least one example in Scripture of their having done so?”, SERMON ON THE MOUNT, 87.

[3]  Guelich, SERMON ON THE MOUNT 284.

[4]  Davies and Allison, MATTHEW, 1:594.

OLDER MATTHEW COMMENTARIES NOT TO OVERLOOK

While most articles center upon modern commentaries, many have a tendency to overlook the older commentaries. Here are commentaries that are at least 20 years old but still in print.

The student or Pastor should not overlook these commentaries on MATTHEW.

COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW, by John A. Broadus. This commentary has survived the test of time. He was a careful scholar and teacher. Valuable work even today.

OUTLINE STUDIES IN MATTHEW by W.H. Griffith-Thomas. His ability to outline and analyze the book of Matthew will be helpful to any preacher who is preaching Matthew. (May be out of print, check used bookstores)

 THE INTERPRETATION OF ST. MATTHEW’S GOSPEL by R.C.H. Lenski. May well be his best work. Lutheran and conservative in perspective. The work is a good expositional work. Worth having for detail study of Matthew. Insightful.

THE TRANSFIGURATION of CHRIST

[This is a reposting from our Website: www.bereanadvocate.com  Because of some renewed interest we are also posting here on the blog] 

One of the major events in the life of our Lord Jesus Christ is the transfiguration.  It is an astonishing event.  Yet, evidently few theologians see much theological significance to the event.  In a search of works on Theology, the vast majority of them never treat it.  Nothing beyond a sentence or two, if any, can be found in theologies of Charles Hodge, William G. T. Shedd, A. H. Strong, Henry Thiessen, Wayne Gruden, Charles Ryrie, or Charles Baker.  I did find some treatment to it in works of J. Oliver Buswell and Lewis Sperry Chafer.  Why is that, especially in the light that it is given in all three of the Synoptic Gospels and in the epistles of Peter? I wish I knew.  It has been mostly left to the task of the commentators to give us the significance of this important event.

In referring to the event, Matthew and Mark use the term, transfigured, which is the word metamorphoo in the Greek.  The word means to change into another form, or change forms.  It is used four times in the New Testament, two of which are used of this event (Matt. 17:2; Mark 9:2).  The Gospel of Luke how ever uses the word “altered.’” It is the Greek word egeneto heteron, which means to become different. Peter mentions both events in his letters (1 Pet. 5:1; 2 Pet. 1:15-21).  Peter calls himself a “partaker of the glory that shall be revealed,” thus referring to the event by the word glory. At the transfiguration he partook of the glory of Christ that will be revealed to all in the future. And in 2 Peter 1:16 he confirms that he was an eyewitness to His (Christ’s) majesty, which refers to the event of the transfiguration.  The New Testament places great importance and significance to the event.

Luke chapter 9 is centered upon identification of Jesus as the Messiah.  In this chapter, Herod wants to know who Jesus is, he fears him to be Elijah, or even John the Baptist resurrected (9:7-9).  The population commonly entertains these opinions. Edersheim reminds us that “however men differed on these points, in this all agreed…they regarded Him not as an ordinary man or teacher.”1 However, Christ asked his disciples who He was, and Peter makes his great confession that He is the Messiah [Christ] of God. (Luke 9:18-21).   What the masses missed, and the leadership of the nation refused to entertain, Peter knew and professed. This marks the great turning point in the ministry of Christ.  Before this identification, Jesus never taught of his coming death.  Matthew says “from this time forth began Jesus to show unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priest and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day” (Matt. 16:21).  Why is that important?  Because the disciples needed to know who He was before He could teach them what He was to do.  If they saw him just as a great man, then there would be no significance to his death.  He was the “Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16) But He being the Messiah, the Son of the living God, now that is another thing.  A week or so later, Jesus continues to reveal his identification of who He is by showing them His glory at the transfiguration.

The Announcement (Luke 9:27).

At the end of his teaching, Jesus tells them “there are some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God” (Luke 9:27). That is an interesting statement. The announcement entails three things.  First, some, but not necessarily all, of them will be a part of the event. Second, they will not die before that happens.  Third, what they will see is thekingdom of God.  But what is the meaning of this?

The Actual Event (Luke 9:28-36)

All three of the Gospels connect the announcement with the event of the transfiguration. The event took place 6 days later says Matthew and Mark, while Luke places it 8 days later. Some have wondered about the difference, but this is easily explained.  As Baker points out, “There is no contradiction.  The six days are exclusive; the eight are inclusive.”2 In other words, Mark and Matthew count the days between the events, while Luke included the days these things happened in his count.  At that time, Jesus took Peter, John, and James up into a mountain to pray. Thus, this event was limited to some of the Twelve not all of them, for these four were “all alone” (Mark 9:2) upon the mountain.  Their purpose of going was prayer. During this time, several distinguished features took place.

1.      The Glory of Jesus was Revealed (Luke 9:29)

The picture is clear.  Jesus is praying, the disciples are asleep (29-32).  During this time, the Lord was transformed or transfigured.  It must be made clear, as Brock points out, “this is a transformation, not a vision.”3 “The fashion of His countenance was altered, and his raiment became white and dazzling,” declares Luke. Matthew (17:2) adds, “his face did shine as the sun.” The emphasis is on the outward appearance of Jesus. This glory radiated outward from the very essence of His being.  God rolled back the veil of humanity, and allowed the divine glory and splendor of deity to shine forth, revealing Christ in all the majesty of His Messiahship. “This was none other than a revelation of the essential glory of God that belongs to Jesus Christ,” declares Pentecost.4  He is the “brightness” of God’s glory (Heb. 1:3).

2.      The Appearance of Moses and Elijah (29:30-31)

Moses and Elijah appear “in glory” with Christ during this time.  All three Gospels witness to this fact.  Various reasons have been given why these two made their appearance.  Some suggest it shows the unity of the law (Moses) and the prophets (Elijah).5 If this was the case, wouldn’t Isaiah be a better representative of the prophets, since he centers his prophecy on the coming Christ or Messiah?  Others seem to say these two represent that the kingdom will include saints that died (Moses), and saints that did not see death (Elijah).6 This does not seem likely, since the truth of the rapture of the church was not revealed, and had nothing to do with their expectation of the earthly Kingdom.  It seems to me, a better explanation centers around what they discussed with Jesus.  They “spoke of His decease which He should accomplish at Jerusalem.” The Greek word used by Luke and translated decease is the word Exodus!  Why Moses and Elijah?  Because they best represent what Christ was to accomplish upon the Cross.  As the Exodus accomplished redemption and liberty to the nation, so the work of Christ does the same for all the saints. Before the earthly Kingdom could be established the Messiah must suffer and die.  Elijah signifies the hope of the coming kingdom after the death of Christ. The last prophecy of the Old Testament ties the coming kingdom to the appearance of Elijah (Malachi 4:5-6).  Bock notes that Elijah “is consistently a figure of eschatological hope” of end time deliverance.

3.      The Witness of Peter, James, and John (29:32-33)

It is no accident that the disciples woke up during this time.  The appearance and transfiguration lasted long enough for them to become “fully awake,” and see the glory and the two men. They also fully recognized Jesus, Moses, and Elijah.  They saw it in its reality; this was not a vision.  John testifies to that when he writes: “and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father” (John 1:14).  Peter testifies He knew the power and coming of the Lord because he was an eyewitness of His majesty, and saw that Christ received honor and glory, when he heard the voice of God upon the mountain (1 Peter 1:16-17).

In fact, Peter on seeing the event suggested they build three tabernacles, one for each person in the transfiguration (29-33).  Pentecost says Peter was suggesting an observance of the Feast of Tabernacles.  For the feasts was a memorial to the Exodus, and it also “anticipated Israel’s final gathering as a nation…under the beneficent rule of the promised Messiah.”8 However, if this is so, Peter himself did not know what he was saying (Luke 29:33).

4.      The Voice from Heaven.

While Peter was making his suggestion, a cloud came and overshadowed them.  As the disciples entered the cloud, they were scared.  At that point they heard the confirmation of God speaking from heaven.  “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased: hear ye Him,” (Matt. 27:5). God “authenticated both the person and work of Christ.”9 Stein observes that, “In contrast to the Voice at Jesus’ baptism, which was addressed to Jesus…here the Voice is addressed to Peter, James and John.”10 They fell to the ground in worship and reverence.  Matthew says Jesus came and touched them and told them to arise, and upon lifting their eyes. When they opened their eyes they saw only Jesus.  Instantly everything was back to normal.

The Aim of the Transfiguration.

There is great theological significance to the transfiguration; even though most theologies do not deal with the event or significance.  The event was designed to do several things:

       (1) It is a fulfillment of the promise given to the twelve that some of them would not taste death until they saw the kingdom of God. The Gospel writers all connect the promise and the event.  The transfiguration “was a miniature and premature picture of the Second Coming of Christ to established His Kingdom.”11  This was necessary because of the coming postponement of the kingdom because of Israel’s rejection of the King and His Kingdom. However, this postponement was still a mystery and was not revealed until the Apostle Paul revealed Israel’s fall (Rom. 11:25).  It in no way replaces the future of the earthly kingdom in the Millennium, which will be established at the Second Coming of Christ.

(2) It confirms the identification of Jesus as the Messiah.  He is the Messiah that the Law and the prophets foretold.  This event was the heavenly ratification of His Messianic calling and glory, and a foretaste of His kingdom.

(3) It confirmed that Israel’s Messiah would experience a cross and then a crown. The transfiguration, while it revealed His glory, confirmed His work as Saviour, by His death.  His death was necessary for His crown.  His exodus was necessary to accomplish His kingdom. In the plan of God it is clear that the crown (kingdom) would come by the way of the cross (His death). 

(4) It confirms the reality of life after death.  Moses and Elijah both continued to live.  They were present with Christ at this event.  They talked and communicated.  Walvoord points out that “the fact that they both have bodies gives some support to the idea of an intermediate body in heaven prior to the day of resurrection.”12 It is also a testimony to the fact of the resurrection to possess the kingdom.  Death will not prevent the believer from full participation in the kingdom of God.

The transfiguration is vital to the understanding of who Christ is and what He was and is to do. It affirms His deity, glory and Messiahship.  To Israel it speaks of the realization of the coming earthly Kingdom when Christ comes again and rules over them and the world as the prophets has promised. To the saints of this dispensation it affirms the reality of what also awaits us when Christ comes for His Body, the Church, and takes us into “His heavenly kingdom” (2 Tim. 4:18).  For Paul declares that at the rapture, “we shall be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye…” (1 Cor. 15:51-52.) The word changed is the word “transfigured.” We will have a body like His glorious body. The transfiguration is truly a glimpse of the future!

(Footnotes)

1  Alford Edersheim, THE LIFE AND TIMES OF JESUS THE MESSIAH, (Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 1965), 2:79.

2  Charles F. Baker, UNDERSTANDING THE GOSPELS, (Grace Publications, Grand Rapids, 1978), 135.

3  Darrell L. Brock, LUKE, (InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, 1994), 172.

4  J. Dwight Pentecost, THE WORDS AND WORKS OF JESUS CHRIST, (Zondervan, Grand Rapids, 1982), 256.

5  Alan Hugh M’Neile, THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW (Macmillan, London, 1915), 251.

6  Margaret Thrall, “Elijah and Moses in Mark’s Account of the Transfiguration” NEW TESTAMENT STUDIES, 1970, 305-17.

7  Bock, Darrell L, JESUS ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE, (Baker, Grand Rapids, 2002), 173.

8  Pentecost, 257.

9  Pentecost, 258

10  Robert H. Stein, JESUS THE MESSIAH, (InterVarsity, Downers Grove, 1996), 172.

11  Pentecost, 256.

12  John Walvoord, MATTHEW: THY KINGDOM COME, (Moody Press, Chicago, 1974), 129.

OLIVET DISCOURSE #17

The Judgment of the Gentiles

Matthew 25:31-46

After the judgment of the nation of Israel comes the judgment of the Gentiles or the nations. This is not the final judgment, as some take it. The amillennialist is forced to view it as such because of the predetermined belief in only one great end-time judgment. Careful comparison of the Great White Throne judgment (Revelation 20:13-15) with this judgment of the nations shows that they are dissimilar. We must be careful not to confuse the two. Several facts show that the two are to be kept distinct:

First, the time of the judgments is distinct. Matthew 5:31-32 shows that the nations are judged upon His return to earth. The White Throne judgment is after the thousand year reign of Christ upon the earth (Revelation 20:11-15).

Second, the subject of the judgments is distinct. Matthew mentions no resurrection and identifies this judgment with the living nations (25:32). In Revelation 20:11 there is a resurrection and the dead are judged.

Third, the location of the judgments is distinct. The judgment of the nations takes place on the earth. This is clear because it takes place at the return of Christ. The judgment before the White Throne is not on earth, but in the throne room of God.

Fourth, the ground for the judgments is distinct. Matthew’s judgment of the nations is based upon their treatment of the nation Israel (25:40, 45). In Revelation 20:15 the ground for judgment is whether their name is in the book of life.

Clearly, by comparing the two judgments, it is evident that the two are distinct independent judgments.

IS THIS A PARABLE?

Some Bible students understand this passage as a continuation of the parables and interpret it as such. Careful study of the passage, however, shows that this is not the case. The language takes us back to the literal event of the second coming of Christ (24:31). McNeile is correct when he notes that “the only parabolic features” are “the simile of the sheep and the goats in v. 32, and its metaphorical use in v. 33.”[1]

THE TIME OF THE JUDGMENT

Like the nation Israel, the Gentile nations must be judged to determine who from among them will enter the earthly Kingdom. The time of this judgment is at the return of Christ to set up His thousand year Kingdom on earth. The Old Testament confirms these words of Jesus. The prophet Joel (3:1-3) declares that this judgment will take place at the valley of Jehoshaphat. The time of the judgment is the same as the restoring of the true remnant of Israel to the land. The judgment of the nations is the complement to the restoration of Israel.

THE PLACE OF THE JUDGMENT

The place of judgment is the land of Israel; however, the exact location is a matter of debate. Joel identifies it as happening in the valley of Jehosphaphat. The location of this valley cannot easily be identified. There was not such valley by this name near Jerusalem in ancient times.

Some scholars hold to a symbolic view. They maintain that the reference to the valley of Jehosphaphat is a “theological symbol rather than a topographical identification.”[2] Jehoshaphat means Jehovah judges. Thus, it is not an actual location, but the event itself that is described by the valley. Wherever the Lord judges it could be the valley of Jehosphaphat. This view cannot be automatically dismissed.

Others hold to a 2 Chronicles 20:26 view. This passage names the valley of Berachah as the place where Jehosphaphat won a great battle, defeating the Moabites and Ammonites. This view holds that the valley of Berachah will be the valley of Jehosphaphat. Most dismiss this view because of the distance from Jerusalem. The context of Joel places the valley near Jerusalem.

Others, wanting a location near Jerusalem, hold to a valley of Kidron view. The main support for this view is that the valley is right outside Jerusalem.

Another possible view is that of a future valley. J. Dwight Pentecost presents this view and believes that there will be a new valley outside Jerusalem at the time. He bases this upon Zechariah 14:4. He argues:

“A valley which is not in existence today shall come into being at the time of the Second Advent. Since the name Jehosphaphat means “Jehovah judges,” it may be that the newly opened valley outside Jerusalem will bear that name because of the momentous events to transpire there.”[3]

This view has merit and deserves strong consideration in the light of prophetic Scripture.

THE JUDGMENT DESCRIBED

Jesus describes the judgment using the image of sheep and goats. The sheep and goats comprise “all nations.” The two groups will be separated, the sheep on the right and the goats on the left. The sheep inherit the Kingdom (25:34). The goats will be cast into “eternal fire” (25:41). In this judgment we see the fulfillment of Genesis 12:3. Notice that it is the “king” who makes this judgment. This is Christ, the One who will reign for 1000 years. The reigning One will also be the judging One.

The description of the judgment brings up some interesting questions:

First, does this include only the living nations, and/or those nations that are no longer in existence? The context suggests only the nations that exist at the time of Christ’s coming will pass through this judgment. There is nothing in the context to suggest a resurrection or either individuals or nations. The word nation never refers to the dead. National judgment will be poured out upon those who are in existence at the time.

Second, is the judgment one of nations as a whole, or individuals within nations? C.F. Baker addresses this stating:

“There is no doubt that nations which have persecuted the Lord’s brethren in the flesh will be destroyed and not permitted to exist as a part of the millennial earth. Does this mean that everyone in each of these goat nations will be eternally lost? No for Scripture makes it plain that every man will be judged according to his own works. From Rev. 7:9 it appears that a great multitude out of every nation will be saved at the end of the Tribulation to enter into the Kingdom.”[4]

It is the individuals within nations that are classified. Each nation will have its sheep and goats. The sheep of that nation will enter into the blessing of the millennial Kingdom.

THE BASIS OF THIS JUDGMENT

The basis of this judgment is repeated twice within the text. It is clearly the treatment of “the least of these my brethren” (25:40, 45). Who is meant by this phrase? The majority of liberal scholarship holds that this refers to the brotherhood of mankind. It is whoever is hungry or needy. That compassion for our fellow man will be the standard by which we are judged. We do not want to be accused of downplaying the need for compassion for our fellow man, but it is safe to say from the context this is not what is meant by the phrase. Others restrict the brethren to the apostles and Christian missionaries. This is closer to what Jesus meant, but still misses the mark.

Christ uses the term brethren on several occasions. In Matthew 12:48-50 He clearly defines who his brethren are. On that occasion he points to his disciples and declares them, and “whosoever shall do the will of my father which is in heaven” are my brethren. The emphasis is on the spiritual brotherhood, rather than the physical. Based upon this and Isaiah 66:19-22, the term clearly applies to believing Israel, the remnant. It is the treatment of God’s elect during the tribulation that will be the determining factor in this judgment.

Judgment will fulfill the promise made to Abraham in Genesis 12:2-3. Notice Jesus uses the same terms as the Abrahamic covenant in the words “blessed” (25:34) and “cursed” (25:41). This judgment is tied to and really based upon the Abrahamic covenant. God’s promise to bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse Israel will be the determining factor in this judgment.

This seemingly presents a problem. It appears that the Gentiles will be saved or lost on the basis of their works alone. Giving food to the hungry, drink to the thirsty, and clothes to the needy, seems to be the basis for granting entrance into the earthly kingdom. Can this be? A close examination will not support this conclusion.

First, this view would contradict the plain teaching of Scripture that faith is necessary for salvation. Nowhere does Scripture teach that works alone will produce salvation. Salvation is always by faith. Hebrews 11:6 states that “without faith it is impossible to be well-pleasing unto Him (God).” Faith will be necessary to enter the Kingdom of God. In addition Jesus teaches that the “new birth” is necessary to enter the Kingdom (John 3:3, 7). These works should not be looked upon as something separate from faith, but as a result of faith (Ephesians 2:8-10).

Second, those who did such actions are called “righteous” (25:37). This indicates not only their character, but their condition. It is a righteousness found by faith in the gospel, which in turn, enables them to live a righteous life. It is not works that makes them righteous; rather these works are evidence of their righteousness. Being righteous is evidence they have accepted the gospel of the Kingdom.

The close relationship between faith and works during the Tribulation is seen in the conditions of the time. The persecution will be so great during that time that no one without faith will dare to help members of believing Israel. The Satanic hatred of Israel will be so great that anyone who helps her will draw the same wrath upon themselves. To feed, clothe, or visit a member of the remnant during such a time will be an act of faith. Acceptance of the messenger will show an acceptance of the message. It is safe to conclude that those Gentiles are not judged and admitted solely on their works;

they will enter the kingdom because their works demonstrate their faith.

THE RESULTS OF THE JUDGMENT

The results of this judgment are clear. The “sheep” will enter into Kingdom blessings and eternal life (25:34, 46). They are called “blessed.”  The word is identified as a perfect particle in the Greek, indicating the act of blessing occurred in the past, but the effects continue into the present.[5] Those who are already heirs of the Kingdom by right, now inherit it in fact. They enter the Millennial Kingdom. This fulfills the prophecies of Daniel 7:14, Isaiah 55:5, and Micah 4:2.

The “goats” are cursed and cast into the lake of fire (25:41, 46). They received this judgment because of their lack of faith as seen in their lack of works and charity toward believing Israel. They rejected the messengers and the message. According to Matthew 25:46 the results are eternal. Evidently, the living Gentiles who are cast into the lake of fire will not be judged again. They will not appear before the White Throne Judgment of Revelation 20. They, like the beast and false prophet, are thrown into the lake of fire before the White Throne Judgment and will stay there eternally.

The judgment will close the tribulation. A glorious new age will dawn, one which will last a thousand years, Christ will rule as King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Man will fulfill his original destiny here on earth (Genesis 1:26; Isaiah 11:6-9; 65:25). God is faithful! He will fulfill His purpose, plans, and word.

It is vital that we take time to understand an important principle: Judgment does not determine destiny. Destiny is determined before judgment by decisions made before one stands in judgment. The purpose of judgment is to bring to light why one is going to his destiny. The unbeliever “is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God” (John 3:18). Your destiny depends on your decision whether or not to exercise faith in the person and work of Jesus Christ (John 3:16-18; Acts 16:31; Romans 3:23-25, 28; 4:5; 6:23; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8-9). Have you made that decision?  

---

[1]  A.H. McNeile, MATTHEW, 368.

[2] Leslie C. Allen, NICOT: THE BOOKS OF JOEL, OBADIAH, JONAH AND MICAH, 109.

[3]  J. Dwight Pentecost, THINGS TO COME, 417.

[4]  C.F. Baker, UNDERSTANDING THE GOSPELS, 320.

[5]  R.C.H. Lenski, INTERPRETATION OF ST MATTHEW, 990.

Olivet Discourse #16

THE PARABLE OF THE TALENTS

Matthew 25:14-30

This is the last parable that the Lord gave on the mount. It is similar to the one in Luke 19:11-27 and often confused with it. The parable in Luke is known as the parable of the Pounds. The two are different.  The differences are clear, as Baker points out:

“Comparing the parables, in one there are three servants and in the other ten; and instead of giving five, two, and one talent, the noblemen gave one point to each ten. In Matthew the one who received five talents doubled the money by trading, as did the one who was given two, but the one who received one talent hid it in the ground. In Luke one man gained ten pounds and another five, and another hid his pound in a napkin.”[1]

The two are not the same, but are “independent stories, based on a common theme and spoken on different occasions.”[2]

The parable of the virgins and the parable of the talents are linked in the text through verse 13. The conjunction “for” (v. 14) makes the link. Verse 13 is the key to the meaning of the parable. The parable reveals the same truth as the preceding parable, but in a different form.

WHAT IS A TALENT?

A talent in contemporary language refers to a special or outstanding ability of people to do certain functions such as a talent for music, art, or sports. This is not the meaning of the word in this discourse. The Greek word is “talanton” and was originally a balance, a measure of weight. Unger notes that it is the “larger weight among the Hebrews, being used for metals, whether gold, silver, lead, bronze, or iron.”[3] It came to be a unit of money. By the time of Christ it was a great sum of money.

To put its value in perspective, we are told that the Roman-Attic talent comprised 6,000 denarii or drachms.[4] According to Matthew 20, one “denarion” was the wage for a laborer in the vineyard for one day. If a laborer in the vineyard worked every day of the year it would take that person 16 years to earn one talent. That is no small amount of money by any standard. However, the point of the parable is not the amount involved, rather, what was done with the talent received.

THE PARABLE.

The parable has a very natural and simple outline.

First, the master and the distribution given to his servants (Matthew 25:14-15). The master is rich and is leaving for some time. Upon leaving he gives his servants some talents. To one he gave five, another two, and the third he gave one.

Second, the use made of the talents (25:16-18). Upon receiving the money, we see that two of the servants put their talents to work. They acted wisely knowing the master would hold them accountable for what he had given them. In contrast, one servant dug a hole and hid the master’s talent. Knowing he would be accountable, he was afraid to use it, for fear he would lose it.

Third, the accounting for the use of the talents (25:19-27). The accounting was upon the return of the master. The master was gone for some time, enabling and expecting the servants to produce gain.. Two of the servants produced gain; the other lacked gain. He had been unfaithful to the trust placed in him. The parable turns now from being prepared to giving an account. The point now centers upon accountable for the service.

The important principle seen is the relation between accountable and faithfulness. Those who received a reward did so because they were good and faithful servants, not because of how much they had gained. Because of their faithfulness with putting their talent to work, not because of the gain they made. Faithfulness is the key to rewards (2 Corinthians 4:2).

The one-talent servant is seen as wicked and slothful because of his unfaithfulness. He is judged not because there was no gain, but because he did not try to be faithful. He was slothful in his responsibility, which is evident by his actions. Like many being caught short when accountability comes, he blames the master.  The master is hard and selfish! He implies that the master is not honest (25:24-25). In reality he was not honest with himself. He was unfaithful to the task and responsibility given to him. In fact, he proved not to be a servant at all.

THE JUDGMENT.

Faithfulness and service goes hand and hand. To be prepared, a servant must be faithful and serve the Master. A major element of faithfulness is obedience. The unfaithful servant is condemned and thrown out from the master’s household (25:26-30). Both parables of the ten virgins and the talents illustrate the truth that Israel will be judged at the second coming of Christ. This judgment will determine who enters the kingdom from heaven and who will be excluded from that kingdom. The parable shows both the rewards for faithfulness and the judgment for unfaithfulness that await those who are anticipating Messiah’s coming.

---

[1]  C.F. Baker, UNDERSTANDING THE GOSPELS, 229-230.

[2]  R.V.G. Tasker, MATTHEW, 238.

[3]  Merrill F. Unger, “Metrology,” UNGER’S BIBLE DICTIONARY, 722.

[4]  W.E. Vine, EXPOSITOR’S DICTIONARY, 4:108.

OLIVET DISCOURSE #15

PARABLE OF THE TEN VIRGINS

Matthew 25:1-30

At this point Mark and Luke have ended their version of the discourse, but Matthew continues and gives the parable of the ten virgins. This is appropriate for two reasons: First, of the three Gospel writers, Matthew is the only eyewitness and original listener of the discourse. Second, Matthew is writing to the Jews, and the discourse has particular relevance to the nation of Israel. Israel, not the church, is the one who will go through the time of Jacob’s trouble (Jeremiah 30:7), otherwise known as the tribulation. Jeremiah specifically says it is a tribulation “for” (Hebrew: sarah) Jacob, and applies directly to national Israel.

Matthew at this point returns to the time element. He beings with the word “then” (Matthew 25:1). It denotes a continuation of the chronology that was discontinued in Matthew 24:31, although he continues to teach in the form of parables. These parables bring us a new application about the second coming of Christ. The preceding parables centered on the unexpectedness of Christ’s coming and the need for readiness by those who believe. Now Matthew centers upon the reason for readiness: judgment. The idea of judgment is the keynote of this whole chapter. First, is the judgment of Israel. This judgment is taught and illustrated in the first two parables. J. Dwight Pentecost captures the essence of this event:

“Christ now resumed His revelation of the chronology of prophetic events for Israel. He taught that following His return (Matthew 24:30) and the regathering of the nation Israel to their land (v. 31), the nation would be brought under judgment (25:1-30).”[1]

Afterward, Matthew deals with the judgment of the Gentiles (25:31-46), the final event preceding the Millennial kingdom.

THE PARABLE AND ITS BACKGROUND

The parable is that of ten virgins, five who are wise; five foolish. The wise took extra oil for the lamps; the foolish did not bring any reserve. They left to meet the bridegroom, but he was delayed. They waited, but fell asleep. Awakened by the announcement of his coming, the five foolish realized they were out of oil. They tried to borrow some, but could not, they left to buy oil. When the five foolish returned and tried to get in, the Lord replied he did not know them and refused to open the door so they could enter.

The parable comes from the marriage custom of the time in the Middle East. There were three states of the wedding. First, the parents agreed upon the marriage of their children and the dowry would be paid. Second, the bridegroom accompanied by his friends would go to the bride’s house to claim her as his own. Third, on the return home, friends would join the wedding party to participate in the marriage feast that was held at the bridegroom’s home. This custom forms the background of the parable.

INTERPRETATIONS OF THE PARABLE

A number of interpretations exist concerning the ten virgins. Albright and Mann say that the parable is “capable of almost infinite variation in interpretation.”[2] A major factor for this is that “almost every detail of the parable lends itself to allegorical treatment.”[3] However, one should remember that a parable’s purpose is to provide one chief point of comparison. To make an important point or allegorical point of every detail may well destroy the original intended purpose.

Dispensational interpretations can be classified into two basic headings: Those who see the meaning in the church of this dispensation; others see it representing Israel.

The Church View.

This view holds that the virgins represent the religious people in the church of this dispensation. This is held by Gaebelein and presented in his commentary. He says this parable “must be looked upon as referring first all to the beginning of this Christian age.”[4] The wise virgins are the true believers, and the foolish are only professing Christians, unsaved but religious people in the church. The major reason for this view is the reference to oil. Oil is a common representation for the Holy Spirit. Since the church is indwelt with the Holy Spirit, it is reasoned that this parable must be speaking to the church.

This view has two major problems:

• First, this view separates the parable from the context of the discourse. The disciples hearing this parable would not have put it in the context of the church. At the time they knew nothing about the Church, the Body of Christ. It was still a mystery (cf. Eph. 3:1-10). The context is clearly the second coming of Christ, not the rapture of the church. There is no reason to separate it from the context of the second coming. We must keep the interpretation within the correct context.
• Second, the word “then” refers not to the church, but the last day events of Israel and the kingdom. Tasker notes:

“although the first word in verse 1, “then” (tote), is often in this Gospel merely a transitional particle…it would seem that it should here be construed in a temporal sense, the reference being to the day that has played such a large part in the previous section. So Knox rightly renders, ‘When that day comes, the kingdom of heaven will be like….’ ”[5]

The subject is the kingdom of heaven. That phrase refers to the earthly kingdom of Christ, not the Church, the body of Christ.

• Third, this parable could not picture the rapture of the church. The rapture of the church was still a mystery that had not yet been revealed. The church of this present dispensation had not been revealed, let alone its rapture to the heavenly kingdom. Besides if this were a picture of the rapture, only the wise virgins would go out to meet the Bridegroom, for only the saved go to meet Christ. No unsaved meet Him at the rapture. This picture is inconsistent with the rapture, but not the second coming. At the second coming both the wise and unwise (saved and unsaved) meet the Lord; the saved (wise) go into the kingdom.
• Fourth, the answer given to the unwise virgins about not knowing them is very similar to the statement in Matthew 7:21-23. The context there is clearly that of entering the earthly kingdom of Christ. Those who only make lip service to faith, even though they did miracles in His name, are denied entrance, because they did not have a relationship with Christ (“I never knew you”). That is also the context and the event spoken of here in the parable.

The Israel View.

The Israel view is consistent with the context of the parable. This view contends that the virgins represent the nation Israel at the time of the second coming of Christ. The five wise virgins are true believers; the five foolish are professors, but not true believers. This is verified by the following facts:

• First, it continues the same theme as the preparedness for the Lord’s return. We have here the same application as given earlier—“Watch, therefore, for ye know not the day nor the hour” (Matthew 25:13 cf. 24:36). The end time motif and the context are the same as in the preceding parables and discourse.
• Second, the phrase “kingdom of heaven” never refers to the church. It is used concerning the earthly kingdom of Christ. The words “will be like unto” is a future passive form of the verb “to compare,” meaning comparable. The coming of Christ to set up His kingdom on earth is associated with the ten virgins.
• Third, the parable illustrates the truth that after the second coming and regathering of His people, God will judge Israel to see who will enter His kingdom. The wise (saved) will enter, the unwise (unsaved) of Israel will not enter; the door will be shut.

The truth of this event is predicted by the prophet Ezekiel. In Ezekiel 20:33-39 we read of God restoring Israel to the land. Then God will cause the nation to “pass under the rod” of judgment. Unbelieving Israel will not enter the land for the Kingdom blessing (20:38). Believing Israel will enter the land and the kingdom blessing (20:40-44). This prophecy awaits fulfillment after the tribulation.

Therefore, in this parable the theme of being prepared for Christ’s return continues, but a new element is added. The new development is the reason for being prepared; judgment. Those who are not prepared will not enter. This parable teaches that there will be a judgment of those at the second coming who will not be prepared.

LESSONS FROM THE PARABLE

There are three distinct lessons from this parable concerning the second coming of Christ:

• First, the necessity of being prepared for the coming of the Bridegroom.
• Second, this preparedness cannot be borrowed. It is each individual’s responsibility to be prepared for His coming.
• Third, being unprepared brings banishment from the kingdom. The door was shut!

---

[1]  J. Dwight Pentecost, THE WORDS AND WORKS OF JESUS CHRIST, 407.

[2]  W.F. Albright, C.S. Mann, MATTHEW, 301.

[3]  A.M. McNeile, THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW, 528.

[4]  A.C. Gaebelein, THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, 528.

[5]  R.V.G. Tasker, MATTHEW, 231.