Meditations in Matthew 25—The Final Judgment

Jesus’s teaching about the sheep and goats judgment challenges our prophetic model (inmillennialism). He mentions this judgment at the end of his Olivet Discourse (Matt 25:31–46). It describes what will happen after the messianic age. The Son of Man will judge “all the nations” (Matt 25:32).

This judgment will bring the eternal state for two groups. Unsaved people “will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life” (Matt 25:46; emphasis added). 

Jesus spoke about this judgment on Tuesday of Passion Week in AD 30.¹ About forty-five years later, the apostle John wrote about this judgment. He described it as the “great white throne” judgment (Rev 20:11–14). As in the Olivet Discourse, it will occur after the age of Christ’s reign (Rev 20:4, 6).²

This timing may appear to present a difficulty. Inmillennialism says the Olivet Discourse has maintained a single subject up to this point. Matthew 24:1–25:30 describes events surrounding the Temple’s destruction in Jesus’s generation. How can the end of the Olivet Discourse relate to events at the end of history?

The problem is not as severe as it at first appears. We will show this in three “looks”: a closer look at the judgment text, a chiastic look at the larger context, and a collapsed look at the historical events Jesus mentioned. The last “look” provides the key interpretive device we mentioned in our last post.

A Closer Look

Jesus’s introduction to the sheep and goats judgment confirms our prophetic model. The Lord says, 

When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. (Matt 25:31–32 NKJV)

First, Jesus speaks of the time when the Son of Man “comes (Gk. erchomai) in His glory (Gk. doxa), and all the holy angels with Him” (Matt 25:31a NKJV).  

Jesus had described this “coming” and “glory” about a year earlier.³ He had said, “The Son of Man will come (Gk. erchomai) in the glory (Gk. doxa) of His Father with His angels” (Matt 16:27 NKJV). 

In his earlier statement, Jesus provided a time stamp. “Assuredly, I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming (Gk. erchomai) in His kingdom” (Matt 16:28 NKJV).

Inmillennialism asserts these statements—Matt 16:27–28 and Matt 25:31—show the same event. Both conceive of the “coming” of the Son of Man as an event that would occur before some of Jesus’s hearers died.

The second phrase shows what would follow this coming. “Then He will sit on the throne of His glory” (Matt 25:31b). This describes Jesus’s position during the messianic age. He reigns in his kingdom.

The Scriptures often use throne-sitting as a picture of Jesus’s messianic-age reign. On the day of Pentecost, Peter quoted David’s prophecy in Ps 16:8–11. He then interpreted it: 

Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ….” (Acts 2:30–31 NKJV; emphasis added)

Peter also quoted Ps 110:1l in his sermon. He said, “David did not ascend into the heavens, but he says himself: ‘The LORD said to my Lord, Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.’ Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:34–36 NKJV). 

Jesus “sat on his throne” after his resurrection. He now reigns there during the messianic age.⁴

The next phrase shows the final judgment when “all the nations will be gathered before Him” (Matt 25:32). This is the final judgment that will occur at the end of Jesus’s messianic-age reign (cp. 1 Cor 15:20–28).

This sequence—Jesus’s coming,⁵ his messianic-age reign, and his judgment—is at the heart of inmillennialism.

A Chiastic Look

Matthew uses a beautiful literary structure to confirm this view of Matt 25:31–46. He applies this device to the entire Olivet Discourse. He also applies it to the warning passage as a separate unit.

The Whole of the Discourse

John F. Hart makes an important observation about the Olivet Discourse. Speaking about Jesus’s answers to the disciples’ questions, he says:

From a literary point of view, Matthew structures these as a chiasm. It is well known that Matthew brings order and precision to his Gospel. Chiastic structures in Matthew are quite common and are fully appropriate in light of his precision.⁶

One of our previous posts (here) showed Matthew’s chiastic structure for the Olivet Discourse:

A. Exhortation: observe!—the Temple will be destroyed (Matt. 24:1–2).

B. When question: what will be the time? (Matt. 24:3a)

C. Sign question: what will be the sign? (Matt. 24:3b)

C.* Sign answer: the signs of associated events, symbols (Matt. 24:4–31)

B.* When answer: this is the time (Matt. 24:32–36)

A.* Exhortation: observe! (Matt. 24:37–25:46); watch! (Matt. 24:42, 43; 25:13)

In the beginning, the disciples asked Jesus about the sign of his “coming (Gk. parousia), and the end of the age” (Matt 24:3 NKJV). By “the end of the age,” they meant the Mosaic age.

The end of one age requires the beginning of another. The disciples used the Greek word parousia to represent that new age. 

The Olivet Discourse describes the transition from the Mosaic age to the messianic age. The new age appeared at the beginning of the discourse. Matthew’s structure leads us to expect some reference to it at the end.

We are not disappointed. In his conclusion, Jesus said he would come (Gk. erchomai) to sit on his throne in the messianic age (Matt 25:31). This reign would end with the final judgment (again cp. 1 Cor 15:20–28).

The Warnings of the Discourse

We saw additional chiastic support for this conclusion in another post (here). Matthew arranged Jesus’s warnings as a chiasmus (Matt 24:37–25:46) within a chiasmus (Matt 24:1–25:46). Here is the one on the inside:

A. Judgment event (distant past): Noah and the flood (Matt 24:37–42)

B. Interim parable: the goodman and his servants (Matt 24:43–51)

C. Entrance parable: the bridegroom and the ten virgins (Matt 25:1–13)

B.* Interim parable: the lord and the servants (Matt 25:14–30)

A.* Judgment event (distant future): the sheep and the goats (Matt 25:31–46)

Jesus began his warnings with a reference to a universal judgment in the distant past. The flood in Noah’s generation forms the first element (A) of the chiasmus. 

The Lord closed this section with a reference to a universal judgment in the distant future, at the end of the messianic age. The sheep and goats judgment is the last element (A*) in the chiasmus.

These chiasmi reinforce the structure found in the text (Matt 25:31–32). Jesus said he would come (Gk. erchomai) in his generation (Matt 24:34). He would then sit on his throne and reign in the messianic age. At the end of that reign, he would judge all nations. Matthew used great skill to make this sequence clear.

A Collapsed Look

Another interpretive device further confirms our view of the sheep and goats judgment. We call it a “collapsed view” of events. Commentators often refer to this view as “prophetic perspective,” “prophetic foreshortening,” or something similar. 

A standard Bible dictionary defines this view and applies it to the Olivet Discourse. 

In that discourse two distinct occurrences, the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the world, seem to be spoken of as coincident and as near. This is in accordance with the nature of biblical prophecy as it is seen in the OT, which brings together in prophetic perspective … events which were widely separated in actual occurrence.⁷

Isaiah provides another example of this collapsed view. “Thus says the Lord GOD: ‘My people went down at first into Egypt to dwell there; Then the Assyrian oppressed them without cause’” (Isa 52:4 NKJV). The prophet “looks back on two previous traumatic periods in Israelite history—the exodus from Egypt in the second millennium BC and the Assyrian invasion of the northern kingdom.”⁸ About 700 years separated these events, but Isaiah collapses them into a single sentence without explanation.

Another example especially interests us. We have mentioned the Song of Moses in previous posts (here). Before giving it, God told Moses what would happen to Israel. He says he would bring “them to the land flowing with milk and honey.” This occurred at the beginning of the Mosaic age. The Lord then spoke of the troubles that would come on Israel at the end of that age (Deut 31:20–21). These two verses provide a collapsed view of the entire Mosaic age.

Jesus does the same thing in the Olivet Discourse. He mentions his coming (Gk. erchomai) that would occur in his generation. This was at the beginning of the messianic age. In the next verse, he mentions the final judgment at the end of that age (Matt 25:31–32). Again, two verses comprise an entire age.

This is not special pleading to make inmillennialism work. It is the application of a recognized interpretive tool.

We will make two observations before ending our discussion of prophetic perspective. First, this device is like the “protensive view” we mentioned before (here). Kenneth Gentry says this occurs when a prophet

looks at the end results of the present redemptive reality. This protensive view is common in Scripture, as when we read of “new wine” being found in the “cluster” (Isa. 65:8). Obviously grapes are found in clusters, not the end product of new wine. But the inherent quality of the grape to produce wine and its common usage for such allow the poet to see the developing wine through the original product. John is able to see in the historic, persecuted first-century church the beauty that is hers—because of her . . . future glory.⁹

We used this concept (here and here) to explain Paul’s “rapture” passage (1 Thess 4:16–17).

The protensive view emphasizes an end as the natural outcome of a beginning. Prophetic perspective collapses two events without regard to any organic relationship between them.

Second, we wish to issue a warning about this interpretive device. We will borrow from Milton Terry to do so.

It is a great error to apply this illustration to specific designations of time. Where no particular time is indicated, or where time-limitations are kept out of view, the figure may be allowed, and is, indeed, a happy illustration. But when the Lord says that certain events are to follow immediately after certain other events, let no interpreter presume to say that millenniums may come between.¹⁰

The same is true when Jesus says events will occur in his generation (e.g., Matt 23:36; 24:34).

Conclusion

Jesus’s prophecy about the Temple’s fall provoked two questions from the disciples. They asked for signs related to that event. They also asked when it would occur. They knew it would end the Mosaic age and complete the transition to the messianic age.

Jesus obliged them. He provided a long list of signs. He told them the Temple would fall in their generation (Matt 24:34).

The Lord then gave the disciples a series of warnings. The last one included a reference to the final judgment.

This outline of the Olivet Discourse is built into inmillennialism. It shows a first-century coming, a messianic-age reign, and a final judgment. The literary structures in the Olivet Discourse display this sequence. And, a well-recognized prophetic device—prophetic perspective—confirms its validity.

1. A. T. Robertson, A Harmony of the Gospels for Students of the Life of Christ (New York: Harper, 1922), 159.
2. The image in this post is The Last Judgement by John Martin  (1789–1854). This file (here) is in the public domain (PD-US).
3. Robertson, A Harmony of the Gospels, 85.
4. See also Matt 19:28; Rev 3:21; 5:13; 6:16; 7:10, 15.
5. Gk. erchomai.
6. John F. Hart, “Should Pretribulationists Reconsider the Rapture in Matthew 24:36–44? Part 1 of 3,” vol. 20 in Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society Autumn 2007), 53. Hart uses “chiasm” instead of “chiasmus.”
7. Stewart Dingwall Fordyce Salmond, “Eschatology of the New Testament,” in A Dictionary of the Bible, ed. James Hastings et al., vol. 1 (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1911–12), 750. Emphasis added.
8. Tremper Longman III, “Isaiah,” in CSB Study Bible: Notes, ed. Edwin A. Blum and Trevin Wax (Nashville, TN: Holman, 2017), 1118.
9. Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., The Book of Revelation Made Easy: You Can Understand Bible Prophecy, 2nd ed. (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2010), 128. Emphasis in original.
10. Milton S. Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Treatise on the Interpretation of the Old and New Testaments, eds. George R. Crooks and John F. Hurst (New York: Eaton & Mains, 1890), 388.