The objective of this lesson: to stress that our treatment of other people [which includes our family members] is among God's priorities in spiritual responsibility.
This is the last parable in a sequence of seven parables that begin in Matthew 21 and conclude in Matthew 25. The first had to do with some wicked tenets. The second had to do with an invitation to attend wedding. The third had to do with discerning the obvious signs. The fourth had to do with faithfulness in servitude. The fifth had to do with preparation to welcome a bride groom. The sixth had to do with accountability. The last deals with the relationship between the way a person treats others and the final judgment.
Just an observation: this is the last parable in the sequence of seven parables found beginning in Matthew 21 and concluding at the last of Matthew 25.
Please note this is not a comprehensive declaration concerning the final judgment. It is a lesson his audience needed to comprehend. Jesus spoke to his disciples (Matthew 24:3). Comprehension concerning Jesus' mission did not begin with the twelve until Acts 2. Their failure to comprehend Jesus' mission is evidenced in Acts 1:6. At the time of this parable, the twelve were quite Jewish in their perspective. (1) Israel was God's chosen people. (2) The Messiah was for Israel and primarily was concerned about Israel. (3) Ancestry guaranteed Israel that they would receive God's favor. (4) 'Who you were' was more important than what you did. (5) 'What you did' primarily involved observing the appropriate ritual commands.
Caution your students not to regard this parable as the comprehensive, all inclusive statement about the criteria for God's judgment. God's judgment will include many factors not included in this parable. For example, Matthew 12:36, 37 declares our judgment will take into account what we say. This parable makes an essential comment about judgment, but it is not an all inclusive statement. Considering Jesus' audience, it makes the point that confidence should not be placed in who you are as Israelites, but how you treat others.
Were the twelve to be interviewed just prior to Jesus giving this parable, they would have declared when Israel came before God, people of that nation had a distinct advantage because of 'who they were.' It seems characteristic of humans to place enormous confidence in 'who I am.' This parable declares confidence must not be placed in 'who you are' but in 'who you serve.' In fact, Christians often work diligently on 'who I am' in a conviction that status improves one's reception by God in judgment. It is almost as if such people envision themselves saying to God, "Do you know who I am? Because of who I am, you must give me better treatment, or improved consideration, or toleration You do not give others."
A principle problem in the devout of first century Israel was placing confidence in 'who we are' as God's chosen people. The twelve [prior to Jesus' death, resurrection, and ascension] were truly Israelites in their perspective. This was one of Jesus' emphases to address their realization that God was interested in much more than ancestry.
This parable is based on a common reality known to everyone. Shepherds often had both sheep and goats in the flock they tended. At times the sheep and the goats needed to be separated. In this parable, the sheep stood for those God accepted as good and the goats as those God regarded as evil. In this parable the good and evil intermingle with each other in the same flock until the time of separation.
People were quite aware that shepherds commonly had sheep and goats in their flock. That was an 'everyday reality' in their world. They would need no explanation of why sheep and goats were in the same flock. They would need no explanation of why on occasions a separation must occur. The parable is based on a familiar happening.
The son of man is presented as the shepherd king who will separate the sheep from the goats from among all the nations assembled before him. Note the separation will not be on the basis of nationality, but on the basis of individuality. The issue was not, "Are you an Israelite?" but "How did you treat people?" The basis of the separation would have shocked the twelve.
This is one of the few times the son of man is declared to be a king. At times, the son of man is presented in very unkingly images. Consider Matthew 20:28.
The king made his first pronouncement to the sheep. They are declared blessed of God. They are invited to inherit [a gift] the kingdom prepared for them from the world's foundation. [The next world began with God's original intention for this world.]
In the parable, the sheep represent the righteous and the goats represent the wicked. The blessing is pronounced on the righteous. The blessing is a gift [an inheritance. A person qualifies for an inheritance. He/she does not 'earn' an inheritance.] The blessing reflects the intent of God 'from the foundation of the world.'
They were selected, not because they were Israelites, but because of the way they served and ministered to others. They fed the hungry, they gave the thirsty something to drink, they were hospitable to people passing through, they clothed those with no clothing, they helped the sick, and they ministered to those in prison.
The basis of selection was astounding then! They were not selected because they were Israelites [remember that all nations were gathered before the shepherd king]. The basis of their selection as the righteous was the way they treated God's people in physical need. The stress was on 'what you did to people,' not 'who you are.'
These people were shocked! They did those things for others, but never for the king. Therefore they asked, "When did we ever see you in these conditions?" He replied, "When you cared for someone insignificant who belongs to me, you ministered to me."
The sheep were surprised at the basis on which they received this blessing. Perhaps they did not regard themselves to be among the righteous because of their concern expressed for others. The point is that they had no awareness that they ever ministered to the king. The idea of a king being in need was foreign to them! Notice the emphasis 'I was.' Note their shock. They had no consciousness that as they ministered to the insignificant who belonged to the king that they ministered to the king. They merely addressed needs without consciousness of ministering to the king. Note also they protested: "We are not deserving of this gift."
The king then addressed the goats. He demanded that they depart from him and enter an eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. Where they were going, they would 'socialize' with the devil, not with the sheep! They would no longer benefit from being among the sheep! Why? They were inattentive to him in his time of need.
The goats are rejected. They benefited from existing among the sheep, but no longer! They would bear responsibility for their own actions. Rather than reflecting the king, they reflected the devil. Instead of benefiting from being among the sheep, they would now associate with the devil and his angels [an undesirable association!].
The goats protested! "We never neglected you! We never saw you in need!" Implication: "Had we seen the king in need, we certainly would have responded to the king's needs!" Again, the king gave this response: "When you refused to care for someone insignificant who belonged to me, you refused to care for me."
Just as the sheep had no awareness that they ministered to the king, the goats had no awareness that they neglected the king. The goats protested that they were unjustly condemned! They would never neglect someone as important as the king! Again, treatment of the insignificant among those who belonged to the king was treatment of the king himself. Therefore, neglect of the insignificant in the king's kingdom was neglect of the king himself.
The parable ends with the righteous being blessed and the wicked being punished. Remember: (1) the definition of 'the righteous' and 'the wicked' was determined by the king, not by the flock; (2) both the righteous [the sheep] and the wicked [the goats] were surprised.
Stress the king's decision and standards determined who was righteous and unrighteous. That was the king's decision, not his subject's decision. What seemed unjust to both the sheep and the goats was not an unjust action. The sheep and the goats had criteria for defining 'the righteous' and 'the unrighteous' that reflected their concepts rather than the king's concepts.
Acceptance in judgment is based on more than merely 'who you are.' It is equally based on how we serve the needs of others. The king notices how we treat the insignificant who belong to him. Does this remind you of Luke 14:12-14? "And He also went on to say to the one who had invited Him, "When you give a luncheon or a dinner, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, otherwise they may also invite you in return and that will be your repayment. But when you give a reception, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, since they do not have the means to repay you; for you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous."
Christ and God's criteria for determining righteousness includes the way a person treats other people. Remember: treat others as you wish to be treated.
Our responsibility is focused on two things: (1) Belonging to God, and (2) treating others like we belong to God.
Treating others appropriately is a part of belonging to God and must not be separated from belonging to God. It is belonging to God that changes our view of others.
For Thought and Discussion
It concludes with the parable of the judgment.
No, it should not be viewed as a comprehensive statement on the judgment. The parable stresses one factor, not the only factor, which is significant in God's judgment. Consider Matthew 12:36,37 and 1 Peter 4:1-6 with emphasis given to verse 5.
They expected to have special advantages before God because they were 'God's chosen people.'
The common reality: sheep and goats often mingled in the same flock.
The shepherd king separated the sheep from the goats from among all the nations gathered before him. The separation was based on the actions of the individual, not the identity of the nation.
They were invited to inherit the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world. When the king was hungry, thirsty, a stranger passing through, naked, sick, or in prison, these people ministered to his needs.
They were shocked: "We never saw you, the king, in any of these conditions."
The king said, "Separate yourselves from me and go associate with and suffer with the devil and his angels."
(1) The way we treat the insignificant among God's people is critical to the way we treat God [and Jesus, the King of kings]. (2) God and Jesus determine what is righteous and unrighteous; we do not. (3) Our concept of injustice may not be the king's concept of injustice.
Link to Student Guide
Lesson 6