Transcript
Okay, I’m here with Zane Hodges, and we’re discussing now the judgment of the sheep and the goats as found in Matthew 25:31-46. And I’d like to give a brief overview, Zane, before we go into it. What we find here is this is the time after the Tribulation, and we’ve got three groups here. The Lord is speaking of three groups. One are the sheep, who are brought before Him. One are the goats, who are brought before Him. And then there’s a group that’s not brought before Him, but Jesus alludes to, and He talks about “My brethren.” Sometimes He talks about “the least of My brethren.”
And what we find—and I’m going to ask you about that more in a moment—what happens is, with the sheep, Jesus says the evidence is clear that you are My sheep because of the way you treated My brethren. You treated them well. With the goats, He says the evidence is clear that you are not My sheep because of the way you mistreated My brethren, the way you didn’t treat My brethren. And so He talks about that. And then to the sheep He says they’re going to inherit the kingdom which has been prepared, and to the goats He says they’re going to be going off into everlasting fire. So we’ve got an interesting kind of parabolic structure taking place here at the end of the Olivet Discourse, where we’ve got the sheep and the goats and the brethren. And so I would like to start us out by asking, would you explain who these three groups are?
Okay, that’s a well-formulated question, and I think basically the fundamental answer is given in Matthew 25:32: “And all nations shall be gathered before Him, and He will separate them like a shepherd does the sheep from the goats.” All right, the term that is used here is ethne, which is the usual translation for the nations, or Gentiles. So the first fundamental fact is the sheep and the goats are entirely made up of Gentiles. There are no Jews in this.
All right, so who are the brethren? Well, having said that the sheep and the goats are Gentiles, it’s natural to understand the brethren as the people to whom Jesus is physically and earthly related, that is, the Jews. But there is more, I think, to determine than that, because earlier in Matthew, in Matthew chapter 12, Jesus identifies His disciples as His brethren: “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.” So we’re now talking not just simply about Jews in general, but Jews who have been disciples to the Lord Jesus Christ during the very troubling times of the Great Tribulation, and in fact have been His servants and the messengers in those days.
Because when we bring into this the earlier part of the Olivet Discourse, “This gospel of the kingdom must be preached in all the world, and then shall the end come,” and then we’re told in the book of Revelation that Satan made war with the remnant of the woman’s seed who had the testimony of Jesus. We think particularly of the 144,000, though we don’t need to think exclusively of them. There is also, I think, biblical evidence that during the course of the Tribulation, God is sifting the nation of Israel very severely. Amos chapter 9 is a particularly important passage here. The wheat and the chaff are separated, and apparently the chaff perishes and the wheat is preserved.
So this is such a terrible and severe time for the nation of Israel that the only survivors are believers. It appears to me that that’s what the Scriptures teach. So now we are talking about people who have managed to survive the Tribulation because of their faith in Christ, and, ah, or have at least served Him during part of the Tribulation, since some of our Lord’s disciples in those days will be beheaded for their witness to Jesus, according to Revelation 20.
So it seems to me that the way we often look at this parable is that when Jesus comes to earth again and sits on the throne of His glory, He gathers just the Gentile nations. This is a judgment that pertains only to them. And because the nation of Israel, and in particular the servants of Christ, the preachers of the tribulation gospel, will have been at the focus of God’s activities, the Gentiles’ relationship to these people, to this testimony, will be a very critical matter. And we also learn from the book of Revelation that if anyone takes the mark of the beast, he’s doomed. In other words, nobody gets saved who takes the mark of the beast.
So it’s fairly evident that if a person has been in any sense favorable and helpful to the Jewish missionaries, to the Jewish believers and disciples, during this period, they have to have some significant relationship to God, because this will be virtually impossible for people to do who are under the sway of the man of sin and who are under the sway of his commercial system and can’t even buy and sell without having his mark. So I think we’ve got a fairly clear-cut picture here, where the reactions of the sheep and the goats to the brethren of Jesus is in fact a revealing reaction.
Now, this is not the final judgment. I think that’s important to keep in mind, because this is what we might call a preliminary hearing, or really an arraignment, right, where the judge determines whether there is sufficient evidence to hold the person for trial.
Right, right. The trial hasn’t been heard yet, but the guy’s in prison, awaiting trial or something like that.
Right. But there’s no bail in this kind of situation. So the presumptive evidence of the goats is that they do not have a relationship with the King, because they have refused to do anything whatsoever for the King’s brethren. And that presumptive evidence, by the way, is absolutely true. There are no mistakes here. Nobody gets among the goats who in fact is a saved person, and who at the final judgment would be ruled as such a person.
But the point is that the nature of the Tribulation Period offers this kind of presumptive evidence in a form that has never existed before, because there is a sense in which the world as a whole will be divided in two camps: those who follow the beast and incorporate themselves into his system, both religiously and commercially, and those who don’t. And those who don’t are taking their lives in their hands if they do anything at all for the brethren of Jesus.
Oh, here you’ve got an evangelist who’s come preaching to your village, say up in Nepal, and you know he’s been in the public square, and the agents of the man of sin have arrested him and thrown him in prison. Do I go to see him, and then maybe take him some cheese and bread or something like that? Or do I just leave him alone? But do I want to take the risk of being identified with this man, because the beast is persecuting these people all over the world? And then if I do this, I’m identifying myself with him. Or suppose he’s fallen sick. He’s had a long journey to Nepal, right, and he’s ill out in the square, or he’s in a hovel somewhere. Do I go and try to help him and minister to him? Then that’s an immense decision in the Tribulation Period that doesn’t compare to anything that we have experienced or know today. And I think that it is only against the background of the Tribulation Period that this entire discussion of the sheep and the goats is meaningful.
This raises a number of questions. First of all, are you simply saying, then, that the reason why—I mean, today we have people who are unbelievers, yet who are humanitarian, you know, who would help a person who is down-and-out or whatever. But what you’re saying is, this is a unique time in all of human history, and in this unique time only believers, and only some believers for that matter, but only believers are going to help the Jewish evangelists, the Jewish brethren, and no unbeliever would do that. Is that what you’re saying, because of the uniqueness of this time?
That’s exactly what I’m saying. And if we take prophecy seriously, if we take the revelation made in the book of Revelation seriously, we know that there has been no analog to this period of time anywhere in human history. There have been situations and countries in the world where it has been dangerous to put yourself on the side of Christ and His faithful servants. But there’s never been a worldwide government that had control of everything in the way that this government will have, or that is hostile openly to Christianity and inciting the persecution and death of everyone who names the name of Christ. There’s never been anything like that in the world.
The reason is that this is a period where the world falls under the control of Satan in a way—we know that it’s already under Satan’s control—but the impact of what we call Judeo-Christian influence is still obvious today in many parts of the world, and we benefit from it. But we’re talking about a world situation where satanic principles and satanic activity are paramount and in total control. Unregenerate man will not respond the same to that as he does in situations today.
Okay, that’s very helpful. Another question is, you’ve mentioned that there’s three groups. You’ve got—and am I correct that when you’re talking about the sheep and the goats, the Gentiles, right, these are only surviving Gentiles? In other words, the Gentiles who died, whether believers or unbelievers, are not being judged at this judgment. Is that correct?
That’s correct. There’s no indication there’s been a resurrection here of either the sheep or the goats. So we’re in a situation that is very logical, given the prophetic picture. When the Lord Jesus Christ comes to earth, the population of the world will have been dramatically reduced, we know that. But it will not be extinguished, because Jesus Himself said, “Except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved; but the days will be shortened for the elect’s sake.”
Yeah.
So now we’re about to inaugurate the kingdom, and we have a mixed bunch of Gentiles in front of us, right? And Jesus is not going to admit to the kingdom unregenerate Gentiles. He’s just not going to do that. So there has to be a hearing here to determine the status of these people, whether they’re going to get into the kingdom or whether they’re not going to get into the kingdom. And basically what Jesus says to the Gentiles is, “I know you,” or, “I don’t know you.” “You don’t know Me.” “You’re going to go to a place of eternal punishment.” And only the regenerate sheep, who have manifested this and therefore survived, will get into the kingdom.
What should be kept in mind here is something you alluded to in your question. Earlier in the discourse He says, “Because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold, but he that endures to the end shall be saved.” All right, that’s to be understood in the same sense as He says later, “Except those days be shortened, there should no flesh be saved.” The only way for a believer to survive this period is to not allow his love to wax cold, and not to be swept away into the unsaved community and into the doom which falls on them.
So we’re talking here about people who have come through the Tribulation Period, and basically they have been victorious in that they have sided with Jesus Christ in a world that was totally hostile to Him. And they do more than enter the kingdom. They inherit it. That is to say, they reign in the kingdom. So this is a rewards passage in the final analysis. But obviously their counterparts of the Gentile world, who are neither regenerate nor victorious, are excluded from the kingdom altogether.
That is very, very helpful. So what we have here is, we have surviving Gentiles, believing and unbelieving, and we have, through an allusion to surviving Jews—however, you’ve already said that all of the surviving Jews are believers. Why aren’t there surviving Jews who are unbelievers? You would expect we’d have four groups: sheep and goats among the nations, and sheep and goats among Israel. But we don’t have that. We have sheep and goats among the nations, and then we have Jesus’ brethren, which, as you pointed out, are not only believers, but they’re faithful believers from within Israel. Why aren’t there unbelieving Jews here?
The bottom-line answer to that is that one of the purposes of the Great Tribulation is the purging of Israel. That although God is obviously sending His judgments upon humanity as a whole, He has now returned to Israel as the center of His purposes, and He’s preparing Israel for the kingdom. I mentioned the passage in Amos where Israel is really sifted like grain, and where the chaff is gotten rid of so that the wheat is preserved. So that is the purpose of God with Israel during this period: to get rid of all the chaff, that is to say, the unbelieving element, and to leave only the believing element behind.
Now, this also fulfills the statement made by Paul that blindness in part has happened unto Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in, and then “all Israel will be saved, for there shall come out of Zion a Deliverer, who shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.”
What does that mean?
Well, that means that at His coming He completely has eliminated ungodliness, in the sense that there are no ungodly people left in Israel. There are no ungodly people that are going into Israel, right? There are ungodly people out in the Gentile world, and He’s taking care of them in the story that we have been told here. But He has purged Israel, and that’s an important feature of prophetic truth, it seems to me.
And remember that there’s a passage in Zechariah where, when they see Him, the whole nation mourns for Him, every tribe apart and every family apart. What is really involved here is that at the glorious appearing of the Lord Jesus Christ, there is a conversion of whoever is left to be converted. And we may say that probably in the few moments in which He descends and fights the battle of Armageddon, if there are any unsaved Israelites, they will be eliminated. That is in fulfillment of the prophecy of Amos, and in fulfillment of the prophecy that Paul quotes in Romans 11. It’s the purpose of God to start the kingdom with a totally regenerate nation, and this has been achieved at this point. So now we’re only concerned with the Gentiles.
That’s very good. Well, a couple other quick questions. This is very, very helpful. Okay, you’ve got the sheep, which are Gentiles who survive the Tribulation, all of which are faithful, because unfaithful Gentiles will have died during it, and you’ve got the goats, which are unbelieving Gentiles who survive, and who are going to be—this is their arraignment, they’re going to be held for a thousand years. You’ve got all of these Gentiles who are believers. They’re going to inherit the kingdom. And by the way, does that mean, in light of 1 Corinthians 15:50, where it says flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, so the mortal cannot take on immortality, does this mean that all of these Gentiles are going to be resurrected?
I think it means that all of these Gentiles that we’re talking about, the sheep that are here and alive at the end of the Tribulation Period, will be transformed. And you’ll notice that the end of the parable tells us that these shall enter into eternal life. All right, what does that mean? Well, we usually take it—you know, if they’re saved they already have eternal life, right? And so in what sense do they enter into it? Well, it seems the obvious conclusion would be they are transformed so that they totally experience eternal life.
So that what happens here at the end of the Tribulation is that the living Gentiles who are believers, who are called to inherit the kingdom of God, having passed through this review—and of course the Lord knows who they are—they are instantly transformed, just as we are instantly transformed when the Lord comes for us if we’re alive at His coming. And so therefore they are prepared to inherit the kingdom because, as you said, the Scripture is clear that flesh and blood will not inherit the kingdom of God. You cannot rule in the kingdom unless you are a transformed believer.
Now it’s interesting that this is not said of Jesus’ brethren. It’s not said that Jesus’ brethren inherit the kingdom. Now, I’ve got a couple questions there, one of which is, we know from Matthew 16:27 it says the Son of Man is coming in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will reward, or recompense, each according to his works. That verse seems to suggest that everybody has to be recompensed according to his works. That would mean that there has to be some judgment for the Jesus’ brethren, for the faithful Jewish believers. And so my question is, is there going to be, even though it’s not mentioned here, is there some judgment for them? And secondly, are they going to be transformed and given glorified bodies, or are they going to go into the Millennium in natural bodies, so they can populate the Millennium?
Well, one of the things, of course, once again to keep in mind is the purpose of the parable. The purpose of the parable is not really to discuss the destiny of the brethren. The purpose of the parable is to discuss the destiny of the living Gentiles who will be here when the Lord sits upon the throne of His glory. So the destiny of the brethren, and exactly what happens to them, is not the subject matter of this parable.
However, given the overall teaching of the New Testament about inheriting the kingdom, and about the fact that flesh and blood will not inherit the kingdom, and the fact that “if we endure, we shall also reign with Him,” we are, I think, on perfectly sound grounds to draw the conclusion that the brethren will be assessed at some point or other, that they, if we’re talking here about only living Jewish people, that they will be transformed at some point or other. For all we know, this may already have occurred by the time the judgment of the sheep and the goats takes place.
Ah, yeah. That’s what I mean.
It would be logical for the assessment of the Jewish faithful Christians to have preceded the assessment of the Gentiles. So I think that that is a strong possibility. But whether it has already occurred by the time this judgment occurs, or whether it is still to occur, is not the subject matter of the text.
Now that does lead to the other question that you’ve alluded to, and that is, who gets into the Millennium in their physical body? And my answer is this: it seems to me that the Scriptures shut us up to only one answer, and that is surviving children underneath the age of accountability. Because all of those who qualify as sheep here are apparently transformed. The brethren will need to be transformed to inherit the kingdom. But the passage is not considering children, right? It’s not considering, what about the children who live through this? The little babies, the two-year-olds, the five-year-olds, and so on, whatever the age of accountability is. There are probably at least hundreds of thousands of them.
And it’s not like God, and certainly not the God revealed in the Bible, to send all these children to a place of punishment along with their parents. So we would assume that these children are brought into the kingdom in their infancy or in their early years, and they grow up in the kingdom. Who takes care of them? Well, it seems to me that since the only adults in the kingdom are glorified people, they’ll be taken care of by glorified people.
This does, of course, open the question—and it’s a hypothetical one—what about the countless children who have died before the age of accountability throughout the world? What about them? But let’s remember that the world has been seriously depopulated by the events of the Tribulation, and is further depopulated by the departure of the goats into punishment. So the number of people surviving, even if we count all of the living children who have come through the Tribulation, is relatively small.
Now Jesus did say to His disciples one time that they’re not to despise the children, because of such is the kingdom of heaven. It certainly seems to me possible—there’s no Scripture to support it definitively, but possible—what God will do is raise all of the children who died before the age of accountability to grow up in the kingdom, and be nurtured and instructed by glorified people. And if that’s what He does, it would be a very beautiful thing indeed, because they will have better parental guidance than they could ever have dreamed of having had they lived and grown up in the world in which they perished as children.
So I think we have to say that the world population is going to be renewed by the presence of children who grow up and marry and have children, and they have grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and so on. None of that is the subject matter here, and I’m certainly not deducing it from here, but the Scriptures do, once we bring them all to bear on this, close in the options so that I think the children remain the only sensible option.
Well, okay, you’ve opened Pandora’s box. I’ve got one or two more questions. First of all, would this not say—and of course I think every view of dispensationalism has to have something like this—that of these children who go in, and it would seem to me your postulation about children who died in times past makes sense, that God would bring them back. But the point would be, if they come to faith during the thousand years of the Millennium—and there’s a suggestion in Isaiah 65 that for a person to die at a hundred in the Millennium is going to be like a stillbirth—so evidently people are going to be living close to, if not the entire, thousand years. So they have a thousand years to come to faith. If they come to faith, they’ll be born again, they’ll go into the new earth and the eternal kingdom. If they don’t, hypothetically some of these people will not come to faith during the Millennium, and they would ultimately be at the Great White Throne Judgment and be condemned. Is that correct?
That certainly seems to me to be correct. And of course what we also know is that there is a rebellion by Satan, under the rubric of Gog and Magog, at the end of the Millennium, and that the number who follow him are like the sand of the sea. There are an enormous number of people. But of course if we think in terms of all the children that have died in past history coming into the world and then multiplying, and then death being relatively rare in the long-term event, then we can imagine that the world is as heavily populated as it is today, or if not more so. And the number of unsaved people, therefore, that this passage views for us will be very, very, very large indeed.
And since these people, many of them of course, will perish in this invasion, so a lot of these people will die as they are led by Gog and Magog. On the other hand, we assume that there may be unsaved people who don’t participate in the rebellion, but their destiny, nevertheless, is the destiny of all unsaved people, and that will work out in the final judgment they have ahead of them.
That really raises another one, because—and you make a good point about the rebellion at the end and all the people involved—because don’t we always assume that if we’d been there with Jesus and we saw the miracles He did and we saw this, certainly we would have come to faith? Yet when that actually did occur, John 1:11 says, “He came to His own, His own received Him not.” The vast majority of Israel rejected her Messiah, and the vast majority of Gentiles rejected the Messiah. And so should it really be that surprising that when the King of kings and Lord of lords is on earth, and He’s ruling on the earth, and people have the opportunity to come to faith in Him, and even have glorified saints present there to witness, that even then still many people, if not the vast majority, are going to be on the wrong path, that instead of going through the narrow gate they’re going to be going through the broad way, even with the King there? Would you comment?
Yes. That’s the kind of astounding conclusion that we are forced to draw from this. And that also magnifies the importance of the Millennium in the purposes of God. The Millennium is a necessary era before eternity begins, because what we have in the Millennium is, first of all, a perfect government, Jesus heading the government and glorified people serving Him in the government. Secondly, we have a creation that is delivered from the curse that fell on man. And Satan is bound for a thousand years in the bottomless pit.
So we’ve got a perfect government, a perfect environment, and no Satan, and yet in those circumstances man fails to believe in Jesus Christ. An innumerable number of people fail to believe in Him, and are even prepared to rebel against Him at the end of the thousand years. This is really the Garden of Eden made large, because, you know, sometimes people would even say, “If I were back in the garden, I wouldn’t have eaten that fruit. I wouldn’t have fallen for Satan’s line. I wouldn’t have done that.” But as a matter of fact, this will show that man in a perfect environment, a worldwide Eden if you want to put it that way, will in fact choose evil rather than good.
It will demonstrate what God has been saying in His word, that man is a hopeless sinner apart from the grace of God and the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. So when God has demonstrated that in the events of the Millennium, then we’re ready for the eternal state: new heavens, new earth, wherein dwells righteousness, no more sin. But sin has got to have this last manifestation for God’s demonstration to be complete and persuasive, even to the rebellious mind.
That is fantastic. Just one or two other things, just to clarify. You talked about the children who would go in, both the children Gentile, I assume, and the children of the brethren, the Jews, surviving Jewish children, surviving Gentile children. But I’m assuming, therefore, that all of these are unbelieving, because if they were believing children—I mean, a child could believe. If a child was old enough to believe, then they would be among those who inherit the kingdom. Is that correct?
I think that’s a pretty difficult question, and I don’t know that we can give an absolutely definitive answer, because in theory it is possible for a saved child, let’s say he’s six years old, to go into the kingdom without being changed. All right, that’s possible, and that may happen. Another interesting feature here, which the Bible is relatively silent about, but the information we have from the Bible would show us, is that at the end of the Millennium, even after the rebellion, there must be millions of people alive in their mortal bodies, right? What happens to them? We’re not told.
But one very strong possibility is that they will be delivered from their sin nature, and they’ll go into eternity as human beings. That is a possibility. And there are some hints in the book of Revelation that we have actual human beings, not glorified immortals, in the eternal state. That makes a lot of sense, because remember, when God created Adam and Eve, and before they sinned, God looked out at everything that He had made and said, “It’s good.” That implies that human beings in the physical condition in which Adam and Eve were created are good. It would be very strange if God has no purpose for people like that in eternity.
So I think that all of this ties in. We can anticipate the possibility that a saved child will enter the kingdom. He’s not an overcomer, so he’s not transformed along with other overcomers, but he’s a believer, and he goes into the Millennium, in all probability, in his human body, and is capable of growing up, marrying, and having children. And the same thing can happen to adults, apparently, as far as we can tell. It can happen to them of passing from the Millennium to the eternal state. But because the eternal state will be sinless, we will then have human beings who are like Adam and Eve, who are sinless.
So you’re suggesting, at the end of the Millennium, it might not be only children who could go into the new earth with natural bodies, but even surviving adults. I’m assuming among the adults these would be believing adults, obviously. But among the children, might this not be children who have not yet come to the age of accountability?
Yes, it could be that. And if we have children born in the eternal state, they will grow up, but then there will be no sin to be saved from. So we won’t have a situation where they will need to be saved, but they will be confirmed in holiness, just like angels. Something happened in the world of angels where, at one point, it was possible for an angel to rebel, but now we get the impression from Scripture it is no longer possible for the angels to rebel. The angels are fixed in whatever state they passed through that particular time in.
So it’s reasonable to think that, in all possibility—understand, I’m not offering this as a definitive solution, but as a possible answer to these questions—it’s perfectly understandable for us to think of a saved individual coming to the end of the Millennium, and God says in effect, “I’m going to confirm you in a state of holiness. I’m going to eliminate your sin nature. You’re going to be a perfect human being.”
That was very good. Now, okay, let’s go back to Adam and Eve not sinning. And I love your idea about this as the Garden of Eden made large, or the worldwide Eden. But if we went back, if Adam and Eve had not sinned, then it seems a reasonable assumption to me that God would have sealed them and their offspring in this state of holiness. And would that not mean, then, that when every child was conceived, that child would have eternal life from the moment of conception, so that there would not be some point at which they got eternal life, even though obviously at some point they would come to believe in the Messiah and believe in Jesus, but you would not be at that point for eternal life because they would already have eternal life? And could that not be the same situation we’re talking about in eternity?
Well, we don’t have definitive Scripture on this, but it would seem to me, given my understanding of broad Scripture, that Adam and Eve in their pre-fall condition had human physical life, but not eternal life. They had eternal existence before them. They could have lived forever. But if by definition eternal life is Christ—“This is the true God and eternal life”; “I am the way, the truth, and the life”—then if we’re talking about acquiring eternal life, we’re talking about acquiring something that does not go with unfallen humanity. It is something that comes directly from God and is part of His nature and character.
So my guess would be that had Adam and Eve not fallen—and of course, if ifs and ands were pots and pans, there’d be no need for tinkers, and it’s risky always to speculate—but if Adam and Eve had not fallen, their children would have been as sinless as they were, and that kind of condition would have gone on indefinitely. In theory, God might have called a stopping point to the period in which it was possible to fall, and confirmed them in the condition of unfallen human beings. But, you know, all of these things are quite speculative, and it depends on your definition of eternal life, whether you think of it as something fairly human that a human has by virtue of being a pure and sinless human, or whether you think of it as a divine type of life that is imparted only when the Lord Jesus Christ is received as Savior.
So in that sense, you could have had the offspring of Adam who were born without sin, but yet did not have eternal life, and when they came to faith they got eternal life. And in the new earth you could have the same thing, where you would have basically two groups of people, those with eternal life, those without. Those without are without simply because they’ve not yet grown to the age at which they can understand and believe the gospel. Once they do, they would get eternal life. Is that what you’re suggesting as a reasonable hypothesis?
Well, that’s a reasonable hypothesis. I guess it’s a little different than what I’m suggesting, because I’m thinking that on the assumption—which of course God knew was not going to be fulfilled—but on the assumption that man did not fall, and that he had children who were sinlessly propagated, without a sin nature, that there would have been no offer of a Savior, because there would not have been something to be saved from. The offer of the Savior, the first one we know of, follows almost immediately upon man’s fall. Furthermore, the offer of eternal life carries with it the guarantee of escape from judgment. But if judgment is already past and no fall is possible, then it seems to me that what you probably have is not eternal life per se, but human life that goes on indefinitely because it is never impeded or stopped by sin.
But you’re not saying, then, that when a child was born they would have instantly believed in Jesus. There would have been some point at which they grasped reality.
Yes, but when we believe in Jesus, we believe in Him as sinners who need the gift of everlasting life, right? A lot of people even in our unsaved world believe in Jesus in the sense that they believe He exists, that He died, and so on. So it’s hardly difficult to imagine an unfallen child who begins to acquire mental capacities and is told by his own unfallen parents that Jesus is the Son of God, that He’s the King of the world, and all of this. He’ll believe all that, yeah. But that is different than believing in Him for eternal life, because that’s something that we as sinners do.
As far as I can see, it’s something confined to the experience of sinners. That is why being transformed is also confined to sinners. And what we would have had if there had been no sin and no fall of man is human beings who had a perfect openness to God, as Adam and Eve did. They had a perfect relationship with God. They could commune with Him. They believed in Him. But they didn’t believe in Him for salvation from sin or eternal death, because there was no sin and there was no eternal judgment to be delivered from. So although they would live forever, had they not fallen, et cetera, or people in the eternal state, if they have natural bodies, if that does happen, we wouldn’t call that everlasting life.
Just like I’ve always had people ask me—I’m sure you’ve had this—they say, “Well, everybody’s going to live forever. Even the unbeliever is going to live forever.” And what I explain to them is, yes, but that’s called the second death. It’s not called eternal life. And you’re saying there could be another category of people who live in physical bodies, natural bodies, forever, but they don’t specifically have everlasting life because that would be a term, if this construct is correct, that would be reserved for the sinner saved by the cross of Calvary and belief in the One who died at Calvary. So that we believe in Him for eternal life, we know we have eternal life, but that wouldn’t quite apply to the person who was in this state of, whatever we call it, sinlessness or this state of innocence.
That’s it. And what we’re then saying is that eternal life is not the equivalent of human life. It is something above and beyond human life that is imparted to us by the grace of God as a result of the cross of Christ. And that the only thing that the Bible calls eternal life is the kind of life that is imparted to sinners, which is identified very closely with Jesus Himself, and which is a gift that preserves him from eternal judgment.
None of these qualifications are met if we think in terms of people who have no sin, no judgment ahead of them, and are simply created by God. We do not think, so far as I know, that angels have eternal life in the sense that we have it.
Let me kind of wrap this up, and then I want to come back to the text, even the goats, before we totally lose it. But before I do, let me see if I’ve got this correct. If this construct were correct, when we come to the new earth, we would have both Jews and Gentiles, and we of course have the church. So we really have three groups. We have the church, which would be made up of people from this age, Jews and Gentiles, who believed in Jesus. Then we would have people who were Gentiles or Jews who were not from the church age, right? And of those, some of those are going to rule, some of those are going to be people who have authority, and some won’t.
But then we might also have people who have natural bodies. And would those be the people, then, that we would rule over, if we’re so blessed to be one of those chosen to rule over five cities or rule over ten cities—or I’m sure the range could be from a whole lot, like David ruling over basically the whole world under Jesus, all the way down to ruling over Balch Springs or some little small town in Texas. But in any regard, could we not have people with non-glorified bodies who are not ruling, but they’re citizens of the kingdom?
That’s exactly, it seems to me, what we do have. We know at least that much. That when we come to the end of the Millennium, let’s say, we have now eliminated all of the lost from that. What’s left? Number one, all of the glorified people who have been born again throughout the history of the world. They’re left. Number two, all of the unglorified people who have been born in the Millennium and have grown up in the Millennium, and have believed in Christ, and are regenerate, but they are still in their physical bodies.
Right? So we know that we have those two categories at the end of the Millennium. We know what happens to the glorified people. They go on being glorified, right? What we do not know, because we’re not told by the Scripture, is what happens to those who are not in glorified bodies, who are nevertheless going to go into the eternal state. We can draw one minimal conclusion from the Scriptures, and that is their sin nature will be eliminated somehow.
But we’re not told how. We’re not told what happens to these people. We’re only given a few scattered clues as to whether or not there might be people in normal human bodies in the eternal state. So we are left with a real measure of uncertainty. And it’s always hazardous to try to pronounce definitively on something that God hasn’t perhaps defined definitively on, because we’re almost always wrong when we do that.
So I think that where we really want to leave this is that at the end of the Millennium we have these two types of people, that we do not know exactly what God will do with the second type of person who is still in his mortal body, who is nevertheless regenerate. We know that he will somehow or other be freed of any sinful inclinations, but beyond that we are not told definitely what happens.
Now, it’s interesting that we’re not told they’re changed.
Right, right.
So the assumption that they are changed is as much an assumption as the one that they’re not changed, except for the sin nature. Those two assumptions are possible, but neither of them is based on clear revelation from Scripture.