Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 10-04-2006, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Verse 32 states Jesus is the shepherd over the sheep, but not the goats. Therefore, the sheep are Christ's followers and do whatever the shepherd (Jesus) tells them to do. The goats are rebellious, and therefore, are thrown into the lake of fire.

The real point of the message, as you guessed, is the difference of the behavior between the sheep and goats. Christ in verse 40 said the sheep were a loving and giving people, and therefore, He regarded their behavior as personally feeding HIM. This was because Christ was the shepherd and the sheep were His. Because of this giving behavior, they inherit God's Kingdom.

But the whole thing is not clear. The parable is written as if the shepherds naturally separated sheep from goats for some reason. Sheep and goats are actually very similar and there is no particular reason to keep them separate.

JEST2ASK · 10-04-2006, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

On holiday i had what can only possibly called a religious experience!

We were sailing through the canals of Holland and came to this lock..By the side of the lock were huge steel lock gates - waiting to be replace the existing ones. Around them were grazing sheep.

It was the sort of image that definitely is biblical! The sun might have just come out of the clouds, oh and there was a rainbow.....

:angel: :huh:

Quote:

But what was separating sheep and goats about - were they quite similar?

Matthew 25: 31-46 When the Son of Man comes in His glory ....
*32 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....

*46 And these (goats) will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous (sheep) into eternal life

Not to derail this too far but many take this parable / analogy to say that simple belief / faith without works will not be enough ... In Other Words profession of Christ / Baptism / Church membership (being in the physical flock) is not enough ...

JEST2ASK · 10-04-2006, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Christian answer

But the whole thing is not clear. The parable is written as if the shepherds naturally separated sheep from goats for some reason. Sheep and goats are actually very similar and there is no particular reason to keep them separate.

Dang beaten to it :Cheeky:

Anat · 10-04-2006, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miss anthrope

Excuse my ignorance, but the idea of separating goats from sheep (metaphorically) caught my eye. What are the explanations for comparing believers to sheep instead of goats, another herd animal that seems to be smarter? Are goats more independent than sheep and thus seen as a symbol of stubborness?

Among modern middle eastern shepherds sheep are considered more expensive and confer more status than goats. I think this has to do with the goats being more mobile and thus more able to find food even in impoverished conditions (so sheep take more effort to keep and they require better conditions). But shepherds always keep some goats around, because when the goats start moving the sheep follow. The goats are more lively, the sheep more lazy and need more motivation to move on. So maybe Jesus is the shepherd of the more high-maintenance, high status types?

Toto · 10-04-2006, 03:55 PM

I finally located an explanation of why sheep are separated from goats, and why sheep might be more highly valued that goats, from here

Quote:

The nations will be judged according to how they respond to the gospel and its messengers. The nations or "Gentiles" in Jewish literature would be judged according to how they treated Israel (4 Ezra 7:37; Klausner 1979:200). As in other parables, here they are gathered (compare 13:40; Is 2:4; Rev 16:16) and separated (Mt 13:30, 49), in this instance the way a shepherd would separate sheep from goats (compare Ezek 34:17), to keep the goats warm at night while keeping the sheep in open air as they preferred (Jeremias 1972:206). Sheep cost more than goats (Jeremias 1972:206) and because of their greater utility and value were nearly always more numerous on a farm (N. Lewis 1983:131-32).

The older dispensational scheme viewed this passage as the judgment of the nations based on their treatment of Israel. This suggestion could fit Jewish perceptions of the judgment, as noted above (compare Manson 1979:249-50). But this suggestion does not fit well Jesus' own designation of his brothers in the Gospels elsewhere (Mt 12:50; 28:10; see below). Because the passage explicitly declares that this judgment determines people's eternal destinies (25:46), it cannot refer to a judgment concerning who will enter the millennium, as in some older dispensational schemes (Ladd 1977:38; compare Ladd 1978b:98-102).

Nor is the popular view that this text refers to treatment of the poor or those in need (as in Gross 1964; Hare 1967:124; Catchpole 1979; Feuillet 1980a) exegetically compelling, although on other grounds it would be entirely consonant with the Jesus tradition (such as Mk 10:21; Lk 16:19-25) and biblical ethics as a whole (for example, Ex 22:22-27; Prov 19:17; 21:13). Jewish lists of loving works include showing hospitality and visiting the sick, though not visiting prisoners; such acts were found praiseworthy in the day of judgment (2 Enoch 63:1-2; Jeremias 1972:207-8; compare Bonsirven 1964:151-52).

In the context of Jesus' teachings, especially in the context of Matthew (as opposed to Luke), this parable addresses not serving all the poor but receiving the gospel's messengers. Elsewhere in Matthew, disciples are Jesus' brothers (12:50; 28:10; compare also the least--5:19; 11:11; 18:3-6, 10-14). Likewise, one treats Jesus as one treats his representatives (10:40-42), who should be received with hospitality, food and drink (10:8-13, 42). Imprisonment could refer to detention until trial before magistrates (10:18-19), and sickness to physical conditions brought on by the hardship of the mission (compare Phil 2:27-30; perhaps Gal 4:13-14; 2 Tim 4:20). Being poorly clothed appears in Pauline lists of sufferings (Rom 8:35), including specifically apostolic sufferings (1 Cor 4:11). The King thus judges the nations based on how they have responded to the gospel of the kingdom already preached to them before the time of his kingdom (Mt 24:14; 28:19-20). The passage thus also implies that true messengers of the gospel will successfully evangelize the world only if they can also embrace poverty and suffering for Christ's name (compare Matthey 1980).

But along the way I learned:

Wikipedia claims (without a footnote or source) that

Quote:

The division of a flock into sheep and goats would be a well-known happening in Jesus time, sheep and goats being much more similar-looking than the modern day animals.

I have also learned that Chinese has a word that includes both sheep and goats, which confounds other Asian nations that try to adopt the Chinese yearly astrological system (The Year of the Sheep is really the Year of the Ruminant Class that includes Sheep and Goats).

The Humane Society quotes a study that shows that sheep can remember faces for some time, and concludes that they are not so dumb.

Someone on the old ANE list claims:

Quote:

...it was and is still routine for Bedouin (and others) to mix goats and sheep. For the herders it is a built in insurance policy when disease strikes. Usually if a disease hits one goat, it will strike all of the goats. The same is true for sheep. In addition, goats seem to "do better" at higher elevations than do sheep; the converse is true.

And in esoteric astrology the sign of Libra separates the constellations governed by Aries (the Ram) from those governed by Capricorn (the Goat). Has Acharya S made something of this?

Anat · 10-04-2006, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I have also learned that Chinese has a word that includes both sheep and goats, which confounds other Asian nations that try to adopt the Chinese yearly astrological system (The Year of the Sheep is really the Year of the Ruminant Class that includes Sheep and Goats).

The Biblical Hebrew 'tzon' and the mishnaic Hebrew 'b'hema daqa' are collective terms for sheep&goats.

Regarding physical similarity - the sheep and goats of the Middle East still resemble each other a lot more than their European parallels.

premjan · 10-04-2006, 11:50 PM

I believe an extant Korean animal (water deer?) is descendant of a class that included deer, sheep and goats before they separated?

singularapathy · 10-05-2006, 11:26 AM

Getting back to the lamb = Jesus idea, it's very likely that it was a comparison to the Paschal Lamb, moreso than the literality of the animal and its attributes. But I've also made the comparison of sheep, before. It's humorous, because sheep are easily herded, relatively low on intelligence— even to the point of needing their legs broken at times to prevent them from falling off of cliffs. I mean... really. Do you want to be a sheep?

J-D · 10-05-2006, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by premjan

I believe an extant Korean animal (water deer?) is descendant of a class that included deer, sheep and goats before they separated?

I don't know. Very likely. But what you may be missing is that all extant sheep, goats, deer, cattle, and antelopes are also descendants of the same common ancestor, Korean water deer (if any) no more so than any other.

gstafleu · 10-05-2006, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I finally located an explanation of why sheep are separated from goats...
to keep the goats warm at night while keeping the sheep in open air as they preferred.

Ah, that makes some sense. Note however that in this case the sheperd extends more active care towards the goats than the sheep!

Quote:

I have also learned that Chinese has a word that includes both sheep and goats, which confounds other Asian nations that try to adopt the Chinese yearly astrological system (The Year of the Sheep is really the Year of the Ruminant Class that includes Sheep and Goats).

<derail>Similarly they seem to have one word for mouse/rat, as I learned when, in the Year of the Rat, Chinese friends of mine put to large dolls of Mickey and Minny Rat on each side of their door!</derail>

Quote:

the sign of Libra separates the constellations governed by Aries (the Ram) from those governed by Capricorn (the Goat). Has Acharya S made something of this?

Aha, excellent catch! Now what came first in this particular chicken and egg situation...?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-04-2006, 11:50 PM	#17
premjan Obsessed Contributor Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: NJ Posts: 61,538	I believe an extant Korean animal (water deer?) is descendant of a class that included deer, sheep and goats before they separated?

10-05-2006, 11:26 AM	#18
singularapathy Regular Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: Virginia Posts: 217	Getting back to the lamb = Jesus idea, it's very likely that it was a comparison to the Paschal Lamb, moreso than the literality of the animal and its attributes. But I've also made the comparison of sheep, before. It's humorous, because sheep are easily herded, relatively low on intelligence— even to the point of needing their legs broken at times to prevent them from falling off of cliffs. I mean... really. Do you want to be a sheep?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.