REGARDING THE NEW VIEW OF THE PARABLE OF THE SHEEP AND THE GOATS

The October 15, 1995 Watchtower contains a major viewpoint change. However, in a lead up article titled, "Why Fear the True God Now?" after citing an example of a law-abiding Witness a familiar idea linked with the view to be discussed is made:

This is the type of people that Jehovah is now gathering and preparing to "come out of the great tribulation" that ends this system. (Revelation 7:9,10,14) Such survival is NOT going to be a matter of chance. To be a survivor, a person must fear Jehovah, recognize him as the rightful Sovereign, and be dedicated to him. The fact is, though, that MOST will not cultivate the kind of fear that will merit protection. (p. 13, par. 21 all caps in cited quotes mine)

Thus, the familiar position is dogmatically restated and reaffirmed--"Come join us, and do it before the end, or be forever lost." For in contending that (1) God is "now gathering and preparing" people for survival, (2) certain conditions for survival are a "must," and that (3) "most [now] will not cultivate the kind of fear that will merit protection"--is this not a reaffirming of the long-held position that billions are soon to be relegated to eternal destruction for not aligning themselves with the sole agency for survival? Restating this position is a curious thing in view of the adjustment or change of an interpretation to be found in two other articles in this same magazine. The first of these titled, "How Will You Stand Before the Judgment Seat?" states:

We have long felt that the parable [of the sheep and the goats] depicted Jesus' sitting down as King in 1914 and since then making judgments--everlasting life for people proving to be like sheep, permanent death for the goats. But a reconsideration of the parable points to an adjusted understanding of its timing and what it illustrates. (p. 19,
par. 4)

The "adjusted understanding" of the "timing" of the sheep and goats parable--and what it illustrates--as referred to in this paragraph, is surprising when we consider that the longheld and now former interpretation was recently haled as "a truly significant step in understanding
Jehovah's purpose." Additionally, it was recently pointed out that it was the very "time that this prophetic parable would be fulfilled" that made it so significant in 1923. (Jehovah's Witnesses-- Proclaimers of God's Kingdom, pp. 163,164)

Understandably, the 'significance' of this now former understanding was also emphasized when we read of how this previous interpretation of the sheep and the goats, and its timing, was considered one of a series of new light interpretations that
progressively led up to an identification of the "great crowd." (Revelation--Its Grand Climax at Hand!, p. 120)

Are we now to believe that this was a case of divine MIS-direction? Wasn't the decades old former
interpretation-understanding, itself once touted as new light received from God? (See for instance the May 15, 1986 Watchtower, p. 14, par. 17)

In introducing the change, the article continues:

This refinement reinforces the importance of our preaching work and the significance of people's response. (p. 19, par. 4)

In 1923 the new slant (now old understanding) on the sheep and the goats parable actually provided impetus for the preaching work, and has since as well. Recall, by 1923 witness and literature distribution work was fully under way, yet it can be argued that the workers then had no clear vision of what they were accomplishing. Recall that many of the friends in 1923 assumed the church had all been gathered and the rest of humanity would be dealt with in the millennium.

Additionally, according to assertions in a booklet they were then distributing, everything was to wind up and restoration of the earth to begin in the year 1925. J.F. Rutherford and the friends in general believed this. (See Millions Now Living Will Never Die, pp. 88,89,90.97)

So what purpose could be gained by an intense witness campaign from 1923 to 1925?

The answer was largely found in the then new interpretation of the sheep and the goats parable. C.T. Russell had applied the parable to what would be accomplished in the millennial age. Thus, J.F. Rutherford--by the new slant--essentially contended that some sort of millennial work was being given to the Bible Students then and now. Of course, bear in mind that the work wasn't to
last past 1925. With the former interpretation's historic link to the impetus of the preaching work, it is understandable why the Watchtower, when mentioning an adjustment, refers to how this "refinement reinforces the importance of our preaching work." This though apparently NEEDS to be stressed. One can't help but wonder WHY the writers feel the need to stress this? Are they--if only subconsciously--aware of how the "refinement" may actually UNDERMINE the preaching work? Are they afraid the friends may conclude this? Apparently so. When you consider how over the years the Watch Tower Society has been able to carefully orchestrate and schedule the consideration of its publications at meetings so that at times the same type of information is covered several times in one week; then it seems more than just coincidental that the Watchtower preceding the issue containing this new view should contain an article titled, "Guard
Your Sense Of Urgency."

This article makes the argument that disciples in the past were not victims of "a ruse" designed to keep them busy. Why emphasize this, unless there is concern felt that with the changed view some may conclude that they have been victims of "a ruse" designed to keep them busy? Also, the statement, "The progressive stages of this assignment [to preach] were revealed only as the work unfolded. But urgency was needed to fulfill each step." Also, "And so today, looking back over nearly 2,000 years, we understand that divine schedule more
fully." -- It does not require a great stretch of the imagination to see how such expressions reflect a view whereby God used error, wrong ideas and misdirection to carry out the "stages" or 'steps' of his "divine schedule."

Yet, "no lie originates with the truth." And, "For with evil things God cannot be tried nor does he himself try anyone." (1 John 2:21; James 1:13) This article on urgency seems to have been written as a sort of ground breaker and at the same time to provide a plausible sounding
explanation for the friends as to what has gone on in recent decades--especially after having read the new interpretation.

Returning to the October 15th, on pages 19-21, paragraphs 5-19 we find a discussion of the significance of 'sitting.'

With this "refinement" we are reminded that in 33 C.E. Jesus sat at God's right hand to wait to become ruler in 1914 C.E. And in 1914 C.E. he began to sit down and rule on his throne. However, now we are told that Jesus has yet to sit down on his glorious throne in the specific role of Judge. -- Doesn't this begin to sound a bit contrived? Isn't it changing circumstances and the fact that so many years have gone by that has actually created the necessity that has mothered this invention? Isn't it born largely of the organizational need to cling to the year 1914 and the superstructure of interpretations built on it, yet at the same time begin hedging bets?

The article continues:

Yet nothing indicates that at that time [1914], or for that matter since, Jesus sat to judge people of all the nations finally as sheep or goats. (p. 22, par. 22)

If there has really been "nothing" to indicate that Christ has been judging the peoples of the nations as sheep and goats from 1914 and since; then what evidence did the Watch Tower Society formerly point to when for decades it contended that he as? Was it not people's
response to the preaching work--both negative and positive? Now though, suddenly we are told this former evidence means nothing and is no evidence at all. Note this:

The parable does not show that such judging would continue over an extended period of many years, as if every person dying during these past decades were judged worthy of everlasting death or everlasting life. (p. 22, par. 23)

Yet, isn't this exactly what the Watch Tower Society has insisted for decades that this parable has shown? Consider, for example, the following taken from the May 1, 1988 Watchtower, page 14:

Lagging behind could also involve kingdom preaching. According to Matthew 25, Jesus is at present judging mankind, separating "the sheep" from "the goats." This is being accomplished for the most part by means of the preaching of "this good news of the kingdom." (Matthew 24:14; 25:31-33; Revelation 14:6,7) The time allotted to accomplish this separating is
necessarily limited.(Matthew 24:34) As the available time draws to a close, we can expect Jesus to speed up the work.

Indeed, the "necessarily limited" "time allotted to accomplish this separating" has been highlighted over the years to stress the urgency of the witness work. Curiously, the Watch Tower Society still contends that the other parables found in Matthew 24,25 concern professed
anointed ones, and that somehow culminated after 1914 and thereafter, and undergo a protracted fulfillment that spans "an extended period of many years," terminating with the system's end. One wonders if these parables too--given changing circumstances and more time
passing--will later be interpreted to show otherwise? Continuing with the October 15th:

It seems that the majority who have died in recent decades have gone to mankind's common grave. (p. 22, par. 23)

What of Witnesses twenty or thirty or forty years ago? They were told their work was then urgent and that it was a vital part of a foretold separating work. What now? Many of those Witnesses who have since died, are now understood to be coming back in a resurrection with
many of their neighbors who rejected their message and were even rude to them. -- Likely, it will be contended that the friends in past decades profited by their efforts that contributed to what the organization now is; that their efforts were a necessary stage as it were. And also, that they'll be in a better position to respond in the millennium than their neighbors--more likely to pass the final test. But since now the significance of the results of past witnessing efforts has been taken from and essentially de-emphasized; was their activity REALLY a warning work? If not, what makes the Watchtower writers so confident that it is NOW? If another ten or fifteen years goes by in this system, will those who die without responding to the ongoing witness work go "to mankind's common grave"? If so, then what is really taking place here? It is good to remember that some proponents of the hellfire doctrine, have felt moved to defend God's mercy by insisting that billions who have died in ignorance will be judged according to their lights and conscience, and so still gain heaven; only to be met with the question, Why preach and send out missionaries at all then? Isn't it better for people to gain heaven through ignorance, than risk hellfire with exposure to a little knowledge that they might reject? The Watch Tower Society contends that many anointed Christians ("wheat") have died faithfully over the centuries without having engaged in the highly organized and regulated witness activity characteristic of Jehovah's Witnesses in the past several decades.

Such highly regulated and organized activity has been considered a MUST--an essential--for anointed and mostly non-anointed Christians in this century. Why a MUST, if rejection of the witness has not prevented individuals from being in line for a resurrection? If people over the past several decades have NOT been "finally" condemned to everlasting destruction for their rejection and/or ignorance of the Witnesses' message, and are now in the grave awaiting a resurrection; what was served by the highly regulated activity? How could the activity have been considered a MUST for non-anointed Christians, if rejection of it has not meant eternal destruction? In other words, couldn't the non-anointed Witnesses themselves have begged off doing the work, rejecting at least that aspect of the message, and still have been in line for a resurrection at death? If the answer is No, because such ones knew too much; then, wouldn't their having remained in ignorance altogether have been better? And again, what of the many anointed Christians ("wheat") in the past, who died faithful, yet didn't engage in such a highly regulated and organized activity? If the answer is, It wasn't the time for it; then, isn't this new "refinement" on the sheep and the goats parable essentially saying that the past several decades hasn't been THE TIME to separate sheep from goats; in
other words, NOT the time to judge a person worthy of eternal destruction for not having supported anointed ones and their highly regulated and organized witness work?

If it is contended that all this witness activity has been a necessary lead up or "stage" to what is soon to take place, namely Christ's final judgment of people of the nations--then what if the "soon" stretches into another ten or fifteen years as it has done so many times in the past? If the Watch Tower Society is again admitting that it has been wrong about a position it has confidently held to for decades; what basis is there for confidence in its latest speculation about what is going on at this time now? It is important to remember that the position, views and interpretations set forth in the Watchtower are not couched in any kind of cautionary phrasing-- there is no ONGOING reminders telling readers that what is presented is simply our present understanding or that it is speculative or that it simply appears to be the case, etc. Instead, what is published is spoken with certainty, and it is insisted that the friends take the statements seriously--as new light, hence the truth. Curiously, when the dogmatic statements are proven wrong, isn't the excuse advanced by the Society that the writers
are not inspired or infallible? -- And isn't this the case with this latest adjustment or "refinement"? For decades readers have been told that Christ has been judging and separating people as sheep and goats since 1914 C.E.

No cautionary remarks connected with it; rather, this has been presented as fact--the truth. And as such, this "truth" has been used to spur people to certain actions.

Now, however, readers are told that this position has been 'refined.' Yet, in reality that which was taught as the truth for decades is no longer recognized as such; hence, it can have been nothing more than a false teaching. -- It is good to remind yourself that the Watch Tower Society has NEVER been correct in any of its published predictions regarding ANY date. Sadly, it seems that few Witnesses have the mental inclination, circumstances or time to see through the baseless claims and inconsistencies expressed in print by those taking the lead. And those who might, generally do not WANT to. Whether the writers of the October 15th, Watchtower are aware of all the implications or not, it is with good reason, as a lead into the next article ("What Future for the Sheep and the Goats?") that the last paragraph of the first article ends thusly:

But how does it affect us who are zealously preaching the Kingdom good news? (Matthew 24:14) Does it make our work less significant, or does it bring a greater weight of responsibility? Let us see in the next article how we are affected. (p. 23, par. 27)

This next article states:

Obviously, the sheep judged worthy of being on Jesus' right side of honor and favor represent a class of humans. (p. 25, par. 8)

No reason is given for why this is supposedly so obvious. Actually, Jesus says he will "separate people one from another." (Matt. 25:32) From this it seems obvious that it is a judgment of individuals not classes. The article continues:

So the sheep must be ones who over a period of time have come to the aid of--actively supporting--Christ's brothers and have exercised faith to the extent of receiving a righteous standing before God. (p. 25, par. 10)

Curiously, the previous article contended that the judging would NOT "continue over an extended period of many years." Still, in this article, the writers feel the need to introduce the time element--"a period of time" unspecified--in which "the sheep" put themselves in line to be "the sheep." -- "Such ones who are alive when he [Jesus] comes to judge the nations will be judged as sheep." (p. 26, par. 11)

The article asks a question but then gives no real answer:

If the other sheep are now preaching the good news with the anointed and aiding them, why would they ask: "Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty, and give you something to drink?" (Matthew 25:37) There could be various reasons. This is a parable. (p. 26, par. 12)

Paragraph 14 on page 26 states:

However, Jesus' judgment will not be based on desperate claims from former churchgoers, atheists, or others. (2 Thessalonians 1:8) Instead, the judge will review the heart condition and past actions of people toward even "one of these least ones [of his brothers]."Admittedly, the number of anointed Christians left on earth is declining. However, as long as the anointed, making up "the faithful and discreet slave," continue to provide spiritual food and direction, prospective sheep have an opportunity to do good to the slave class, just as the 'great crowd out of all nations and tribes and peoples' have done.--Revelation 7:9,14.

If "Christendom" was ALREADY JUDGED and received a "judicial sentence" shortly after 1914 as contended in the previous article (See p. 22, par. 22); an apparent judgment of a class of people, and a judgment considered distinct from this judgment of the sheep and goats; then Why are "churchgoers" of "Christendom" judged later and put in a class? If MOST all who have died in recent decades have gone to mankind's common grave, awaiting a resurrection--and this regardless of their "heart condition and past actions" toward the anointed, when arguably FAR MORE of those so professing were alive and active; then Why condemn to eternal destruction more people living than ever before based on their "heart condition and past actions" toward those professing to be of the anointed at a time when FAR, FAR
FEWER will be alive and active? Why condemn billions to eternal destruction on the basis of their attitude and treatment of such a tiny fraction of mankind; yet contend that the majority in "recent decades" will be resurrected, even though such showed the same attitude and meted out the same treatment at a time when far more professed anointed ones were alive, active and available? -- What other than egotism fostered by an unyielding paradigm would lead those of a religious organization to believe that a righteous and loving God could base a life-or-death judgment of all humanity on such a terribly unbalanced and fragile basis? The 'doing good' to the "anointed, making up 'the faithful and discreet slave,'" we are told is what determines whether one is a sheep in line for everlasting life. -- Doesn't this interpretation of the parable of the sheep and the goats make for a situation that violates what the Scriptures teach?

Jesus said to him: "I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. Furthermore, there is no salvation in anyone else, for there is not another name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must get saved. For no man can lay
any other foundation than what is laid, which is Jesus Christ. (John 14:6; Acts 4:12; 1 Cor. 3:11) By making for a situation whereby it is the acceptance and support or rejection and non-support of a small group of people that forms the basis for others receiving everlasting life or death--is this not an infringement on Christ's role? Is this not making certain imperfect humans indispensable to man's salvation? Is this not laying another foundation other than the one laid? The article states:

What, though, does this fresh understanding of the parable of the sheep and the goats mean to us? Well, people are already taking sides. Some are on 'the broad road leading off into destruction,' while others try to stay on 'the cramped road leading off into life.' (Matthew 7:13,14) But the time when Jesus will pronounce final judgment on the sheep and the goats depicted in
the parable is yet ahead. (p. 27, par. 21)

The foregoing has essentially been claimed over "recent decades" when the old understanding was believed. Why be so sure that this claim is true NOW that the "fresh understanding" is believed? The article proceeds to make a claim with a "fresh" distinction:

While the judging as described in the parable is in the near future, even now something vital is taking place. We Christians are engaged in a lifesaving work of proclaiming a message that causes a division among people. (Matthew 10:32-39) (p. 28, par. 22; )

Again, what if ten or fifteen years pass? What of the phrase "near future" then? Will this year's witness work be looked on as so vital then? Also, isn't this all a matter of a semantic shuffle? We read that it is no longer a vital SEPARATING work as once thought in view of the old 
understanding; rather, it is now being haled as a vital DIVIDING work. What's the difference? What's the point? Paragraph 23 on page 28 reads:

Many are exposed to our message as we preach from house to house or informally. Others may learn of Jehovah's Witnesses and what we represent in ways unknown to us. When judgment time arrives, to what extent will Jesus consider community responsibility and family merit? We cannot say, and it is pointless to speculate.(Compare 1 Corinthians 7:14.) Many now turn a deaf ear, ridicule, or share in outright persecution of God's people. Hence, this is a crucial time; such ones may be developing into those whom Jesus will judge as goats.--Matthew 10:22; John 15:20; 16:2,3; Romans 2:5,6.

We are told not to "speculate" about such things as "community responsibility and family merit." Strangely, the Watch Tower Society itself has printed reams on these very subjects. Here, however, the Society appears to be summarily dismissing in a couple of sentences these former VITAL concepts. Is this a veiled admission that its previous printed positions on these matters have been nothing more than "pointless" speculations? With this new "refinement" regarding the parable of the sheep and the goats, is the Society intimating that its previous view was essentially a pointless speculation? And, wasn't that really all it was? And so, how about the NEW view? -- Also, why counsel readers not to speculate, and yet print a journal that has done little else over the years? Isn't this a double standard? Compare: Prov. 20:23; Rom. 2:1,3.

In recent decades the Watchtower has informed readers that many who turn a deaf ear, ridicule, or share in outright persecution of God's people have been being judged as goats--separated as such. Evidence was marshalled to back this claim. Now the Watchtower tells readers that "it seems that the majority who have died in recent decades have gone to mankind's common grave." Now it tells readers: "Many now turn a deaf ear, ridicule, or share in outright persecution of God's people. Hence, this is a crucial time; such ones MAY be developing into those who Jesus will judge as goats." (p. 28, par. 23 Caps mine)

What is the evidence for this speculation? Is it any stronger or more convincing than that formerly used for the previous view and assertions? Does the expression "may be developing into...goats" serve as a potential disclaimer should ten or fifteen years go by and matters are again re-evaluated? The article states:

The point is that those responding and actively supporting the remnant of Christ's brothers are thereby now giving evidence that will provide a basis for them to be placed on Jesus' right hand when, in the near future, he sits down on his throne to render judgment. These are being and will continue to be blessed. (p. 28, par. 24)

Again, doesn't this interpretation infringe on Christ's role and make a small group of imperfect people indispensable for man's salvation? Did Jesus and the apostles teach this? The article concludes:

Thus, this parable should spur us on to more zealous activity in the Christian ministry. Before it is too late, we want to do all we can to proclaim the good news of the Kingdom and in that way give others the opportunity to respond. Then it is up to Jesus to render judgment, condemnatory or favorable.--Matthew 25:46. (p. 28, par. 24)

It has always been important and appropriate for Christians to share the good news. However, there is a real question as to whether this parable was designed to spur a fraction of professed Christians living at a specific time period on to more zealous activity. The former view that prevailed for decades was used to spur for decades. Hereon out a new view is to be used to spur "now" and "in the near future." -- The only thing that has made the proclaiming of the Watch Tower Society's speculative interpretations vital and urgent and a must, is yet other speculative interpretations. It is easy to insist that something is true simply because it has been taught for years and years. This latest change in understanding is yet another example of the Watch Tower Society's teaching something erroneous for decades at a time. Ultimately, the question is not 'Is it old?' but 'Is it true?' (Compare: Job 15:9,10)

It would be good to give careful thought to what else has been taught for decades that may not be true.

SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT

The illustrations leading up to the one concerning the sheep and the goats deal with the conduct and judgment of professed disciples. (See: Matt. 24:45-51;  25:1-30) And according to WatchTower publications those being dealt with are specifically "anointed" Christians with heavenly hope--Christ's "brothers." The question then is, What is it that indicates that the sheep and goats parable deals with yet others as Watch Tower theology contends? The argument is advanced that (1) 'all the nations are gathered before Christ,' (Matt. 25:32), and (2) Christ's anointed "brothers" APPEAR to be separate and distinct from both sheep and goats (Matt.25:40,45). Is this reasoning sound and conclusive? Regarding the first point, in the context of Jesus' discussion he speaks of:

(a) a preaching of the good news as a witness to "all the nations." (Matt. 24:14)

(b) "all the tribes of the earth" ultimately seeing the "sign of the Son of man" and beating themselves in lamentation. (Matt. 24:30)

(c) the gathering on the part of "angels" of his "chosen ones together from the four winds, from one extremity of the heavens to their other extremity." (Matt. 24:31)

To briefly recap and rephrase: The good news has impacted the peoples of the earth, leading multitudes to PROFESS Christianity. Christ's return to execute judgment will be a time of  lamenting for many so professing. At this time of general lamentation, Christ sends forth his
angels to gather his chosen ones "from the four winds" simply meaning, from all over the world or in every direction--such ones being found among "all the nations."

With reference to the second point mentioned above: Christ's saying that treatment given his "brothers" would constitute treatment given to he himself, need NOT be construed to mean that a class of non-brothers is being designated. Jesus had earlier told prospective "brothers":

"He that receives you receives me also, and he that receives me receives him also that sent me forth." (Matt. 10:40)

Obviously, receptive ones then and thereafter put themselves in position to become Christ's "brothers" as well. Also, Jesus had said:

"But whoever stumbles one of these little ones that believe, it would be finer for him if a millstone such as is turned by an ass were put around his neck and he were actually pitched into the sea." (Mark 9:31)

It is obvious that "whoever" could include one of Christ's "brothers" stumbling a 'little one that believes', namely, "the least of these my brothers." Why then couldn't the parable of the sheep  and the goats, like the ones preceding, be concerned with the conduct and judgment of professed disciples--"chosen ones"? Why couldn't this have provided a lesson throughout the Christian era to any claiming to be disciples?--they thus knowing that their behavior would ultimately and finally receive a judgment from Christ on his return? Wouldn't the four apostles who heard Jesus utter this illustration have made a simple application to themselves and their associates? Earlier in his ministry, Jesus had said:

"For the Son of man is destined to come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he will recompense each one according to his behavior." (Matt. 16:27)

Is this not another way of expressing: "When the Son of man arrives in his glory, and all the angels withEhim, then he will sit down on his glorious throne. And all the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another, just as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will put the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left"? (Matt. 25:31-33) --The Watch Tower Society still holds to its peculiar approach to much of Matthew chapters 24 and 25 in keeping with the year 1914 C.E., and the superstructure of interpretations linked with that year. However, the Watchtower now places the above quoted verses from Matthew, at
the end of the system when  Jesus returns to execute judgment. (Oct. 15, 1995 Watchtower, p. 24, par. 4) This fits the context. And though this is called "new light" by the Society, it is a view held to by many Bible commentators for centuries.

Copyright 1995 --PW/EC