Who are the Nations in Matthew 25:32?

Thanks to Sarah, David and Jane, and Fiona, for contributing to the discussion here on how we should read Mathew 25. This is something of a response to Sarah's argument, not because I think Sarah must agree with me, or that I even have a hard and fast opinion on the subject, but because there are some problems with her argument which need fixing if it is to be convincing.

Firstly, I like Sarah's summary of the message of the first two parables in Matt 25, of the Ten Virgins: "the kingdom of Heaven is an imminent event that is coming but will take a bit longer than expected!" and of the parable of the Talents: "we need to do the best with what we have and keep on working untill the master returns." I don't know that anyone would disagree with that. But it is fair to say that the climactic and sudden event that the parables describe is usually thought of by Christians as describing the end of history when Christ returns to judge the living and the dead and to renew the creation. So why does Sarah instead read them as relating to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 and the end of the Jewish system of temple sacrifice? The substantial part of Sarah's argument relies on identifying the "nations" (ethnos) in Mathew 25:32 as the Jewish diaspora. This is distinctly unlikely for the following reasons:

1. Just because a word is used one way by one author in Acts that does not control its meaning when used by a different author in Matthew.
2. But, in this instance Acts 2:5 is referring to Jews who have come FROM every nation. The word "nation" does not describe the Jews but merely where they have been living. So for there to be consistency (although there does not have to be) between the passages, ethnos would not refer to the Jews at all but the nations in which the diaspora was found.
   
3. Most importantly the words here rendered "nations" (ethnos) is a word used 14 times in Matthews gospel and every time it is used it refers to foreign pagan nations not the Jewish people living among those nations.* This reason alone is enough to render Sarah's argument as it stands untenable. For the writer of Matthew's gospel to have used the word consistently, as he has given every indication of doing, it simply must refer to foreign nations.
   
4. When the word ethnos appears in the plural and with the definite article as it does in this passage my Greek NT dictionary tells me it can be translated: "non-Jews, gentiles, pagans, heathen, unbelievers." I cannot find any reason to understand this word to refer to a diaspora.

Now there are other issues but that is the big one. I think if the argument is to have any merit it needs to concentrate more on the immediate context. Most people (in my experience) agree that Matt 24 refers (at least in part) to the AD 70 fall of Jerusalem. As Matt 25 is part of the same monologue as 24 this needs some explaining.

Let me know what you think :)

* In the NIV Matt 4:15, 10:5, 10:18, 20:19, 20:25, rendered "Gentiles"; Matt 6:32, rendered "pagans"; Matt 12:18, 12:21, 24:7, 24:9, 24:14, 25:32, 28:19 rendered "nation/s" (not the Jewish nation); Matt 21:43 rendered "a people" (not the Jews);

Word Study: Preaching/Teaching in Titus

This word study is done at the request of a member of my homegroup. If you like this sort of stuff you should think about learning to read Greek. You don't have to go to Bible College to do it, reading a langauge is the easiest part of a language to learn (you will never have to write or speak Biblical Greek I promise!), and to do word studies like this one only requires a very basic level. Even if you are convinced learning Greek is not an option, comparing a number of translations will often give you an idea of a word's semantic range in that context.

Format will be a verse reference in Titus where the word is found, followed by the Greek lemma (root word), a transliteration, English rendering in two translations (NIV, then NRSV), and my own comment.

(NB. about halfway through, I realised the word study was going to be WAY too long, but I started so i'll finish. But pleased be assured, future word studies will be much shorter. :))

1:3, κήρυγμα, kḗrygma, preaching/proclamation, this word was used to describe an official announcement by a herald. The suggestion is then that the message does not belong to Paul but is given to him to proclaim. hence when Paul talks about 'my gospel' in 2 Tim 8 he is not claiming ownership of the message, but the message's ownership of him.

1:9 uses four different words related to preaching/teaching,
διδαχὴν, didachḗ, taught/teaching,
παρακαλέω, parakaléō, encourage/preach,
διδασκαλία, didaskalía, doctrine/doctrine,
ἐλέγχω, elénchō, refute/refute,
These words relate to the task of an elder/bishop/overseer/steward. What strikes me about these words is that the role of the teacher is not presented as a passionless task but both parakaléō and elénchō carry tones of urgency and the desire to convince others, either positively of the truth, or negatively by exposing falsehood.

1:11, διδάσκω, didáskō, teaching/teaching, here the verb 'to teach' is used of the false teachers who are damaging the church in Crete. All teaching is therefore not equal and must be judged to some extent on whether it edifies (builds up) or upsets/ruins the church.

1:13, ἐλέγχω, elénchō, rebuke/rebuke, this word from 1:9 reappears but here this term is rendered by both NIV and NRSV as rebuke rather than refute. Perhaps a nuance that is lost in translation is that elénchō carries with a a connotation of effective conviction, not merely empty rhetoric but actually bringing about a new realisation in the one being rebuked. This is born out by the context here where Paul's desire is for the false teachers to become 'sound in the faith' as a result of the rebuke.

2:1,
λαλέω, laléō, teach/teach, while the word simply means 'speak', in context Paul is clearly detailing for Titus the content of his teaching hence the translation here by the NIV and NRSV. (NB. In 2:2 and 2:3 there is no Greek word where the NIV/NRSV use teach/tell but that is the sense implied.)
διδασκαλία, didaskalía, doctrine/doctrine, makes a second appearance again coupled with ὑγιαίνω, hygiaínō, translated by both NIV and NRSV as 'sound', giving us 'sound doctrine.' 'Sound', as in incorrupted, is is a figurative rendering, literally the two words together mean 'healthy teaching.' Although the word was used as a technical term in philosophical discourse of the day, I still think the idea of 'healthy teaching' has currency in our (health obsessed) culture today. 'Sound doctrine' on the other hand sounds awefully stuffy and boring!

2:4, σωφρονίζω, sōphronízō, train/encourage, is a fascinating word that specifies instruction or encouragement towards sensible or right behaviour. This is reinforced in 2:5 by the use of the adjective σώφρων, sṓphrōn, self-controlled/self-controlled.

2:6, παρακαλέω, parakaléō, encourage/urge, as in 1:9 but translated differently by the NRSV. The sense is still of a strong urgent appeal.

2:7, τύπος, týpos, example/model, shows that Titus is not just to teach with his words but also with his whole life, he is to be the Christian on which the young men can model themselves.

2:12, παιδεύω, paideúō, teaches/training, this word is used to refer to the act of educating or disiplining a child. Here it reminds us that before God's grace we are all children equally in need of being taught constantly how to live rightly. Paul and Titus may be teaching others, but they themselves depend on God's teaching.

2:15 sees another cluster of words related to our subject,

λαλέω, laléō, teach/declare,

παρακαλέω, parakaléō, encourage/exhort,

ἐλέγχω, elénchō, rebuke/reprove,

ἐπιταγή, epitagḗ, authority/authority, this word, which essentially means 'command' and hence implies authority, shows that Titus needs to be willing to take authority in situations and lay down the law in respect to those things which are being falsely taught. Now I am a big fan of conversation and discussion and giving people space to come to their own conclusions but some things cannot be tolerated and must be named for what they are. In particular when destructive views are being pushed on to other vulnerable members of the community. Drawing this line sensitively continues to be one of the hardest jobs a church pastor does.

3:1, ὑπομιμνῄσκω, hupomimḗskō, remind/remind, so here Titus is merely going over old ground, this is not new teachig for the Cretan's but it is important and so needs to be repeated. Teacher's mustn't be afraid to go over the 'basics' time and again. After all doesn't matter how much time you spend on the cutting edge if you dont have the foundation in place you are on a hiding into nothing.

3:8 διαβεβαιόομαι, diabebaióomai, stress/insist, this final word in oour study means to 'maintain strongly' or 'speak confidently' or 'insist', in this case the insistence is on the life of good works that comes in response to the transformation that God gives through Jesus by the Spirit. Paul is leaving no doubt that 'good works' could be some kind of optional extra, they are of vital importance.

If you made it to the end, well done! Any thoughts?