Matthew 25:31-46

I hope for this to be the first of a series of deep dives in to the passages in the Biblical text that have and continue to be the focal point scriptures focusing on the concept of hell, or judgement. I am undertaking this exercise as a matter of urgent need; one in which I see people around me falling prey to the guile and misleading teaching on the subject.

But first, a disclaimer.

This is a two-part exercise and it is critical that it is done in order. Let me explain as I believe this to be an absolute necessity in all disputes, arguments and engagements on the teachings of the Bible.

We must separate two exercises that are most of the time combined, or more matter-of-factly, taken in reverse order. The two steps are quite simple really; and oddly the misstep I will describe below is of particular interest to me as we don’t do this with any other reading in our normal course of life. With that in mind, here is my ask with this exercise as we examine this passage (and soon, others): That we go in this order…

What does the particular theme or teaching say in plain reading, and what does it mean.

How do we feel about that teaching.

Here is why this is important. I cannot tell you how many things I have read about hell (in the case of this example, but frankly it could be applied to any doctrine or scriptural teaching) where the conversation narrative looks something like this:

Do you believe in hell? (yes or no)

If no, what do you think about such-and-such verse… say Matthew 25:31-46 as an example?

And the conversation immediately spirals to say something along the lines of, “How could a loving God send someone to hell.” “That’s unfair, unjust, unloving, irrational” etc.

Now, on the one hand, there is absolutely nothing wrong with “feeling” a certain way about anything. No problem here. Where the problem comes in, is when we craft an opinion about what something says with how we feel about it. And then, promptly try to claim it does or doesn’t say something based on those feelings.

I doubt this is revolutionary point but how we feel about something does not change what something says.

If I were to say the Muslims teach in the Quran that Jesus was crucified, died, and rose again that would just simply be false.

According to the traditional interpretation of Surah 4:157, Jesus Christ was never really crucified but miraculously taken to heaven by God while another was made to appear as Jesus and crucified in his place. It says the following:

That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not

If I were talking to a Muslim and said, your Quran does not really teach that, what it really means is that he was crucified. Well, the only way to know what something says is to read it. First in plain language. Then in context. Perhaps if it were still confusing then step three would be to go elsewhere in the book to see what else is taught about to see if it aligns or not.

On to Matthew’s passage. Regarding the verses in question (which we will read in the moment), I first want to list the three ways people who argue this does not constitute a teaching on hell seem to twist this verse. I will unpack each of this claims in this piece.

By butchering the Greek words aonian kolasin by claiming they are a modern mistranslation and really mean something closer to “age-abiding” or some temporal (not eternal) amount of time. Or famously (regarding kolasin) by people like Rob Bell, that the second bit means trimming/pruning/refining/corrective action. I’ve even see people claim this means: “correction until restoration is complete.” This will be the bulk of how we unpack this verse below, but generally, I see this most frequently.

That Jesus’ teaching in this verse had to do with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, and that the separation of sheep and goats in the passage refers to the people at that time. Hence, this has already occurred.

That it’s a parable and doesn’t really mean hell. Or judgement.

That sheep and goats are some sort of hidden key that really describes right and wrong beliefs, or as a teaching on helping and serving others.

Regarding the argument that “eternal punishment” (greek “aonian kolasin”) means “age chastisement” or some other terrible translation that denotes a period of time rather than eternal. This is just flat out wrong. It literally does not mean that remotely. This does not up to this point need to be an opinion. An opinion on how I feel about a place people called hell is fine to have, but words have meaning. So, let’s unpack first what it says. Then let’s move to what we feel about it and why. “aiōnios” is used 69 times in the NT. Go look up the lemma translations. In EVERY single usage it means everlasting/eternal. Kolasin is used twice in NT, both punishment. I can’t tell you why Weymouth and Bell are reading the text as aion, which can mean age. Aion just isn’t there. It’s also a noun not an adjective, but I digress. Instead, the text has a different word, aionion. Aionion means eternal or everlasting. Full discourse below:

Plato, Phocylides, Philo, Clement, Diodorus Siculus, Arrianus, Josephus, Maximus Tyrius, Ignatius, Homer are among those who used this meaning of the word "aionios"

https://www.biblestudymanuals.net/aionion.htm#Plato

Matthew 25:31–46 (ESV)

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

Why am I posting this? This is neither a review of Love Wins, which I haven’t read, nor a statement about Rob Bell, whom I haven’t met. It is a lengthy discussion of a single phrase in the New Testament, eis kolasin aionion, which is apparently used by Bell in developing his position on hell and punishment. I checked several sites on the Internet, and I didn’t see any that discussed eis kolasin aionion in the kind of detail that satisfied my readers. This page comments only on eis kolasin aionion, because that’s what I was asked about. (RLH, 3/20/13) Summary For those of you who don’t want to read five pages on this topic, here are my conclusions. Also please read the Introduction.

In my initial, short answer to this question on 7/10/11, I said, “it appears that [Richard Francis] Weymouth and [Rob] Bell are on extremely shaky ground when they say that vs. 46 means anything other than “everlasting/eternal punishment” and “everlasting/eternal life.”

The one-page answer generated more questions. After considerably more study and consultation with two Greek scholars, I have modified my conclusion. Weymouth and Bell are clearly wrong in saying that vs. 46 means anything other than “everlasting/eternal punishment” and “everlasting/eternal life.

I can’t tell you why Weymouth and Bell are reading the text as aion, which can mean age. Aion just isn’t there. Instead, the text has a different word, aionion. Aionion means eternal or everlasting.

I see no justification in the context of any verse that includes kolasis, in two dictionaries, or in either of two concordances for the idea that either kolasis (which is the word used in Matthew 25:46) or kolazo (which is the word Bell says is used) has anything to do with pruning, trimming, or correction. In every case, punishment or torment is used in the dictionary and all translations that I consulted, and in context, those appear to be appropriate.

Finally, vs. 46 is part of a parable. A parable is a memorable story with (usually) a single theological point, and vs. 46 is not the point. Taking one sentence out of a parable and trying to interpret it separately is fraught with danger. Here’s a longer discussion of how to interpret parables.

Introduction

According to the reader who sent the original question, this is what Rob Bell (p. 91) writes:

‌

“The goats are sent, in the Greek language, to an aion of kolazo. Aion, we know, has several meanings: One is “age” or “period of time”, another refers to intensity of experience. The word kolazo is a term from horticulture. It refers to the pruning and trimming of the branches of a plant so it can flourish. An aion of kolazo. Depending on how you translate aion and kolazo, then, the phrase can mean “a period of pruning” or “a time of trimming,” or an intense period of correction. In a good number of English translations of the Bible, the phrase “aion of kolazo” gets translated as “eternal punishment,” which many read to mean “punishment forever,” as in never going to end.Now, keep bearing in mind that I still haven’t read Love Wins, and I’ve read just enough of the on-line critics to see what’s going on. Neither the book nor the responses are particularly interesting to me, and I currently have no plans to read them.

Nevertheless, it’s reasonably clear to me that the discussion is being conducted on several levels: How to translate certain Greek words, Orthodoxy, Heresy, Theology, and Doctrine.

The differences between these five topics are significant, and it will make the whole discussion easier for you to understand if you can recognize each of them when you see it. Here’s a detailed discussion of the differences among scripture, orthodoxy, heresy, theology and doctrine.

So why I’m I writing this at all? Because I’ve been asked questions by two readers and one non-reader about what the Greek says, and this scriptural question is what I’m going to talk about.

In vs. 46, “into everlasting punishment” is the King James translation of eis kolasin aionion. Now, it is important that “into life eternal” is eis zoen aionion, which means that both the kolasin, punishment – if we decide to go with that, and the zoen, life – about which there is no possible question in the Greek – are aionion. Whatever we say about the punishment, we have to be willing to say exactly the same thing about the life. Furthermore, the New Testament uses aionios to describe God, the Holy Spirit, the kingdom of Jesus Christ, and the honor and power of Jesus Christ. Are those “for an age” or “eternal”?

Through the good offices of Father Antony Hughes, whom we’ve heard from before, I received comments on this verse from Dr. George Parsenios, associate professor of New Testament at Princeton Theological Seminary, M.A. (Classics) Duke University; M.Div. Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology, and M.A., M.Phil., and Ph.D. Yale University. Here’s a summary of his comments:

‌

Bell’s argument that the word aion has a variety of meanings, including “an age,” etc., is correct, but the word aion is not in Matthew 25:46.  The word used is aionios, which means “eternal.” 

Now, in some cases in the NT, aionios is coupled with chronos time (e.g., Romans 16:25, 2 Timothy 1:9, Titus 1:2), where it means something like “the long lasting ages.”  This only occurs when the word is linked with chronos, which it is not in vs. 46.  

In classical usage, the adjective can refer to things “lasting an age,” but also to “eternal” things.  Matthew 25 reflects the primary meaning of the word, and the vast majority of usages in the NT: “eternal.”  There is no reason in Matthew to translate it anything but “eternal.” 

Another problem is a question of logic, not of grammar.  In Matthew 25:46, Jesus refers to both “eternal life” and “eternal punishment.”  Dr. Parsenios says, “Are we to believe that the word eternal means everlasting when it refers to life, but that something totally different is in mind when it refers to punishment - with no notice in the text that the meaning of the word has changed?  I can't take that possibility seriously.” 

Just to be absolutely certain, Dr. Parsenios looked at the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (ed. G. Kittel), and the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Early Christian Literature (ed. Bauer, et al), and they confirmed what he has said here.  He added that the definitive commentary on Matthew by W. D. Davies and Dale Allison doesn’t even raise the question as a possibility, so certain is the translation “eternal.”

Kolasin vs. Kolazo vs. Pruning

I looked at 29 translations of kolasin in vs. 46. (Kolasin is the direct-object form of the noun kolasis; it is exactly the same word, not a “related” word.) All but two had “punishment”; one had “to be punished”; and one had “torment.”

The noun form is used twice in the New Testament, here in Matthew 25:46 and in 1 John 4:18, “There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love” (ESV). Kolasis is translated “punishment” or “torment” is all translations that I looked at.

The verb form, kolazo, is also used twice and is translated punish or torment:

‌

Acts 4:21 “And when they had further threatened them, they let them go, finding no way to punish them, because of the people, for all were praising God for what had happened.” (ESV)

2 Peter 2:9 “then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment.” (ESV)The Arndt & Gingrich Greek-English Lexicon (i.e., a dictionary) has only punish and punishment for New Testament Greek. They cite usages in classical Greek, e.g., Plato and Hippocrates, and various Church fathers and the Septuagint (LXX, the Greek Old Testament) for this definition. There is no indication here that the word has a horticultural background.

Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible gives every Hebrew and every Greek word used to translate every English word in the Bible. (I believe that my edition uses the King James as its basis.) Here also, kolasis and kolazo have to do with punishment or torment. Just to be sure, I checked for prune, e.g., Isaiah 5:6, and that is zamar in Hebrew, which comes into the Greek Septuagint as a number of words, none of which is kolasis or kolazo. When Jesus talks about the Father as the vinedresser in John 15:2, “Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit,” he uses the word kathairo, which means mainly cleanse, but is also translated purge or prune.

Finally, I checked Hatch and Redpath’s Concordance to the Septuagint (LXX). Kolasis is used seven times in the LXX, the Greek Old Testament:

‌

Jeremiah 18:20 (note that that the cited phrase does not appear in most modern translations or [apparently] the Hebrew); Ezekiel 14:3; Ezekiel 14:4, 7; Ezekiel 18:30; Ezekiel 43:11; and Ezekiel 44:12.I urge you to look up each of these verses and at least glance at the context for yourself. I think that changing punishment to pruning would be an incredible stretch of the context. It is nearly certain, in my opinion, that the Jewish writers of the New Testament used the word in the same way it is used in the LXX.

Strong’s Greek dictionary says that kolazo is “from kolos (dwarf); properly, to curtail, i.e. (figuratively) to chastise (or reserve for infliction):--punish.” Again, there’s no indication that I see of a horticultural background, and the only definition is punish.

However, I think I’ve found the source that Bell used for his translation, which is The Expositor’s Greek New Testament. Expositor’s is a commentary (that is, a writer’s thoughts or opinions about the text). The commentary on Matthew 25:46 says, without any explanation or reference, that “kolazo = mutilation or pruning, hence suggestive of corrective rather than of vindictive punishment.” Not only does Expositor’s definition not agree with the Lexicon, Strong’s dictionary, either concordance, either context in the New Testament (in my opinion), or the interpretive decisions of 29 translation teams and individuals, but it’s also not even the word that’s there, which is kolasis.

Aionion vs. Aion

Moving on to aionion, it is virtually always translated eternal, everlasting, or forever. Looking at the 29 translations of vs. 46, most have both “everlasting” and “eternal,” like the King James, three have “everlasting” in both places, four have “eternal” in both places, and one has “forever” and “eternal.” Only one, the 1912 Weymouth New Testament, has “Punishment of the Ages” and “Life of the Ages”; however, of the ages is grammatically incorrect.

Aionion is used 69 times in the New Testament, where Dr. Parsenios says it means eternal unless coupled with chronos time, and about 150 times in the Old Testament.

In the LXX, aionios is used only to translate the Hebrew word olam, which, depending on the context, means a variety of things in the general area of time, eternity, duration, and the existence of various dynasties, places, and things. Of most interest to me are verses that apply olam to God’s existence: Ps. 93:2 “You [God] are from olam.”; Gen. 21:33 “God olam,” Isa. 40:28 “olam LORD”; Deut. 32:40 “I [God] live olam”; Dan. 12:7 “the one who lives olam:), or other things to do with God (about 50 verses that I am too lazy to list here). In the New Testament, aionios is used in Romans 16:26 to describe God himself; in 1 Timothy 6:16 to describe Jesus Christ’s honor and power; in Hebrews 9:14 to describe the Holy Spirit; and in 2 Peter 1:11 to describe the kingdom of Jesus Christ. Anyone who maintains that Matthew 25:46 has to do with “a period” is going to have to explain to me why God is God for “a period.” Check these verses for yourself and see what you think.

Now, aion means age, beginning of the world, or eternity, depending on the context, and it is the word that Bell uses. So I looked at the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament to see if any major or minor manuscripts have aion instead of aionion in Matthew 25:46. Apparently not one manuscript uses this word, or indeed has any variant at all in this verse.

The most important point is this. Aion is a noun, and aionion, the word actually used, is an adjective. Let’s try this in English. You say, “This item is made from aged iron.” Now suppose that your friend concludes, “This item is from the Iron Age.” That is not what you said, and it’s a different idea entirely. Introducing the word aion into the discussion of vs. 46 is just grammatically wrong, and the meaning of aion is irrelevant.

Context of Matthew 25:46

Vs. 46 is the final sentence of a well-known parable, The Parable of the Sheep and the Goats, which begins in vs. 31. The final sentence of a parable is often not the point, and in this parable, the point is in vss. 40 and 45.

William Barclay has this to say about the parable (The Gospel of Matthew, Vol. 2, © 1958 by St. Andrew Press). He doesn’t even mention vs. 46.

‌

This is one of the most vivid parables which Jesus ever spoke, and the lesson of it is crystal clear. The lesson is this—that God will judge us in accordance with our reaction to human need. … When we learn the generosity which without calculation helps men in the simplest things, then we too will know the joy of helping Jesus Christ Himself.

Chas. R. Erdman (An Exposition, The Gospel of Matthew, © 1948 by Charles R. Erdman) says,

‌

It is undoubtedly a difficult scene to interpret. If one attempts to press too far the possible suggestions of each minor detail, if one forgets that there are other passages of Scripture with which any seeming teaching must be compared, and further, if one neglects to notice that Jesus is still dealing in parables and imagery rich with Oriental color, he will undoubtedly find himself confronted by problems difficult to solve and will reach conclusions contrary to the plainest teachings of the Bible. Thus it is absurd to conclude that our Saviour here teaches that eternal life can be secured by being kind to the poor regardless of any relationship to him, and in spite of lack of moral character or faith. (Emphasis added.)

Parables normally have a single theological point, and it is rarely appropriate to take one sentence and elaborate it into a doctrine.

Mini Conclusion

Aion can mean age, but it isn’t used in Matthew 25:46.

The verb kolazo isn’t used either, and it doesn’t mean prune.

Eis kolasin aionion means into eternal punishment.

Translating aionion as of an age here is inconsistent with numerous verses that uses the same word to describe God and Jesus.

Translations Examined

The New Testament from 26 Translations, including

‌

King James, American Standard, Revised Standard, New American Standard, New English, John A. Broadus, Henry Alford, New Testament in Basic English, William F. Beck, Berkeley, Edgar J. Goodspeed, Ronald Knox, George N. Lamsa, James Moffatt, Helen Bartlett Montgomery, Olaf M. Norlie, J. B. Phillips, E. V. Rieu, J. B. Rotherham, Living Bible, The Twentieth Century New Testament, Richard Francis Weymouth, Charles B. Williams, and The Amplified New Testament.

Many of these I also checked for myself.

Other translations that I looked at include William Barclay, Jerusalem, Today’s English, Contemporary English, and James Murdock, God’s Word.