Home » Articles » Is the Parable of the Sheep & Goats About Hell? (Matthew 25:31-46)

Is the Parable of the Sheep & Goats About Hell? (Matthew 25:31-46)

by Dr. Eitan Bar
5 minutes read

Jesus presents three parables in Matthew 25: The Parable of the Ten Virgins (verses 1-13), The Parable of the Bags of Gold (verses 14-28), and the one we focus on today, The Parable of the Sheep and the Goats (verses 31-46). Some, Augustine himself included, interpret a section of this parable (verses 41-46) as evidence allegedly supporting the Augustinian-Calvinist Hellfire. Let’s read the entire parable:

When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. Then the King will say to those on his right, “Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.” Then the righteous will answer him, “Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?” The King will reply, “Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.” Then he will say to those on his left, “Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the aiōnion [age-long] fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.” They also will answer, “Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?” He will reply, “Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.” Then they will go away to aiōnion punishment, but the righteous to aiōnion life.

Firstly, it’s important to recognize that this, like the preceding two, is a parable, not a historiographical account of events.

Secondly, it is significant that Jesus’ warnings are not aimed at those with flawed Soteriology or Christology or at those completely devoid of faith in him. Instead, Jesus cautions those who show indifference to society’s marginalized, impoverished, and needy individuals. Furthermore, the initial audience and critique of the parable were directed not at the secular, non-believing society, but rather at the religious community.

Thirdly, verse 32 states that “the nations will be gathered before him.” Nations cannot “burn in hell,” but they can collapse and be consumed by enemies in an “everlasting fire,” similar to empires that were permanently destroyed. Historically, the downfall of nations that neglected their poor and needy often foreshadowed their eventual destruction.

According to Abbott’s An Analytical Study of Words:

Matthew 25:31-46 concerns the judgment of NATIONS, not individuals. It is to be distinguished from other judgments mentioned in Scripture.

Fourthly, the text lacks a redemptive quality. There is no apparent indication of post-mortem salvation within the entire context of the parable. If it were about salvation from hell, it would suggest that salvation comes not through faith—which is never mentioned in the text—but through deeds, such as visiting prisons and clothing the homeless. This presents a dilemma for proponents of the Augustinian-Calvinist concept of eternal damnation. If the text indeed refers to torment in hellfire, it appears to be contingent not on faith but on actions, a concept at odds with the Reformed doctrine of sola fide (“by faith alone”).

The Sheep and the Goats

As everyone over here in the Middle East can testify, sheep are way cuter (and tastier) than goats. However, these are not the primary distinctions between the two. The key to understanding this parable and who the goats are lies in, of course, the Hebrew Scriptures. Ezekiel 34 similarly employs the sheep and goats metaphor:

Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel; prophesy and say to them: “This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Woe to you shepherds of Israel who only take care of yourselves! Should not shepherds take care of the flock?”…As for you, my flock, this is what the Sovereign Lord says: “I will judge between one sheep and another, and between rams and goats.”

Ezekiel 34:2, 17

Ezekiel’s parable is not a contrast between believers ascending to heaven and seculars descending into hellfire but rather a critique of Israel’s leadership and their poor stewardship.

Similarly, Zechariah 10:3 underscores the theme of selfishness represented by the shepherds/goats (the mention of ‘goats’ is oddly missing from the popular NIV and ESV):

Mine anger was kindled against the shepherds, and I punished the goats: for the LORD of hosts hath visited his flock the house of Judah, and hath made them as his goodly horse in the battle.

Zechariah 10:3, KJV

Like the prophets who preceded him, Jesus’ parables of judgment target Israel and its religious leaders. This aligns with the role of Hebrew prophets, who held Israel’s leadership accountable for their stewardship of the flock entrusted to them, especially regarding the poor, widows, and orphans.

In the same vein, only two chapters earlier (Matthew 23), Jesus sharply reproaches the leadership of Israel, using the same language of “woes” that Ezekiel employs to denounce those who neglect their duty to the flock.

His original audience clearly understood the target of Jesus’ parables as a criticism being directed at Israel’s religious leaders:

When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard Jesus’ parables, they understood that he was speaking about them.

Matthew 21:45

Conversely, interpreting these parables as addressing unbelievers vs. believers (In what? Jesus hadn’t even died yet) rather than critiquing the leadership’s treatment of the poor and needy misrepresents their broader context. Jesus, the ultimate prophet of Israel, judged the house of Israel, particularly its leadership. This insight is further reinforced by Jesus’s other parables.

Matthew 21 further supports this interpretation:

Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruit…When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard Jesus’ parables, they knew he was talking about them.

Matthew 21:43,45

Indeed, Jesus entrusted the keys to the Kingdom to his Jewish followers, effectively transferring God’s presence from man-made Jewish sects to one made by Jesus himself. Acts 2:42-47 illustrates that the first church consisted predominantly of Israeli Jews. This counters the notion of Replacement Theology; God did not replace Israel with the Gentiles but instead created a new Jewish denomination into which Gentiles were later integrated (Acts 15, Romans 11).

In summary, a shepherd does not torture his goats with fire or kill them when they are annoying; rather, he disciplines them. Goats may symbolize wicked leadership, bad nations, or both—subject to individual interpretation—destined to endure disciplinary punishment.

Verse 46 in earlier Bible translations:

The topic of “eternal punishment” (kolasin aionion) was addressed in another chapter; however, consider how Matthew 25:46 has been rendered in previous Bible translations.

The New Covenant by Dr. J.W. Hanson, 1884:

And these shall go away into onian chastisement, and the just into onian life.

Young’s Literal Translation of the Holy Bible, 1898:

And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.

The Holy Bible in Modern English, 1903:

And these He will dismiss into a long correction, but the well-doers to an enduring life.

The People’s New Covenant, 1925:

And these will depart into age-continuing correction, but the righteous, into age-continuing life.

The New Testament, a Translation, 1938:

And these will go away into eonian correction, but the righteous into eonian life.

Rotherham Emphasized Bible, 1959:

And these shall go away into age-abiding correction, But the righteous into age-abiding life.

The Restoration of Original Sacred Name Bible, 1976:

And these shall go away into age-abiding correction, but the righteous into age-abiding life.

The New Testament, A New Translation, 1980:

Then they will begin to serve a new period of suffering, but God’s faithful will enter upon their heavenly life.

With more than 900 translations of the Bible in English, it’s always beneficial to explore multiple versions to gain a broader understanding. For more insights on Bible hermeneutics, consider exploring my book: “Read Like a Jew: 8 Rules of Basic Bible Interpretation for the Christian.


This article was a copy-paste from my new book on hell: HELL: A Jewish Perspective on a Christian Doctrine

You may also like:

Dr. Eitan Bar
Author, Theologian, Activist