The Good Shepherd and His Lost Sheep (John 10)
The Good Shepherd and His Lost Sheep (John 10)
The connection of this chapter with what has gone before is not very obvious, but it exists. The subject of the opening of the tenth chapter is the contrast between the true and false shepherds or guides. Thus τυφλοί (9:40) is the link of connection. The term ‘blind’ is the link, with the suppressed thought which may be supplied from Matt 15:14: τυφλοί εἰσιν ὁδηγοί τυφλῶν· τυφλὸς δὲ τυφλὸν ἐὰν ὁδηγῇ, ἀμφότεροι εἰς βόθυνον πεσοῦνται. Or Matt 23:16-26. Comp. Luke 6:39.
This is not the only place where St. John’s narrative receives its explanation from the deeds or the words of our Lord as reported by the Synoptists. He frequently presupposes these. And this passage, with its repeated denunciations of the Pharisees (repeated as we find from St. Matthew) as blind guides seems to be assumed as known. This is, if we may say so, a commonplace of our Lord’s teaching.
The image of the shepherd in Palestine is naturally very common. For the Old Testament see especially Jerm 23:1sq.; 31:10; Ezek 34; 37:24; Zech 11:4-17; 13:7; Ps 23:7sq.; 81:1sq. The point to be observed about all these passages is that there is a reference to the one good shepherd who was to displace all these bad ones. See Jer 33:5; Ezek 24:23; Zech 11:16. God himself in such passages is represented as the shepherd of his people. Again bear in mind the parable of the lost sheep in St. Matthew and St. Luke.
Vs. 1 διὰ τῆς θύρας What is meant by the door is explained in vs. 7. But how can the good leaders, the prophets, be said to have come through the door? We must remember here, as we must remember always, that our Lord’s words here apply not only to the Word Incarnate, but also to the Word pre-Incarnate. The Word of God was from the beginning, and has inspired all the servants of God in all ages. They have entered the fold through Him as the door.
αὐλήν as e.g. in the Odyssey sec. 5, though there the reference is to swine. A sheep pen was built with high walls as protection against: 1) the weather; 2) the wild beasts; and 3) thieves.
ἀλλὰ ἀναβαίνων ἀλλαχόθεν The last word, either doctrinally or ecclesiastically approach the sheep, otherwise, he’ll be making his own road.
κλέπτης ἐστὶν καὶ λῃστής The idea is: 1) κλέπτης, stealth; 2) λῃστής, violence and thus plunder. A thief is a ‘robber’ correctly translated here, but not so always, e.g. Matt 21:13, a den of thieves, correctly here, though later robbers in Jer 7:11. For λῃστής see John 18:40; Matt 27:16 δέσμιον ἐπίσημον (see Trench, Syn. sec. xliv. p. 176). For κλέπτης see John 12:6; so a thief in the night. The rabbis make the same distinction between these sorts of terms. See John Lightfoot here.
Vs. 2 ποιμήν a shepherd.
Vs. 3 ὁ θυρωρός i.e. when spiritually applied it is God (or the Spirit of God). See Acts 14:2 (a favorite metaphor of St. Peter); Col 4:3 (references selected from Alford). But we must remember that hitherto there is no spiritual application, at least no direct application, to Christ.
τὰ ἴδια πρόβατα there is a plain distinction here between τὰ πρόβατα and τὰ ἴδια πρόβατα. There are many inferior shepherds, many ministers, many preachers of the Gospel, each of whom has his own sheep, all included in the same αὐλή. The distinction of τὰ πρόβατα and τὰ ἴδια πρόβατα would not apply to Christ, as all the sheep in the αὐλή are His.
φωνεῖ κατ’ ὄνομα i.e. spiritually applied, he appeals to them according to their several capacities, several tempers, several opportunities. He has a distinct word to address to each.
ἐξάγει i.e. to pasture and to drink. Ps 23:2—‘thou shalt feed me in a green pasture, and lead me by the waters of comfort.’
Vs. 4 ἐκβάλῃ More forceful than ἐξάγει (to lead out). A little pressure must be put upon the lostness, the unwillingness, the sluggishness. ‘Curva trahit, quos virga regit, pars ultima pungit.’
Vs. 5 ἀλλοτρίος A stranger, the false shepherd, the thief who tries to lead them.
ἀκολουθήσουσιν The correct reading.
Vs. 6 τὴν παροιμίαν a wayside, popular, trite saying. Herzel (?) recognizes as a πάροιμος. It is used of: 1) short pithy sentences, proverbs, as of Solomon; 2) more extended metaphors or figures which have a moral meaning, as here. In the latter case, παροιμία also differs from παραβολή, in that while the παραβολή put the image and the thing side by side, gives the story, and then applies it, the παροιμία the thing signified is contained implicitly but not explained by the speaker. Both are ‘similitudes.’ There is a distinct comparison. The most perfect instance, of the seed sown by the wayside, but the comparison is always brought out more or less previously in a parable, e.g. comparison with the Kingdom of Heaven (see St. Luke).
Our Lord’s discussions in the other Gospels are, and are called, παραβολαί. The word παροιμία is not found in the Synoptics. In St. John as here and in John 15 they are, and are called παροιμία. Comp. 16:25, 29. Neither the name nor the long παραβολή occur in the Fourth Gospel. But the words are closely aligned and sometimes interchanged. They are both renderings of the same Hebrew word מָשַׁל, similitude. In Ezek 12:22 and 16:44 Symach. has παροιμία, but the LXX has παραβολή (see Trench, Parables, p. 65sq.), e.g. Solomon’s proverbs in 1 Kngs 4:32 are called παραβολή comp. Luke 4:23. In Sirach 47:17 we have ἐν ᾠδαῖς καὶ παροιμίαις καὶ παραβολαῖς καὶ ἐν ἑρμηνείαις ἀπεθαύμασάν σε χῶραι. We do not know what the original Hebrew was.
Vs. 7 ἡ θύρα τῶν προβάτων The door of the sheep, and not the sheep only but also of the shepherds. See vss. 1, 2, 8. There is a twofold application to Jesus: 1) he is the door, but 2) he is also the good shepherd. This is like he is the victim, but also the priest. This is characteristic of Christianity, as distinguished from Buddhism or Islam. Jesus is at once the preacher of the Gospel and the subject of the Gospel. See Ignatius, Phil. 9.
Vs. 8 πάντες ὅσοι ἦλθον. πάντες ὅσοι over-rendered here by the A.V. ‘all that come,’ ‘must come.’ The translation is important—it refers to a particular coming. Two variant readings here: 1) omission of πάντες—Origen and others; 2) omission of πρὸ ἐμοῦ by very considerable authorities including א, Theb. Lat., Cureton Syr. The second certainly, the first due to a particular cause. On the use made of the text by the Gnostics e.g. Valentinius see Hippolytus, Haer. vi.35 (p. 194). On the Manicheans use of it, see Augustine and Theophylact; so recently writers of the Tübingen school. This is contrary to the language of the Gospel throughout—see 1:46; 3:14; 5:45 and reference to the prophets e.g. 12:38sq. and the constant authoritative quotations from the Old Testament. I will reserve consideration of its meaning until vss. 10, 11. The πρὸ ἐμοῦ is the first indication of his other application of his imagery where our Lord is no longer the door, but the good shepherd.
Vs. 9 δι’ ἐμοῦ ἐάν τις εἰσέλθῃ, σωθήσεται, καὶ εἰσελεύσεται καὶ ἐξελεύσεται καὶ νομὴν εὑρήσει. εἰσελεύσεται καὶ ἐξελεύσεται is perhaps a reference to Num 27:17 ὅστις ἐξελεύσεται πρὸ προσώπου αὐτῶν καὶ ὅστις εἰσελεύσεται πρὸ προσώπου αὐτῶν καὶ ὅστις ἐξάξει αὐτοὺς καὶ ὅστις εἰσάξει αὐτούς, καὶ οὐκ ἔσται ἡ συναγωγὴ Κυρίου ὡσεὶ πρόβατα οἷς οὐκ ἔστι ποιμήν.
νομὴν εὑρήσει see Ps 33:2. Implying safety, liberty, support. ‘He shall feed us in a green pasture.’ It is difficult to say whether it is the shepherd or the sheep intended in this sense. The passage in Numbers points to the former and so also the immediate context here in vss. 8, 10. Yet probably the sheep are meant.
Vss. 10-11 He is the Good Shepherd, whereas before him have been thieves and robbers. They have come only to kill and slay. There is a reference to the prophetic passages that observe, in the same order: 1) the bad shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep; 2) the good shepherd who shall supplant the bad ones and shall feed the sheep. The good shepherd carries a distinctively messianic reference. See Jerm 23:1, 5; Ezek 24:1, 23; 37:24; Zech 11:7.
The πάντες ὅσοι πρὸ ἐμοῦ are these blind guides, these false teachers, the scribes and the Pharisees of whom it might truly be said that they came to kill and to plunder. He is also referring to false teachers of false messianic ideas. See Matt 23:34; Mark 12:40. The πάντες must be limited by the sphere of vision which is contemplated in the context.
θύσῃ ‘slay’ a reference again to the prophetic imagery Ezek 34:3; Zech 11:17.
περισσὸν ἔχωσιν περισσόν is used substantively. περισσόν with αὐτῷ, as e.g. Xenophon, Anab. vii.6.31. As in ἐκ περισσόν.
ὁ ποιμὴν ὁ καλός Not the ἀγαθός ‘the beneficent,’ the good, the beautiful, the ideal. A reference to the prophetic passages. As appears from the emphasis and the repetition, the shepherd, the good one. Heb 13:20 where the effect is the same τὸν ποιμένα τῶν προβάτων τὸν μέγαν.
Vs. 11 τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ τίθησιν prophetic, layeth down.
Vs. 12 ὁ μισθωτός He who, for selfish ends, tends the sheep, will for selfish ends desert them. He is not a shepherd.
τὸν λύκον the enemy to the truth, to God, e.g. a persecutor of the faith, or a teacher of wrong (moral or doctrinal), not as Alford. See Matt 10:16 (Luke 10:3); comp. Acts 20:29. For the image see 1 Sam 17:34; Amos 3:12; Is 31:4; Jer 5:6. No passage in itself is quoted, but obviously things are taken from them. See also the rabbinical quotations in John Lightfoot, II, p. 576; how far is a minder, a keeper, honor bound to watch the flock, etc.
Vs. 15 A.V. has ‘As the Father knoweth me, even so, know I the Father, and I lay down my life for the sheep.’ This is wrong.
καθὼς γινώσκει ‘just as the Father knows me, and I know the Father. . . .’ Comp. 15:10; 17:21. The union of the believer with Christ is at once a consequence of, and a reproduction of the union of Christ with the Father.
Vs. 16 καὶ ἄλλα πρόβατα Remember St. John’s position at Ephesus, and the comprehension of the Gentiles elsewhere in this Gospel. See 7:35 and 12:20 (comp. 11:51). It is worth remarking that Ἕλλην does not occur in the other Gospels, not even in St. Luke (though we have Ἑλληνίς in St. Mark 7:26).
ἔχω ‘Hoc verbum habet magnum potestatem’—Bengel.
αὐλῆς See Alford’s note: ‘Observe that they are not in these folds, but scattered, see xi.52.’ The idea is in Bengel and Meyer.
ἀγαγεῖν ‘lead’ not ‘bring.’
γενήσεται See Ezek 34:11sq. ‘There shall come to pass . . .’ i.e. this slate of things, this proverb ‘One flock, One Shepherd.’ The fulfillment of the Messianic prophecy in Ezek 34:23. See Bengel. Comp. Ephes 4:4-6 to εἷς ποιμήν here. A.V. has ‘one fold’ confusing the term used here with αὐλή. The Stoics used a similar image—see Plutarch, Moral. p. 439 (de Alex. i.6). See Meyer on this quote.
Vs. 17 ἵνα πάλιν λάβω i.e. to earn the victory by the humiliation. Alford points to the διό in Phil 2:8sqq.
Vs. 18 ἀπ’ ἐμαυτοῦ as 5:19; 16:13 etc. The ἀπ’ ἐμαυτοῦ is not to be taken in the same sense as ἀπ’ ἐμέ, as the apparent parallelism of the clauses might suggest.
τὴν ἐντολήν This is the complemental aspect to the ἐξουσία.
Vs. 20 Δαιμόνιον ἔχει See 7:20 and 8:48.
Vs. 22 τὰ ἐγκαίνια (following T.R., B.M.T.) This word and its modifiers are used in the LXX of: 1) the rededication of the first Temple by Solomon (1 Kngs 8:64; 2 Chron 7:5, 9); and 2) the dedication of the second Temple under Ezra (Ezra 4:16, 17); 3) the purification and dedication of the altar and Temple after the pollution by Antiochus Epiphanes in 167 B.C. It is to this last ἐγκαίνια that this text refers. This was kept as an annual Festival. See 1 Macc 4:36sqq. (54-59). There is a full description of the initiation of this Festival, see especially 2 Macc 10:5. See Josephus, Ant. xii.7.7. Chislev, Nov./Dec. coinciding more often with December. There is no reference to the discourse that follows, and the ceremonial of the Festival.
ἐν τοῖς Ἱεροσολύμοις—The Dedication (unlike the three great festivals) might (as would appear from the passages given in John Lightfoot) be celebrated elsewhere besides Jerusalem, hence the additions. But do these passages cited by John Lightfoot refer to the time before the destruction of Jerusalem? If not the celebration might be no different than those of the other festivals, which since the destruction it has been the custom to hold elsewhere.
Between Tabernacles and Dedication is an interval of two months. Where was our Lord meanwhile? Probably in Jerusalem and its neighborhood. The one incident related as occurring between the two is the healing of the man born blind in John 9. At first sight, we might suppose that this took place at or immediately after the Feast of Tabernacles. There is however no expressions in the narrative that require or suggest this. And the connection of subject in 10:26sq. seems to bring it close upon the Feast of the Dedication. But this will depend much on the rejection or retention of καθώς εἶπον ὑμῖν.
χειμὼν ἦν as it would be at the Feast of the Dedication. This is added however to explain how our Lord should be walking in Solomon’s Porch. Solomon’s Porch is described in Josephus, Ant. xx.9.7. It was a part of Solomon’s original construction, involving enormous stones. It was left to the last and was not ever repaired or completed. Its aspect is noticeable in connection with χειμών.
Vs. 24 τὴν ψυχὴν ἡμῶν αἴρεις This last word in the phrase may be used of any emotion—fear, uncertainty, hope, etc. which disturbs the calm, the repose of the soul which uplifts it. See references in Meyer.
Vs. 25 εἶπον ὑμῖν. καθώς εἶπον ὑμῖν if genuine may be explained in two ways: 1) referring to utterances such as found in vss. 3, 14. I told you implicitly; 2) take καθώς εἶπον ὑμῖν with what follows. Comp. 7:38; 13:33. The latter explanation is much better. The reading however is more than questionable. The omission is support by א, B, L, K, M*, Vulg., Memph., Theb., Origen, i.e. better authorities than those to retain it. But see Tregelles. Both the omission and the insertion can be explained, and about equally well. This being so, the authority of the oldest copies must prevail.
Vs. 29 The correct reading is ὁ Πατήρ μου ὃ δέδωκέν μοι πάντων μεῖζόν ἐστιν. This is to be retained for two reasons: 1) as being better supported by א, A, B, Latt. Memph. Goth.; 2) as being slightly harder, and so more likely to be altered.
Vs. 30 ἕν ἐσμεν See Hippolytus, c. Noet. 7; see other references in Tregelles.
Vs. 31 πάλιν λίθους as they had done before at the Feast of the Tabernacles, 7:59. Does Ἐβάστασαν here imply that they got there from a distance, from the part of the Temple that was being rebuilt?
Vs. 34 ἐν τῷ νόμῳ ὑμῶν See Ps 82:6. See Perowne on this passage.
Vs. 35 ὁ λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐγένετο The last word has a certain emphasis, at least to the Evangelist himself. We can scarcely doubt that in the Evangelist’s mind the contrast was present between those to whom the Word of God came, and He himself who is the Word of God.
λυθῆναι ‘explained away,’ ‘set at nought,’ ‘made light of,’ ‘got rid of.’ See Matt 5:19; John 5:18; 7:23 (see Meyer).
Vs. 36 Υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ See the expression in Ps 82:6. ‘I have said, you are gods, and you are all children of the Most High.’
Vs. 38 καὶ γινώσκητε Two v.l. 1) καὶ πιστεύσητε A, Δ, 69, Vulg., Peshit., Goth. and [al]so א except it has the present tense of the verb ‘believe’; 2) omit καὶ γινώσκητε D, A, B, C, Tertull., Cyprian. ‘That you may discern and continue to discern. . . .’ Meyer quotes Plato, Leg. 8, p. 849B.
Vs. 40 Καὶ ἀπῆλθεν πάλιν See Matt 19:1; Mark 10:1sq.
ἦν Ἰωάνης τὸ πρῶτον βαπτίζων It is a question whether this refers to: 1) Beltabara (or Beltany) referred to in 1:29 or; 2) to an earlier place of baptizing mentioned previously, near Jericho. If St. John wrote of Beltabara (or Beltany), comp. Matt 3:5; Mark 1:5. The latter seems more probable, see Smith’s Dictionary I, p. 1127.
Vs. 41 Ἰωάνης μὲν σημεῖον ἐποίησεν οὐδέν etc. The scene reminds them of the Baptist.