John 10 JOHN 10:1-9 Jesus as the Good Shepherd "I tell you the solemn truth, the one who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs in some other way, is a thief and a robber. The one who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. The doorkeeper opens the door for him, and the sheep hear his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought all his own sheep out, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him because they recognize his voice.
They will never follow a stranger, but will run away from him, because they do not recognize the stranger’s voice." Jesus told them this parable, but they did not understand what he was saying to them. So Jesus said to them again, "I tell you the solemn truth, I am the door for the sheep. All who came before me were thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. I am the door. If anyone enters through me, he will be saved, and will come in and go out, and find pasture. The chapter we have now begun is closely connected with the preceding one.
The parable before us was spoken with direct reference to the blind teachers of the Jewish Church. The Scribes and Pharisees were the people our Lord had in view, when He described the false shepherd. The very men who had just said "We see," were denounced with holy boldness, as "thieves and robbers." We have, for one thing, in these verses, a vivid picture of a false teacher of religion.
Our Lord says that he is one who "enters not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbs up some other way." The "door," in this sentence, must evidently mean something far more than outward calling and commission. The Jewish teachers, at any rate, were not deficient in this point--they could probably trace up their orders in direct succession to Aaron himself. Ordination is no proof whatever that a man is fit to show others the way to heaven.
He may have been regularly set apart by those who have authority to call ministers, and yet all his life may never come near the door, and at last may die nothing better than "a thief and a robber." The true sense of the "door" must be sought in our Lord's own interpretation. It is Christ Himself who is "the door." The true shepherd of souls is he who enters the ministry with a single eye to Christ, desiring to glorify Christ, doing all in the strength of Christ, preaching Christ's doctrine, walking in Christ's steps, and laboring to bring men and women to Christ.
The false shepherd of souls is he who enters the ministerial office with little or no thought about Christ, from worldly and self-exalting motives, but from no desire to exalt Jesus, and the great salvation that is in Him. Christ, in one word, is the grand touchstone of the minister of religion. The man who makes much of Christ is a pastor after God's own heart, whom God delights to honor.
The minister who makes little of Christ is one whom God regards as an impostor--as one who has climbed up to his holy office not by the door, but by "some other way." The sentence before us is a sorrowful and humbling one. That it condemns the Jewish teachers of our Lord's time all men can see. There was no "door" in their ministry. They taught nothing rightly about Messiah. They rejected Christ Himself when He appeared--but all men do not see that the sentence condemns thousands of so-called Christian teachers, quite as much as the leaders and teachers of the Jews.
Thousands of ordained men in the present day know nothing whatever about Christ, except His name. They have not entered "the door" themselves, and they are unable to show it to others. Well would it be for Christendom if this were more widely known, and more seriously considered! Unconverted ministers are the dry-rot of the Church. "When the blind lead the blind" both must fall into the ditch. If we would know the value of a man's ministry, we must never fail to ask, Where is the Lamb? Where is the Door? Does he bring forward Christ, and give Him his rightful place?
We have, for another thing, in these verses, a peculiar picture of true Christians. Our Lord describes them as sheep who "hear the voice of a true Shepherd, and know His voice;" and as "sheep who will not follow a stranger, but will flee from him, for they know not the voice of strangers." The thing taught in these words is a very curious one, and may seem "foolishness" to the world. There is a spiritual instinct in most true believers, which generally enables them to distinguish between true and false teaching.
When they hear unsound religious instruction, there is something within them that says, "This is wrong." When they hear the real truth as it is in Jesus, there is something in their hearts which responds, "This is right." The careless man of the world may see no difference whatever between minister and minister, sermon and sermon. The poorest sheep of Christ, as a general rule, will "distinguish things that differ," though he may sometimes be unable to explain why. Let us beware of despising this spiritual instinct.
Whatever a sneering world may please to say, it is one of the peculiar marks of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. As such, it is specially mentioned by John, when he says, "You have an annointing from the Holy One, and you know all things." (1 John 2:20.) Let us rather pray for it daily, in order that we may be kept from the influence of false shepherds. To lose all power of distinguishing between bitter and sweet is one of the worst symptoms of bodily disease.
To be unable to see any difference between law and gospel, truth and error, Protestantism and Popery, the doctrine of Christ and the doctrine of man, is a sure proof that we are yet dead in heart, and need conversion. We have, lastly, in these verses, a most instructive picture of Christ Himself. He utters one of those golden sayings which ought to be dear to all true Christians. They apply to people as well as to ministers. "I am the door--by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture." We are all by nature separate and far off from God.
Sin, like a great barrier-wall, rises between us and our Maker. The sense of guilt makes us afraid of Him. The sense of His holiness keeps us at a distance from Him. Born with a heart at enmity with God, we become more and more alienated from Him, by practice, the longer we live. The very first questions in religion that must be answered, are these--"How can I draw near to God? How can I be justified? How can a sinner like me be reconciled to my Maker?" The Lord Jesus Christ has provided an answer to these mighty questions.
By His sacrifice for us on the cross, He has opened a way through the great barrier, and provided pardon and peace for sinners. He has "suffered for sin, the just for the unjust, to bring us to God." He has opened a way into the holiest, through His blood, by which we may draw near to God with boldness, and approach God without fear. And now He is able to save to the uttermost all who come unto God by Him. In the highest sense He is "the door." No one "can come to the Father" but by Him. Let us take heed that we use this door, and do not merely stand outside looking at it.
It is a door free and open to the chief of sinners--"If any man enter in by it, he shall be saved." It is a door within which we shall find a full and constant supply for every need of our souls. We shall find that we can "go in and out," and enjoy liberty and peace. The day comes when this door will be shut forever, and men shall strive to enter in, but not be able. Then let us make sure work of our own salvation. Let us not stand tarrying outside, and halting between two opinions. Let us enter in and be saved. Technical Notes: 1.
Verily, verily, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber. 2. But he who enters in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. 3. To him the porter opens, and the sheep hear his voice; and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4. And when he brings out his own sheep, he goes before them; and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. 5. And a stranger they will not follow, but will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers. 6.
This parable Jesus spoke to them, but they did not understand the things which he spoke to them. 7. Then Jesus said to them again, Verily, verily, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8. All who ever came before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. 9. I am the door. If any man enters by me, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out and find pasture. 1.--[ Verily, verily, I say to you. ] Three things must be carefully remembered if we would rightly understand the first nine verses of this chapter.
Inattention to them has caused much confused and inconsistent interpretation. (a) For one thing, the passage is closely connected with the last chapter. The opening sentence should be read on, without break or separation between, together with the 41st verse of the ninth chapter.
Our Lord is still speaking to the hostile Pharisees who asked, “Are we blind also?” and got the answer, “Ye say, We see; therefore your sin remains.” It is to them that He goes on to say, “I say to you , he who enters not in by the door is a thief and a robber.” He is not so much comforting His disciples now, as rebuking and exposing His enemies. (b) For another thing, the passage is entirely a parable, or allegory. (See sixth verse.) In interpreting it, like almost all our Lord’s parables, the one great lesson should be kept in view, which is the keynote to the whole.
We must not press every detail and little point too far and try to attach a spiritual meaning to the lesser parts of the picture. Those who do so always run aground in their exposition and get into difficulties. To this parable, if any, the old quaint sayings are applicable: “No parable stands on four legs.” “Squeeze parables too far, and you will draw blood from them and not milk.” Calvin remarks wisely: “It is useless to scrutinize too closely every part of this parable.
Let us rest satisfied with this general view, that as Christ states a resemblance between the Church and a fold (a sheepfold in which God assembles all His people), so He compares Himself to a door because there is no other entrance into the Church but by Himself. Then it follows that they are good shepherds, who lead men straight to Christ; and that they are truly gathered into Christ’s fold so as to belong to His flock, who devote themselves to Christ alone. (c) For another thing, the object that our Lord had in view, in speaking this parable, must be kept steadily before our eyes.
That object was to show the entire unfitness of the Pharisees to be pastors and teachers of the Jews, because they had not taken up their office in the right spirit and with a right understanding of the work they had to do. He is not in this part speaking of Himself as “the Shepherd” but as “the Door”—only as the Door. What Christ is as a “Shepherd” comes afterward; what Christ is as “the Door” is the one point of the first nine verses. The “progressive” character of our Lord’s discourses recorded in St. John is strikingly illustrated in this chapter.
Starting from a very simple statement, our Lord goes on to speak of the highest truths. We see the same in the fourth, fifth, and sixth chapters. This is one of the twenty-four places in St. John’s Gospel where the double “verily” comes in. Here, as elsewhere, it always prefaces some statement of more than ordinary importance and solemnity. [ He who does not enter, etc. ] Our Lord here appeals to the common experience of His hearers.
They all knew well that anyone who was seen entering a sheepfold by climbing over the wall or fence of enclosure, and not by going through the door, would be justly suspected of being a thief. Every true shepherd, as a matter of course, makes use of the door. The “door” He afterwards interprets to mean Himself. The latent thought evidently is, that any teacher of religion who does not take up and discharge his office with faith in Christ and His atonement, and with an aim to glorify Christ, is unfit for his business and unable to do any good.
Instead of being a shepherd who helps and feeds, he is no better than a “robber” who does harm. Instead of saving souls, he kills them. Instead of bringing life, he brings death to his hearers. Some, as Chrysostom, Euthymius, Theophylact, and Maldonatus, think the “door” means the Scriptures. Others, as Tholuck and Hengstenberg, think the “door” means a proper divine call to office. Both views seem to me unnatural and incorrect. Augustine observes: “Christ’s fold is the Catholic Church. Whoso would enter the fold, let him enter in by the door: let him preach very Christ.
Let him not only preach very Christ, but seek Christ’s glory, not his own.” He says, again, “I, seeking to enter into your hearts, preach Christ. If I preach other than that, I shall be striving to climb in some other way. Christ is my Door; through Christ I win your hearts.” Language borrowed from the care of sheep and sheepfolds would be much more intelligible in Palestine than it is here in England. Keeping sheep was much more common there than in our climate. Folds, doors, shepherds, thieves climbing over some other way, would be points familiar to most Jews.
Moreover, the use of such language in speaking of spiritual things would be peculiarly intelligible to all who had read Jer. xxiii, Ezek. xxxiv, and Zech. xi. Brentius remarks on the condescension of our Lord in borrowing spiritual lessons from such humble sources: “What is more low than a shepherd’s condition? Every shepherd is an abomination to the Egyptians. What more dull and stupid than a sheep? Yet here is a picture of Christ and believers!
Sir Isaac Newton (in his book on Daniel) supposes that our Lord, in choosing the subject of this parable, had before His eyes the many sheepfolds near the temple and about Jerusalem where sheep were kept ready to be sold for sacrifice. The expression “some other way” seems to me purposely very wide. Men may become teachers of the Church from many different motives, and in many different frames of mind. Some may be skeptical, some formalists, some worldly; but all alike are wrong if they do not enter office “through the Door,” viz., by Christ.
The word rendered “the same” would be more literally translated “that man.” The expression “thief and robber” is very strong and supplies a striking instance of the use of a parable to convey indirectly a sharp and severe rebuke. Of course, our Lord could hardly have said to the Pharisees, “You are thieves and robbers.” Yet by use of a parable, He says what is tantamount to it. Let it be noted that these strong epithets show plainly that there are times when it is right to rebuke sharply.
Flattering everybody and complimenting all teachers who are zealous and earnest, without reference to their soundness in the faith, is not according to Scripture. Nothing seems so offensive to Christ as a false teacher of religion, a false prophet, or a false shepherd. Nothing ought to be so much dreaded in the Church and, if needful, be so plainly rebuked, opposed, and exposed. The strong language of our Reformers, when writing against Romish teachers, is often blamed more than it ought to be. The Greek word rendered “thief” implies secret fraud and dishonesty.
The word rendered “robber” implies more open violence. There are false teachers of both sorts: open Papists and open skeptics, semi-Papists and semi-skeptics. All are alike dangerous. Augustine observes: “Let the pagans, the Jews, the heretics say, ‘We lead a good life.’ If they enter not by the door, what does it avail? A good life only profits if it leads to life eternal. Indeed, those cannot be said to lead a good life who are either blindly ignorant of, or willfully despise, the end of good living.
No one can hope for eternal life who knows not Christ—who is the life—and by that door enters the fold.” Hammond alone among commentators applies this verse and the four following entirely to Christ Himself, and considers “the door” to mean the proper evidence of miracles and doctrine. I cannot see this at all. Bishop Burnet remarks that this parable is the passage above all others which both Fathers and modern writers have chiefly used in order to show the difference between good and bad ministers.
Wordsworth calls the whole chapter “a divine pastoral to Bishops, priests, and deacons.” 2.--[ He who enters in by the door, etc. ] This verse contains the converse of the preceding verse. He who is seen entering the sheepfold by the one proper entrance, the door, may be set down as a true shepherd. Such a man, being duly commissioned by the owner of the flock and recognized by the sheep as their pastor and friend, has no need to enter clandestinely like a thief, or by violence as a robber. The word “the” before shepherd is not in the Greek.
It should be simply “a shepherd.” The omission of the article seems intentional, to show that our Lord is describing true “shepherds of sheep” generally and not Himself. 3.--[ To him the porter opens, etc. ] The whole of this verse is meant to show the character of a true shepherd of sheep in four respects: (1) The porter opens the gate to him, knowing by his step and manner of approach, that he is a friend and not an enemy. (2) The sheep recognize his voice and attend to what he says. (3) He, knowing all his flock individually, calls each sheep by his own peculiar name. (4) He leads them out to feed, desiring daily to promote their health and well-being.
In all these four points he is unlike the thief and robber. The different customs of Eastern countries, as compared to our own, must be carefully kept in mind to understand the expressions of this verse. A fold in Palestine was a space enclosed by high walls, not by low hurdles. It had a gate guarded by a porter at night, since the sheep could not be safely left alone. An Eastern shepherd knows each sheep in his flock and often has a name for each one. The sheep are led and not driven. About “the porter who opens” in this verse, opinions differ.
Most commentators hold that the “porter” means the Holy Ghost, who calls true ministers into the Church and “opens hearts”. The sense is: “To a true pastor, the Holy Ghost gives a call to his office and makes a way into the hearts of hearers.” This, no doubt, is excellent divinity, but I cannot think our Lord meant anything of the kind. The “porter” here is not said to call the pastor but to open when the pastor comes; nor yet to open hearts but the door of the fold, through which the true pastor enters.
The view of Wordsworth, also held by Augustine, Rupertus, Bullinger, and Flacius—that the “porter” is Christ Himself, who is not only “Door” but “Porter” also—does not appear to me necessary. I prefer, with Glassius, Grotius, Hutcheson, and Bloomfield, regarding the whole sentence as a subordinate feature in the parable, signifying that a true shepherd of sheep not only enters by the lawful door but that every facility is made for his entrance.
Some, as Chrysostom, Euthymius, and Theophylact, think the “porter” may mean “Moses.” Others, as Ecolampadius, Lampe, Webster, think the “porter” means the ministers and teachers of the Church, who have the power of the keys and the right to admit pastors. Others, as Gomarus, Brentius, Maldonatus, Hall, Whitby, Bengel, and Hengstenberg, think the “porter” is God the Father. The expression “his own sheep” must not be pressed too far.
It simply means that a real shepherd, according to Eastern custom, knowing his own flock individually by name, calls them at once by their names and proves his relation to them by so doing. If not his own, he could not do so. 4.--[ And when he brings out, etc. ] This verse is simply a continuation of the description of a true and faithful shepherd of sheep. Whenever such a one takes his flock out to pasture, he walks before them (as an Eastern shepherd always does), never requiring them to go where he does not first go himself.
Such a shepherd the sheep follow with implicit confidence, and knowing his voice, go wherever he calls them.
The words of Moses should be read: “Let the Lord set a man over the congregation, who may go out before them and who may go in before them, and who may lead them out and who may bring them in; that the congregation of the Lord be not as sheep which have no shepherd.” (Num. xxvii.16,17.) That Eastern shepherds “lead” their sheep is clear from Exod. iii.1, “He led the flock,” and Psalm xxiii.2, “He leads me.” 5.--[ And a stranger they will not follow, etc. ] This verse concludes the picture of a true shepherd and his flock.
It was a fact well-known to all our Lord’s hearers that sheep accustomed to one shepherd’s voice would not obey a stranger’s voice, but would rather be frightened at it. Just so, true Christians have a spiritual taste and discernment by which they distinguish a false teacher and will not hear him. “Ye have an unction from the Holy One, and know all things.” (1 John ii.20.) The poor and illiterate believers often illustrate this in a very extraordinary way. Brentius observes here the singular faculty which sheep possess of always knowing and recognizing the voice of their own shepherd.
He also notices the extraordinary knowledge that the lamb has of its own mother’s bleat among a thousand others, as a curious characteristic of an animal in many respects dull and stupid. Scott observes that this verse justifies true Christians in not listening to false teachers. In leaving their parish church, perhaps, under these circumstances, many reproach them. Yet the very men who reproach them would not trust their worldly affairs to an ignorant and dishonest lawyer, or their bodies to an incompetent doctor! Can it be wrong to act on the same principles for our souls?
Besser observes: “Sheep flee from a false shepherd. They will not say, it is enough if we do not follow this strange preacher in those points in which he holds forth unsound teaching. They will have nothing at all to do with him. They will flee from him as from a contagious disease.” (2 Tim. ii.17.) Bickersteth observes that this verse, and the third, throw light on the pastoral office of ministers. “How much of ministerial influence depends on personal knowledge.
Great is the hindrance to the influence when an overgrown population renders it impossible.” 6.--[ This parable Jesus spoke to them. ] The word rendered “parable” here hardly bears the sense of the expression. It is rather “allegory,” or figurative picture. However, it clearly settles that the whole passage must be taken as a picture of spiritual things, and must be carefully handled and not interpreted too literally.
The Greek word used by John for “parable” is not used in any other Gospel. [ But they did not understand, etc. ] The Pharisees appear to have failed in seeing the application of the parable. This is curious when we remember how quickly they saw the application to themselves of the parable of the husbandmen who killed the heir of the vineyard. But nothing seems to blind men’s eyes so much as pride of office.
Wrapped up in their conceit of their own knowledge and dignity, they did not see that they themselves, who pretended to be leaders and teachers of the Jewish flocks, were not shepherds but “thieves and robbers” doing more harm than good. They did not see that the fatal defect in their own qualification for office was ignorance of Christ and lack of faith in Him. They did not see that no true sheep of Christ could be expected to hear, follow, or obey their teaching.
Above all, they did not see that in excommunicating the poor blind man whom our Lord had healed, they were just proving themselves to be “thieves and robbers” and injuring one whom they ought to have helped. If even One who “spoke as never man spoke” was not always understood, ministers cannot be surprised if they find they are often not understood now. How little of a sermon is understood, few preachers have the least idea!
Ferus remarks that our Lord’s hearers must have been blind not to see that their own prophet Ezekiel had already shown the application of the parable. (Chap. xxxiv.) Lampe thinks they knew that our Lord was speaking of them, but could not fully comprehend the application of the parable. 7.--[ Then Jesus said to them again. ] Here we see the condescension and patience of our Lord. Seeing His hearers not able to understand Him, He proceeds to explain His meaning more fully. This is an example for all teachers of religion.
Without frequent repetition and simplification, spiritual lessons can never be taught. [ Verily, verily...you. ] Once more this solemn expression is used and again to the same hearers, the Pharisees. [ I am the door of the sheep. ] Here is plain exposition. Jesus here declares that He Himself is the Door through whom, and by faith in whom, both shepherd and sheep must pass if they would go inside God’s fold. “Every single sheep must enter through Me if he would join God’s flock.
Every teacher who wishes to be a shepherd over God’s flock must enter his office looking to Me.” This high claim of dignity must have sounded startling to the Pharisees! A higher claim we can hardly conceive. None but One, even the Divine Messiah, could have used such an expression. No prophet or apostle ever did.
At first sight it seems strange that our Lord says, “I am the Door of the sheep” and not simply “the Door.” But I think it is meant to teach that the Door is for the benefit of the sheep more than the shepherd, and that He Himself is given more particularly for all His people than for His ministers. Ministers are only servants. The flock might possibly do without them, but they could not do without the flock. Bullinger calls attention to the many beautiful figures under which our Lord represented Himself and His office to the Jews in St. John’s writings.
The Bread, the Living Water, the Light of the World, the Door, the Shepherd, are all in five chapters of this Gospel. Musculus observes that the simple view of Christ being “the Door” is that He is the Mediator between God and man. Webster observes: “It is worthy of remark that in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. vii.13-17), the description of the strait gate and narrow way immediately precedes the warning against false prophets and ravening wolves.” The same also may be seen here. 8.--[ All who ever came before Me, etc. ] These words, “All, before Me,” must evidently be limited or qualified.
They cannot be taken in their fullest sense. The prophets and John the Baptist were not thieves and robbers. It cannot well be taken to mean “All who have claimed to be the Messiah.” There is no evidence that many claimants did appear before our Lord, if any. Besides, the word “are” in the present tense seems to exclude those who lived before our Lord’s time.
The great knot of the difficulty lies in the words “came before Me.” The Greek word rendered “before” has only four meanings: (1) before in point of time, (2) before in point of place, (3) before in point of dignity and honor, and (4) before in the way of substitution. Of these, the first two seem out of the question, and we are shut up to the last two.
I can only conjecture that the sentence must be paraphrased in this way: “All who have come into the Church professing to be teachers, claiming honor for themselves instead of Me, or honoring anything in preference to Me, such as you Pharisees—all such are not true shepherds but thieves and robbers.” I can see no better solution, and I admit that the sentence is a difficulty. Some, as Chrysostom and Theophylact, think “thieves and robbers” mean Theudas, Judas of Galilee (Acts v.36,37), and others like them.
Euthymius remarks that “all” here must not be taken literally, but is a Hebraism meaning, “Anyone who does not come by Me is a thief,” etc. Theophylact observes that the Manichean heretics wrested this text into a proof of their fanatical view that the Old Testament prophets were not sent by God! Luther says: “These thieves and robbers form at all times the great majority in the world, and nothing better can they be as long as they are not in Christ. In fact, the world will have such wolf’s preaching, and indeed desires no better, because it hears not Christ nor regards Christ.
It is no wonder that true Christians and their pastors are so few.” Calvin remarks: “That no man may be moved by the consideration that there have been teachers in all ages who gave themselves no concern whatever about directing men to Christ, Christ expressly states that it is no matter how many there may have been of this description, or how early they began to appear.
There is but one Door, and all who leave it and make openings or breaches in the walls are thieves.” Lightfoot thinks that our Lord refers to the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes, who had long misled the Jews before Christ came, and that they were the three false shepherds whose final casting off is foretold in Zechariah xi.8. The expression, “The sheep did not hear them,” must mean that true believers, when our Lord came on earth (such as Simeon, Anna, and others), had ceased to put any confidence in the commissioned teachers of the Jews, and were like sheep without a shepherd.
The word “sheep” in this explanatory verse must evidently be taken in a spiritual sense and can only mean true believers. Mere outward members of the Church, without faith and grace, are not “sheep.” “Sheep,” says Hengstenberg, “in the discourses of Christ are always the faithful members of God’s kingdom, the company of believers.” Alford says: “The sheep throughout this parable are not the mixed multitude of good and bad, but the real sheep—the faithful, who are what all in the fold should be.
The false sheep, the goats, do not appear.” Brentius remarks that we must not hastily assume, from our Lord’s saying “the sheep did not hear them,” that godly people will never be led away temporarily by false teachers. They may be deceived and seduced, but will return to the truth at last. 9.--[ I am the door, etc. ] This verse is one of those wide, broad, grand statements which our Lord sometimes makes, stretching far beyond the subject of which He is immediately speaking.
It is like, “I am the Bread, I am the Light, I am the Way.” The primary meaning is, “I am He through whom and by whom alone true pastors must enter the Church. All such pastors, entering by Me, shall find themselves at home in the fold and enjoy the confidence of my flock, and find food for the souls of my sheep, their hearers.” The secondary or fuller meaning is, “I am the Way of access to God.
All who come to the Father by Me, whether pastors or hearers, shall find through Me safety and liberty, and possess continual food for their souls.” Strictly speaking, the sentence appears to belong specially to the true ministers of the flock of Christ. But I dare not confine it to them alone. It is a grand, wide promise to all who enter in.
Melancthon sees, in this verse, a most excellent picture of a true pastor in four respects: (1) he shall be saved personally, (2) he shall go in to close and intimate communion with God, (3) he shall go forth furnished with gifts and be useful to the Church, and (4) he shall find food and refreshment for his own soul. Musculus observes that our Lord does not say “If any learned, or righteous, or noble, or rich, or Jewish man enters by Me,” but “any man”—no matter who, great or small, however wicked in times past—“any man” that enters by Me shall be saved.
The expression “go in and out” implies a habit of using familiarly a dwelling and treating it as a home. It is a Hebraism. It expresses beautifully the habitual communion and happy intercourse with Christ which a true believer enjoys. (See Acts i.21, ix.28, John xiv.23, and Rev. iii.20.) Augustine suggests that “go in” means entering by faith, and “going out,” dying in faith and the result of it having life in glory. He says, “We come in by believing; we got out by dying.” But this seems far-fetched.
Euthymius thinks that “going out” refers to the Apostles going out into the world to preach the Gospel. The “finding pasture” implies the satisfaction, comfort, and refreshment of soul which everyone who uses Christ as his Door into heaven shall experience. The latent thought is evidently Psalm xxiii.1,2,etc. Burgon remarks: “The concluding words describe the security and enjoyment which are the privilege of Gods people. To go in and out is to transact the business of each day’s life: its rest and labor, the beginning and end of every work.
The Hebrew phrase denotes a man’s whole life and conversation. The promises connected therewith seem to imply that in their daily walk (it may be in the world’s dusky lane and crowded mart), the people of God will find spiritual support and consolation, even meat for the souls which the world knows not of. Elsewhere the phrase is often ‘go out and come in.’ Here, not without meaning, the expressions are transposed.
The former is the order of nature, the latter the order of grace.” In leaving this difficult passage, it is well to remember that though our Lord is not speaking of Himself as a Shepherd here, and is only giving a descriptive picture of a good shepherd, there is a latent application to Himself. There is no one to whom the various features of the picture apply so literally, clearly, and exactly as they do to the great Shepherd of believers.
“Every expression,” says Burgon, “has a marked reference to Christ; yet it is plain that it is not of Himself that He is primarily speaking.” Throughout the passage it is noteworthy how much stress is laid on the “voice” of the shepherd and on hearing his voice. I cannot but regard this as intentional. It is the “voice in teaching” which makes the great difference between one earthly pastor and another.
“The shepherd,” says Burgon, “must not be silent while among his sheep.” It is hearing the voice of the Chief Shepherd which is one great mark of all true believers.” JOHN 1:10-18 "The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come so that they may have life, and may have it abundantly. "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The hired hand who is not a shepherd and does not own sheep, sees the wolf coming and abandons the sheep and runs away. So the wolf attacks the sheep and scatters them.
Because he is a hired hand and is not concerned about the sheep, he runs away. "I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me-- just as the Father knows me and I know the Father--and I lay down my life for the sheep. I have other sheep that do not come from this sheepfold. I must bring them too, and they will listen to my voice, so that there will be one flock and one shepherd. This is why the Father loves me--because I lay down my life, so that I may take it back again. No one takes it away from me, but I lay it down of my own free will.
I have the authority to lay it down, and I have the authority to take it back again. This commandment I received from my Father." These verses show us, for one thing, the great object for which Christ came into the world. He says, I have come that men "might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly." The truth contained in these words is of vast importance. They supply an antidote to many crude and unsound notions which are abroad in the world.
Christ did not come to be only a teacher of new morality, or an example of holiness and self-denial, or a founder of new ceremonies, as some have vainly asserted. He left heaven, and dwelt for thirty-three years on earth for far higher ends than these. He came to procure eternal life for man, by the price of His own vicarious death. He came to be a mighty fountain of spiritual life for all mankind, to which sinners coming by faith might drink; and, drinking, might live for evermore. By Moses came laws, rules, ordinances, ceremonies. By Christ came grace, truth, and eternal life.
Important as this doctrine is, it requires to be fenced with one word of caution. We must not overstrain the meaning of our Lord Jesus Christ's words. We must not suppose that eternal life was a thing entirely unknown until Christ came, or that the Old Testament saints were in utter darkness about the world to come. The way of life by faith in a Savior was a way well known to Abraham and Moses and David. A Redeemer and a Sacrifice was the hope of all God's children from Abel down to John the Baptist; but their vision of these things was necessarily imperfect.
They saw them afar off, and not distinctly. They saw them in outline only, and not completely. It was the coming of Christ which made all things plain, and caused the shadows to pass away. Life and immortality were brought into full light by the Gospel. In short, to use our Lord's own words, even those who had life had it "more abundantly," when Christ came into the world. These verses show us, for another thing, one of the principal offices which Jesus Christ fills for true Christians. Twice over our Lord uses an expression which, to an Eastern hearer, would be singularly full of meaning.
Twice over he says emphatically, "I am the Good Shepherd." It is a saying rich in consolation and instruction. Like a good shepherd, Christ KNOWS all His believing people. Their names, their families, their dwelling-places, their circumstances, their private history, their experience, their trials--with all these things Jesus is perfectly acquainted. There is not a thing about the least and lowest of them with which He is not familiar.
The children of this world may not know Christians, and may count their lives folly; but the Good Shepherd knows them thoroughly, and, wonderful to say, though He knows them, does not despise them. Like a Good Shepherd, Christ CARES tenderly for all His believing people. He provides for all their needs in the wilderness of this world, and leads them by the right way to a city of habitation. He bears patiently with their many weaknesses and infirmities, and does not cast them off because they are wayward, erring, sick, footsore, or lame.
He guards and protects them against all their enemies, as Jacob did the flock of Laban; and of those that the Father has given Him He will be found at last to have lost none. Like a Good Shepherd, Christ LAYS DOWN HIS LIFE for the sheep. He did it once for all, when He was crucified for them. When He saw that nothing could deliver them from hell and the devil, but His blood, He willingly made His soul an offering for their sins. The merit of that death He is now presenting before the Father's throne. The sheep are saved for evermore, because the Good Shepherd died for them.
This is indeed a love that passes knowledge! "Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." (John 15:13.) Let us only take heed that this office of Christ is not set before us in vain. It will profit us nothing at the last day that Jesus was a Shepherd, if during our lifetime, we never heard His voice and followed Him. If we love life, let us join His flock without delay. Except we do this, we shall be found at the left hand in the day of judgment, and lost for evermore.
These verses show us, lastly, that when Christ died, He died of His own voluntary free will. He uses a remarkable expression to teach this--"I lay down my life that I might take it again. No man takes it from Me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again." The point before us is of no small importance. We must never suppose for a moment that our Lord had no power to prevent His sufferings, and that He was delivered up to His enemies and crucified because He could not help it. Nothing could be further from the truth than such an idea.
The treachery of Judas, the armed band of priests' servants, the enmity of Scribes and Pharisees, the injustice of Pontius Pilate, the crude hands of Roman soldiers, the scourge, the nails, and the spear--all these could not have harmed a hair of our Lord's head, unless He had allowed them. Well might He say those remarkable words, "Do you think that I cannot now pray to my Father, and He shall presently give Me more than twelve legions of angels?
But how, then, shall the Scripture be fulfilled?" (Matt. 26:53.) The plain truth is, that our Lord submitted to death of His own free will, because He knew that His death was the only way of making atonement for man's sins. He poured out His soul unto death with all the desire of His heart, because He had determined to pay our debt to God, and redeem us from hell. For the joy set before Him He willingly endured the cross, and laid down His life, in order that we, through His death, might have eternal life.
His death was not the death of a martyr , who sinks at last overwhelmed by enemies, but the death of a triumphant conqueror , who knows that even in dying he wins for himself and his people a kingdom and a crown of glory. Let us lean back our souls on these mighty truths, and be thankful. A willing Savior, a loving Savior, a Savior who came specially into the world to bring life to man, is just the Savior that we need. If we hear His voice, repent and believe, He is our own. Technical Notes: 10. The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy.
I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly. 11. I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives his life for the sheep. 12. But he who is a hireling, and not the shepherd, who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them. 13. The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care about the sheep. 14. I am the good shepherd and know my sheep , and am known by my own. 15. As the Father knows me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16.
And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold and one shepherd. 17. Therefore does my Father love me, because I lay down my life that I might take it again. 18. No man takes it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.
This commandment I have received from my Father. 10.--[ The thief...destroy. ] In this passage our Lord entirely drops the figure of “the door” and presents Himself under a new aspect, as “the Shepherd.” And the first thing He does is to show the amazing difference between Himself and the false teachers who bore rule among the Jews. He had already told the Pharisees that they were no better than “thieves and robbers.” He now contrasts their objects with His own. A thief does not come to the fold to do good to the flock but harm, for his own selfish advantage and for the injury of the sheep.
Just so the Pharisees only became teachers of the Jewish Church for their own advantage and interest and taught doctrine which was only calculated to ruin and destroy souls. A.
Clarke observes: “How can worldly-minded hirelings, fox-hunting, card— playing priests, read these words without trembling to the center of their souls!” Bickersteth suggests that “the thief in the singular number may remind us of the prince of darkness, the great chief robber and thief of souls.” [ I am come...life...abundantly. ] Our Lord here puts in strong contrast with the false teachers of the Jews His own purpose and object in coming into the world.
He drops the figure of “the door” and says plainly and distinctly, stating it in the widest broadest way, that as a personal Savior He came that men might have life. The thief came to take life; He came to give it. He came that the way to eternal life might be laid open, the life of justification purchased by His blood, the life of sanctification provided by the grace of His Spirit. He came to buy this life by His sacrifice on the cross. He came to proclaim this life and offer it to a lost world. To bring life and hope to a lost, dead, perishing world was the grand object of His incarnation.
The ministry of the Pharisees was death, but that of Christ was life. The word “they” before “might have” must be taken generally here for “men.” There is nothing else to which it can apply. But this was not all. Our Lord came that men who had life already “might have it more abundantly.” That is, that they might see the way of life more clearly and have no uncertainty about the way of justification before God; and that they might feel the possession of life more sensibly and have more conscious enjoyment of pardon, peace, and acceptance. This seems to me by far the simplest view of the text.
Of course, there were millions in the world who before Christ came knew nothing of life for their souls. To them Christ’s coming brought “life.” But there were also many believing Jews who had life already when Christ came, and were walking in the steps of Abraham. To them Christ’s coming brought “life more abundantly.” It enlarged their vision and increased their comfort.
So Paul tells Titus that “Christ’s appearing brought life and immortality to light.” (2 Tim. i.10.) Most commentators do not admit the comparative idea in “more abundantly,” but interpret it as simply meaning the abundance of grace and mercy which Christ brings into the world, as Rom. v.20,21. This is true, but I venture to think it is not all the truth. Chemnitius, following Augustine, thinks that “more abundantly” may refer to the life of glory hereafter, which saints will have after the life of faith here.
But I cannot see this. 11.--[ I am the Good Shepherd. ] Here our Lord declares that He Himself is the great Head Shepherd of God’s people, of whom all ministers—even the best—are only faint imitators. It is as if He said: “I am towards all who believe in Me, what a good shepherd is to his sheep—careful, watchful, and loving.” The article in the Greek is twice used to increase the emphasis: “I am the Shepherd, the good or excellent One.” In the second verse of the chapter, before the word “Shepherd” in the Greek, we may remember there is no article at all.
It is probable that the name “shepherd,” in Jewish ears, would convey much more clearly than it does in ours a claim to be regarded as the Messiah or Shepherd of souls. (See Gen. xlix.24, Psalm xxiii, Ezek. xxxiv.) [ The good shepherd gives his life for the sheep. ] Our Lord here shows the distinguishing mark of a good shepherd. Such a one will lay down his life for his sheep, to save, protect, and defend them. He will die rather than lose one. He will peril his life, like David attacking the lion and the bear, rather than let one be taken from him.
“All this,” our Lord implies, “I have come to do for my spiritual sheep. I have come to shed my lifeblood to save their souls; to die that they may live.” The word “gives” here should have been translated “lays down.” It is so rendered in the 15th verse. Flacius observes how our Lord here, as elsewhere, always brings round His discourse to His own atoning death. Hengstenberg observes: “This expression, ‘laying down the soul or life’ for anyone, does not occur anywhere else independently in the New Testament. It is never found in profane writers.
It must be referred back to the Old Testament, and specially to Isa. liii.10 where it is said of Messiah, ‘He shall make, or place, His soul an offering for sin.’” Tittman says: “Those who maintain that Christ died only to confirm the truth of His doctrine, or to confirm the certainty of the promises of pardon and acceptance with God, are under a mistake. The death of Christ was not necessary for either of those purposes. The truth of His doctrine and the certainty of His promises must be established by other evidence.
Neither does our Lord say that He laid down His life for His doctrines , but for His sheep.” 12,13.--[ But he who is a hireling, etc. ] Our Lord in these two verses illustrates the subject He has taken up by showing the wide difference between a mere hired shepherd and one who feels a special interest in his sheep, because they are his own. A mere hired servant who has not spent his money in buying the sheep, but only takes charge of a flock for pay and cares little so long as he gets his money—such a one, as a general rule, will make no sacrifice and run no risk for the sheep.
If he sees a wolf coming, he will not meet him and fight but will run away and leave the flock to be scattered and devoured. He acts in this way because his whole heart is not in his work. He feeds the flock for money and not for love, for what he can get by it and not because he really cares for the sheep. Of course, the picture must be taken as generally true. We cannot suppose our Lord meant that no paid servant was trustworthy. Jacob was a hired shepherd, yet trustworthy. But doubtless His Jewish hearers knew many such “hirelings” as He here describes.
The picture of a faithless shepherd in Ezekiel xxxiv would also occur to those who were familiar with Old Testament Scripture. It is worth remembering that St. Paul specially warns the Ephesian elders, in Acts 20, that “grievous wolves” would enter in among them, not sparing the flock. Our Lord also in the Sermon on the Mount compares false prophets to “ravening wolves.” (Matt. vii.15.) Musculus observes how great a misfortune it is to Christ’s sheep when they are deserted by ministers and left without regular means of grace. It has a scattering weakening effect.
The best of ministers are poor weak creatures. But churches cannot keep together, as a rule, without pastors; the wolf scatters them. The ministry, no doubt, may be overvalued; but it may also be undervalued. We cannot doubt that the latent thought of our Lord’s language here was as follows. The Pharisees and other false teachers were no better than hired shepherds. They cared for nothing but themselves and their own honor or profit. They cared nothing for souls. They were willing to have the name and profession of shepherds, but they had no heart in their work.
They had neither will nor power to protect their hearers against any assault which that wolf, the devil, might make against them. Hence the Jews, when our Lord came on earth, were without help for their souls, fainting, and scattered like sheep without a shepherd, a prey to every device of the devil. Let it be noted that the great secret of a useful and Christlike ministry is to love men’s souls. He who is a minister merely to get a living, or to have an honorable position, is “the hireling” of these verses. The true pastor’s first care is for his sheep.
The false pastor’s first thought is for himself. Our Lord’s strong language about the false teachers of the Jews ends here. Those who think that unsound ministers ought never to be exposed and held up to notice, and men ought never to be warned against them, would do well to study this passage. No class of character throughout our Lord’s ministry seems to call forth such severe denunciation as that of false pastors. The reason is obvious. Other men ruin themselves alone; false pastors ruin their flocks as well as themselves.
To flatter all ordained men and say they never should be called unsound and dangerous guides, is the surest way to injure the Church and offend Christ. Chrysostom, Theophylact, and most commentators think that the “wolf” here means the devil, even as he is called elsewhere a roaring lion, a serpent, and a dragon. Lampe, on the other hand, thinks that the wolf signifies the same as the thief and robber, and that it must mean the false prophet, the wolf in sheep’s clothing. (See Zeph. iii.3 and Matt. vii.15.) In interpreting this whole passage, we must be careful not to strain it too far.
Our Lord did not mean that in no case is flight from danger lawful in a pastor. He Himself says elsewhere, “When they persecute you in one city, flee ye to another.” (Matt. x.23.) So Paul left Damascus by stealth to escape the Jews. (Acts. ix.25.) Calvin remarks: “Ought we to reckon that man a hireling who for any reasons whatever shrinks from encountering the wolves? This was anciently debated as a practical question, when tyrants raged cruelly against the Church. Tertullian and others were, in my opinion, too rigid on this point.
I prefer greatly the moderation of Augustine, who allows pastors to flee on certain conditions.” No unbending rule can be laid down. Each case must be decided by circumstances. There are times when, like St. Paul or Jewell, a man may see it a duty to flee and await better days; and times when, like Hooper, he may feel called to decline flight and to die with his sheep. Barnabas and Paul were specially commended to the Church at Antioch (Acts xv.25) as those who had “hazarded their lives for the name of the Lord Jesus.” St.
Paul tells the Ephesian elders, “I count not my life dear unto myself so that I may finish my course with joy.” (Acts xx.24.) Again he says, “I am ready to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.” (Acts xxi.13.) 14.--[ I am the Good Shepherd. ] These words are repeated to show the importance of the office our Lord fills as the Good Shepherd, and to bring into stronger light the wide difference between Him and the Pharisees. [ And know my sheep, and am known by my own. ] These words express the close and intimate union there is between Christ and all His believing people, a union understood fully by those alone who feel it, but to the world foolishness.
Our Lord, like a good earthly shepherd, knows every one of His people—knows them with a special knowledge of love and approval; knows where they dwell and all about them, their weaknesses, trials, and temptations; and knows exactly what each one needs from day to day. His people, on the other hand, know Him with the knowledge of faith and confidence, and feel in Him a loving trust of which an unbeliever can form no idea. They know Him as their own sure Friend and Savior and rest on the knowledge. The devils know that Christ is a Savior. The sheep know and feel that He is their Savior.
I fancy the fullness of this verse would be far more plain to Jews accustomed to Oriental shepherds and their flocks, to the care of a good shepherd and the confidence of a flock, than it is to us in this Northern climate. At any rate, it teaches indirectly the duty of every Christlike pastor to be personally acquainted with all his people, just as a good shepherd knows each one of his sheep. Musculus points out the strong contrast between “I know my sheep” and the solemn saying to the virgins “I know you not,” and to the false professors “I never knew you” in Matt. xxv.7 and vii.23.
Besser remarks that “I am known of mine” is a sharp rebuke to those doubters who in voluntary humility refuse to be sure of their salvation. 15.--[ As the Father knows me, even so I know the Father. ] I believe this sentence ought to be read in close connection with the last verse, and without any full stop between. There is nothing in the Greek against this view.
The sense would then be: “I know my sheep and am known of mine, even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father.” The meaning will then be that the mutual knowledge of Christ and His sheep is like the mutual knowledge of the Father and the Son—a knowledge so high, so deep, so intimate, so ineffable, that no words can fully convey it. The full nature of that knowledge which the First Person of the Trinity has of the Second and the Second has of the First, is something far beyond finite man’s understanding. It is, in short, a deep mystery.
Yet the mutual knowledge and communion of Christ and believers is something so deep and wonderful that it can only be compared, though at a vast distance, to that which exists between the Father and the Son. To understand this knowledge a little, we should read carefully the language used in Proverbs viii.22-30. [ And I lay down my life for the sheep. ] Our Lord, to show how truly He is the Good Shepherd, declares that like a good shepherd He not only knows all His sheep, but lays down His life for them. By using the present tense He seems to say, “I am doing it. I am just about to do it.
I came into the world to do it.” This can only refer to His own atoning death on the cross, the great propitiation He was about to make by shedding His life blood. It was the highest proof of love. “Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” (John xv.13.) Taken alone and by itself, this sentence undoubtedly contains the doctrine of particular redemption. It declares that Christ “lays down His life for the sheep.” That He does so in a special sense I think none can deny. The “sheep” alone, or true believers, obtain any saving benefit from His death.
But to argue from this text that in no sense and in no way did Christ die for any beside His “sheep” is to say what seems to me to contradict Scripture. The plain truth is that the extent of redemption is not the leading subject of this verse. Our Lord is saying what He does for His sheep; He loves them so that He dies for them. But it does not follow that we are to conclude that His death was not meant to influence and affect the position of all mankind. I venture to refer the reader to my own notes, in this commentary, on John i.28; iii.16, and vi.32 for a full discussion of the subject.
Both here and in the 11th verse, I do not think the Greek word translated “for” should be pressed too far, as if it necessarily implied the doctrine of substitution or the vicariousness of Christ’s death. That doctrine is a blessed and glorious truth, and is taught plainly and unmistakably elsewhere. Here, however, we are reading parabolic figurative language, and I doubt whether it is quite fair to explain it as meaning more than “on account of” or “in behalf of” the sheep. Of course it comes to the same thing at last. If the Shepherd did not die, the sheep would die.
But I do not quite think “vicariousness,” at any rate, is the primary idea of the sentence. I fully agree with Parkhurst, at the same time, that the Greek expression for “dying for anyone” in Rom. v.6-8 never has any signification other than that of “rescuing the life of another at the expense of our own.” 16.--[ And other sheep...this fold. ] In this sentence our Lord declares plainly the approaching conversion of the Gentiles. The sheep He specially died for were not merely the few believing Jews, but the elect Gentiles also. They are the “other sheep;” “this fold” means the Jewish Church.
It reads as though He would show the real measure and size of His flock. It was one much larger than the Jewish nation, of which the scribes and Pharisees were so proud. Let it be noted here that our Lord uses the present tense. The heathen sheep were as yet heathen and not brought in; yet He says, “I have them.” They were already given to Him in the eternal counsels, and foreknown from the beginning of the world.
So it was with the Corinthians before their conversion: “I have much people in this city.” (Acts xviii.10.) Augustine remarks: “They were yet without, among the Gentiles, predestinated, not yet gathered in. These He knew who had predestinated them. He knew who had come to redeem them with the shedding of His own blood. He saw them who did not yet see Him.
He knew them who yet believed not in Him.” [ Them also I must bring. ] Our Lord here declares that it is necessary for Him, in order to fulfill the prophecies of the Old Testament and to carry out the great purpose of His coming, to bring in and add to His flock other believers beside the Jewish sheep. “It is part of my work, office, and mission to gather them out from the heathen by the preaching of my Apostles.” The prediction here made was contrary to Jewish prejudices. The Jews thought they alone were God’s flock and favored people.
Even the Apostles afterwards were slow to remember these words. Hutcheson observes: “Christ Himself is chief in bringing in His elect, whatever instruments He employs; and He is at pains to seek them and gain their consent, as being bound in the covenant of redemption to present all that are given Him blameless before the Father.” Saints are “the called of Jesus Christ.” (Rom. i.6.) [ They shall hear my voice. ] This is a prophecy and a promise combined.
It was a prophecy that the elect among the heathen, however unlikely it might appear, would hear Christ’s voice speaking to them in the Gospel preached; and hearing, would believe and obey. It was a promise that would encourage His Apostles to preach to the heathen: “They will listen, and be converted, and follow Me.” It is a saying that was wonderfully forgotten by the Apostles afterwards. They were backward to bring in the other sheep after their Master left the world. It is a sentence that should nerve and cheer the missionary.
Christ has said it: “The sheep who are scattered among the heathen will hear.” The text “He who hears you hears Me” (Luke x.16), is the Divine explanation of the expression “hear my voice.” [ And there shall be one fold and one shepherd. ] This sentence contains one word which ought to have been differently translated. It ought to be, as Tyndale renders it, “one flock and one shepherd.” There is an evident difference.
Christ’s universal Church is a mighty company of which the members may be found in many different visible churches, or ecclesiastical “folds;” but it composes only one “flock.” There is only One Holy Catholic Church” which is the blessed company of all faithful people; but there are many various visible churches. The sentence is true of all believers now. Though differing in various points, such as government or ceremonies, true believers are all sheep of one flock, and all look up to one Savior and Shepherd. It will be more completely fulfilled at Christ’s second coming.
Then shall be exhibited to the world one glorious Church under one glorious Head. In the view of this promise, unity with all true Christians should be sought and striven for my every true sheep. Gualter remarks that there never has been, or can be, more than one Holy Catholic Church, and unless we belong to it we cannot be saved. And he warns us against the pernicious error that all men shall get to heaven if sincere, whether they belong to the Holy Catholic Church or not. Chemnitius observes that we must be careful not to make this one Church either too narrow or too broad.
We make it too narrow when, like the Jews and the Papists, we exclude any believer who does not belong to our particular fold. We make it too broad when we include every professing Christian, whether he hears Christ’s voice or not.
It is a flock of “sheep.” In every other place in the New Testament the word here wrongly translated “fold” is rendered “flock.” (Matt. xxvi.31, Luke ii.8, 1 Cor. ix.7.) The word “fold” before us is evidently an oversight of our translators. 17.--[ Therefore does my Father love me, etc. ] This is a deep and mysterious verse, like all verses which speak of the relation between the First and Second Persons of the Trinity. We must be content to admire and believe what we cannot fully understand.
When, as in John v.20 and here, our Lord speaks of “the Father loving the Son,” we must remember that He is using language borrowed from earthly affection to express the mind of one Person of the Trinity towards another, and accordingly we must interpret it reverently. Yet we may surely gather from this verse that our Lord’s coming into this world to lay down His life for the sheep by dying on the cross, and to take it again for their justification by rising again from the dead, was a transaction viewed with infinite complacency and approbation by God the Father.
“I am about to die, and after death to rise again. My so doing, however strange it may seem to you Pharisees, is the very thing which my Father in heaven approves, and for which He specially loves Me.” It is like the Father’s words “In whom I am well pleased,” and St. Paul’s “Wherefore God has highly exalted Him” (Matt. iii.17, Phil. ii.29), and Isaiah’s “I will divide Him a portion with the great, because He has poured out His soul unto death” (Is. liii.12). Our Lord, by mentioning His resurrection, seems to remind His hearers that in one respect He was different from the best of shepherds.
They might lay down their lives; but then there would be an end of them. He meant to lay down His life, but after that to take it again. He would not only die for His people but also rise again. Guyse thinks the true meaning is: “I cheerfully lay down my life for the expiation of my sheep’s offenses, in order that I may rise again for their justification.” Let it be noted here that there is no part of Christ’s work for His people that God the Father is said to regard with such special complacency as His dying for them.
No wonder that ministers ought to make Christ crucified the principal subject of their teaching. Gualter thinks these words were specially meant to prevent the offense of the ignominious death of Christ on the cross. That death, whatever the Jews might think, was part of Christ’s plan and commission, and one reason why the Father loved Him.
Brentius thinks that there is here a reference to the story of Abraham offering Isaac, when the words were used, “Because thou hast done this thing, and not withheld thy son, therefore blessing I will bless thee.” (Gen. xxii.) Hengstenberg remarks that the Father’s love “was the very opposite of that wrath of God, of which the Jews regarded Christ’s death as a proof and sign.” They thought that God had forsaken Him and given Him up to be crucified in displeasure, when in reality God was well pleased. 18.--[ No man takes...of myself. ] In this sentence our Lord teaches that His own death was entirely voluntary.
An earthly shepherd may die for his flock, but against his own will. The great Shepherd of believers made His soul an offering for sin of His own free will. He was not obliged or compelled to do it by superior force. No one could have taken away His life had He not been willing to lay it down; but He laid it down “of Himself” because He had covenanted to offer Himself as a propitiation for our sins. His own love to sinners, and not the power of the Jews or Pontius Pilate’s soldiers, was the cause of His death. The word “I” is inserted emphatically in the Greek.
“I myself” lay down my life “of myself.” Henry observes: “Christ could, when He pleased, slip the knot of union between body and soul, and without any act of violence done to Himself could disengage them from each other. Having voluntarily taken up a body, He could voluntarily lay it down again. This appeared when He cried with a loud voice and ‘gave up’ the ghost.” [ I have power...down...take it again.] Our Lord here amplifies His last statement and magnifies His own Divine nature by declaring that He has full power to lay down His life when He pleases and to take it again when He pleases.
This last point deserves special notice. Our Lord teaches that His resurrection, as well as His death, was in His own power. When our Lord rose again, He was not passive and raised by the power of another only, but rose by His own Divine power. It is noteworthy that the resurrection of our Lord in some places is attributed to His Father’s act (as Acts ii.24-32), once, at least, to the Holy Spirit (as 1 Pet. iii.18), and here and in John ii.19 to Christ Himself.
All leads to the same great conclusion—that the resurrection of our Lord, as well as every part of His mediatorial work, was an act in which all three Persons of the Trinity concurred and cooperated.
Hutcheson observes that if Christ had power to take life again when He pleased, “so He can put a period to the sufferings of His own when He pleases, without any help of their crooked ways.” [ This...received from my Father. ] Chrysostom, and most other commentators, apply these words strictly to the great work which our Lord has just declared He had power to do: viz., to lay down His life and to take it again. “This is part of the commission I received from my Father on coming into the world, and one of the works He gave Me to do.” No doubt this is good exposition and good divinity.
Yet I am rather inclined to think that our Lord’s words refer to the whole doctrine which He had just been declaring to the Jews: viz., His office as a Shepherd, His being the true Shepherd, His laying down His life for the sheep and taking it again, His having other sheep who were to be brought into the fold, His final purpose to exhibit to the world one flock and one Shepherd.
Of all this truth He says, “I received this doctrine in charge from my Father to proclaim to the world, and I now declare it to you Pharisees.” I suspect that both here and elsewhere the word “commandment” has a wide, deep meaning and points to that solemn and mysterious truth—the entire unity of the Father and the Son in the work of redemption—to which John frequently refers: “I am in the Father, and the Father in Me.
The words that I speak to you, I speak not of myself, but the Father who dwells in Me, He does the works.” (John xiv.10.) “The Father gave Me a commandment what I should speak.” (John xii.49.) Our Lord’s object in these often repeated expressions seems to be to keep the Jews in mind that He was not a mere human Prophet, but one who was God as well as man, and in whom, both speaking and working, the Father always dwelt.
When our Lord speaks of “receiving a commandment,” we must take care that we do not suppose the expression implies any inferiority of the Second Person of the Trinity to the First. We must reverently remember the everlasting covenant between Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, for the salvation of man, and interpret “commandment” as meaning a part of the charge or commission with which the Second Person, Christ, was sent into the world— to carry out the purposes of the Eternal Trinity.