“THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST: ITS
METAPHORS (flock)”
Earl Radmacher wrote,
“The figure of the flock is one of the
broadest in application of any of the figures used of the church. In the Old
Testament, Israel is called ‘the Lord’s flock’ (Jer 13:17; cf. Zech 10:3). Jesus
referred to his small circle of disciples as the ‘little flock’ (Luke 12:32). Again,
the term is used of the church on several occasions (cf. Acts 20:28; 1 Pet
5:3). In addition to these are the repeated references to the sheep that
compose the flock (cf. John 10:16; 21:15-17) and to the Shepherd of the flock
(John 10:2-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:4; Heb 13:20). Although this figure is rich with
potential for application, there are a few things that deserve special note,
for this figure is used to speak of relationships within the church.” [1]
Except for his misunderstanding the
church to mean everyone who is a Christian while I am convinced the church
refers to a congregation, I concur with his comment above. Jeremiah 13.17
reads,
“But if ye will not hear it, my soul
shall weep in secret places for your pride; and mine eye shall weep
sore, and run down with tears, because the LORD’s
flock is carried away captive.”
Next, Zechariah 10.3:
“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.”
Jeremiah writing at the beginning of
the Babylonian captivity and Zechariah writing after the Babylonian captivity,
we see in the words of both prophets that the house of Judah is identified as
“the LORD’s flock” by Jeremiah and “the LORD of hosts hath visited his flock the
house of Judah” by Zechariah.
Let us be careful to recognize that
because the house of Judah is characterized as the LORD’s flock in the Old Testament, by use
of a figure of speech, does not therefore mean that using the same figure of
speech in the New Testament necessarily means that the same entity is being
referred to in both testaments. I contend that the use of the flock metaphor in
the Old Testament and in the New Testament speaks more to the kind of
relationship the LORD exercises than it does to the actual identity
of each flock referred to. This will become obvious as we proceed.
A challenging consideration arises
when thought is given to the Lord Jesus Christ’s description of His men as the
“little flock” in Luke 12.32. Of course, this takes place after the Lord Jesus
Christ has called the twelve to be apostles, Luke 6.13. This leads me to
conclude, since the Lord Jesus Christ founded the church during His earthly
ministry, and since the first members of the church of Jesus Christ were the
apostles,[2]
that the phrase “little flock” is a fair representation of the church of Jesus
Christ when it was comprised of but twelve men recently selected. Does the Lord
Jesus Christ by His use of the word flock when He addressed His apostles mean
that they are “the Lord’s flock” in the same sense as the house of Judah when
so labeled by the prophets Jeremiah and Zechariah? Keep in mind that the church
in Ephesus was identified as “the flock” by the Apostle Paul in Acts 20.28-29,
though they were undoubtedly a mostly Gentile Christian congregation:
28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves,
and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to
feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
29 For I know this, that after my
departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
Consider as well the Apostle Peter’s
uses of the term in First Peter 5.1-3:
1 The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an
elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the
glory that shall be revealed:
2 Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the
oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy
lucre, but of a ready mind;
3 Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but
being ensamples to the flock.
How can Peter’s comments not be in
reference to a particular congregation of Christians, since practical reality
means that elders cannot feed all of Christianity, and because Peter refers to
that “which is among you”? How can elders be examples to the flock if the flock
is everywhere and not rather a local congregation? As well, how can elders take
oversight over all who are Christians? No, this concept of the flock is
meaningful only when referring to a congregation or congregations and not to
all sheep everywhere. All sheep everywhere is not a flock in anyone’s thinking.
Therefore, congregations are rightly understood to be flocks of God and a
church is the flock of God.
The question, remember, is whether
“the LORD’s flock” in Jeremiah and “his flock”
in Zechariah, though using the same figure of speech is referring to the same
thing in the New Testament. Is the house of Judah in the Hebrew scriptures the
same entity as a New Testament church congregation? Granting that the same
figure of speech is used with both, the notion of the flock, is the Old
Testament usage and the New Testament usage of that figure of speech therefore necessarily
a reference to the same entity? To help us answer the question I would like to
compare and contrast the nation of Israel and the church of Jesus Christ:
The
distinctions between Israel and the church.
J. Dwight Pentecost
has summarized in his classic work Things To Come what Lewis
Sperry Chafer set forth in his famous Systematic Theology,
listing twenty-four contrasts between Israel and the church of Jesus Christ
which show us conclusively that these two entities cannot be united into one,
but that they must be distinguished as two separate entities with whom God is
dealing in a special program. These contrasts may be outlined as follows:
(1) The extent of Biblical revelation:
Israel is dealt with in nearly four-fifths of the Bible; the church of Jesus
Christ is dealt with in about one-fifth of the Bible.
(2) The Divine purpose: Israel is the
beneficiary of the earthly promises of the Abrahamic, the Palestinian, the
Davidic, the New, and the Mosaic covenants; the church of Jesus Christ is the
beneficiary of the heavenly promises in the gospel.
(3) The seed of Abraham: With respect to Israel
the seed of Abraham is his physical seed, of whom some become a spiritual seed;
whereas with the church of Jesus Christ a spiritual seed is in view.
(4) Birth: With respect to Israel a
physical birth occurs that produces a blood kin relationship with those
descendants of Abraham who are also in covenant with God; whereas with respect
to the church of Jesus Christ a spiritual birth occurs that establishes a relationship
with Christ as a precursor to church membership.
(5) Headship: With Israel father Abraham
is the patriarchal head of the covenant nation; in the church of Jesus Christ
it is the Lord Jesus who is the head of the church.
(6) Covenants: Israel is in covenant with
God through the Abrahamic and all the subsequent covenants; the church of Jesus
Christ is indirectly related to the Abrahamic and the New covenants.
(7) Nationality: Israel is one nation;
the church of Jesus Christ is comprised of members from all nations.
(8) Divine dealing: Israel is dealt with
by God on both a national and an individual basis; the church of Jesus Christ
is dealt with by God on a congregational and an individual basis.
(9) Dispensations: Israel is seen in
scripture in all ages from the time of Abraham; the church of Jesus Christ is
seen in scripture only in this present age.
(10) Ministry: Israel has been engaged in no
missionary activity and has been given no overt gospel to preach; the church of
Jesus Christ has been charged with the Great Commission to fulfill and has been
given the gospel to proclaim.
(11) The death of Christ: Israel bears
national guilt for rejecting Christ and will someday be saved by Him; the
church of Jesus Christ is comprised of those now saved on the merits of
Christ’s sacrifice.
(12) God the Father: Israel is related by a
peculiar relationship with God as the rejected Father to the nation;[3]
those who are members of the church of Jesus Christ are related individually to
God the Father through faith in His Son Jesus Christ.
(13) Christ: Toward Israel the Lord Jesus is
as yet the unrecognized Messiah, Immanuel, and King;[4] the
church of Jesus Christ owns Jesus Christ as Savior, Lord, Bridegroom, and Head.
(14) The Holy Spirit: Several men in Israel
had some experience with the Spirit when He came upon them temporarily; those
in the church of Jesus Christ are continually indwelt by the Spirit.[5]
(15) Governing principle: Israelites
beginning with Moses were under the Mosaic Law system until Christ’s
crucifixion;[6]
the church of Jesus Christ is guided by the principle of grace.[7]
(16) Divine enablement: The nation of Israel
was provided with no ongoing and usual supernatural enablement but was
commanded to keep the Law; the church of Jesus Christ is enabled by the
indwelling Holy Spirit.
(17) Two farewell discourses: The nation of
Israel was given the rejected Savior’s Olivet discourse; the church of Jesus
Christ comprised of the apostles was given the upper room discourse.
(18) The promise of Christ’s return: The
Lamb of God who was slain will visibly return to Israel in power and glory as
the Lion of the tribe of Judah and as the King of kings and Lord of lords for
judgment at the time of His second coming; the church of Jesus Christ will be
caught up to meet the Lord Jesus Christ in the air seven years before His
Second Advent in the Rapture.[8]
(19) Position: Israel occupies the position
of a servant; the church of Jesus Christ occupies the position of members of
the family.
(20) Christ’s earthly reign: Israel will be
His subjects during the millennial kingdom; the church of Jesus Christ will be
co-reigners with Him during His millennial kingdom reign.
(21) Priesthood: Israel had a priesthood;
the church of Jesus Christ is a priesthood.
(22) Marriage: Israel is the LORD’s unfaithful wife;
the church of Jesus Christ is our Lord’s bride.
(23) Judgments: Israel must face judgment;
the church of Jesus Christ has been delivered from all judgments, with the
Judgment Seat of Christ being a time of rewards.
(24) Positions in eternity: Israel is
comprised of the spirits of just men made perfect in the new earth; the church
of Jesus Christ will be the church of the firstborn in the new heavens.
These clear
contrasts, which show the distinction between Israel and the church, make it impossible
to identify the two in one program. Therefore, the flock figure of speech in
the New Testament does not refer to the same entity as the flock figure of
speech in the Old Testament.[9]
In
our study of the church of Jesus Christ we observe that use is made of metaphors
and other figures of speech for the purpose of providing a greater and more
thorough understanding of the nature and function of the church of Jesus
Christ. We know the church of Jesus Christ is the body of Christ.[10]
We know the church of Jesus Christ is the temple of God.[11] We
know the church of Jesus Christ is a priesthood.[12] We are
at present exploring the metaphor of the flock in connection with the church of
Jesus Christ. The challenge arises when it becomes apparent that the nation of
Israel, specifically the kingdom of Judah (which would include those from the
north tribes of Israel who had migrated to the kingdom of Judah region over the
years), is described as “the LORD’s
flock” by the prophet Jeremiah and the prophet Zechariah, while the metaphor
“the flock” is also found in the New Testament as a label for churches of Jesus
Christ.
Obviously,
the two flocks are not the same. Israel is not the church and the church is not
Israel, though the flock metaphor is used in both testaments. The flock in the
Old Testament refers to the nation of Israel, an entity bound to God by
covenant into which mostly unregenerate physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob were physically born and circumcised. The church of Jesus Christ, on
the other hand, is comprised of saved individuals from every kindred, tongue,
and tribe, both Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians who have been baptized
by immersion following their conversion to Christ. Though it is comparatively
easy to correlate passages in the New Testament related to the church that are
written to churches or that contain the word translated church in them, too
often passages intimately related to the church of Jesus Christ are completed
dismissed as instructive about the church of Jesus Christ because use is made
of a metaphor that goes unrecognized. Such is the case in John 10.1-21 where
the Lord Jesus Christ speaks after having just restored the sight of the man
born blind in John chapter 9. He speaks to false shepherds (Pharisees) who have
no care for the sheep. However, it must be understood that He speaks for the
benefit of His apostles who will serve as His undershepherds. Keep five things
in mind as we make our way through the passage; Jesus Christ as the Door, the
sheep of Israel as a flock in the sheepfold, then the Lord Jesus Christ as the
Good Shepherd, His calling of His sheep out from the sheepfold, and the other
sheep He has that are not of the sheepfold initially referred to.
1 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by
the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a
thief and a robber.
2 But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of
the sheep.
3 To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice:
and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.
4 And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before
them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.
5 And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from
him: for they know not the voice of strangers.
6 This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood
not what things they were which he spake unto them.
7 Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say
unto you, I am the door of the sheep.
8 All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but
the sheep did not hear them.
9 I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be
saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.
10 The
thief cometh not, but for 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 giveth his life for the sheep.
12 But
he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not,
seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth
them, and scattereth the sheep.
13 The
hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep.
14 I
am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.
15 As
the Father knoweth me, even so know I 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
doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No
man taketh 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 have I received of my
Father.
19 There
was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.
20 And
many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?
21 Others
said, These are not the words of him that hath a devil. Can a devil open the
eyes of the blind?
This passage is easily recognizable as
falling into four parts: In the first five verses our Lord rehearses important
facts known to anyone of that era about sheep and shepherding. In verse 6 the
apostle provides a brief explanation to his readers. In verses 7-10 the Lord
Jesus Christ identifies Himself with the declaration “I am the door of the
sheep.” Verses 11-18 are built upon the Lord Jesus Christ’s statement “I am the
good shepherd.” Verses 19-21 conclude the passage by rehearsing the dispute
among those the Savior was speaking to. I propose to deal with each of these
five unequally-sized portions of the passage separately:
First, OUR LORD REVIEWS THE
EXPERIENCES OF THE FLOCK
Allow me to first provide a bit of
background from Arthur W. Pink before we read verses 1-5:
“It will probably be of some help to
the reader if we describe briefly the
character of the ‘sheepfold’ which obtains in
Eastern lands. In Palestine, which in the pastoral sections was infested with wild beasts, there was in
each village a large sheepfold, which
was the common property of the native farmers. This sheepfold was protected by a wall some ten or twelve
feet high. When night fell, a
number of different shepherds would lead
their flocks up to the door of the fold, through which they passed, leaving
them in the care of the porter, while they went
home or sought lodging. At the door, the porter lay on guard through the night, ready to
protect the sheep against thieves and robbers, or against wild
animals which might scale the walls. In the morning the different shepherds
returned. The porter would allow each one to enter through the door, calling by name the sheep which
belonged to his flock. The sheep would respond to his voice, and he would
lead them out to pasture.”[13]
John 10.1-5:
1 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by
the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a
thief and a robber.
2 But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of
the sheep.
3 To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice:
and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.
4 And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before
them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.
5 And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from
him: for they know not the voice of strangers.
Verses 1-5 is a literary device that
is unique to the New Testament, which I will explain in greater detail after we
have carefully considered the passage:
Verse
1: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the
sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.”
“Verily, verily, I say unto you,” or
“Amen, amen, I say unto you,”
should be recognized as signifying a
very important statement or declaration made by the Lord. However, there is
something else about double amen statements in John’s gospel to take note of. John
writes in such a way that none of the Lord’s discourses ever begins in this
gospel with a double amen statement.[14] That
suggests that what we have here is very definitely a continuation of what was
begun in John chapter 9. In other words, the Lord Jesus Christ is in the middle
of a serious comparison of Himself to the Pharisees, showing that by contrast
He is the legitimate shepherd and they are frauds.
“. . . He that entereth not by the
door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief
and a robber.”
Who of those familiar with the care of
sheep in that culture would argue with this rehearsal of truth? There is only
one way into the sheepfold and one way out of the sheepfold, and only thieves
and robbers seek to gain entrance any other way than by the door of the
sheepfold.
Verse
2: “But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.”
There are only two types of men who
would seek to gain entrance to the sheepfold, the shepherd of the sheep being
legitimately authorized to enter in, with the thief and the robber being
illegitimate and seeking entrance by other means. Simple. Indisputable.
Verse
3: “To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his
own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.”
Of course, the porter is the fellow
charged with the responsibility of guarding the sheep at night once they have
been brought into the sheepfold. It is his job to open the door to the
sheepfold and to close the door to the sheepfold, as well as to allow only
shepherds to come in to call his sheep to follow him out to pasturage for the
day.
“and the sheep hear his voice: and he
calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.”
Shepherds in the East tend to their
flocks differently than shepherds in Europe. The Basques of Northern Spain and
shepherds throughout Europe in the British Isles use sheep dogs to drive their
flocks. In the Middle East, however, shepherds are far more intimate with their
flocks, giving each sheep a name and each sheep of the flock recognizing and
responding to the voice of the shepherd. Thus, in this picture painted with
words our Lord shows the shepherd to be the leader of the flock rather than one
who merely herds the flock. Implicit in this concept of a sheepfold is the idea
that more than one flock would be penned inside at night and that a sheep would
respond only to his shepherd’s voice. Important to point out here is that each
sheep is called individually by the shepherd, the flock was not called in or
out as a group. That, I am convinced, is an important feature of this entire
passage.
Verse
4: “And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the
sheep follow him: for they know his voice.”
Thus, the common pattern of
shepherding is known to one and all. Even those who do not make their living as
shepherds recognize from the culture they have grown up in that shepherds lead
their sheep and do not drive them, that sheep follow their own shepherd and no
one else, because they recognize the voice of their shepherd.
Verse
5: “And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know
not the voice of strangers.”
What is stated here needed to be said,
though it was already understood by everyone who originally heard the Savior’s
words. Sheep will not follow a stranger. Sheep will run away from a stranger. And
this is because sheep do not recognize the voice of a stranger.
Next, THE APOSTLE OBSERVES THE
PHARISEE’S FAILURE TO UNDERSTAND
Verse 6: “This parable spake Jesus unto them:
but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them.”
Please take note of the word that is
translated parable. What we understand to be parables are actually found only
in Matthew, Mark, and Luke in the gospels, not the gospel according to John. The
word used here is not the Greek word parabolh,
but the word paroimian, which is a specific kind of parable
known as an allegory.[15]
Allegories typically have more points of comparison between the reality that is
being described and the word picture used to portray it than do parables. Thus,
it should have been easier for the Pharisees to understand what the Lord Jesus
Christ said in verses 1-5 than if He had uttered a parable, yet they still did
not understand what things He said to them.
Go back and read John chapter 9 when
you get home and you will see that the Pharisees are the thieves and robbers,
the blind man is the sheep, and the Lord Jesus Christ is the legitimate
shepherd of the kind referred to in John 10.1-5. The sheep hear the Savior’s
voice and follows Him, while the Pharisees responded to the undeniable miracle
of his newly given eyesight by casting him out of the synagogue.[16]
Yet the Pharisees failed to grasp what our Lord had said. Of course, they could
not understand His words, since they were not His sheep and did not recognize
the sound of His voice.
Third, THE LORD JESUS CHRIST IS THE
DOOR
At this point the Lord Jesus Christ
begins to declare to His obstinate audience the first of His two great
metaphors within this metaphor by pointing out specifically where He is to be
found in the allegory of verses 1-5, and He does this in verses 7-10:
7 Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say
unto you, I am the door of the sheep.
8 All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but
the sheep did not hear them.
9 I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be
saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.
10 The
thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that
they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.
Verse
7: “Then said Jesus unto them
again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.”
Again grabbing His audience’s
attention by saying “Verily, verily, I say unto you,” the Lord Jesus Christ
utters for the third time one of His important “I am” statements:[17]
“I am the door of the sheep.” These “I am” declarations hearken back to the
burning bush and God’s declaration to Moses in Exodus 3.14,
“I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus
shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.”
It is important for us to understand
at this point what the Lord Jesus Christ means by the declaration “I am the
door of the sheep.” In addition to the obvious assertion of His deity by use of
the “I am” phrase, the door here referred to should not be understood to be the
door to the sheepfold. After all, no one referred to here became a part of the
flock of the nation of Israel by entering in through the door which is Jesus
Christ. Important to remember is that the sheep to whom the Lord is presently
referring are all Jewish and that they are already penned in the sheepfold of
the covenant nation of Israel under the authority of the Law of Moses. That
said, most of the Jews who are in the sheepfold of Israel are not sheep as
evidenced by the fact that they do not hear His voice and follow Him. When the
Lord Jesus Christ declares Himself to be the Door of the sheep it must be that
a different sheepfold is in mind than the one He calls His sheep out from.
Verse
8: “All that ever came before me
are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them.”
This is obviously not a reference to
prophets sent by the LORD, men such as Samuel and Elijah,
Isaiah and Jeremiah. The Lord is here referring to unauthorized men who did not
represent God while claiming to speak for Him.
Verse
9: “I am the door: by me if any
man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.”
Again, our Lord declares “I am the
door.” However, in this verse He explicitly claims to be the exclusive door by
which any man entering in shall be saved. These two claims, He declares in
verses 7 and 9, may echo Psalm 118.20, where we read,
“This gate of the LORD, into which the righteous shall
enter.”
There are two very important though
not at all obvious truths we need to grasp to benefit most from this verse,
paying careful attention to the two middle phrases: “by me if any man enter in,
he shall be saved.” First, notice that the Savior indicated salvation is
the result of entering in by Him. This is important to note since no
sinner can save himself. Not only must a sinner pass through the Door from
death to life, from sin to salvation, but that passing through must be
accomplished, according to the Savior, “by me.” That is, no one saves himself. Sinners
are saved by the Savior. Second, Do not mistakenly think that the words
“if any man enter in” refers to entering the sheepfold. It does not. The fact
is, for those Jewish people to enter in they had to actually leave the
sheepfold of Mosaic Law Judaism, something most of them would not do because so
many in that sheepfold were not, in fact, sheep. Then, the final phrase about
going in and out to find pasture is a frequent theme describing God’s
relationship with His people in the Old Testament.[18]
Before moving on to verse 10, let me read a summary of verse 9 written by a
wonderful commentator:
“‘I
am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved,
and shall go in and out, and find pasture.’ Seven things are enumerated in this precious verse. First, ‘I am the door’: Christ the only Way to God. Second ‘By
me if any man enter’: Christ the
Imparter of power to enter. Third, ‘If
any man enter’: Christ the Saviour for Jew and Gentile alike.
Fourth, ‘If any man enter in’:
Christ appropriated by a single act of faith. Fifth, ‘he shall be
saved’: Christ the Deliverer from the penalty, power, and presence of sin.
Sixth, ‘he shall go in and out’: Christ the Emancipator from all bondage.
Seventh, ‘and find pasture’: Christ the Sustainer of His people.”[19]
Verse
10: “The thief cometh not, but for to
steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and
that they might have it more abundantly.”
It is abundantly clear from John
chapter 9 that the Lord Jesus Christ is addressing the Pharisees who were so
opposed to His ministry. In John 10.5 He refers to them as strangers (plural). In
John 10.6 we are told that He was speaking to them (again, plural). In verse 8
He refers to them as thieves and robbers (plural for the third time). In this
verse, however, our Lord speaks in the singular by referring to “the thief.” Who
do you suppose He is referring to? The Pharisees are described in verse 8 as
“thieves and robbers,” but this individual is one who comes “for to steal, and
to kill, and to destroy.” Stealing is usually done by stealth. Destruction is
typically accomplished by violence. And this word kill may be related to slain
offerings. Who is our Lord alluding to? Could it be our Lord is powerfully
contrasting Himself not only with the Pharisees, but also with the “idol
shepherd” of Zechariah 11.15-17:
15 And
the LORD said unto me, Take unto thee yet the
instruments of a foolish shepherd.
16 For,
lo, I will raise up a shepherd in the land, which shall not visit those
that be cut off, neither shall seek the young one, nor heal that that is
broken, nor feed that that standeth still: but he shall eat the flesh of the
fat, and tear their claws in pieces.
17 Woe
to the idol shepherd that leaveth the flock! the sword shall be upon his
arm, and upon his right eye: his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye
shall be utterly darkened.
I think this is likely the antichrist,
with the Devil being the real genius who lies back of the Pharisee’s opposition
to the Lord Jesus Christ. The Devil is back of the insane denials of the
implications of our Lord’s great miracles, and His rightful claim to be the
Messiah of Israel. Those who are false shepherds are, like the idol shepherd,
unconcerned about the health and welfare of the flock. What a contrast there
is, then, between the counterfeit and the True. The verse concludes with one of
the most wonderfully comforting statements of our Lord’s mission found in the
Bible:
“I am come that they might have life,
and that they might have it more abundantly.”
What a comfort to the sheep is the
voice of our Shepherd. His motives are pure. His strength is unsurpassed. His
wisdom is unmatched. His sovereignty should be unquestioned.
It is my purpose to show the
importance of John 10.1-21 in God’s plan for Christians during the age in which
we live by showing our the Savior revealed to His apostles in this passage that
His sheep must hear His voice and come out of the sheepfold of Israel, leaving
behind those who are not His sheep and who do not hear His voice. As we
consider His claim to be the Good Shepherd we will also see that He has other
sheep not of this fold, which I understand to be sheep that come to Him from
the Gentile nations. The Good Shepherd gives His life for His sheep, while the
hireling flees in the face of danger. What is not stated in this passage, but
what I think the Lord Jesus Christ establishes a foundation for, is the new
flock into which His sheep called out of the nation of Israel and from the
Gentile nations will be gathered.
We must be careful not to demand too
much from any parable or allegory. However, my own conviction is that this
passage is important to show that the church of Jesus Christ is the flock of
the Good Shepherd’s sheep. To review, we know the metaphor of the flock was
used in the Old Testament by the prophets Jeremiah and Zechariah to refer to God’s
covenant people. However, we also know the Lord Jesus Christ referred to the
embryonic church as His “little flock,” with the flock metaphor also used by
the Apostle Paul and the Apostle Peter. The flock metaphor, then, is used to
identify God’s people in two entirely different economies in which those in
those different economies enjoy completely different kinds of relationships
with God. The covenant people of Israel are the physical descendants of
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob who were governed by the Law of Moses, with the
church of Jesus Christ being constituted on a completely different basis, the
two flock metaphors not being at all the same.
It is with respect to these two
economies in God’s program for the ages that we began to examine John 10.1-21
last Sunday night, getting as far as John 10.10. John 10.1-5, you may remember,
is unique to the New Testament, a specific kind of parable found only there and
forming the basis for our Lord’s remarks to continue from John chapter 9, where
the miracle of giving sight to the man born blind is recorded and also forming
the basis for the Savior contrasting Himself in John chapter 10 with the
fraudulent shepherds known to us as Pharisees.
In John 10.6 we are informed by the
Apostle John that our Lord’s audience did not understand His figure of speech
in verses 1-5. No great surprises since only His sheep hear His voice and
follow Him. Then, in John 10.7-10 the Lord Jesus Christ identifies Himself as
the door by saying “I am the door of the sheep” in verse 7 and “I am the door:
by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved” in verse 10. I mentioned last
week that this was the third of our Lord’s dramatic “I am” statements in John’s
gospel whereby He declared His deity. Recognizing that we cannot expect either
a parable or an allegory to be a perfect fit for that which such figures of
speech are used to describe, let me caution you that while the sheepfold the
Savior made mention of is almost certainly to be identified with the Mosaic
economy used by God to govern the lives of His covenant people from the time of
Moses to the time of Christ’s crucifixion, it would be a mistake to conclude
that the Lord Jesus Christ identifies Himself as the door to the sheepfold of
Judaism (for lack of a better term). After all, the reality is that when His
sheep heard His voice and followed Him they in fact left Judaism to follow Him,
and His other sheep that will be mentioned in verse 16 (who are taken to be
Gentiles) did not pass into Judaism when they passed through the door who is
Jesus Christ. This brings us to the portion of John 10.1-21 in which the Lord
Jesus Christ expands His self description.
Fourth, THE LORD JESUS CHRIST IS THE
GOOD SHEPHERD
11 I
am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.
12 But
he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not,
seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth
them, and scattereth the sheep.
13 The
hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep.
14 I
am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.
15 As
the Father knoweth me, even so know I 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
doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No
man taketh 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 have I received of my
Father.
This is the fourth time in John’s
gospel that the Lord Jesus Christ identifies Himself using the “I am”
declaration, this time twice stating “I am the good shepherd.”
In verse 11 He tells His audience that
the Good Shepherd dies for His sheep.
“I am the good shepherd: the good
shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.”
It is always beneficial to keep in
mind when examining our Lord’s statements that since He is the fulfillment of
numerous Old Testament predictions, it is needful to consider not only the
backdrop of scripture but also the mindsets of those Jewish people that our
Lord was speaking to who were steeped in Old Testament learning. This is
especially true when considering the Lord Jesus Christ as the Good Shepherd. The
Pharisees our Lord was speaking to on this occasion, as well as His apostles
whose benefit He was speaking for, were well aware that in the Old Testament
God repeatedly contrasted Himself with unfaithful shepherds who because of
their dereliction of duty were subject to His judgment.[20] As
well, David (or the Davidic messiah) is spoken of as a good shepherd.[21]
Moses is also portrayed as the “shepherd of his flock.”[22] By
once more using the “I am” phrase to identify Himself, the Lord Jesus Christ is
again declaring in no uncertain terms His absolute deity. He is God. He is the
One who spoke to Moses from the burning bush. He is the God of Israel. By
claiming “I am the good shepherd” He is more obviously contrasting Himself with
the Pharisees than He had previously done. Remember that the Pharisees for the
most part were not priests and certainly were not God-called prophets. They
were self-anointed religious zealots fulfilling a self-appointed role as
enforcers of the Law of Moses . . . as they understood it. Though there were
exceptions among them, such as Nicodemus, for the most part they were religious
nit pickers and intrusive hypocrites who imagined themselves to be spiritual
shepherds of the Jewish people. They were not. Not authorized in any way in the
Hebrew scriptures to fulfill the role they presumed to occupy, they are most
known for their opposition to the Savior. Following the dispersion of the
Jewish people in 70 AD it was the Pharisaic version of Judaism that has
survived in their writings over the centuries to have by far the most influence
on modern religious Judaism. However, that is not all the Lord accomplished
when He declared “I am the good shepherd.” He declared Himself to be God. He
identified with the Old Testament references to shepherds; God, Moses, and
David. Then there are the types of Christ in the Old Testament who were
shepherds; Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and David. So, our Lord accomplished
a great deal by identifying Himself with the statement “I am the good
shepherd.” However, when He goes so far as to say “the good shepherd giveth his
life for the sheep” He breaks new ground. God showed Himself as shepherd to His
people in the Old Testament, yet He did not die for the sheep. Abraham, Isaac,
Jacob, Joseph, Moses, and David were each shepherds, but they did not give
their lives for the sheep. Certainly, David risked his life, but he did not
actually give his life for the sheep. The Lord Jesus Christ hereby distinguishes
Himself from all others described as shepherds in the Hebrew scriptures by
first declaring that as the Good Shepherd He will die for His sheep, and then
by actually dying for His sheep. He alone is the shepherd who dies for His
sheep, with this Greek preposition translated for understood to mean that He
dies for the benefit of His sheep and not merely as an example they are to
follow.[23]
This is an allusion to Christ’s substitutionary sacrifice on the cross of
Calvary. One final observation pertinent to verse 11. The Lord Jesus Christ,
the Good Shepherd, declares that “the good shepherd giveth his life for the
sheep.” That gives rise to a question. What can be said about the goats? Our
Lord here refers only to the sheep, those who hear His voice and follow Him,
which is to say believers. Nothing is here stated about goats and the Good
Shepherd giving His life for goats, which is to say those who did not hear His
voice and did not therefore follow Him.
The character and conduct of hirelings
is set forth in verses 12-13:
12 But
he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not,
seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth
them, and scattereth the sheep.
13 The
hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep.
If you will remember from John 10.1-2
the Lord Jesus Christ makes reference to sheep, to shepherds, and also to
thieves and robbers. In this passage He introduces yet another type of
character, who is neither as bad as a thief and a robber nor as good as a
shepherd. This is a fellow who has charge for the welfare of the sheep, though
he is only on the job for what he can get out of it by way of pay. Hence the
label, hireling. We must be mindful that this type of fellow is not around to
steal what is not his. He does not sneak into the sheepfold unawares. He
apparently has no intention of harming the sheep. This is a fellow whose
presence is very much known to the shepherd and who is in the shepherd’s
employ. Notice what we learn of such a fellow from the Savior’s description of
him. First, he is an hireling and not a shepherd. Our Lord said in verse
12, “But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd.” Thus, though you might
observe two different kinds of men tending to a flock, it is a mistake
confusing the two or taking the one for the other. No hireling is a shepherd by
any definition. Next, the sheep cared for by the hireling are not his,
he does not own them, and therefore his concern for them is very superficial. “whose
own the sheep are not” When things are going well the hireling does not pose a
problem of any kind. The problem with the hireling is that he is a guy you can
depend upon until you need him. He is like a sunshine patriot, a fair weather
friend, a guy who says nice words to you because they don’t cost anything, and
who does things needful so long as they are easy tasks. Third, the
hireling is someone you most definitely cannot depend upon when you need him,
because he “seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the
wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.” So you see, this guy called a
hireling might very well pass for reliable, and even think that he is a fellow
with some integrity and character. However, when push comes to shove, when the
crisis hits, when there is danger, he cuts and runs. Interesting is the
Savior’s appraisal of the hireling, found in verse 13:
“The hireling fleeth, because he is an
hireling, and careth not for the sheep.”
Notice the principle set forth by the
Savior. The hireling flees because he is an hireling, and because he has no
care for the sheep. In other words, he does what he does because he is what he
is. One commentator wrote these observations of the principle stated here by
our Lord:
“There is ever a rigid consistency
between character and conduct.”
“When the testing time comes each man
reveals what he is by what he does.”
“Conduct conforms to character as the
stream does to the fountain.”
“Character is revealed by our conduct
in the crises of life.”[24]
Of course, the comments made by our
Lord to the Pharisees but for the benefit of the apostles serve three important
purposes: First and foremost, the
Master is establishing a comparison between Himself and His enemies, the
Pharisees. They are thieves and robbers, but also hirelings who perform their
pastoral duties so long as they received personal benefit. As soon as personal
risk of any kind is seen, they are so like any hireling when he sees a wolf. He
cuts and runs, motivated only by self interest. Second of course, the Lord Jesus Christ wants to bring along His
apostles so they will not themselves act like hirelings. Remembering that they
were men who had jobs they left to follow the Lord Jesus Christ, none of the
twelve but Judas Iscariot followed the Lord Jesus Christ for what they could
gain materially. Nevertheless, it is always good to remind disciples and redraw
the lines that needed drawing in the first place. Those men are to serve as
undershepherds of the Lord’s flocks, so running away when they see wolves
approaching are not an option. Therefore, this is in part for their
edification. Finally, there is the
person who is neither sheep nor shepherd who hears the Good Shepherd speaking. The
Lord Jesus Christ speaks (and the preacher preaches, by the way) so that His
sheep will hear His voice and will follow Him. If the bystander hears the
Lord’s voice and follows Him, it may be that he is both sheep and someday
undershepherd. If you are an undershepherd, can you shepherd the Lord’s flock
yet not be so craven and indifferent to their welfare that you will run and
hide when you see danger to them approaching?
I know a man who has been in the
ministry approaching fifty years. Forty years ago he once said in my hearing
that whenever he perceived trouble arising in a church where he was pastor his
habit was to immediately resign and moved on, leaving the problem for the next
guy to resolve. His conduct since then bears out what he said. He has probably
averaged a new pastorate every three or four years. That, beloved, is the
behavior of a hireling. And the one thing you know about such a fellow is that
he does not care for the sheep, the Lord Jesus Christ said as much in John
10.13.
Verse 14 shows us the intimacy that
exists between the Good Shepherd and His sheep:
“I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep,
and am known of mine.”
By restating that He is the Good
Shepherd the Lord Jesus Christ is emphasizing the contrast that exists between
the hirelings mentioned in verses 12-13 (which are, of course, the Pharisees of
John chapter 9). They are only men, and not very good men at that truth be
told, while He is the God of Israel (remember His “I am” declaration) who as
the Good Shepherd will give His life for the sheep. And what is the result of
the Good Shepherd giving His life for the sheep? He knows His sheep and is
known by His sheep. That is, the Lord Jesus Christ comes to know His sheep and
His sheep come to know the Good Shepherd; this as a direct result of Him giving
His life for His sheep. Arthur W. Pink is a marvelous devotional commentator
who provides wonderful observations. Yet another example: Here in John 10.14 he
points out that we see the Savior identify Himself as the Good Shepherd in
connection with His death on the cross and laying down His life for the sheep. Pink
then points out that in Hebrews 13.20 in connection with His resurrection from
the dead our Lord is referred to as the Great Shepherd of the sheep. And in
First Peter 5.4 in connection with His glorious second coming in power and
great glory He is referred to by the Apostle Peter as the Chief Shepherd who
shall appear.[25]
What a wonderful Savior and glorious Shepherd of the sheep is our Lord Jesus
Christ.
Verse 15 points out to us the intimacy
that exists between the Father and the Son:
“As the Father knoweth me, even so
know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.”
Interesting, is it not, that the Greek
word for know, ginwskw, is found
four times in these two verses, twice in verse 14 and twice in verse 15. The Savior
knows and is known by His sheep, and knows and is known by the Father. Not to
suggest that the depth of the Christian’s knowledge will ever reach the depth
of Christ’s knowledge or of the Father’s knowledge, but each is a knowledge
born of experience. It is an interacting knowledge and not a purely abstract
knowledge. It is to know and to be known. This is the relationship the
Christian has with the Savior, the Savior has with the Christian, and is the
relationship the Father and the Son have with each other, though our human
limitations mean our knowledge is necessarily restricted. This is a stunning
assertion that is unique to the Christian faith in light of the Muslim claim
that Allah is absolutely unknowable.[26] As
well, notice once again that reference is made by the Savior to Him laying down
His life for the sheep. And why not make mention of His sacrifice once more? His
sacrifice as the Good Shepherd is profoundly important, and is the central act
of all God’s dealings with mankind, providing the basis for everything having
to do with our salvation from sins and our salvation to glory in eternity. Mention
it not only again, but again and again.
Verse 16 brings to our attention the
Gentile sheep saved by the Shepherd:
“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.”
A phrase at a time: The verse begins,
“And other sheep I have, which are not
of this fold.”
It is difficult to imagine who our Lord
might be referring to if He is not speaking of Gentiles “which are not of this
fold,” this fold being the nation of Israel, this fold being Judaism. Also
interesting is that the Savior refers to these as yet unsaved people who will
become Christians as sheep; “other sheep I have.” The next phrase reads
“them also I must bring, and they
shall hear my voice.”
Pay attention to the certainty with
which the Savior speaks. “I must bring” and “they shall hear my voice.” There
is no question in His mind what will happen with respect to the salvation of
His sheep, who will hear His voice and who will follow Him. The verse ends,
“and there shall be one fold, and
one shepherd.”
There is no question about the Savior
once and for all gathering all Jewish people who have believed in Him and all
Gentiles who have believed in Him together into one fold. No one that I know of
questions that certainty. The issue is how quickly will this take place and
where will this take place? Confusion arises from the fact that the word “fold”
at the beginning of verse 16 is the usual word meaning a sheepfold (the pen
where sheep are placed at night for their protection), while the word “fold” at
the end of this verse is the word that actually refers to a flock. Why it was
translated in this fashion I do not know. What is clear, however, is that the
sheep that hear Christ’s voice and follow Him will comprise a single flock of
sheep and will not be segregated into a Jewish Christian flock and a Gentile
Christian flock. There is only one flock.
Verses 17-18 further illuminate our
understanding of the relationship existing between the Father and the Good
Shepherd:
17 Therefore
doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No
man taketh 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 have I received of my
Father.
Please do not misunderstand verse 17
as a declaration by the Lord Jesus Christ of the Father’s love for Him being
conditional, based upon His compliance with the Father’s will. He always does
His Father’s will.[27]
Rather, the Father’s love for Him is eternal, based as it is on their absolute
unity of essence and purpose, and the fact that they are in reality One God.[28]
This verse is a declaration by Christ of the Father’s love for Him and also His
voluntary laying down of His life so that He might take it up again, of course
referring to the resurrection following His crucifixion. Anticipating those who
would try to explain Christ’s crucifixion in terms of Him being a helpless
victim overwhelmed by events beyond His control, He makes three strong
statements: First, no man takes His life from Him, but He lays it down
Himself. Second, He has power (read authority here) to both lay down and
also to take up His life. Third, His actions are according to the will
of God and not any group of chief priests or a traitorous disciple.
Finally, THE DISPUTE AMONG THE JEWS IS
SUMMARIZED
19 There
was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.
20 And
many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?
21 Others
said, These are not the words of him that hath a devil. Can a devil open the
eyes of the blind?
Verse 19 informs us that there was a
division again among the Jews over what our Lord said. Thus, this is a
recurrence of an ongoing dispute. But who are these Jews? The Pharisees only,
or a larger crowd that had assembled? I am inclined to think the Jews referred
to here are a larger crowd that had assembled as our Lord spoke.
Notice the dispute that is recorded in
verses 20-21, with some insisting our Lord is demonized, or perhaps insane. Why
listen to the guy? Others are kinder, pointing out that His words are not
inspired by a demon, especially in light of the fact that He worked the miracle
of giving sight to the blind.
The problem, of course, is that even
those who saw themselves as somewhat sympathetic to the Lord Jesus Christ did
nothing beyond uttering a few sympathetic words. They were still lost, still
sinners whose sins remained unforgiven, still not born again, and content to
sit on the sidelines with everyone else when came the time to arrest Him, to
unjustly try Him, and to wrongly crucify Him.
As wonderful and compelling as John
10.1-21 has proven to be, our primary interest in the passage has been to gain
an understanding of the metaphor of the flock used by the Lord in the gospel of
John. The sheepfold of Judaism contained the Jewish population, some of whom
were Christ’s sheep and were called out by Him, His sheep hearing the Good
Shepherd’s voice, knowing His voice, and passing through the Door (which also
was Him). It was in John 10.16 that our Lord made reference to His “other
sheep,” who I and just about all others who comment take to be Gentiles who are
sheep outside the sheepfold of Judaism. Whenever one of His sheep responds to
His voice, be he Jewish or be he Gentile, he becomes part of the Good
Shepherd’s flock. Arthur W. Pink wonderfully comprehends the issue when he
writes,
“The ‘one flock’ comprehends, we
believe, the whole family of God, made up of believers before the nation
of Israel came into existence, of believing Israelites, of believing Gentiles,
and of those who shall be saved. The ‘one flock’ will have been gathered from various
‘folds.’”[29]
Consider now, if you will, the Apostle
Paul’s use of the metaphor, found in Acts 20.28-30 on the occasion of his final
meeting with the Ephesian elders, where he says to them,
28 Take
heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy
Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath
purchased with his own blood.
29 For
I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you,
not sparing the flock.
30 Also
of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away
disciples after them.
There can be no denying that in this
context the Apostle Paul twice uses the metaphor of the flock to refer to the
Ephesian congregation and only to the Ephesian congregation. Can the same be
said about the Apostle Peter’s two uses of the metaphor in First Peter 5.2-3?
2 Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the
oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy
lucre, but of a ready mind;
3 Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but
being ensamples to the flock.
Though some might protest against the
obvious, the fact that the Apostle Peter mentions that he is referring to “the
flock of God which is among you” and that the elders should be examples to the
flock, is clear indication that the flock is a congregation and is not by its
use here a reference to all Christians everywhere.
Admittedly, John 10.1-21 does not
suggest that Christians are sheep that are brought into the sheepfold of the
congregation, the church of Jesus Christ. That passage only shows that Christ’s
Jewish sheep are called out of the sheepfold of Judaism and that
Christ’s “other sheep” join them in belonging to one flock of the Good Shepherd’s
sheep. I suggest for your consideration that though all Christians everywhere
are of the same flock, we will not be gathered into a single sheepfold this
side of heaven, but will someday be so gathered in heaven, as Hebrews 12.22-23
reveals:
22 But
ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly
Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
23 To
the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven,
and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect.
I am persuaded that there will come a
day when the Good Shepherd, that Great Shepherd of the sheep, will incorporate
all who are His flock into this general assembly and church of the firstborn,
will bring us all into one all-encompassing sheepfold. But that will not be, in
my opinion, until our Chief Shepherd shall appear at the time of His second
coming in power and in great glory. Until the Rapture occurs, I believe it is
our Savior’s plan to bring His sheep into little sheepfolds that we recognize
as congregations, assemblies of born again, scripturally baptized believers in
Jesus Christ. These are small sheepfolds in which He pens members of His flock,
with undershepherds assigned to feed the flock and to provide protection for
them as needed.
What then do we learn from the
metaphor of the flock if metaphors are useful to enhance our understanding? By
means of the metaphor of the flock we gain a clearer picture of our Savior as
the Good Shepherd, as the Great Shepherd, and as the Chief Shepherd. By means
of the flock we can obtain a clearer picture of ourselves as sheep who know and
are known by our Shepherd, and who must be both led and fed by Him and His
designees. Finally, and this is what is most frequently lost by both
Protestants and Baptists, in my opinion, the flock metaphor enhances our
understanding of the place and the importance of the church of Jesus Christ in
the lives of Christ’s sheep as a provision for protection from spiritual danger
and as a provision for nourishment and growth under the oversight of
undershepherds. So many sheep erroneously think they are competent to provide
for themselves and to protect themselves, yet the Apostle Paul warned the
Ephesian undershepherds (and not the congregation at large) of the danger the
flock was in. I read Acts 20.29-30 again:
29 For
I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you,
not sparing the flock.
30 Also
of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away
disciples after them.
There are many ways in which the
church of Jesus Christ is described in the New Testament. However, it is the
metaphor of the flock which best shows not only the danger sheep face from
thieves, from robbers, from the neglect of hirelings, from grievous wolves that
enter in among us, and from men who arise from among church leaders who will
speak perverse things to draw away disciples after them, but also our Good
Shepherd’s provision for your nurture and your protection. Our wonderful
Shepherd of the sheep knew perfectly what He was doing when He brought the
church into existence. We should therefore honor His wisdom by complying with
His wishes and His provision for us as His sheep.
[1] While I am convinced the New Testament does not support his understanding of the church, I am indebted to Earl D. Radmacher, What The Church Is All About: A Biblical And Historical Study, (Chicago: Moody Press, 1978, reprinted from 1972 Western Conservative Theology Seminary edition originally titled The Nature Of The Church), pages 298-307.
[2] 1 Corinthians 12.28
[3] 1 Samuel 8.7
[4] Acts 2.22-23
[5] Romans 8.9; Ephesians 1.13-14
[6] Deuteronomy 5.1-3; Romans 3.19
[7] John 1.17
[8] 1 Thessalonians 4.13-18
[9] I have modified to reflect my own convictions excepts from J. Dwight Pentecost, Things To Come, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1958), pages 201-202 and Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, Vol. IV, (Dallas, TX: Dallas Seminary Press, 1948), pages 47-53.
[10] http://www.calvaryroadbaptist.org/sermon.php?sermonDate=20150518a
[11] http://www.calvaryroadbaptist.org/sermon.php?sermonDate=20150524b
[12] http://www.calvaryroadbaptist.org/sermon.php?sermonDate=20150531b
[13] Arthur W. Pink, Exposition of the Gospel of John, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976), Vol 2, pages 102-103.
[14] Andreas J. Kostenberger, John - ECNT, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2004), page 299.
[15] A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures In The New Testament, Vol V, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1932), page 175.
[16] John 9.22-34
[17] John 6.35; 8.12
[18] Deuteronomy 28.6; Psalm 23.2; 79.13; 100.3; 121.8; Ezekiel 34.12-15
[19] Pink, page 115.
[20] Jeremiah 23.1-4; Ezekiel 34; Zechariah 11.4-17
[21] 2 Samuel 5.2; Psalm 78.70-72; Ezekiel 37.24; Micah 5.4
[22] Isaiah 63.1; Psalm 77.20
[23] D. A. Carson, The Gospel According To John (PNTC), (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), page 386.
[24] Pink, pages 124.
[25] Pink, page 125.
[26] Georges Houssney, Engaging Islam, (Boulder, CO: Treeline Publishing LLC, 2010), page 85
[27] John 8.29
[28] Deuteronomy 6.4; 1 Corinthians 8.4, 6; 1 Timothy 2.5
[29] Pink, page 130.
Would you like to contact Dr. Waldrip about this sermon? Fill out the form below to send him an email. Thank you.