Written and edited by Glenn Pease

I have put together the thinking of great minds on each verse of this chapter. This is all information that is available to anyone, but by bringing it together in one place, it saves Bible students a lot of time, and hopefully this will be a blessing to them. Many of the quotes are from older commentators whose writings are in public domain, but some are contemporary authors, and if any of them I quote do no want their wisdom to be shared in this way, they can let me know and I will remove their material. My e-mail is

1. William Barclay has the best introduction to this chapter. He wrote a very lengthy study of the shepherd and his sheep that is informative in understanding what Jesus was saying by calling himself the Good Shepherd. “There is no better loved picture of Jesus than the Good Shepherd. The picture of the shepherd is woven into the language and imagery of the Bible. It could not be otherwise. The main part of Judaea was a central plateau, stretching from Bethel to Hebron for a distance of about 35 miles and varying from 14 to 17 miles across. The ground, for most part, was rough and stony. Judaea was, much more a pastoral than an agricultural country and was, therefore, inevitable that the most familiar figure of the Judaean uplands was the shepherd. His life was very hard. o flock ever grazed without a shepherd, and he was never off duty. There being little grass, the sheep were bound to wander, and since there were no protecting walls, the sheep had constantly to be watched. On either side of the narrow plateau the ground dipped sharply down to the craggy deserts and the sheep were always liable to stray away and get lost. The shepherd's task was not only constant but dangerous, for, in addition, he had to guard the flock against wild animals. especially against wolves, and there were always thieves and robbers ready to steal the sheep. Sir George Adam Smith, who traveled in Palestine, writes: "On some high moor, across which at night the hyaenas howl, when you meet him, sleepless, far-sighted, weather-beaten, leaning on his staff, and looking out over his scattered sheep, every one of them on his heart, you understand why the shepherd of Judaea sprang to the front in his people's history; why they gave his name to their king, and made him the symbol of providence; why Christ took him as the type of self-sacrifice." Constant vigilance, fearless courage, patient love for his flock, were the necessary characteristics of the shepherd. In the Old Testament God is often pictured as the shepherd, and the people as his flock. "The Lord is my shepherd: I shall not want" (Ps.23:1). "Thou didst lead thy people like a flock by the hand of Moses and Aaron" (Ps.77:20). "We thy people, the flock of thy pasture, will give thanks

to thee for ever" (Ps.79:13). "Give ear, O Shepherd of Israel, thou who leadest Joseph like a flock" (Ps.80:1). "He is our God, and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand" (Ps.95:7). "We are his people, and the sheep of his pasture" (Ps.100:3). God's Anointed One, the Messiah, is also pictured as the shepherd of the sheep. "He will feed his flock like a shepherd: he will gather the lambs in his arms, and will carry them in his bosom, and gently lead those that are with young" (Isa.40:11). "He will be shepherding the flock of the Lord faithfully and righteously, and will suffer none of them to stumble in their pasture. He will lead them all aright" (SS.17:45). The leaders of the people are described as the shepherds of God's people and nation. "Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture!" (Jer.23:1-4). Ezekiel has a tremendous indictment of the false leaders who seek their own good rather than the good of the flock. "Woe be to the shepherds of Israel who have been themselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep?" (Eze.34). This picture passes over into the ew Testament. Jesus is the Good Shepherd. He is the shepherd who will risk his life to seek and to save the one straying sheep (Matt.18:12; Lk.15:4). He has pity upon the people because they are as sheep without a shepherd (Matt.9:36; Mk.6:34). His disciples are his little flock (Lk.12:32). When he, the shepherd, is smitten the sheep are scattered (Mk.14:27; Matt.26:31). He is the shepherd of the souls of men (1Pet.2:25), and the great shepherd of the sheep (Heb.13:20). Just as in the Old Testament picture, the leaders of the Church are the shepherds and the people are the flock. It is the duty of the leader to feed the flock of God, to accept the oversight willingly and not by constraint, to do it eagerly and not for love of money, not to use the position for the exercise of power and to be an example to the flock (1Pet.5:2-3). Paul urges the elders of Ephesus to take heed to all the flock over which the Holy Spirit had made them overseers (Ac.20:28). It is Jesus' last command to Peter that he should feed his lambs and his sheep (Jn. 21:15-19). The very word pastor (Eph.4:11) is the Latin word for shepherd. The Jews had a lovely legend to explain why God chose Moses to be the leader of his people. "When Moses was feeding the sheep of his father-in-law in the wilderness, a young kid ran away. Moses followed it until it reached a ravine, where it found a well to drink from. When Moses got up to it he said: `I did not know that you ran away because you were thirsty. ow you must be weary.' He took the kid on his shoulders and carried it back. Then God said: `Because you have shown pity in leading back one of a flock belonging to a man, you shall lead my flock Israel.'" The word shepherd should paint a picture to us of the unceasing vigilance and patience of the love of God; and it should remind us of our duty towards our fellow-men, especially if we hold any kind of office in the church of Christ. The Palestinian shepherd had different ways of doing things from the shepherds of our country; and, to get the full meaning of this picture, we must look at the shepherd and the way in which he worked. His equipment was very simple. He had his scrip, a bag made of the skin of an animal, in which he. carried his food. In it he would have no more than bread, dried fruit, some olives and cheese. He had his sting. The skill of many of the men of Palestine was such that they "could sling a stone at a hair and not miss" (Judg.20:16). The shepherd used his sling as a weapon of offense and defense; but he made one curious use of it. There were no sheep dogs in Palestine, and, when the shepherd wished to call back a sheep which was straying away, he fitted a stone into his sling and landed it just in front of the straying sheep's nose as a warning to turn back. He had his staff, a short wooden club which had a lump of wood at the end often studded with nails. It usually had a slit in the handle at the top, through which a thong passed; and by the thong the staff swung at

the shepherd's belt. His staff was the weapon with which he defended himself and his flock against marauding beasts and robbers. He had his rod, which was like the shepherd's crook. With it he could catch and pull back any sheep which was moving to stray away. At the end of the day, when the sheep were going into the fold, the shepherd held his rod across the entrance, quite close to the ground; and every sheep had to pass under it (Eze.20:37; Lev.27:32); and, as each sheep passed under, the shepherd quickly examined it to see if it had received any kind of injury throughout the day. The relationship between sheep and shepherd is quite different in Palestine. In Britain the sheep are largely kept for killing; but in Palestine largely for their wool. It thus happens that in Palestine the sheep are often with the shepherd for years and often they have names by which the shepherd calls them. Usually these names are descriptive, for instance, "Brown-leg," "Blackear." In Palestine the shepherd went in front and the sheep followed. The shepherd went first to see that the path was safe, and sometimes the sheep had to be encouraged to follow. A traveler tells how he saw a shepherd leading his flock come to a ford across a stream. The sheep were unwilling to cross. The shepherd finally solved the problem by carrying one of the lambs across. When its mother saw her lamb on the other side she crossed too, and soon all the rest of the flock had followed her. It is strictly true that the sheep know and understand the eastern shepherd's voice; and that they win never answer to the voice of a stranger. H. V. Morton has a wonderful description of the way in which the shepherd talks to the sheep. "Sometimes he talks to them in a loud sing-song voice, using a weird language unlike anything I have ever heard in my life. The first time I heard this sheep and goat language I was on the hills at the back of Jericho. A goat-herd had descended into a valley and was mounting the slope of an opposite hill, when turning round, he saw his goats had remained behind to devour a rich patch of scrub. Lifting his voice, he spoke to the goats in a language that Pan must have spoken on the mountains of Greece. It was uncanny because there was nothing human about it. The words were animal sounds arranged in a kind of order. o sooner had he spoken than an answering bleat shivered over the herd, and one or two of the animals turned their heads in his direction. But they did not obey him. The goat-herd then called out one word, and gave a laughing kind of whinny. Immediately a goat with a bell round his neck stopped eating, and, leaving the herd, trotted down the hill, across the valley, and up the opposite slopes. The man, accompanied by this animal, walked on and disappeared round a ledge of rock. Very soon a panic spread among the herd. They forgot to eat. They looked up for the shepherd. He was not to be seen. They became conscious that the leader with the bell at his neck was no longer with them. From the distance came the strange laughing call of the shepherd, and at the sound of it the entire herd stampeded into the hollow and leapt up the hill after him" (H. V. Morton, In the Steps of the Master, pp. 154, 155). W. M. Thomson in The Land and the Book has the same story to tell. "The shepherd calls sharply from time to time, to remind them of his presence. They know his voice, and follow on; but, if.a stranger call, they stop short, lift up their heads in alarm, and if it is repeated, they turn and flee, because they know not the voice of a stranger. I have made the experiment repeatedly." That is exactly John's picture. H. V. Morton tells of a scene that he saw in a cave near Bethlehem. Two shepherds had sheltered their flocks in the cave during the night. How were the flocks to be sorted out? One of the shepherds stood some distance away and gave his peculiar call which only his own sheep knew, and soon his whole flock had run to him, because they knew his voice. They would have come for no one else, but they knew the call of their own shepherd. An eighteenth century traveler actually tells how Palestinian sheep could be made to dance, quick or slow, to the peculiar whistle or the peculiar tune on the flute of their own shepherd. Every detail of the shepherd's life lights up the

picture of the Good Shepherd whose sheep hear his voice and whose constant care is for his flock.” 2. Will Pounds, “Shepherds are a power image in the Old Testament for leaders, both politically and spiritually. Here Jesus distinguishes His own ministry from the false shepherds of Israel (cf. Isa. 56:9-12; Ezek. 34; Jer. 23:1-4; 25:32-38; Zech. 11; Ps. 23; 80:1; Isa. 40:10ff). A false shepherd of Israel failed to perform his divine responsibilities. However, the prophets looked forward to the divinely sent Shepherd after God’s own heart who is like the shepherd David. “Then I will set over them one shepherd, My servant David, and he will feed them; he will feed them himself and be their shepherd” (Ezekiel 34:23). John chapter ten powerfully declares the fulfillment of this great Messianic prophecy. Jesus introduces Himself as the Shepherd like unto David. Israel’s true Shepherd is the Good Shepherd. It is true the shepherd provided care for his flock, but he was also a powerful sovereign. He was absolute ruler over his sheep. He determined their coming and going into the fold, and where they would eat. He determined when they would be sheered, how they would be provided for, and even decided which ones would be sacrificed for the sin of the shepherd and his family. John chapter ten sets forth Jesus as the true Ruler and Shepherd of His own people. Jesus is the ideal messianic ruler. He is the very opposite of the false shepherds. Here we see the nature and purpose of the Good Shepherd. He provides for His sheep even to the extent of laying down His own life for them. He alone has this power to choose the manner of His own death, when He will die and when He will rise again from the dead. o one else has that kind of sovereignty.”

The Shepherd and His Flock 1"I tell you the truth, the man who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber.
1. The owner of the sheep goes into the sheep pen by the gate designed for that purpose, for he has the right of ownership, but the thief and the robber climbs over the fence at a distance from the gate so as not to call attention to his presence. Jesus is saying that the Pharisees are like the robber, for they are not true shepherds who care for the sheep, but are seeking to gain control of the sheep for their own private ego trip. They want the power over the people, and not to lead them to what is good for them, but to what is good for the power structure they control. They want to keep the sheep in line and not let them go wandering after this Jesus who seeks to lead them away from their control. A good shepherd wants to be with the sheep to bless them. A bad shepherd wants to be with the sheep to bleed them for his own benefit. There are ministries that exist to bless people, and there are ministries that exist to bleed people of their wealth so they have power to control. There are givers and there are takers. Jesus was a giver and gave his all

for the sake of the sheep. 1B. The truth is not always pleasant, and Jesus was willing to label men for what they really were. He came right out and called the Pharisees thieves and robbers, for they only cared about their own power positions. They did not care for the lost sheep of the house of Israel. They were willing to rob them of their Messiah rather than admit that Jesus was the Messiah. They were willing to steal from the people the greatest thing that ever happed to them in their lives rather than see the crowds forsake them and flock to Jesus. If you want to read of just how selfish and uncaring they were, read Matthew chapter 23 where Jesus was so disgusted with their robbery of the people he called them snakes and a brood of vipers. ame calling is usually not appropriate for a godly person, but there are times when scoundrels who prey on the people, and make the innocent victims of their greed, need someone to label them for what they are so their powers of deception can be weakened, and avoided. Poison needs to be labeled for the protection of people, and so it is with selfish schemers. 1C. John Macarthur has this interesting note: " ow you might ask, "Why does He use the particular analogy or allegory of a shepherd?" Well, a shepherd was so much a part of the life of Judea that they couldn't escape it. There's a main plateau in Israel that stretches about 35 miles north and south. This main plateau is approximately 14 to 17 miles wide. It does not lend itself to agriculture at all since it is rocky and stony and very difficult to grow anything there. And so consequently a greater portion of the land became acclimated to shepherding rather than farming. And so the familiar figure to the Judean hills has always been a shepherd." 2. Calvin, "He who entereth not by the door. It is useless, I think, 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 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. Hence it follows that they alone are good shepherds who lead men straight to Christ; and that they are truly gathered into the fold of Christ, so as to belong to his flock, who devote themselves to Christ alone. But all this relates to doctrine; for, since all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden in Christ, (Colossians 2:3,) he who turns aside from him to go elsewhere neither keeps the road nor enters by the door. ow, whoever shall not despise Christ or his instructor will easily rid himself of that hesitation which keeps so many in a state of perplexity, what is the Church, and who are they to whom we ought to listen as shepherds For if they who are called shepherds attempt to lead us away from Christ, we ought to flee from them, at the command of Christ, as we would flee from wolves or thieves; and we ought not to form or maintain intercourse with any society but that which is agreed in the pure faith of the Gospel. For this reason Christ exhorts his disciples to separate themselves from the unbelieving multitude of the whole nation, not to suffer themselves to be governed by wicked priests, and not to allow themselves to be imposed upon by proud and empty names." 3. Alan Carr, "A Sheepfold was a circular wall about 10 feet tall with a single opening that served as a door. Several flocks might be placed into the sheepfold at night, with one of the shepherds lying in the opening to serve as the door. othing could get into, or out of the sheepfold without having to go through the shepherd. Jesus is telling His audience that only thieves and robbers seek to enter the sheepfold by another means besides the door. The shepherd, however, always comes in the right way!"

4. If you want to be in the flock, and to be a part of the people of God, you have to come in by way of the one and only door, or gate, and that gate is a person by the name of Jesus. He is not a way, but the way, for there is no other way in accept by bypassing the gate and climbing over the fence. Those who come in that way are thieves and robbers. So what we have is those who climb in another way other than coming in by the gate, and they are intruders. That is why we have people in the church who are not authentic sheep. They are hypocrites who pretend to be sheep, but they are wolves in sheep clothing with a design to hinder the flock and not bless them. They enter in to rob the flock and do damage, and that is why we need to be on the alert and not assume that all who are in the church are true followers of Jesus. They listen to the beat of a different drummer, and that drummer is the devil himself, and his design is to bring trouble into the flock by creating dissention, and by promoting false doctrine. 5. Constable, "Jesus evidently chose the figure of a good shepherd to contrast Himself with the bad shepherds who were misleading God's sheep. Many Old Testament passages castigated Israel's shepherds who failed in their duty (cf. Isa. 56:9-12; Jer. 23:1-4; 25:32-38; Ezek. 34; Zech. 11). God was Israel's Shepherd (cf. Ps. 23:1; 80:1; Isa. 40:10-11). The shepherd metaphor also was a good one to picture Jesus' voluntary self-sacrifice for His people." 5B. Constable adds, "The words "thief" (Gr. kleptes, stressing trickery) and "robber" (Gr. lestes, stressing violence) are quite close in meaning. God frequently compared His relationship to Israel to that of a shepherd and his sheep in the Old Testament (e.g., Ps. 80:1; Isa. 40:11; Ezek. 34:1016; cf. Ps. 23:1). He also called Israel's unfaithful leaders wicked shepherds of His people (e.g., Isa. 56:9-12; Jer. 23:1-4; 25:32-38; Ezek.34:4; Zech. 11). Moreover He predicted that one day a descendant of David would shepherd the nation properly (Ezek. 34:23-25; 37:24-28).Thus these figures all had meaning to the Jews to whom Jesus first addressed this teaching." 6. IVP Commentary, "Jesus now puts the events of chapter 9 into perspective by contrasting himself, the Good Shepherd, with the Pharisees, whom he identifies with the evil shepherds of Ezekiel 34. "The `Pharisees' have expelled from God's flock the man whom Christ Himself enlightened. They are scattering the sheep whom Christ came to gather" (Dodd 1953:359). In this way, Jesus' estrangement from official Judaism is further developed as he calls into being a people who follow him rather than the leaders of Israel. Jesus Contrasts the Good Shepherd with the Thieves and Robbers (10:1-6) Jesus has used divine language when speaking of himself (8:58) and backed it up with a healing unheard of since the world began (9:32), thereby revealing himself as the agent of creation. By referring to himself as the shepherd of the flock he is appropriating further divine language. In the Old Testament, the leaders of the people are called shepherds, especially Moses (Ps 77:20) and David (Ps 78:70-72; Ezek 34:23). But God is the shepherd par excellence (for example, Ps 80:1; cf. Jeremias 1968:488-89; Barrett 1978:373-74). Jeremiah and Ezekiel in particular develop the shepherd motif to express how God cares for his people and his condemnation of false and evil rulers. God will condemn the false shepherds (Jer 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10) and appoint faithful shepherds to tend his flock after the manner of his own heart (Jer 3:15; 23:4). Indeed, the coming Davidic Messiah will be God's shepherd for his flock (Ezek 34:23-24), a prophecy given in the context of God's announcement that he himself will come to shepherd his flock. He will search for his scattered flock, gather them from the nations and lead them to good pasture on the mountains of Israel. He will tend to the weak and injured but will judge those sheep who only look after themselves and harm the others (Ezek 34:11-22)."

7. S. Lewis Johnson, " ow these strangers and robbers that he refers to in this symbolic picture, these are references to the cruel actions of the Jews in chapter 9 towards the blind man. In John 9: 22 we read, " These words spake his parents, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue." These are men who seek to come in some other way, so we are think then when we read of the thieves and robbers, of the Jewish men who sought to keep the blind man from coming to Jesus Christ." 8. "Joseph H. Mayfield in his Study of John makes this observation concerning Ezekiel 34. “In Ezekiel 34 the same figure of shepherd and flock appears. There the rulers are condemned as negligent, tyrannous, careless of their responsibilities (4). They abuse their office (3), and feed themselves rather than the sheep (2:3, 8). As a result the sheep are scattered (5), and have become a prey to every beast of the field (8). Consequently, God will judge the unworthy shepherds (10), and will Himself gather the scattered sheep (12) and will feed them (14) and give them rest (15). God will appoint one Shepherd, David (Messiah), and He shall feed the flock, and be their Shepherd (23). Then the flock will have peace, enjoy safety (25), and possess the full blessing of the well-watered earth (26). The flock is Israel (30) and belongs to the Lord (31).” 9. Jamison, “Joh_10:1-21. The good shepherd. This discourse seems plainly to be a continuation of the closing verses of the ninth chapter. The figure was familiar to the Jewish ear (from Jer_23:1-40; Eze_34:1-31; Zec_11:1-17, etc.). “This simple creature [the sheep] has this special note among all animals, that it quickly hears the voice of the shepherd, follows no one else, depends entirely on him, and seeks help from him alone cannot help itself, but is shut up to another’s aid” [Luther in Stier]. He that entereth not by the door ― the legitimate way (without saying what that was, as yet). into the sheepfold ― the sacred enclosure of God’s true people. climbeth up some other way ― not referring to the assumption of ecclesiastical office without an external call, for those Jewish rulers, specially aimed at, had this (Mat_23:2), but to the want of a true spiritual commission, the seal of heaven going along with the outward authority; it is the assumption of the spiritual guidance of the people without this that is meant.” 10. Barnes, “say unto you - Some have supposed that what follows here was delivered on some other occasion than the one mentioned in the last chapter; but the expression verily, verily, is one which is not used at the commencement of a discourse, and the discourse itself seems to be a continuation of what was said before. The Pharisees professed to be the guides or shepherds of the people. Jesus, in the close of the last chapter, had charged them with being blind, and of course of being unqualified to lead the people. He proceeds here to state the character of a true shepherd, to show what was a hireling, and to declare that he was the true shepherd and guide of his people. This is called Joh_10:6a parable, and it is an eminently beautiful illustration of the office of the Messiah, drawn from an employment well known in Judea. The Messiah was predicted under the image of a shepherd. Eze_34:23; Eze_37:24; Zec_13:7. Hence, at the close of the discourse they asked him whether he were the Messiah, Joh_10:24. Into the sheepfold - The sheepfold was an inclosure made in fields where the sheep were collected by night to defend them from robbers, wolves, etc. It was not commonly covered, as the seasons in Judea were mild. By the figure here we are to understand the Jewish people, or the church of God, which is often likened to a flock, Ezek. 34:1-19; Jer_23:1-4; Zec_13:1-9. By the door, here, is

meant the Lord Jesus Christ, Joh_10:7, Joh_10:9. He is “the way, the truth, and the life,” Joh_14:6. And, as the only proper way of entering the fold was by the door, so the only way of entering the church of God is by believing on him and obeying his commandments. The particular application of this place, however, is to religious teachers, who cannot enter properly on the duties of teaching and guarding the flock except by the Lord Jesus that is, in the way which he has appointed. The Pharisees claimed to be pastors, but not under his appointment. They entered some other way. The true pastors of the church are those who enter by the influences of the Spirit of Jesus, and in the manner which he has appointed. Some other way - Either at a window or over the wall. A thief - One who silently and secretly takes away the property of another. A robber - One who does it by violence or bloodshed. Jesus here designates those pastors or ministers of religion who are influenced not by love to him, but who seek the office from ambition, or the love of power, or wealth, or ease; who come, not to promote the welfare of the church, but to promote their own interests. Alas! in all churches there have been many - many who for no better ends have sought the pastoral office. To all such Jesus gives the names of thieves and robbers.” 11. Clarke, “, verily, etc. - From Joh_10:6, we learn that this is a parable, i.e. a representation of heavenly things through the medium of earthly things. Some think our Lord delivered this discourse immediately after that mentioned in the preceding chapter; others think it was spoken not less than three months after. The former, says Bishop Pearce, was spoken at the feast of tabernacles, see chap. 7, or about the end of September, and this at the feast of dedication, or in December. See Joh_10:22. Christ, says Calmet, having declared himself to be the light of the world, which should blind some while it illuminated others, Joh_9:41, continues his discourse, and, under the similitude of a shepherd and his flock, shows that he was about to form his Church of Jews and Gentiles, and that into it he would admit none but those who heard his voice. The unbelieving and presumptuous Jews, who despised his doctrine, are the sheep which hear not the voice of the shepherd: the proud and self-sufficient Pharisees are those who imagine they see clearly while they are blind. The blind who become illuminated are the Gentiles and Jews who turn from their sins and believe in Jesus. The light of the world, the good shepherd, and the door which leads into the sheepfold, are all to be understood as meaning Jesus Christ; the hireling shepherds, the willfully blind; the murderers and robbers are the false Christs, false prophets, scribes, Pharisees, wicked hireling priests, and ungodly ministers of all sorts, whether among primitive Jews or modern Christians. Our Lord introduces this discourse in a most solemn manner, Verily, verily! - Amen, amen! - it is true, it is true! - a Hebraism for, This is a most important and interesting truth; a truth of the utmost concern to mankind. At all times our Lord speaks what is infallibly true; but when he delivers any truths with this particular asseveration, it is either, 1. Because they are of greater importance; or, 2. because the mind of man is more averse from them; or, 3. because the small number of those who will practice them may render them incredible. Quesnel.

He that entereth not by the door - Christ assures us, Joh_10:7, that he is the door; whoever, therefore, enters not by Jesus Christ into the pastoral office, is no other than a thief and a robber in the sheepfold. And he enters not by Jesus Christ who enters with a prospect of any other interest besides that of Christ and his people. Ambition, avarice, love of ease, a desire to enjoy the conveniences of life, to be distinguished from the crowd, to promote the interests of one’s family, and even the sole design of providing against want - these are all ways by which thieves and robbers enter into the Church. And whoever enters by any of these ways, or by simony, craft, solicitation, etc. deserves no better name. Acting through motives of self-interest, and with the desire of providing for himself and his family, are innocent, yea, laudable, in a secular business; but to enter into the ministerial office through motives of this kind is highly criminal before God.” 12. Gill, “Verily, verily, I say unto you,.... To the Scribes and Pharisees, who had taken it ill that they should be thought to be blind; and who had cast out the man that Christ had cured of blindness, for speaking in favour of him; and who had traduced Christ as an impostor, and a deceiver, and set up themselves to be the shepherds of the flock, and the guides and rulers of the people; all which occasion the following parable; the design of which is to show, that Christ is the true and only shepherd, who was appointed, called, and sent of God, whose the sheep are, whose voice they hear, and know, and whom they follow; and that they, the Scribes and Pharisees, were thieves and robbers, and not shepherds of the flock; who were not sent of God, nor did they come in at the right door, but in another way, and usurped a domination, which did not belong to them. He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold: the sheepfold, with the Jews, was called ‫;דיר‬ and this, as their writers say (o), was an enclosure sometimes in the manner of a building, and made of stone, and sometimes was fenced with reeds, and in it was a large door, at which the shepherd went in and out, when he led in, or brought out the sheep. At tithing, which was done in the sheepfold, they made a little door, so that two lambs could not come out together; and to this enclosure is the allusion here; and by the "sheepfold" is meant the church of God; see Joh_10:16; and a good fold it is, Eze_34:14. The church may be compared to a sheepfold, because it is separated from the world: it is where the people of God, and sheep of Christ are gathered together; where there is a strict union between them; have society with each other; keep one another warm and comfortable; and where they are fed and nourished, and are preserved; and where they lie down and have rest; and which, like a sheepfold, will be taken down, and not always continue in the form it now is: and by "the door" into it, is meant Christ himself, as appears from Joh_10:7; faith in him, a profession of him, and authority from him. ow he that does not come into the church of God, whether as a member of it, or officer in it, at this door, but climbeth up some other way; by hypocrisy and deceit: or, like the prophets of old, who ran and were not sent; prophesied when they were not spoken to, but took their place and post by usurpation: the same is a thief and a robber; steals into the church, or into an office in it, and robs God or Christ of their power and authority; and such were the Scribes and Pharisees: the Persic version renders the words, "whoever does not introduce the sheep through the door of the sheepfold, know that that man is a thief and a robber"; which these men were so far from doing, that they would not suffer those that were entering to go in, Mat_23:13. The difference between a thief and a robber, with the Jews, was, that the former took away a man's property privately, and the latter openly (p).

13. Henry, “is not certain whether this discourse was at the feast of dedicationin the winter (spoken of Joh_10:22), which may be taken as the date, not only of what follows, but of what goes before (that which countenances this is, that Christ, in his discourse there, carries on the metaphor of the sheep, Joh_10:26, Joh_10:27, whence it seems that that discourse and this were at the same time); or whether this was a continuation of his parley with the Pharisees, in the close of the foregoing chapter. The Pharisees supported themselves in their opposition to Christ with this principle, that they were the pastors of the church,and that Jesus, having no commission from them, was an intruder and an impostor, and therefore the people were bound in duty to stick to then,against him.In opposition to this, Christ here describes who were the false shepherds, and who the true, leaving them to infer what they were. I. Here is the parable or similitude proposed (Joh_10:1-5); it is borrowed from the custom of that country, in the management of their sheep. Similitudes, used for the illustration of divine truths, should be taken from those things that are most familiar and common, that the things of God be not clouded by that which should clear them. The preface to this discourse is solemn: Verily, verily, I say unto you, - Amen, amen.This vehement asseveration intimates the certainty and weight of what he said; we find amendoubled in the church's praises and prayers, Psa_41:13; Psa_72:19; Psa_89:52. If we would have our amensaccepted in heaven, let Christ's amensbe prevailing on earth; his repeated amens. 1. In the parable we have, (1.) The evidence of a thief and robber, that comes to do mischief to the flock, and damage to the owner, Joh_10:1. He enters not by the door,as having no lawful cause of entry, but climbs up some other way,at a window, or some breach in the wall. How industrious are wicked people to do mischief! What plots will they lay, what pains will they take, what hazards will they run, in their wicked pursuits! This should shame us out of our slothfulness and cowardice in the service of God.”

2The man who enters by the gate is the shepherd of his sheep.
Barnes, “that entereth by the door - was the way in which a shepherd had access to his flock. In Joh_10:7Jesus says he is the door. In this place he refers to those who by him - that is, in accordance with his spirit and law become ministers of religion. Is the shepherd of the sheep - Christ does not here refer to himself, for he is the way or door by which others enter; but he refers to all the ministers of the gospel who have access to the church by him. In the original, the article “the” is missing before the word shepherd - “is a shepherd.” By his entering in this manner he shows that he is a shepherd one who cares for his flock, and does not come to kill and destroy. 2. The Messiah was predicted under the image of a shepherd, Ezekiel 34:23; 37:24; Zechariah 13:7. Hence at the close of the discourse they asked him whether he were the Messiah, John 10:24. The Shepherd, of course, does not climb over the fence to get to his flock. He comes strait into the pen through the gate, for he is the owner of the flock, and has full authority to do so. Robbers and thieves have no right to come through the gate, for they own none of the sheep. Jesus is talking here of the right of private property. He came into the world to seek

for and save the lost sheep of the house of Israel. They belong to him, for he is appointed by God to be the good shepherd who would round up the lost sheep and lead them back into the kingdom of his heavenly Father. The present leaders of Israel were abusing the sheep, and Jesus is telling them that they have no more right to be in charge of God's people. They have no right to enter the gate. He alone has that right, for he alone is the good shepherd who truly cares for the sheep. They are robbers of the sheep, but he is the redeemer of the sheep. It is no wonder that they wanted to stone him later in this chapter, for he was basically saying to these leaders that they were fired, and he was taking over the leadership of God's people. They had no clue that they would make him the new king by their putting him on the cross. 3. Bob Utley, 10:2 “But he who enters by the door is a shepherd of the sheep” There is a very obvious mixing of metaphors in this chapter: Jesus as the door of the sheepfold, v. 7, and also the shepherd of the sheep (vv. 11 and 14). However, this mixing of metaphors is not uncommon in John and the T: (1) Jesus is the bread and the giver of the bread (cf. 6:35,51); (2) Jesus is the truth and the speaker of truth (cf. vv. 8:45-46 and 14:6); (3) Jesus is the way and He shows the way (14:6); (4) Jesus is the sacrifice and the one who offers the sacrifice (cf. the Book of Hebrews). The title “shepherd” was a common OT title both for God and the Messiah (cf. Ps. 23; Ps. 80:1; Isa. 40:10-11; I Pet. 5:1-4). The Jewish leaders are called the “false shepherds” in Jer. 23; Ezek. 34 and Isa. 56:9-12. The term “shepherd” is related to the term “pastor” (cf. Eph. 4:11; Titus 1:5, 7)." 4. Clarke, “that entereth in by the door - Observe here the marks, qualities, and duties of a good pastor; The first mark is, that he has a lawful entrance into the ministry by the internal call of Christ, namely, by an impulse proceeding from his Spirit, upon considerations which respect only his glory, and upon motives which aim at nothing but the good of his Church, the salvation of souls, the doing the will of God, and the sacrificing himself entirely to his service, and to that of the meanest of his flock. 5. Gill, “he that entereth in by the door,.... With a divine commission, and by a divine authority, who comes not of himself, but is sent; does not take the honor to himself, or thrust in himself, and assume an office to himself, but is called unto it, and invested in it, he is the shepherd of the sheep; by whom Christ means himself, as is evident from Joh_10:11, whose the sheep are, and who takes care of them, and feeds them, as a shepherd does his flock; and which holds true of any under shepherd, having his mission and commission, and deriving his authority from Christ. 6. Henry, “character that distinguishes the rightful owner, who has a property in the sheep, and a care for them: He enters in by the door,as one having authority (Joh_10:2), and he comes to do them some good office or other, to bind up that which is broken,and strengthen that which is sick,Eze_34:16. Sheep need man's care, and, in return for it, are serviceable to man (1Co_9:7); they clothe and feed those by whom they are coted and fed.”

3The watchman opens the gate for him, and the sheep

listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.
1. The watchman guards the gate, and he has the authority to open the gate, and he does so when the rightful owner comes to see his sheep. That he is authentic is not only because the watchman lets him in, but also in that the sheep immediately respond to his voice, which they recognize as the voice of their shepherd. As soon as he calls out their name they respond and follow him out without hesitation. 1B. Arthur Pink wrote, "To him the porter openeth." The "porter" was the one who vouched for the shepherd and presented him to the sheep. As to the identity of the "porter" in this proverb there can be no doubt. The direct reference was to John the Baptist who "prepared the way of the Lord." He it was who formally introduced the Shepherd to Israel: "that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing" (John 1:31), was his own confession. But, in the wider application, the "porter" here represented the Holy Spirit, who officially vouched for the credentials of the Messiah, and who now presents the Savior to each of God’s elect. To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice;, and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out" (John 10:3). Three things mark the genuine shepherd: first, he entered the fold by "the door," and climbed not over the walls, as thieves and robbers did. Second, he entered the door by "the porter" opening to him. Third, he proved himself, by "the sheep" recognizing and responding to his voice. Mark, then, how fully and perfectly these three requirements were met by Christ in His relation to Israel, thus evidencing Him to be the true Shepherd. In John 9 Christ had shown how that He had entered the door into the sheepfold, for He had come working the works of God (John 9:4), and had thus shown Himself to be in the confidence of the Owner of the fold, and therefore the approved Shepherd of the flock. The Pharisees, on the contrary, were resisting Him and attacking the sheep; therefore they must needs be "thieves and robbers." The blind beggar was a sample of the flock, for refusing to listen to the voice of strangers, he, nevertheless, knew the voice of the Shepherd, and drawn to Him, he found salvation, security, and sustenance.........It is beautiful to compare John 10:3 with 9:34. The Pharisees’ "casting out" of the poor beggar was, in reality, the Shepherd leading him out from the barren wilderness of Judaism to the green pastures of Christianity. Thus are we given to see the Lord Himself behind the human instru-ments—a marvellous example is this of how God ofttimes employs even His enemies to accomplish a good turn for His people." 1C. Will Pounds, “Many travelers to Palestine have described sheep and their shepherds going to the sheep pens to get their flocks. The sheep were all mixed together in a common pen for the night. When the morning came one of the shepherds stood some distance from the sheep and began to call his sheep. First one, then another, then four or five animals ran towards him. In a few minutes he had counted his whole flock and headed off to the luscious green fields with them. When all the sheep are together the shepherd leads them out to their destination. The sheep hear his voice and follow their shepherd. They follow because they know their shepherd’s voice. The Lord Jesus Christ knows His sheep and they respond to Him. Jesus calls His sheep by name. Jesus comes to the door of the sheepfold and, knowing His sheep in advance, calls them and leads

them out. All those are saved whom God has given Jesus. Jesus saw a man named Matthew, sitting in the tax collector’s booth; and He said to him, "Follow Me!" And he got up and followed Jesus (Matt. 9:9). Here was a lone sheep of Christ. The Shepherd called him; he recognized His voice, and promptly followed Him. Jesus looked up into a tree and said, “Zaccheus, hurry and come down, for today I must stay at your house” (Luke 19:5). Here was one of the sheep, called by name. The response was prompt, for we are told, “And he hurried and came down and received Him gladly” (v. 6). Jesus "found Philip." And Jesus said to him, "Follow Me" (Jn. 1:43). This shows us the Shepherd seeking His sheep before he called him. John chapter 11 supplies us with a still more striking example of the drawing power of the Shepherd’s voice as he called His own sheep. There we read of Lazarus, in the grave; but when Christ calls His sheep by name—“Lazarus, come forth”—the sheep at once responded. Jesus said His sheep know His voice. Mary Magdalene was in the garden and she found the stone rolled away, and the body of Jesus gone. Suddenly as she stood there weeping in the cemetery the risen Christ stands by her and “she knew not that it was Jesus.” He spoke to her, but the thought He was the gardener. Then she identified Him and said, “Rabboni!” Jesus said, “Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren, and say to them, ‘I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God’ ” (v. 17). o one believed her testimony that day until they saw Jesus themselves. A. W. Pink says, “The moment He called His sheep by name she knew His voice!” 2. Gill wrote, “These are Christ's own, by the Father's gift of them to him, by the purchase of his own blood, and by the power of his grace upon them; who looks them up, and finds them out, and brings them home, and takes care of them as his own, and feeds them as a shepherd his flock: these he may be said to "call by name", in allusion to the eastern shepherds, who gave names to their sheep, as the Europeans do to their horses, and other creatures, and who could sit and call them by their names: this is expressive not only of Christ's call of his people by powerful and special grace, but of the exact and distinct knowledge he has of them, and the notice he takes of them, as well as of the affection he has for them; see Isa_43:1. “ 2B. F. B. Hole, “But now comes what no one had anticipated: He enters the fold not to reform or improve it but to call an election from the mass — "His own sheep" — and lead them out into something new. Israel had been the elect nation but now it is entirely individual, for He calls His own sheep "by name," establishing personal contact with each of these. Further, He leads them out by first going out Himself: they follow Him because this contact exists and they recognize His voice and trust Him.” I see this as an excellent insight, for Israel as a nation was no longer the elect nation, for from now on it was a matter of the individual following the Messiah. The nation as a whole rejected their Messiah, and so it was a matter of each person making a choice to believe in Jesus or reject him. The fold was opened up now to everyone, and Gentiles were also permitted to chose to believe or not. Individualism opened up the kingdom of God to all the world, and no longer was it centered in a nation. The new Israel, or the church, is not a nation, but a body of people of all nations and languages who individually have come to trust in Jesus as their Lord and Savior.

3. Alan Carr, "A man in Australia was arrested and charged with stealing a sheep. But he claimed emphatically that it was one of his own that had been missing for many days. When the case went to court, the judge was puzzled, not knowing how to decide the matter. At last he asked that the sheep be brought into the courtroom. Then he ordered the plaintiff to step outside and call the animal. The sheep made no response except to raise its head and look frightened. The judge then instructed the defendant to go to the courtyard and call the sheep. When the accused man began to make his distinctive call, the sheep bounded toward the door. It was obvious that he recognized the familiar voice of his master. "His sheep knows him," said the judge. "Case dismissed!" 4. Constable, "The doorkeeper was the person hired to protect the sheep from their enemies. In the case of Jesus' ministry this person corresponded to John the Baptist. ormally there were sheep from several different flocks belonging to several different owners that stayed together in these large pens. The pen then symbolized Israel or Judaism. Upon entering the pen a shepherd would call his own sheep to come out from the others, and he would lead them out to pasture. ormally shepherds did this with a distinctive call or whistle. This shepherd, however, called each sheep by its own name, which evidently was not uncommon in Jesus' day." 5. S. Lewis Johnson does the best job of relating this chapter to the events of chapter 9. "In John chapter 9 we notice the remarkable response of the blind man, and that of course is designed to represent the response of the sheep, referred in chapter 10 and verse 3 and 4. "To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice." So the response of the sheep is like the response of the blind man in John chapter 9. And the care of the shepherd for the sheep, referred to in chapter 10, is like the care of the Lord Jesus for the blind man for when he was thrown out of the synagogue, according to John 9:34 we immediately read, "Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of Man?" and brought him to faith in himself. So what we have then in chapter 10 is an allegorical or symbolic picture of the event of chapter 9 with further suggestions as to the meaning of what had happened." 6. "The following are characteristics of regenerated sheep: (1) They recognize the voice of the Shepherd (John 10:3). (2) They believe His teaching (John 17:8). (3) They have spiritual discernment (I Cor. 2:12; Heb. 5:14). (4) They have the mind of Christ (I Cor. 2:16). (5) They try the spirits (I John 4:1). (6) They follow the Shepherd (John 10:4). (7) They flee from false shepherds (John 10:5)." 7. "In this proverb of the Good Shepherd, Jesus described several types of people. The porter, in John 10:3, was someone that served as an under-shepherd when the shepherd was absent. John the Baptist had been such a person, as he had opened the door for Jesus to begin His ministry. The thieves, in John 10:10, were the ones that would try to break into the fold and snatch the sheep away or even kill them, and such individuals would have been people like the Pharisees. In John 10:12, the wolf tried to break into the fold and destroy the sheep, and that was and is Satan. The hirelings, also in John 10:12, were the legal guardians that had no real interest in the sheep, and they were people like the Priests and Levites. The shepherd, in John 10:11 and John 10:14, was the person that took care of the sheep. He protected them, he knew them, and he even

sacrificed his own life for their safety and wellbeing. In each of those capacities, Jesus was and is the Good Shepherd." Author unknown 8. Barnes, "He calleth his own sheep by name. It was customary, and is still, we are told by travellers, for shepherds to give particular names to their sheep, by which they soon learned to regard the voice of the shepherd. By this our Saviour indicates, doubtless, that it is the duty of a minister of religion to seek an intimate and personal acquaintance with the people of his charge; to feel an interest in them as individuals, and not merely to address them together; to learn their private wants; to meet them in their individual trials, and to administer to them personally the consolations of the gospel." 8B. There is no doubt that the small chuch allows the pastor to be more like a shepherd, for he can get to know his people personally. Pastors of large churches cannot minister to thousands on any personal level. A lot has been written about the value of the small church of about a hundred people. It fits the parable of Jesus about the one sheep that wandered away from the 99 who stayed secure in the sheep pen, and the shepherd went to find it and came home rejoicing that it was restored to the 99, and the 100 was again complete. When you get much bigger than a hundred it is hard to be an efficient shepherd. Pastors of these small churches ought never to feel inferior to those in the large churches, for they have an opportunity to be more like the Good Shepherd than they do, and this is a great honor. 9. John Macarthur, "Two things are here. The human side, we hear when He calls. Divine sovereign side, He knows our names. You say, "How does He know our name?" Listen, my friend, the Bible says that if you're one of His sheep, your name was written in the Lamb's Book of Life before...what?...the foundation of the world was ever laid, He knew your name. That's My sheep. And when the time comes, He calls your name. You know something? You know when He calls if you're His sheep. His sheep hear His voice. They know He's calling and He knows their names. You know, the more I thought about that the more thrilling it became. To think that He knows my name and that He knew it before the foundation of the world. And that He has that kind of a personal intimate relationship with me that He actually cares and loves Me in a special personal way. You know, the shepherds always named their sheep. Brown leg, or black ear, or something like that, or whatever particular characteristic the sheep might have, he knew their names. When he called, they knew his call. They knew it. And so He steps into the fold and He calls and those that the Father gives to Him shall...what?...come to Him. So there's the divine side, that's sovereignty, He calls His own sheep. But there's a human side, they have to hear His voice, don't they? And respond." 9B. Macarthur adds, "And you'll notice what it says at the end of verse 3, "He leadeth them out." You know, shepherds don't get behind the sheep and herd them along, they lead them. You want to know something exciting? The shepherd always went first, saw the danger, checked out the trail, found the place to pasture, always went out front. And every place the sheep went, he'd already been. Do you like that? Can you apply that to your life? I don't care where you are, friend, Jesus has been there. Isn't that good? Whatever you've gone through, He's been there? Yet without sin, but He's been there. He understands the anxiety of your heart because He's been there. Every step you've ever taken, He's already taken. He's leading. He's out there in front. Beautiful thought." 10. Jamison, “To him the porter openeth ― that is, right of free access is given, by order of Him

to whom the sheep belong; for it is better not to give the allusion a more specific interpretation [Calvin, Meyer, Luthardt]. and the sheep hear his voice ― This and all that follows, though it admits of important applicationto every faithful shepherd of God’s flock, is in its direct and highest sense true only of “the great Shepherd of the sheep,” who in the first five verses seems plainly, under the simple character of a true shepherd, to be drawing His own portrait [Lampe, Stier, etc.]. 11. Clarke, “him the porter openeth - Sir Isaac ewton observes that our Lord being near the temple, where sheep were kept in folds to be sold for sacrifices, spoke many things parabolically of sheep, of their shepherds, and of the door to the sheepfold; and discovers that he alluded to the sheepfolds which were to be hired in the market place, by speaking of such folds as a thief could not enter by the door, nor the shepherd himself open, but a porter opened to the shepherd. In the porter opening the door to the true shepherd, we may discover the second mark of a true minister - his labor is crowned with success. The Holy Spirit opens his way into the hearts of his hearers, and he becomes the instrument of their salvation. See Col_4:3; 2Co_2:12; 1Co_16:9; Rev_3:8. The sheep hear his voice - A third mark of a good shepherd is that he speaks so as to instruct the people - the sheep hear His voice; he does not take the fat and the fleece, and leave another hireling on less pay to do the work of the pastoral office. o: himself preaches Christ Jesus the Lord, and in that simplicity too, that is best calculated to instruct the common people. A man who preaches in such a language as the people cannot comprehend may do for a stage-player or a mountebank, but not for a minister of Christ. He calleth his own sheep by name - A fourth mark of a good pastor is that he is well acquainted with his flock; he knows them by name - he takes care to acquaint himself with the spiritual states of all those that are entrusted to him. He speaks to them concerning their souls, and thus getting a thorough knowledge of their state he is the better qualified to profit them by his public ministrations. He who has not a proper acquaintance with the Church of Christ, can never by his preaching build it up in its most holy faith. And leadeth them out - A fifth mark of a good shepherd is, he leads the flock, does not lord it over God’s heritage; nor attempts by any rigorous discipline not founded on the Gospel of Christ, to drive men into the way of life; nor drive them out of it, which many do, by a severity which is a disgrace to the mild Gospel of the God of peace and love. He leads them out of themselves to Christ, out of the follies, diversions, and amusements of the world, into the path of Christian holiness: in a word, he leads them, by those gentle yet powerful persuasions that flow from a heart full of the word and love of Christ, into the kingdom and glory of his God. 12. Henry, “ready entrance that the shepherd finds: To him the porter openeth,Joh_10:3. Anciently they had their sheepfolds within the outer gates of their houses, for the greater safety of their flocks, so that none could come to them the right way, but such as the porter opened to or the master of the house gave the keys to. (4.) The care he takes and the provision he makes for his sheep. The sheep hear his voice,when he speaks familiarly to them, when they come into the fold, as men now do to their dogs and horses; and, which is more, he calls his own sheep by name,so exact is the notice he takes of them, the account he keeps of them; and he leads them our from the fold to the green pastures; and (Joh_10:4, Joh_10:5) when he turns them outto graze he does not drive them, but (such was the custom in those times) he goes before them, to prevent any mischief

or danger that might meet them, and they, being used to it, follow him,and are safe. (5.) The strange attendance of the sheep upon the shepherd: They know his voice,so as to discern his mind by it, and to distinguish it from that of a stranger (for the ox knows his owner,Isa_1:3), and a stranger will they not follow,but, as suspecting some ill design, will flee from him, not knowing his voice,but that it is not the voice of their own shepherd. This is the parable; we have the key to it, Eze_34:31: You my flock are men, and I am your God. Let us observe from this parable, (1.) That good men are fitly compared to sheep. Men, as creatures depending on their Creator, are called the sheep of his pasture. Good men, as new creatures, have the good qualities of sheep, harmless and inoffensive as sheep; meek and quiet, without noise; patient as sheep under the hand both of the shearer and of the butcher; useful and profitable, tame and tractable, to the shepherd, and sociable one with another, and much used in sacrifices. (2.) The church of God in the world is a sheepfold, into which the children of God that were scattered abroad are gathered together (Joh_11:52), and in which they are united and incorporated; it is a good fold, Eze_34:14. See Mic_2:12. This fold is well fortified, for God himself is as a wall of fire about it, Zec_2:5. (3.) This sheepfold lies much exposed to thieves and robbers; crafty seducers that debauch and deceive, and cruel persecutors that destroy and devour; grievous wolves (Act_20:29); thieves that would steal Christ's sheep from him, to sacrifice them to devils, or steal their food from them, that they might perish for lack of it; wolves in sheep's clothing, Mat_7:15. (4.) The great Shepherd of the sheep takes wonderful care of the flock and of all that belong to it. God is the great Shepherd, Psa_23:1. He knows those that are his calls them by name, marks them for himself, leads them out to fat pastures, makes them both feed and rest there, speaks comfortably to them, guards them by his providence, guides them by his Spirit and word, and goes before them, to set them in the way of his steps. (5.) The under-shepherds, who are entrusted to feed the flock of God, ought to be careful and faithful in the discharge of that trust; magistrates must defend them, and protect and advance all their secular interests; ministers must serve them in their spiritual interests, must feed their souls with the word of God faithfully opened and applied, and with gospel ordinances duly administered, taking the oversight of them. They must enter by the door of a regular ordination, and to such the porter will open;the Spirit of Christ will set before them an open door,give them authority in the church, and assurance in their own bosoms. They must know the members of their flocks by name, and watch over them; must lead them into the pastures of public ordinances, preside among them, be their mouth to God and God's to them; and in their conversation must be examples to the believers. (6.) Those who are truly the sheep of Christ will be very observant of their Shepherd, and very cautious and shy of strangers. [1.] They follow their Shepherd,for they know his voice,having both a discerning ear, and an obedient heart. [2.] They flee from a stranger,and dread following him, because they know not his voice. It is dangerous following those in whom we discern not the voice of Christ,and who would draw us from faith in him to fancies concerning him. And those who have experienced the power and efficacy of divine truths upon their souls, and have the savor and relish of them, have a wonderful sagacity to discover Satan's wiles, and to discern between good and evil.” 13. Bruce Goettsche, “The sheep delight to hear His voice. Why? Because through experience they have learned that this voice leads them to food, protects them, helps them when they are in trouble. This voice was concerned about them. This voice belonged to a friend. In the same way we delight in our Shepherd. He knows the sheep by name. I have a terrible time telling the difference between identical twins. But I haven't found a parent yet who could not tell them apart. Why? Because they are intimately acquainted with them. And the Shepherd is able to tell which sheep is which because He knows them. The Good Shepherd knows our name.”

14. Ron Daniel, “The Bible often refers to people as sheep... Ps. 78:52 ...He led forth His own people like sheep, And guided them in the wilderness like a flock; Ps. 95:7 For He is our God, and we are the people of His pasture, and the sheep of His hand... Isa. 53:6 All of us like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way... Ezek. 34:31 "As for you, My sheep, the sheep of My pasture, you are men, and I am your God," declares the Lord GOD.

4When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice.
1. ot all the sheep belong to this shepherd, and so some do not follow him out of the pen, but his own do, for they know his voice and follow that voice, for they know it is the voice of the one who loves them and seeks only their good in leading them to fresh pastures. In our culture the sheep are pushed from behind in the direction they are wanted to go, but in the Biblical culture the sheep are led by the shepherd, for they have a personal relationship with him, and they know his voice. 1B. Preceptaustin, “A man in Australia was arrested and charged with stealing a sheep. But he claimed emphatically that it was one of his own that had been missing for many days. When the case went to court, the judge was puzzled, not knowing how to decide the matter. At last he asked that the sheep be brought into the courtroom. Then he ordered the plaintiff to step outside and call the animal. The sheep made no response except to raise its head and look frightened. The judge then instructed the defendant to go to the courtyard and call the sheep. When the accused man began to make his distinctive call, the sheep bounded toward the door. It was obvious that he recognized the familiar voice of his master.” 2. Dave Guzik, "During World War I, some Turkish soldiers tried to steal a flock of sheep from a hillside near Jerusalem. The shepherd, who had been sleeping, awoke to find his flock being driven off. He couldn't recapture them by force, so he called out to his flock with his distinctive call. The sheep listened, and returned to their rightful owner. The soldiers couldn't stop the sheep from returning to their shepherd's voice." 3. IVP commentary, "The word for know and recognize are the same word in Greek (oida), so the sheep will be known by whom they know. Here is a beautiful picture of both divine sovereignty in the shepherd's call and the human response in the hearing, knowing and following by the sheep. We also find the theme of discernment, since there are more voices calling to them than just their own shepherd's. Following Jesus means refusing to follow others who are claiming to be shepherds. Put in this perspective, the expulsion from the synagogue is no great hardship-indeed, Jesus' sheep will actually run away from strangers." 4. John Macarthur, "And I love the end of verse 4, "They know his voice." That is so good. I

think of John 20, Mary Magdalene in the garden. Jesus' body was gone, resurrected, she didn't know that. She says, "Oh, sir, they've taken my Master and I don't know where they laid Him." She thought He was the gardener, Jesus. Finally the light dawned, she knew it was Jesus, you know, tried to grab Him and hold on to Him. He says, "You can't hold on to Me yet, I haven't gone to My Father, I'm going to go and I'll come back and then I'll be here to stay." What made the difference? How did she finally know who He was? One word, "Mary." See, she knew His voice. He said her name, she knew His voice, see. That's the way the shepherd works. He just calls the name and we know His voice and we follow. What a beautiful thought that is." 5. Pink, "And the sheep follow him: for they know his voice." Link this up with the third clause in the previous verse. "He calleth his own sheep by name . . . and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice." A number of blessed illustrations of this are found scattered throughout the Gospels. "And as Jesus passed forth from thence, he saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he saith unto him, Follow me. And he arose, and followed him" (Matthew 9:9). Here was a lone sheep of Christ. The Shepherd called him; he recognized His voice, and promptly followed Him. "And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up, and saw him, and said unto him, Zacchaeus, make haste, and come down; for today I must abide at thy house" (Luke 19:5). Here was one of the sheep, called by name. The response was prompt, for we are told, "And he made haste, and came down, and received him joyfully" (verse 6). "The day following Jesus would go forth into Galilee, and findeth Philip, and saith unto him, Follow me" (John 1:43). This shows us the Shepherd seeking His sheep before He called him. John 11 supplies us with a still more striking example of the drawing power of the Shepherd’s voice as He calleth His own sheep. There we read of Lazarus, in the grave; but when Christ calls His sheep by name―"Lazarus, come forth"―the sheep at once responded." 6. Clarke, “goeth before them - A sixth mark of a true pastor is, he gives them a good example: he not only preaches, but he lives, the truth of the Gospel; he enters into the depths of the salvation of God; and, having thus explored the path, he knows how to lead those who are entrusted to his care into the fullness of the blessings of the Gospel of peace. He who does not endeavor to realize in his own soul the truths which he preaches to others will soon be as salt without its savor; his preaching cannot be accompanied with that unction which alone can make it acceptable and profitable to those whose hearts are right with God. The minister who is in this state of salvation the sheep, genuine Christians, will follow, for they know his voice. It was the custom in the eastern countries for the shepherd to go at the head of his sheep, and they followed him from pasture to pasture. I have seen many hundreds of sheep thus following their shepherd on the extensive downs in the western parts of England. 7. Gill, “when he putteth forth his own sheep,.... The Ethiopic version reads, "when he leads them all out"; in order to bring them into proper pastures: he goeth before them; in allusion to the eastern shepherds, who when they put out their flocks, did not, as ours do, drive them before them, and follow after them, at least not always, but went before them: so Christ, the great shepherd, goes before his flock, not only to provide for them, but by way of example to them; in many instances he is an example to the flock, as under shepherds, according to the measure of grace received, should be: he has left them an example in many respects, that they should tread in his steps:

and the sheep follow him; in the exercise of the graces of humility, love, patience, self-denial, and resignation of will to the will of God; and in the discharge of duty, walking, in some measure, as he walked. For they know his voice; in the Gospel, which directs and encourages them to exercise grace in him, and to walk in the path of duty: this they know by the majesty and authority of it; and by the power with which it comes to their souls; and by its speaking of him, and leading to him; and by the evenness, harmony, and consistency of it. The Persic version renders the whole thus; "when he calls and leads out the sheep, they go before him, and their lambs after them, for they know his voice".

5But they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger's voice."
1. The stranger scares the sheep, for they have no idea if he be friend or enemy, and so their first impulse is to flee from the stranger as from danger. His voice rings no bell of security in their mind, and so they seek escape. 2. Constable wrote, "Some people appeal to these verses to prove that true Christians will inevitably follow Christ and will never apostatize. This seems wrong for at least three reasons. First, Jesus said that His sheep follow Him, not a stranger, because they know the Good Shepherd's voice (what he says, his teaching). Sheep normally do follow their shepherd because they know his voice, but there are exceptions among sheep and among Christians. Second, if following false teachers were impossible for Christians, why are there so many warnings against doing precisely that in the ew Testament? Third, John identified this saying of Jesus as a figure of speech (or compressed thought, v. 6). Illustrations typically make one main point, so we should not expect this illustration to correspond to reality in every detail, much less to teach doctrine in all its parts." 3. John Macarthur, "True believers don't depart from the faith. Matthew 24:24, "There will come false shepherds, false Christs, false apostles who if it were possible would deceive the very elect." You know what that verse means? You can't deceive the very elect. They would do it if it were possible...not possible. True sheep hear the shepherd's voice, they don't listen to the voice of strangers. It's interesting that a shepherd's sheep will not, even though the false shepherd speaking physically, would imitate the voice of the shepherd, the true shepherd, they won't follow him, they become so aware of their own shepherd's voice. Just like your dog if you've had him for a long time knows your voice. And they follow only their shepherd." 4. Barnes, "Verse 5. A stranger, &c. This was literally true of a flock. Accustomed to the voice and presence of a kind shepherd, they would not regard the command of a stranger. It is also true spiritually. Jesus by this indicates that the true people of God will not follow false teachers-- those who are proud, haughty, and self-seeking, as were the Pharisees. Many may follow such, but

humble and devoted Christians seek those who have the mild and self-denying spirit of their Master and Great Shepherd. It is also true in reference to those who are pastors in the churches. They have an influence which no stranger or wandering minister can have. A church learns to put confidence in a pastor; he knows the wants of his people, sees their danger, and can adapt his instructions to them. A stranger, however eloquent, pious, or learned, can have few of these commit the churches to the care of wandering strangers, of those who have no permanent relation to the church, than it would be for a flock to be committed to a foreigner who knew nothing of it, and who had no particular interest in it. The pastoral office is one of the wisest institutions of heaven. The following extract from The Land and the Book (Thomson) will show how strikingly this whole passage accords with what actually occurs at this day in Palestine: "This is true to the letter. They are so tame and so trained that they follow their keeper with the utmost docility. He leads them forth from the fold, or from their houses in the villages, just where he pleases. As there are many flocks in such a place as this, each one takes a different path, and it is his business to find pasture for them. It is necessary, therefore, that they should be taught to follow, and not to stray away into the unfenced fields of corn which lie so temptingly on either side. Any one that thus wanders is sure to get into trouble. The shepherd calls sharply from time to time to remind them of his presence. They know his voice and follow on; but if a stranger call, they stop short, lift up their heads in alarm, and, if it is repeated, they turn and flee, because they know not the voice of a stranger. This is not the fanciful costume of a parable; it is simple fact. I have made the experiment repeatedly. The shepherd goes before, not merely to point out the way, but to see that it is practicable and safe. He is armed in order to defend his charge, and in this he is very courageous. Many adventures with wild beasts occur not unlike that recounted by David, and in these very mountains; for, though there are now no lions here, there are wolves in abundance; and leopards and panthers, exceedingly fierce, prowl about these wild wadies. They not unfrequently attack the flock in the very presence of the shepherd, and he must be ready to do battle at a moment's warning. I have listened with intense interest to their graphic descriptions of downright and desperate fights with these savage beasts. And when the thief and the robber come (and come they do), the faithful shepherd has often to put his life in his hand to defend his flock. I have known more than one case in which he had literally to lay it down in the contest. A poor faithful fellow last spring, between Tiberias and Tabor, instead of fleeing, actually fought three Bedouin robbers until he was hacked to pieces with their khanjars, and died among the sheep he was defending." "but will flee from him" 2 Timothy 3:5; Revelation 2:2 5. Clarke, “a stranger will they not follow - That is, a man who, pretending to be a shepherd of the flock of God, is a stranger to that salvation which he professes to preach. His mode of preaching soon proves, to those whose hearts are acquainted with the truths of God, that he is a stranger to them; and therefore, knowing him to have got into the fold in an improper way, they consider him a thief, a robber, and a murderer; and who can blame them if they wholly desert his ministry? There are preachers of this kind among all classes. 6. Gill, “a stranger will they not follow,.... One that knows not Christ, is not sent by him, and who does not preach him: but will flee from him; shun him and his ministry, as not only disagreeable, but dangerous: for they know not the voice of strangers: they do not approve of their doctrine, nor take any delight in it, or receive any profit from it. The Persic version, as before, reads, "neither will the lambs ever go after strange sheep, and if they see them, they will flee from them".

6 Jesus used this figure of speech, but they did not understand what he was telling them.
1. How blind do you have to be to not grasp that Jesus is saying to them that they are not listening to the voice of the Shepherd that God has sent into the world to gather his sheep? They do not hear his voice because they are not true sheep. They are hearing Jesus as a stranger who frightens them because they are not in tune with the voice of God. They are running away from the true shepherd because they do not recognize his voice. 2. IVP commentary, "Jesus spoke this figure of speech to the Pharisees (v. 6, autois; ["to them"], left out of the IV), but they did not get it. These are people who claim to be able to see (9:40-41), but their inability to understand Jesus is yet another example of their spiritual blindness. The word for figure of speech (paroimia) refers to an obscure saying that needs to be interpreted (cf. Jn 16:25, 29, Hauck 1967a:856). It is not just a figure of speech or a comparison, but a saying that is loaded with significance--the verbal equivalent of Jesus' signs. Little that Jesus says in this Gospel is not conveyed in this manner, as he will admit at the end of his teaching (16:25)." 3. John Macarthur, "They didn't understand. You know, they thought they were shepherds, Jesus says you're not only not shepherds, you're not even sheep. My sheep hear My voice. ot only are you not leaders, you aren't even followers. They have just been taken down a few notches." 4. Bob Utley, "This is not the normal term translated “parable,” but it comes from the same root. This form is only found here, in 16:25,29 and in II Pet. 2:22. Although it is a different form, it seems to be synonymous with the more common term “parable.” The term “parable” usually means to place a common cultural occurrence beside a spiritual truth so as to help in understanding. It can, however, refer to the hiding of truth from spiritually blind eyes (cf. 16:29; Mark 4:11-12)." 5. Gill, “parable spake Jesus unto them,.... To the Pharisees, who were with him, Joh_9:40; but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them; the things spoken by him being delivered in a parabolical way, though in lively figures, and in terms plain and easy to be understood; yet what through the blindness of their minds, and the hardness of their hearts, and their prejudices in favour of themselves, and against Christ, they did not understand what were meant by them; see Mat_13:13.” 6. Henry, “The Jew's ignorance of the drift and meaning of this discourse (Joh_10:6): Jesus spoke this parable to them, this figurative, but wise, elegant, and instructive discourse, but they understood not what the things were which he spoke unto them,were not aware whom he meant by the thieves and robbers and whom by the good Shepherd. It is the sin and shame of many who hear the word of Christ that they do not understand it, and they do not because they will not, and because they will mis-understand it. They have no acquaintance with, nor taste of, the things themselves, and therefore do not understand the parables and comparisons with which they are illustrated. The Pharisees had a great conceit of their own knowledge, and could not bear that it

should be questioned, and yet they had not sense enough to understand the things that Jesus spoke of;they were above their capacity. Frequently the greatest pretenders to knowledge are most ignorant in the things of God.”

7Therefore Jesus said again, "I tell you the truth, I am the gate for the sheep.
1. Alright, says Jesus, I will make it even more simple and plain for you to grasp. I am the gate for the sheep. In other word, the sheep can only get into the kingdom of God by means of me, and they can only go out into fresh pasture and live the abundant life by means of me. I am the door in and out. There is only one way, and I am the way. 1B. “Eva Watts says that as she traveled with a friend though the land where Jesus lived, “We reached a high ridge overlooking the village of Bethlehem. There we found a sheepfold, and went right in to inspect. It was not long before the owner appeared—a veteran, like Moses, with a long beard. ‘This is your sheepfold?’ my friend asked. Aye.’ And is this where the sheep sleep,’ pointing to a rough shelter thrown up against the rock in a corner. He nodded. But you’ve no gate to the fold; how do you close them up at night?’ The old man looked at us as if we ought to have known better. ‘I am the door,’ he said with emphasis; and, gathering his loose robe tight about his ankles, he was down in a moment, squatting in the doorway, back against one post, feet against the other, his knees drawn up and clasped by his weather-beaten old hands. Gently he bowed his head and closed his eyes, as many a time he had closed them to catch a few hours’ sleep under the starlight. ‘I am the door,’ he repeated. ‘I keep watch here at night. If thieves or wild beasts attempt to enter, they have to tackle me first. I have never lost a lamb from the fold yet.’” 2. IVP commentary, "Jesus uses the shepherd motif to interpret what has just taken place with the former blind man. Judaism is described as a sheep pen, but not all the sheep in the pen belong to Jesus' flock. They are separated out as they recognize his voice and follow him out from the sheep pen. Jesus is gathering his flock together from the pen of official Judaism. Jesus Is the Gate for the Sheep (10:7-10) Because these Jewish leaders did not understand what Jesus was saying he goes back over it again from a different perspective. In this repetition we see God's graciousness, the same graciousness that caused the word of the Lord to come a second time to Jonah (Jon 3:1) and suffered with Israel's waywardness throughout her history. It is the same graciousness we each depend on every day of our lives. In this second statement Jesus says, I am the gate for the sheep (v. 7). The scene has shifted from the village to the open field. In the summer sheep are sometimes kept out in the pasture overnight. The pen used is simply an enclosure made of piled rocks. There is neither roof nor door, but thorns along the top of the rock walls protect the sheep from wild animals, and the shepherd himself sleeps in the entrance, providing a door (cf. Bailey 1993:11; Beasley-Murray 1987:169). So when Jesus says he is the gate for the sheep (v. 7) he is still using the image of a

shepherd, but applying it directly to himself. From this picture of a shepherd sleeping in the entrance we would expect Jesus' role to be the protector of the sheep. Jesus does indeed protect his own (cf. 6:39; 17:12), but the image is developed here in a surprising way. The sheep are to enter through Jesus (v. 9), something not true of the shepherd sleeping in the entrance of a summer shelter! So the image is not that of a door as a barrier for protection, but of a door as a passageway. 3. S. Lewis Johnson, " ow I think it’s important for us to concentrate on this simple four word expression, “I am the door.” ow if you were looking at this in the original text you would notice that there is a little bit of emphasis upon that personal pronoun, “I.” “I am the door,” almost as if he were saying, “Others who claim to be the door by which we enter into life are not true doors.” “I (and I alone) am the door.” And that is further stressed by the fact that he says, “The door.” It is not a question of different methods of salvation. So many people think that it does not really matter what we believe so long as we believe it sincerely. Oh, nothing could be farther from the truth of the word of God. “I am the door,” the Lord Jesus said. The whole of the Bible stresses the fact that there is only one way to eternal life. That’s why we have Christmas. We celebrate the incarnation which is the one way by which the second person of the Trinity is able to take a step along the way to the redemption of the saints of God. “I am the door.” One of the great figures of salvation in the Old Testament was the Ark of oah. How many doors were in the ark? There was one door in the ark. That was the figurative way of expressing that there was one way of deliverance from the flood. Peter speaks in his epistle of how that is an illustration of salvation. The tabernacle, perhaps the greatest visual picture of the salvation of God in the Old Testament, how many doors were there into the tabernacle? Well there was one door. All of this designed to stress the exclusiveness of the salvation that God provides. 4. Dr. William R. Crews has a list of doors that are not the door. People miss the point that Jesus is the only way in. They assume that there are many doors, and that any one of the many are adequate to gain entrance into the family of God. This is one of life's most dangerous misunderstandings. Read his list of doors that people think can give them entrance into God's kingdom in Appendix A. 5. Barnes, “am the door - I am the way by which ministers and people enter the true church. It is by his merits, his intercession, his aid, and his appointment that they enter. 6. Clarke, “am the door of the sheep - It is through me only that a man can have a lawful entrance into the ministry; and it is through me alone that mankind can be saved. Instead of, I am the door, the Sahidic version reads, I am the shepherd; but this reading is found in no other version, nor in any MS. It is evidently a mistake of the scribe. 7. Gill, “said Jesus unto them again,.... By way of explanation of the above parable, since they did not understand it: verily, verily, I say unto you; this is certainly truth, and what may be depended on as such, whether it will be believed or not: I am the door of the sheep; and of none but them; not of goats, dogs, or swine; none but sheep enter at this door; and all the sheep do sooner or later: Christ is the door to them, by which they enter into a visible church state, and are let into a participation of the ordinances of it, as baptism and the Lord's supper: no man comes into a church, at the right door, or in a right way, or has a

right to partake of Gospel ordinances, but he that truly believes in Christ, and makes a profession of faith in him: Christ is the door of the under shepherds of the sheep; none are fit to be pastors of churches, but who first enter into a Gospel church at this door, and are qualified, and called, and sent forth by Christ: he is the door of the sheep, by which they are let into the presence of his Father, and have communion with him, and partake of all the blessings of grace; it is through him that sanctifying, justifying, pardoning, and adopting grace, are conveyed unto them, and they brought into the enjoyment of them; it is through him they have all their peace, joy, and comfort, and deliverance from, and victory over all their enemies; through him they have heirship, and a right unto eternal life, and that itself; for he is the door into heaven itself, through which they shall have an abundant entrance into it: and he is the only door into each of these; there is no coming to God the Father but by, and through him; nor to a participation of the blessings of the covenant, nor rightly into a Gospel church state, and to the ordinances of it, nor into heaven at last, but in at this door: and this is a door of faith and hope, and an open one, for all sensible sinners, for all the sheep of Christ, to enter in at; though it is a strait gate, the number being few that enter in at it; and those that do, though they are certainly, yet but scarcely saved; for it is through many tribulations and afflictions that they enter.” 8. Barclay, “The Jews did not understand the meaning of the story of the Good Shepherd. So Jesus, plainly and without concealment, applied it to himself. He began by saying: "I am the door." In this parable Jesus spoke about two kinds of sheep-folds. In the villages and towns themselves there were communal sheep-folds where all the village flocks were sheltered when they returned home at night. These folds were protected by a strong door of which only the guardian of the door held the key. It was to that kind of fold Jesus referred in Jn. 10:2-3. But when the sheep were out on the hills in the warm season and did not return at night to the village at all, they were collected into sheep-folds on the hillside. These hillside sheep-folds were just open spaces enclosed by a wall. In them there was an opening by which the sheep came in and went out; but there was no door of any kind. What happened was that at night the shepherd himself lay down across the opening and no sheep could get out or in except over his body. In the most literal sense the shepherd was the door. That is what Jesus was thinking of when he said: "I am the door." Through him, and through him alone, men find access to God. "Through him," said Paul, "we have access to the Father" (Eph.2:18). "He," said the writer to the Hebrews, "is the new and living way" (Heb.10:20). Jesus opens the way to God. Until Jesus came men could think of God only as, at best, a stranger and as, at worst, an enemy. But Jesus came to show men what God is like, and to open the way to him. He is the door through whom alone entrance to God becomes possible for men.” 9. Daniel Parks, “Jesus Christ declares, "I am the door" (John 10:7,9). God has sent His Son Jesus Christ into the world so that sinners barred from Him might freely and boldly approach Him. Observe: 1) Jesus Christ is the door made available to all: "if anyone enters by Me ..." (v.9). God bars the door of salvation and fellowship to no one who will come to Him through Jesus Christ. Whoever and whatever you are, you may through faith in Jesus Christ enter into fellowship with God. 2) Jesus Christ is the door entered only by the sheep: "I am the door of the sheep" (v.7). All mankind is divided by God into sheep and goats. Sheep are those who will believe in Jesus Christ; goats are those who will not (v.26). one but sheep, believers in Jesus Christ, will enter the door of fellowship with God.

3) Jesus Christ is the only door: "I am the door of the sheep" (v.7; cp. vv.8,10). "For there is ... one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5). Jesus therefore declares, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. o one comes to the Father except through Me" (John 14:6). You cannot approach God through any other person or thing. 4) Jesus Christ is the door to salvation: "If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved" (v.9). God is too holy to even look upon sin (Habakkuk 1:13). They who would approach Him therefore must be forgiven of their sins. This forgiveness is obtained only through faith in Jesus Christ and His redeeming blood (Ephesians 1:7; Acts 16:31). " or is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). 5) Jesus Christ is the door to liberty: "If anyone enters by Me, he will ... go in and out ..." (v.9). Jesus Christ provides perfect freedom from all harm and danger to sinners enslaved by their fears and doubts. His sheep can say, "Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; for You are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me. You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies ... Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life; and I will dwell in the house of the LORD forever" (Psalm 23:46). 6) Jesus Christ is the door to provision: "If anyone enters by Me, he will ... find pasture" (v.9). God ascertains that all His sheep are well fed and nourished. His sheep can say, "The LORD is My shepherd; I shall not want. He makes me to lie down in green pastures; He leads be beside the still waters" (Psalm 23:1-3a). 7) Jesus Christ is the door to abundant life: "The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly" (v.10). The "thief" is a false prophet or heretical preacher. All who would enter heaven through following them will suffer the same fate as their leaders at the final judgment. God says, "... And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness" (Matthew 7:15-23). But all who follow Jesus Christ receive "life ... abundantly." Jesus Christ says to them, "And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand" (John 10:28). (Those professing Christians who claim they may be "saved today but lost tomorrow" have evidently never entered this door.) Have you entered God's fellowship through Christ the Door?” 10. Bob Deffinbaugh, “ It is little wonder that our Lord’s audience does not understand Him. How can they when they are not His sheep (10:26-27)? In verses 7-18, Jesus continues with the sheep/shepherd imagery, but with a somewhat different twist.177 First, He shifts from the more general third person (“the one who,” “he,” “him,” “his”) to the very specific first person singular (“I,” “me”). He makes it very clear from here on that He is speaking of Himself as “the True Shepherd” and “the Good Shepherd.” He now speaks of Himself as the “door,” and He drops any further reference to the “doorkeeper.” In verses 7-10, John continues to speak of those who are “thieves and robbers,” but in verses 11-18 Jesus contrasts Himself—“the Good Shepherd”—with hirelings. The Good Shepherd not only presents Himself in a way that is fitting, He also cares for the sheep by laying His life down for them. The importance of our Lord’s teaching is indicated by the familiar expression, “Truly, truly …,” or as the ET Bible renders it, “I tell you the solemn truth …” Jesus is the “door” for the sheep. In verses 7-10, it is not “the shepherd” who passes through the door, but his sheep. Those sheep who pass through the door—who trust in Jesus as God’s Messiah, the Good Shepherd—are those

who are saved, and who enter into the abundant life. In “sheep terms,” they enjoy the safety of the shepherd’s care and protection, and the abundance of the rich pastures and water to which he leads them. They couldn’t have it any better. In “people terms,” those who trust in Jesus are forgiven their sins and enter into the abundant life, under the protection, guidance, and tender care of the Savior, who is their “Good Shepherd.”

8All who ever came before me were thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them.
1. There were many who came before professing they were the Messiah, but they were just trying to use the sheep for their own gain. The true sheep did not follow these imposters. 1B. Pink, "It is abundantly clear that here we have another instance in John’s Gospel where the word "all" cannot be taken absolutely. The Lord had been speaking of shepherds, the shepherds of Israel; but not all of them had been "thieves and robbers." Moses, Joshua, David, the prophets, ehemiah, and others who might be mentioned, certainly could not be included within this classification. The "all" here, as is usually the case in Scripture, must be restricted. But restricted to whom? Surely to the scribes and Pharisees, who were here being addressed by the Lord. Bishop Ryle has a helpful note on this verse: "Let it be noted," he says, "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. othing seems so offensive to Christ as a false teacher of religion, a false prophet, or a false shepherd. othing 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." 1C. Pink adds, "What, may be asked, is the distinction between "thieves" and "robbers"? The word for "thief" is "kleptes" and is always so rendered. It has reference to one who uses stealth. The word for "robbers" is "lestes," and is wrongly translated "thief" in Matthew 21:13; Luke 10:30, 36, etc. It has reference to one who uses violence. The distinction between these two words is closely preserved all through the ew Testament with the one exception of verse 10, where it seems as though the Lord uses the word "kleptes" to combine the two different thoughts, for there the "thief" is said not only to "steal," but also to "kill and destroy." 2. So often in Scripture the language is exaggerated and absolute when, in fact, it is not meant to be read and interpreted this way. It is just a Hebrew way of stating things, and you have to use discernment in interpreting the meaning. If it contradicts the rest of Scripture to interpret in literally, then it is a form of exaggeration for the purpose of effect. Whole books are written about the exaggeration that is not to be taken literally in Scripture. Those who do not see this make absolute judgments that are based on these exaggerated statements and become distorters of the meaning of God’s Word.

3. Gill gives us an interpretation that shows the language here cannot be taken in a literal fashion. He wrote, “This must be understood with some restrictions, not of every individual person, nor of every individual prophet or shepherd; not of Moses, nor of the prophets of the Lord, nor of John the Baptist, who came immediately before Christ, was his harbinger, and prepared his way; but of those prophets who came, and were not sent of God, and so did not come in by the door; of the shepherds of Israel, who fed themselves, and not the flock, but lorded it over God's heritage; and of such, as Theudas, and Judas the Galilean, who boasted that they were some great persons, but were only thieves and robbers; and particularly of the three shepherds cut off in one month, Zec_11:8, supposed to be the three sects among the Jews, and the leaders of them, the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes, especially the former; who were wolves in sheep's clothing, usurped a power that did not belong to them, robbed God of his authority, and glory; and, in a literal sense, plundered men of their substance, and devoured widows' houses, as well as destroyed their souls. The phrase, "before me", is wanting in seven of Beza's exemplars, and in several others; and in the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Persic versions: but the sheep did not hear them; the elect of God, some of which there were in all ages, though their number is comparatively few, did not attend to the false prophets, and false teachers, and idol shepherds; did not receive their doctrines, nor follow their practices; for it is not possible that these should be finally and totally deceived, or carried away with the error of the wicked. 4. S. Lewis Johnson, "In verse 7 then he expresses this new figure, “I am the door of the sheep.” ow he contrasts this with the false for he says, “All the ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them.” ow we must as we read something like this remember that he is giving us something in symbol. So when he speaks about all that came before me, he is looking at himself as the shepherd who goes out early in the morning to the sheep to take them out to pasture, and all that came before him are those who seek to lead astray the sheep by coming before the shepherd comes to the flock and seeking to destroy them. 5.Clarke, “that ever came before me - Or, as some translate, all that came instead of me, προ εµου, i.e. all that came as the Christ, or Messiah, such as Theudas, and Judas the Gaulonite, who are mentioned, Act_5:36, Act_5:37; and who were indeed no other than thieves, plundering the country wherever they came; and murderers, not only slaying the simple people who resisted them, but leading the multitudes of their followers to the slaughter. But our Lord probably refers to the scribes and Pharisees, who pretended to show the way of salvation to the people - who in fact stole into the fold, and clothed themselves with the fleece, and devoured the sheep. The words, προ εµου, before me, are wanting in EGMS, Mt. BKV, seventy others; Syriac, Persic, Syriac Hieros., Gothic, Saxon, Vulgate, eleven copies of the Itala; Basil, Cyril, Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius, Augustin, and some others. Griesbach has left them in the text with a note of doubtfulness. The reason thy these words are wanting in so many respectable MSS., versions, and fathers, is probably that given by Theophylact, who says that the Manicheans inferred from these words that all the Jewish prophets were impostors. But our Lord has borne sufficient testimony to their inspiration in a variety of places. Κλεπτης, and λῃστης, the thief and the robber, should be properly distinguished; one takes by cunning and stealth; the other openly and by violence. It would not be difficult to find bad ministers who answer to both these characters. Tithes have been often enforced and collected in a most exceptionable manner, and in a most disgraceful spirit.

The reflection of pious Quesnel on this verse is well worth attention. A pastor ought to remember that whoever boasts of being the way of salvation, and the gate of heaven, shows himself to be a thief and an impostor; and though few are arrived at this degree of folly, yet there are many who rely too much upon their own talents, eloquence, and labors, as if the salvation of the sheep depended necessarily thereon: in which respect they are always robbers, since they rob the grace of Christ of the glory of saving the sheep. God often puts such pastors to shame, by not opening the hearts of the people to receive their word: while he blesses those who are humble, in causing them to be heard with attention, and accompanying their preaching with an unction which converts and saves souls. Let every man know that in this respect his sufficiency and success are of the Lord.” 6. Barnes, "All that ever came before me. This does not refer to the prophets, but to those who came pretending to be the pastors or guides of the people. Some have supposed that he referred to those who pretended to be the Messiah before him; but there is not evidence that any such person appeared before the coming of Jesus. It is probable that he rather refers to the scribes and Pharisees, who claimed to be instructors of the people, who claimed the right to regulate the affairs of religion, and whose only aim was to aggrandize themselves and to oppress the people. See Barnes "John 1:18". When the Saviour says that "all" were thieves, he speaks in a popular sense, using the word "all" as it is often used in the ew Testament, to denote the great mass or the majority. Thieves and robbers. See John 10:1; Jeremiah 23:1: "Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture;" Ezekiel 24:2,3: "Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool, ye kill them that are fed; but ye feed not the flock." This had been the general character of the Pharisees and scribes. They sought wealth, office, ease at the expense of the people, and thus deserved the character of thieves and robbers. They insinuated themselves slyly as a thief, and they oppressed and spared not, like a robber. The sheep. The people of God--the pious and humble portion of the Jewish nation. Though the great mass of the people were corrupted, yet there were always some who were the humble and devoted people of God. Comp. Romans 11:3,4. So it will be always. Though the great mass of teachers may be corrupt, yet the true friends of God will mourn in secret places, and refuse to "listen to the instruction that causeth to err." 7. Calvin, "All who came before me. The words pantes hosoi may be literally rendered, all as many as came before me They who restrict this expression to Judas the Galilean, and such persons, depart widely, in my opinion, from Christ's meaning; for he contrasts all false doctrine, in general, with the Gospel, and all false prophets with faithful teachers. or would it even be unreasonable to extend this statement to the Gentiles, that all who, from the beginning of the world, have professed to be teachers, and have not labored to gather sheep to Christ, have abused this title for destroying souls. But this does not at all apply to Moses and the Prophets, who had no other object in view than to establish the kingdom of Christ. For it ought to be observed, that a contrast is here made between the words of Christ and those

things which are opposed to them. But so far are we from discovering any contradiction between the Law and the doctrine of the Gospel, that the Law is nothing else than a preparation for the Gospel. In short, Christ testifies that all the doctrines, by which the world has been led away from him, are so many deadly plagues; because, apart from him, there is nothing but destruction and horrible confusion. Meanwhile, we see of what importance antiquity is with God, and in what estimation it ought to be held by us, when it enters, as it were, into a contest with Christ. 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 of no consequence how many there have been of this description, or how early they began to appear; for it ought to be considered that there is but one door, and that they who leave it, and make openings or breaches in the walls, are thieves But the sheep did not hear them. He now confirms more clearly what he had already spoken more obscurely and in the figure of an allegory, that they who were led out of the way by impostors did not belong to the Church of God. This is said, first, that when we see a great multitude of persons going astray, we may not resolve to perish through their example; and, next, that we may not waver, when God permits impostors to deceive many. For it is no light consolation, and no small ground of confidence, when we know that Christ, by his faithful protection, has always guarded his sheep, amidst the various attacks and crafty devices of wolves and robbers, so that there never was one of them that deserted him. [284] But here a question arises, When does a person begin to belong to the flock of the Son of God? [285] For we see many who stray and wander through deserts during the greater part of their life, and are at length brought into the fold of Christ. I reply, the word sheep is here used in two ways. When Christ says afterwards, that he has other sheep besides, he includes all the elect of God, who had at that time no resemblance to sheep At present, he means sheep which bore the shepherd's mark. By nature, we are at the greatest possible distance from being sheep; but, on the contrary, are born lions, tigers, wolves, and bears, [286] until the Spirit of Christ tames us, and from wild and savage beasts forms us to be mild sheep Thus, according to the secret election of God, we are already sheep in his heart, before we are born; but we begin to be sheep in ourselves by the calling, by which he gathers us into his fold. Christ declares that they who are called into the order of believers are so firmly bound together, that they cannot stray or wander, or be carried about by any wind of new doctrine. It will perhaps be objected, that even those who had been devoted to Christ frequently go astray, and that this is proved by frequent experience, and that it is not without good reason that Ezekiel ascribes it to the good Shepherd, that he gathers the scattered sheep,

(Ezekiel 34:12.) I readily acknowledge that it frequently happens, that they who had belonged to the household of faith are, for a time, estranged; but this is not at variance with Christ's statement, for, so far as they go astray, they cease, in some respects, to be sheep What Christ means is simply this, that all the elect of God, though they were tempted to go astray in innumerable ways, were kept in obedience to the pure faith, so that they were not exposed as a prey to Satan, or to his ministers. But this work of God is not less astonishing, when he again gathers the sheep which had wandered for a little, than if they had all along continued to be shut up in the fold. It is always true, and without a single exception, that they who go out from us were not of us, but that they who were of us remain with us to the end, (1 John 2:19.) This passage ought to strike us with the deepest shame; first, because we are so ill accustomed to the voice of our Shepherd, that there are hardly any who do not listen to it with indifference; and, next, because we are so slow and indolent to follow him. I speak of the good, or of those who are at least passable; for the greater part of those who boast that they are Christ's disciples kick fiercely against him. Lastly, as soon as the voice of any stranger has sounded in our ears, we are hurried to and fro; and this lightness and unsteadiness sufficiently shows how little progress we have hitherto made in the faith. But if the number of believers is smaller than might be desired, and if out of this small number a large proportion be continually dropping off, faithful teachers have this consolation to support them, that the elect of God, who are Christ's sheep, listen to them. It is our duty, indeed, to labor diligently, and to strive by every possible method, that the whole world may be brought, if possible, into the unity of the faith; but let us, in the meantime, be well satisfied with belonging to the number.” 8. IVP commentary, "Jesus also refines his earlier reference to the thief and robber (v. 1), saying, All who ever came before me were thieves and robbers (v. 8). This is a sweeping generalization. If it were not for references to Moses, the prophets and John the Baptist as witnesses to Jesus (for example, 1:17, 19-36; 5:39), then they would seem to be included in the category of all who ever came before me. But the context of our passage is the condemnation of the Jewish rulers, some of whom have rejected Jesus and others who have faith in him. This sweeping statement shows that these leaders are members of a much larger group. Jesus, the one mediator of salvation, contrasts himself with all others who would claim to be "mediators of salvation" (Beasley-Murray 1987:170). The reason Moses, the law, the prophets and John the Baptist are not included in this condemnation is precisely because they bear witness to Jesus. All who do not bear witness to Jesus, who alone has seen the Father and makes him known (1:18), are not of the truth. They do not bring blessing but rather take it away, like a thief or a robber. So we see the contrast between different ways of salvation. The Jewish leaders have rejected Jesus on the basis of their knowledge of God and his ways. They have expelled the man healed in

chapter 9 from the people of God on the basis of his confession of Jesus. They believe they have consigned the former blind man to death, that is, to separation from God and his people. But Jesus has found him and incorporated him into his own company.” 9. Barclay, “Jesus said that those who came before him were thieves and robbers. He was of course not referring to the great succession of the prophets and the heroes, but to these adventurers who were continually arising in Palestine and promising that, if people would follow them, they would bring in the golden age. All these claimants were insurrectionists. They believed that men would have to wade through blood to the golden age. At this very time Josephus speaks of there being ten thousand disorders in Judaea, tumults caused by men of war. He speaks of men like the Zealots who did not mind dying themselves and who did not mind slaughtering their own loved ones, if their hopes of conquest could be achieved. Jesus is saying: "There have been men who claimed that they were leaders sent to you from God. They believed in war, murder, assassination. Their way only leads for ever farther and farther away from God. My way is the way of peace and love and life; and if you will only take it, it leads ever closer and closer to God." There have been, and still are, those who believe that the golden age must be brought in with violence, class warfare, bitterness, destruction. It is the message of Jesus that the only way that leads to God in heaven and to the golden age on earth is the way of love.” 10. Bob Deffinbaugh, “In what appears to be a sweeping statement, Jesus says, “All who came before me were thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them” (verse 8). He most certainly is not referring to the godly prophets of old, men like Moses and Elijah, and Daniel.178 I believe we could paraphrase our Lord’s words in this way: “All who have come before me, claiming to be me—what I alone am as the Good Shepherd—are thieves and robbers.” In the immediate context, Jesus has just claimed to be “the door.” When He speaks of “all who came before me,” He is referring to all those pseudo-shepherds (past, present, and future) who seek to usurp His place and prominence as the One sent from heaven by the Father, the Messiah. The Pharisees certainly think of themselves as the “gatekeepers” of the kingdom of God in Jesus’ day: “But woe to you experts in the law and you Pharisees, hypocrites! You keep locking people out of the kingdom of heaven! For you neither enter nor permit those trying to enter to go in” (Matthew 23:13). These “shepherds” are nothing more than “thieves and robbers.” They do not come to do good to the sheep. They do not care about the sheep, nor do they care for the sheep. They come for personal gain, at the expense of the sheep. But the Lord’s sheep are not taken in. They know the voice of their Shepherd, and they know a stranger when he comes as their shepherd, so they do not listen to them. In contrast, the Good Shepherd has come to benefit the sheep, at His own expense.”

9I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture.

1. There is no need to wait, for Jesus is an open gate. You can walk right in and be free from sin. Then just as freely you can walk out, and tell the world with a glorious shout, how happy you are on this day, for you have found that Jesus is truly the way. I am the true and authentic Messiah, and by me only can the sheep enter the kingdom of God and be saved. They will be free to go in and out and find the best that God has provided for his people. There is only one gate, and I am it says Jesus. There is no other way in or out, and so only those sheep who follow him will have access to the kingdom. The door to heaven does not open for those who do great things, or who know great truths, or who can achieve great goals, but only for those who follow the Shepherd who leads them into the kingdom. Salvation is in a person, and not anything else. It is a relationship to the person of Jesus that gets one into the kingdom. If you trust him as your Shepherd and Savior, then you are able to get through the gate that leads to eternal life. Being saved is not a hard thing to achieve, for it is a gift given to those who will walk through the door, which means trusting in Jesus as your Savior. If you can get into the house and other building by walking through the door, you can get into the kingdom of God just as easily. Put your faith in Jesus and yield to him as your Savior and Lord and you are in. 1B. Barclay, “To describe something of what that entrance to God means, Jesus uses a wellknown Hebrew phrase. He says that through him we can go in and come out. To be able to come and go unmolested was the Jewish way of describing a life that is absolutely secure and safe. When a man can go in and out without fear, it means that his country is at peace, that the forces of law and order are supreme, and that he enjoys perfect security. The leader of the nation is to be one who can bring them out and lead them in ( um.27:17). Of the man who is obedient to God it is said that he is blessed when he comes in and blessed when he goes out (Deut.28:6). A child is one who is not yet able by himself to go out and to come in (1Kgs.3:7). The Psalmist is certain that God will keep him in his going out and in his coming in (Ps.121:8). Once a man discovers, through Jesus Christ, what God is like, a new sense of safety and of security enters into life. If life is known to be in the hands of a God like that, the worries and the fears are gone.” 2. Henry Van Dyke has written much on this verse, but his book has been out of print for almost a century. I want to quote a lot of what he wrote, for it is excellent commentary that most will never see anywhere else. "Christ taught by pictures as well as by parables. He came into the world to be the Savior of men. What that meant in all its fullness could not be put into any doctrine, any theory, any description. So Christ looked around Him in the world of life, and whatever He saw that was beautiful and useful and precious He claimed and used as a picture of Himself. All that is best and most needful and most glorious is but a type and symbol of what I am. I am the bread of heaven, I am the water of hfe, I am the hght of the world, I am the true vine, I am the good shepherd, I am the lamb of God, I am the way, the truth, and the life." Among these " I ams " of Christ, the picture in the text, " I am the door," seems at first lowly and commonplace, not worthy to be compared with the other images which our Lord uses to reveal Himself A door is an ordinary affair, made by man, for an everyday purpose. We pass through a hundred doors daily without noticing them. But think for a moment what the door means ; what is its real significance in life ? The door is the way of entrance into any building or structure. It signifies, therefore, the right of admission to all that the building stands for. The open door says " Come in." In the home, the door means access to the inner circle of love and joy and peace."

3. Van Dyke goes on, "But the door is not only the way of entrance. It is also the way of egress. It leads in and it leads out. It is the symbol of liberty as well as the symbol of peace. A door through which you can pass only in one direction is not a door : it is a trap. The dwellers in a human home use the door not only to enter into their place of rest but also to go out to their places of work. The door of the fortress would not fulfill its purpose if it only let the garrison in ; it must also swing free to let the soldiers forth to battle and conquest. The temple doors invite the worshipers to praise God in the sanctuary; but they also remind us of the duty and privilege of going out from the holy place to serve God in the world. Inward and outward — both ways the true door invites us. Protection and freedom ; safety and struggle ; worship and work ; life enfolded in peace, and life enlarged in power — this is the twofold significance of the door. And this is what Christ means when He says to us, " I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture. But this refuge, this restfulness, is not the whole of salvation. To be truly saved, thoroughly saved, means something more than coming into security and peace. It means also going out to a richer, fuller life, a broader, deeper usefulness, a larger joy of noble work. Full salvation is active as well as passive. It includes deliverance from danger and consecration to duty. It ransoms the soul from sin in order to set it free for service. The soul that is saved, goes in to God and out to life; and everywhere, inward and outward, it finds through Christ what it needs — protection to safeguard it, rest to refresh it, pasture to strengthen it, work to discipline and unfold it. " I am come," says Christ, " not only that they might not die, but that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly." 3B. Pink, " A "door" speaks of easy ingress and is contrasted from the high walls in which it is set. There are no difficult walls which have to be scaled before the anxious sinner can obtain access to God. o, Christ is the "door" into His presence. A "door" may also be contrasted from a long, dreary, circuitous passage—just one step, and those on the outside are now within. The soul that believes God’s testimony to the truth of salvation by Christ alone, at once enters God’s presence. But mark the definite article: "I am the door." There was only one door into the ark in which oah and his family found shelter from the flood. There was only one door into the Tabernacle, which was Jehovah’s dwelling-place. So there is only one "door" into the presence of the Father—" either is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven, given among men, whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). And again, "I am the way," said Christ. " o man cometh unto the Father but by me" (John 14:6). Have you entered by this "door," dear reader? Remember that a door is not to be looked at and admired, but to be used! or do you need to knock: the Door is open, and open for "any man" who will enter. Soon, though, the Door will be shut (see Luke 13:25), for the present Day of salvation (2 Cor. 6:2) will be followed by the great Day of wrath (Rev. 6:17). Enter then while there is time." 4. The sheep go out to find pasture to feed on, and the food of the sheep of Christ is to do the will of God. They go out to do what he wills for them to do in the world. Jesus said his food was to do the will of God, and that is what we are to live on as well. Doing God's will is to be our food, or what we live on spiritually. 5. IVP commentary, "Jesus says the one who enters through him (through me is emphatic in the Greek) will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture (v. 9). This is said to be true of

each individual, as just illustrated by the former blind man--the shepherd knows each sheep by name (v. 3). The salvation spoken of refers to protection from the sheep's enemies, here understood to be false teachers as typified by the Jewish opponents. Such teachers threaten death by keeping people from a true knowledge of God, who is himself the sole source of life. The one who enters by Jesus has the liberty to come in and go out. This is an Old Testament expression often used in political and military contexts to refer to leadership (for example, Deut 31:2, paraphrased in the IV as "to lead you"), but it is also used elsewhere in a more general sense to refer to the entirety of one's daily activities (Deut 28:6, 19; Ps 121:8; cf. Acts 1:21). Jesus' sheep have the freedom to live their lives in his presence. Both their going out and their coming in is through him. In this way he fulfills the type of Joshua as described by Moses (Jesus is actually the name Joshua in Greek): "Moses said to the Lord, `May the Lord, the God of the spirits of all mankind, appoint a man over this community to go out and come in before them, one who will lead them out and bring them in, so the Lord's people will not be like sheep without a shepherd'" ( um 27:15-17; cf. Jn 10:18). The freedom of Jesus' sheep to go out and come in reflects Jesus' own freedom, for their going out and coming in are not on their own but are a part of their following him. As he brings them into the safety of his fold and leads them out to find food and water they find pasture (v. 9). The Good Shepherd will make them "lie down in green pastures" and lead them "beside quiet waters," preparing a table in the presence of their enemies (Ps 23:2, 3, 5). Through Jesus they receive their "daily bread" (Mt 6:11; Lk 11:3), that which is needed for life with God, for he offers the bread of life (Jn 6:35-58) and living water (7:38). Jesus has spoken repeatedly of the provision of life as the purpose of his coming (3:15; 4:14; 5:21, 24, 40; 6:27, 33, 35, 40, 47, 51, 54; 8:12), and now he focuses this key theme when he says, I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full (10:10). In the next section (vv. 11-18) he will explain further this life he has come to offer, which will be illustrated in the raising of Lazarus (chap. 11). In contrast to the protection, freedom and pasture that come from entering through Jesus are the stealing, death and destruction brought by the thief (v. 10). One has a positive effect on the sheep, whereas the effect of the other is negative. The thief acts for his own selfish ends and to the detriment of the sheep. Jesus, however, serves the sheep by providing for them the way of life, which he will do, we learn in the next section, at the cost of his own life. Thus, the contrast with the thief is complete. Those who enter through Jesus find life, which means we all begin on the outside and need to enter through him. We are all sheep in need of a shepherd, just as we all, like the man born blind, are in need of the light. Jesus is declaring that he "mediates membership of the Messianic community and reception of the promised blessings of salvation, that is, deliverance from judgment, . . . citizenship in the divine community of salvation . . . and eternal life" (Jeremias 1965:180). The salvation he brings is personal but not merely individual: he knows each sheep by name, but salvation is membership in a community, the community that is called and guided and provided for by Christ. The flock of Christ is neither an aggregate of isolated, autonomous individuals nor a faceless corporation, but a community in which each member is taken up into the life of God to form with others a single whole as branches on a vine (15:1). By referring to himself as the shepherd Jesus is claiming to be the leader of this new community. 6. S. Lewis Johnson, "There was a woman by the name of Mrs. Field who was the consecrated

leader of Hepsaba house in ew York City. She had a habit of asking others when she met them, “Are you an out and out Christian?” Well she had a good friend, and it was Dr. C.I. Schofield, the editor of the well known Scofield Bible. Mr. Scofield one day asked her, “Mrs. Field you never do ask me, you never have asked me, ‘Am I and out and out Christian’?” And she said, “Well I’ll ask you know. Are you an out and out Christian?” And he said, “ o.” And she was a little astonished, obviously because she thought of them that way, but he went on to say, “I'm not an out and out Christian. I'm an in and out Christian.” And then he cited this text, “I'm the door by me if any man enter in he shall be saved and shall go in and out.” I'm an in and out Christian. I have the liberty of being delivered from the bondage of the law and from the bondage and condemnation of sin. I have liberty in Christ. And then our Lord concludes the famous statement in John 10:9 by saying, “And fine pasture.” Sustenance, all the things that we need the Lord Jesus Christ supplies. All of the solutions to life’s problems, all of the means by which we grow, Jesus gives those things for us. That’s the difference between the true shepherds and the false shepherds for he goes on to explain further in the 10th verse, “The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy.” That is so characteristic of the work of the Lord. There are many people out in the ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ professedly who are not there to give the sheep something, but to get something from the sheep. But the true shepherd is one who gives, not one who seeks simply to get from the sheep. The Lord Jesus is one who gives. “I have come that they might have life and that they might have it more abundantly.” One of the characteristic of the ministry of God is that it is a ministry of giving not getting, not seeking to obtain from people, but to give to people. We always hope that in Believers Chapel that is the ministry of the word of God here, to give to people, not to get, not to seek your wealth, your substance, but to give you the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. So, they shall “Find pasture.” They shall be given life, given the supply of everything that is needed to the glory of the grace of God. 7. Henry, “is the door of the sheep(Joh_10:9): By me(di emou- through meas the door) if any man enter into the sheepfold,as one of the flock, he shall be saved;shall not only by safe from thieves and robbers, but he shall be happy, he shall go in and out.Here are, First,Plain directions how to come into the fold: we must come in by Jesus Christas the door. By faith in him, as the great Mediator between God and man, we come into covenant and communion with God. There is no entering into God's church but by coming into Christ's church; nor are any looked upon as members of the kingdom of God among men but those that are willing to submit to the grace and government of the Redeemer. We must now enter by the door of faith(Act_14:27), since the door of innocencyis shut against us, and that passbecome unpassable, Gen_3:24. Secondly,Precious promises to those who observe this direction. 1. They shall be saved hereafter;this is the privilege of their home. These sheep shall be saved from being distained and impounded by divine justice for trespass done, satisfaction being made for the damage by their great Shepherd, saved from being a prey to the roaring lion; they shall be for ever happy.2. In the mean time they shall go in and out and find pasture;this is the privilege of their way. They shall have their conversation in the world by the grace of Christ, shall be in his fold as a man at his own house, where he has free ingress, egress,and regress. True believers are at home in Christ; when they go out, they are not shut outas strangers, but have liberty to come in again; when they come in, they are not shut in as trespassers, but have liberty to go out. They go out to the field in the morning, they come into the fold at night; and in both the Shepherd leads and keeps them, and they find pasture in both: grass in the field, fodder in the fold. In public, in private, they have the word of God to converse with, by which their spiritual life is supported and nourished, and out of which their gracious desires

are satisfied; they are replenished with the goodness of God's house.” 8. Spurgeon, “Jesus, the great I AM, is the entrance into the true church, and the way of access to God himself. He gives to the man who comes to God by him four choice privileges. 1. He shall be saved. The fugitive manslayer passed the gate of the city of refuge, and was safe. oah entered the door of the ark, and was secure. one can be lost who take Jesus as the door of faith to their souls. Entrance through Jesus into peace is the guarantee of entrance by the same door into heaven. Jesus is the only door, an open door, a wide door, a safe door; and blessed is he who rests all his hope of admission to glory upon the crucified Redeemer. 2. He shall go in. He shall be privileged to go in among the divine family, sharing the children's bread, and participating in all their honors and enjoyments. He shall go in to the chambers of communion, to the banquets of love, to the treasures of the covenant, to the storehouses of the promises. He shall go in unto the King of kings in the power of the Holy Spirit, and the secret of the Lord shall be with him. 3. He shall go out. This blessing is much forgotten. We go out into the world to labour and suffer, but what a mercy to go in the name and power of Jesus! We are called to bear witness to the truth, to cheer the disconsolate, to warn the careless, to win souls, and to glorify God; and as the angel said to Gideon, "Go in this thy might," even thus the Lord would have us proceed as his messengers in his name and strength. 4. He shall find pasture. He who knows Jesus shall never want. Going in and out shall be alike helpful to him: in fellowship with God he shall grow, and in watering others he shall be watered. Having made Jesus his all, he shall find all in Jesus. His soul shall be as a watered garden, and as a well of water whose waters fail not.” 9. Spurgeon, “Wide-awake men are always on the alert for open doors. Some are seeking an open door to wealth, others an open door to fame, others still an open door to power and others an open door to wisdom and learning. One of the chief differences between the men who succeed and the men who fail in this world is that the former are quick to see the doors which stand open and quick to enter them, and the latter are so slow to see, or so slow to enter, that the door slams in their face while they are standing wondering whether they would better go in or not. An open door which if entered leads to more that is good and glorious than any other door that men have ever entered. John 10:9. Jesus Christ is the Door. I. To What Is He The Door? 1. He is the door to salvation. "By me if any man enter in he shall be saved." 2. He is the door to life. John 10:10 RV. 3. Christ is also the door to liberty and security. "By me if any man enter in he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and shall find pasture." 4. Jesus Christ is also the door to pasture. "Shall find a pasture." Food, satisfaction. It is in Christ alone that the soul of man can find pasture, find food, find satisfaction.

II. To Whom is the Door Open? "I am the door; by me IF A Y MA enter in, he shall find pasture." That door is open to any man, to every man. CO CLUSIO . -- The door stands open to all here. The door will not always stand open. Luke 13:25. 10. James A. Fowler, “Religionists are exposed again in the allegory that Jesus uses of His being the Good Shepherd of God's sheep, which was also a Messianic expectation (Isa. 40:11; Ezek. 34:23; 37:24). In the spiritual kingdom that Jesus came to bring in Himself, He is both the door through whom all God's people must enter, and the shepherd who leads, cares for, converses with, and lays down His life for the sheep. Religionists, on the other hand, are false prophets, wolves in sheep's clothing (Matt. 7:15), self-appointed false shepherds, who steal from the people (Lk. 11:39), plunder the people (Matt. 23:14), murder (Jn. 8:44) and destroy (II Thess. 2:3). The strange voice of religion preys upon people and destroys people, robbing them of all hope and fleecing them of their possessions. Religious leaders are hirelings and mercenaries who are not prophets but are engaged for the profit. Having no genuine love or compassion for God's people, they have become paid professionals for their own personal interest and gain. They are not willing to invest their lives for people, but when trouble comes they bail out and flee to save their own hides; "worthless shepherds who leave the flock" (Zech. 11:17). As the Good Shepherd of God, Jesus has an intimate relationship of spiritual union with His people, wherein they know Him and He knows them, and they listen to His voice in obedience. This is much deeper than the religious epistemology that merely "knows about" Jesus and advocates legalistic obedience and commitment to Him. Jesus also challenged religious exclusivism and racial superiority by indicating that He had "other sheep, not of this fold," that is other than Jews. The gospel of the kingdom is a universal invitation to all peoples to become one flock, one Body (Eph. 4:4), one People (I Pt. 2:9), one humanity (Eph. 2:14) in Jesus Christ, based upon His voluntary death and resurrection for all mankind. "Jew and Gentile; all are one in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 3:28). The Jewish religionists were quite aware that they had been painted in a bad light by Jesus' allegory, and that their proud and exclusivistic attitudes of superiority had been challenged. They reverted to hurling the same old hackneyed charges of Jesus being insane and possessed of a demon (Jn. 7:20; 8:48).” 11. "When Jesus advertised the fact "I am the door", He also announced the most liberal invitation imaginable, "If anyone enters by me, he will be saved." ote the universality of that. "If anyone--anyone--anyone enters by me, he will be saved." It's entering that counts. It's entering that makes the difference. It's entering that seals the saving act. Those who reap the benefits of salvation, security and sustenance are not mere observers. or do they just knock on the door. Or sit down in front of the door. Or march back and forth before the door. They go through the door. They enter in by confession and faith. They are no better than those who are still outside the door. They have merely met the one qualification God has set. The invitation is to "anyone". The qualification is "who enters.” author unknown

12. Clarke, “am the door: by me if any man enter, etc. - Those who come for salvation to God, through Christ, shall obtain it: he shall be saved - he shall have his sins blotted out, his soul purified, and himself preserved unto eternal life. This the scribes and Pharisees could neither promise nor impart. Go in and out - This phrase, in the style of the Hebrews, points out all the actions of a man’s life, and the liberty he has of acting, or not acting. A good shepherd conducts his flock to the fields where good pasturage is to be found; watches over them while there, and brings them back again and secures them in the fold. So he that is taught and called of God feeds the flock of Christ with those truths of his word of grace which nourish them unto eternal life; and God blesses together both the shepherd and the sheep, so that going out and coming in they find pasture: every occurrence is made useful to them; and all things work together for their good. 13. Gill, “am the door,.... Of the sheep, as before, see Joh_10:7. The Ethiopic version reads, "I am the true door of the sheep"; which is repeated for further confirmation, and for the sake of introducing what follows: by me if any man enter in; into the sheepfold, the church, he shall be saved; not that being in a church, and having submitted to ordinances, will save any, but entering into these, at the right door, or through faith in Christ, such will be saved, according to Mar_16:16; such shall be saved from sin, the dominion of it, the guilt and condemning power of it, and at last from the being of it; and from the law, its curse and condemnation, and from wrath to come, and from every evil, and every enemy; such are, and for ever shall be, in a safe state, being in Christ, and in his hands, out of which none can pluck them: and shall go in and out; in allusion to the sheep going in and out of the fold: not that those who come in at the right door, shall go out of the church, or from among the saints again; but this phrase rather denotes the exercises of faith in going unto Christ, and acting upon him, and in coming forth in the outward confession of him, and the performance of good works; or in going unto him, and dealing with his blood, righteousness, and sacrifice, and coming out of themselves, and all dependence on their own righteousness; or it may regard the conversation of the saints in the church, their attendance on ordinances, their safety there, their free and open communion one with another, and with Christ, in whose name and strength they do all they do, coming in and out at this door: and find pasture; green and good pasture; pasture for their souls; the words of faith, and good doctrine; the wholesome words of Christ Jesus; the ordinances, the breasts of consolation; yea, Christ himself, whose flesh is meat indeed, and whose blood is drink indeed: the Persic version renders it, "and shall a pastor", or "shepherd"; see Jer_3:15. 14. Henry, “is the door of the sheep(Joh_10:9): By me(di emou- through meas the door) if any man enter into the sheepfold,as one of the flock, he shall be saved;shall not only by safe from thieves and robbers, but he shall be happy, he shall go in and out.Here are, First,Plain directions how to come into the fold: we must come in by Jesus Christas the door. By faith in him, as the great Mediator between God and man, we come into covenant and communion with God. There is no entering into God's church but by coming into Christ's church; nor are any looked upon as members of the kingdom of God among men but those that are willing to submit to the grace and government of the Redeemer. We must now enter by the door of faith(Act_14:27), since the door of innocencyis shut against us, and that passbecome unpassable, Gen_3:24. Secondly,Precious promises to those who observe this direction. 1. They shall be saved hereafter;this is the privilege

of their home.These sheep shall be saved from being distrained and impounded by divine justice for trespass done, satisfaction being made for the damage by their great Shepherd, saved from being a prey to the roaring lion; they shall be for ever happy.2. In the mean time they shall go in and out and find pasture;this is the privilege of their way.They shall have their conversation in the world by the grace of Christ, shall be in his fold as a man at his own house, where he has free ingress, egress,and regress.True believers are at home in Christ; when they go out, they are not shut outas strangers, but have liberty to come in again; when they come in, they are not shut inas trespassers, but have liberty to go out. They go out to the field in the morning, they come into the fold at night; and in both the Shepherd leads and keeps them, and they find pasture in both: grass in the field, fodder in the fold. In public, in private, they have the word of God to converse with, by which their spiritual life is supported and nourished, and out of which their gracious desires are satisfied; they are replenished with the goodness of God's house.” 15. Maclaren, “One does not know whether the width or the depth of this marvelous promise is the more noteworthy. Jesus Christ presents Himself before the whole race of man, and declares Himself able to deal with the needs of every individual in the tremendous whole. ‘If any man’— no matter who, where, when. For all noble and happy life there are at least three things needed: security, sustenance, and a field for the exercise of activity. To provide these is the end of all human society and government. Jesus Christ here says that He can give all these to every one. The imagery of the sheep and the fold is still, of course, in His mind, and colors the form of the representation. But the substance is the declaration that, to any and every soul, no matter how ringed about with danger, no matter how hampered and hindered in work, no matter how barren of all supply earth may be, He will give these, the primal requisites of life. ‘He shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.’” 16. Bruce Goettsche, “Jesus' claim to be the sole way to salvation (v.9) is considered "fighting words" today. In our society, as Josh McDowell points out, the pre-eminent virtue is "tolerance". Anyone who seems to be intolerant is condemned. [We are to be tolerant of everyone except those who do not share our view of the importance of tolerance]. Anyone who claims to have a hold of absolute truth is deemed a bigot. Jesus' words do not play well in today's cultural atmosphere. Imagine someone claiming that the only way to eternal life was through them. Why . . . that would imply that everyone else was in error. That doesn't sound very "open". But, Jesus doesn't have to be "open" if He is telling us the truth. You may not like the words, but they are still His Words. As many have pointed out, we are certainly to protect the equal rights of all people. Everyone should have an equal right to live and feel protected. However equal rights is not the same thing as equal validity. Just because we believe every person should have a right to the basic freedoms of our land doesn't mean we approve of all that is taught and practiced.”

10The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.

1. The imposters and fake messiah’s just want to rob and kill the sheep for their own gain, but I have come to give the sheep life and the fullness of life that God desires for his people to enjoy. They are anti-sheep, but I am pro-sheep, and my goal is for the good of the sheep. My goal is that the sheep have life, and life that is better than mere life, but life that is full, meaning that it is eternal and filled with values that far exceed the mere fact of being alive. The life we receive by being followers of Jesus is life that cannot be gotten by any other means. It cannot be purchased by vast riches. It cannot be inherited. It cannot be won as a trophy for great achievements. It is a gift that can only be received by faith in Jesus, and enjoyed to the fullest by following Jesus as he leads us to ever greener pastures. It is possible to get into the kingdom by faith in Jesus, and then never follow him out into the world to enjoy the riches of his grace by leading others to trust him as their Shepherd also. 1B. Barclay, “Jesus claims that he came that men might have life and might have it more abundantly. The Greek phrase used for having it more abundantly means to have a superabundance of a thing. To bc a follower of Jesus, to know who he is and what he means, is to have a superabundance of life. A Roman soldier came to Julius Caesar with a request for permission to commit suicide. He was a wretched dispirited creature with no vitality. Caesar looked at him. "Man," he said, "were you ever really alive?" When we try to live our own lives, life is a dull, dispirited thing. When we walk with Jesus, there comes a new vitality, a superabundance of life. It is only when we live with Christ that life becomes really worth living and we begin to live in the real sense of the word.” 2. John Macarthur, "It's an interesting thing about false shepherds. Whether they're in the Old Testament or whether they're in the ew Testament, or whether they're in the twentieth century, or wherever they are, whenever they are, they're always the same. They don't ever care about their flock, their so-called flock. All they care about is themselves. The Old Testament and the ew Testament both say clearly they're in it for the money, the power, the pride, the prestige and the self-glory, and that's it. False teachers are not in it for the sake of the people, obviously. People go into false religions and cults and all kinds of things like that and isms and various things in order to gain something that they need, either money, or ego. And Jesus contrasts these kind of shepherds who are in it for prestige, power and prominence with the true shepherd who is none other than Himself." 2B. Macarthur goes on, "Well, you know, Israel has always had false shepherds, nothing new for them. I was reading yesterday in Ezekiel 34 and came across this particular portion where he discusses these false shepherds. They had them even in Ezekiel's time, nothing new at all. Ezekiel 34, listen to this, "And the Word of the Lord came unto me saying, 'Son of man...that's a reference to Ezekiel...prophesy against the shepherds of Israel...see, here they are, false shepherds...prophesy and say unto them, Thus says the Lord God unto the shepherds, woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves.'" Can you imagine that? The sheep are all starving and they're sitting around feeding themselves. "'Should not the shepherds feed the flocks? You eat the fat and you clothe yourselves with the wool. You kill those who are fed but you feed not the flock.'" You take the fat ones and you kill them and you let the skinny ones die off. "'The diseased, have you not strengthened, neither have you healed that which was sick, neither have you bound up that which was broken, neither have you brought again that which was driven away. either have you sought that which was lost, but with force and cruelty have you ruled them.'" See, that's always the way with false teachers and false shepherds, they don't care anything about the flock. "And they were scattered because there's no shepherd and they became food to the beast of the field when they were scattered. My sheep wander through all the

mountains, upon every high hill." He's indicting the leaders of Israel, see. "My flock was scattered upon the face of the earth and none did search nor seek after them." Verse 7, "Therefore, you shepherds, hear the Word of the Lord," and then He just really lets them have it. He tells them they're going to be paying for what they've done." Instead of feeding the sheep, they are engaged in fleecing the sheep. 3. Will Pounds, "The “abundant” life Jesus gives is one that overflows. “I came that they may keep on having life, and may keep on having it abundantly.” The word “abundant” means to have a surplus, superabundance, “till it overflows.” The Greek word translated “abundant” (perissos) is a mathematical word meaning a surplus. Jesus had a surplus of leftovers after He fed the 5,000. These 12 baskets of leftovers were in abundance. Our Shepherd always gives in abundance. The English word “abundance” comes from Latin meaning “the rise in waves” or “to overflow.” It is the picture of unceasing rise of waves upon seashore, with waves rising again and again in the incoming tide. It is also the picture of increasing abundance like that, which causes the river to overflow its banks as a result of increasing rains. The life Jesus offers us fore each day is a life that overflows from a surplus of confidence that God is equal to every emergency and does supply all our genuine needs according to His riches in glory in Christ Jesus (Phil. 4:13, 19; Matt. 6:33). The abundant life is the life of the sheep who finds himself in the hands of the Good Shepherd. The Good Shepherd’s banks are always overflowing with waters of abundance. His grace is always more than enough for all our needs. othing can suppress the unending all sufficiency of His provision for His sheep. Such is the God we serve. "My God shall supply all your needs according to His riches in glory in Christ Jesus" (Philippians 4:19). Before we can know the life of abundance, we must know the life itself as it comes to us in Christ. We must first be made alive through faith in Christ. Jesus said, “I have come that they may have life.” That life is found by going through the Door. Christ is the Door to eternal life. Only after we go through the Door and receive His life can we have His kind of life “in abundance.” Are you aware that you have this life in Christ? How do you live the abundant life the Shepherd gives to all who go through His Door? We reckon upon the grand provisions of Christ Himself. He leads us into the fullness of this new life in Christ. He always gives His very best, and He gives it in abundance. It is a walk of faith. He leads us “in and out” to find good pasture. His sheep are well fed and are provided with all good things now and will dwell in the house of the Lord forever. The sheep who follow the Good Shepherd will not lack any good thing. The awesome truth of Christianity is that Jesus Christ crucified declares that man is incapable of saving himself. It declares the supremacy that Jesus alone is able to make atonement for our sins and because of that fact He is the only way of salvation. Because of personal sin and failure to live up to God’s expectation of man, every person will face a future judgment against sin. Those who have come through the door of Jesus Christ to eternal life will be saved for all eternity and enjoy fellowship with him. To all who reject Him it is eternal separation from God in a place called hell.” 4. Clarke, “character is well pointed out by the Prophet Ezekiel, Eze_34:2, etc. Wo be to the shepherds of Israel, that do feed themselves! Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool; ye kill them that are fed: but ye feed not the flock, etc, How can worldly-minded, hireling, foxhunting, and card-playing priests read these words of the Lord, without trembling to the center

of their souls! Wo to those parents who bring up their children merely for Church honors and emoluments! Suppose a person have all the Church’s revenues, if he have God’s wo, how miserable is his portion! Let none apply this censure to any one class of preachers, exclusively. That they might have life - My doctrine tends to life, because it is the true doctrine - that of the false and bad shepherds tends to death, because it neither comes from nor can lead to that God who is the fountain of life. Might have it more abundantly - That they might have an abundance, meaning either of life, or of all necessary good things; greater felicity than ever was enjoyed under any period of the Mosaic dispensation; and it is certain that Christians have enjoyed greater blessings and privileges than were ever possessed by the Jews, even in the promised land. If περισσονbe considered the accusative fem. Attic, agreeing with ζωην, (see Parkhurst), then it signifies more abundant life; that is, eternal life; or spiritual blessings much greater than had ever yet been communicated to man, preparing for a glorious immortality. Jesus is come that men may have abundance; abundance of grace, peace, love, life, and salvation. Blessed be Jesus.

5. Barnes, “The thief cometh not, &c. The thief has no other design in coming but to plunder. So false teachers have no other end in view but to enrich or aggrandize themselves. I am come that they might have life. Might have it more abundantly. Literally, that they may have abundance, or that which abounds. The word denotes that which is not absolutely essential to life, but which is superadded to make life happy. They shall not merely have life--simple, bare existence-- but they shall have all those superadded things which are needful to make that life eminently blessed and happy. It would be vast mercy to keep men merely from annihilation or hell; but Jesus will give them eternal joy, peace, the society of the blessed, and all those exalted means of felicity which are prepared for them in the world of glory. 6. Calvin, “The thief cometh not. By this saying, Christ -- if we may use the expression -- pulls our ear, that the ministers of Satan may not come upon us by surprise, when we are in a drowsy and careless state; for our excessive indifference exposes us, on every side, to false doctrines. For whence arises credulity so great, that they who ought to have remained fixed in Christ, fly about in a multitude of errors, but because they do not sufficiently dread or guard against so many false teachers? And not only so, but our insatiable curiosity is so delighted with the new and strange inventions of men, that, of our own accord, we rush with mad career to meet thieves and wolves. ot without reason, therefore, does Christ testify that false teachers, whatever may be the mildness and plausibility of their demeanour, always carry about a deadly poison, that we may be more careful to drive them away from us. A similar warning is given by Paul, See that no man rob you through vain philosophy, (Colossians 2:8.) I am come. This is a different comparison; for Christ, having hitherto called himself the door, and declared that they who bring sheep to this

door are true shepherds, now assumes the character of a shepherd, and indeed affirms that he is the only shepherd Indeed, there is no other to whom this honor and title strictly belongs; for, as to all the faithful shepherds of the Church, it is he who raises them up, endows them with the necessary qualifications, governs them by his Spirit, and works by them; and therefore they do not prevent him from being the only Governor of his Church, or from holding the distinction of being the only Shepherd For, though he employs their ministry, still he does not cease to fulfill and discharge the office of a shepherd by his own power; and they are masters and teachers in such a manner as not to interfere with his authority as a Master. In short, when the term shepherd is applied to men, it is used, as we say, in a subordinate sense; and Christ shares the honor with his ministers in such a manner, that he still continues to be the only shepherd both of themselves and of the whole flock. That they may have life. When he says that he is come, that the sheep may have life, he means that they only who do not submit to his staff and crook (Psalm 23:4) are exposed to the ravages of wolves and thieves; and -- to give them greater confidence -- he declares that life is continually increased and strengthened in those who do not revolt from him. And, indeed, the greater progress that any man makes in faith, the more nearly does he approach to fullness of life, because the Spirit, who is life, grows in him.” 7. S. Lewis Johnson, "There is such a thing as light from a flickering candle, like a Christmas candle, but there is also light that comes from a blast furnace. They are both light, but oh what a difference in the power and wattage of those lights. So, one may have light, but one more have more light. There may be two people who are alive, but one may be very sick. They both have life, but one does not have abundant life. You may even think of two people who are perfectly healthy, and yet there is a difference. One may have life, and health, but the other may have life and health and maturity. And oh what a difference it is to have maturity as well as health, and then one has a more abundant life. Or we may think of an individual who is healthy and who is mature and another individual who has life and health and maturity but for some reason or other he may be in prison, and he doesn't have liberty. Both have life, both have health, both have maturity, but one does not have the same freedom that the other has. There is a great deal of difference in the experience of life. One has life, the other has life, but one has a more abundant life. Or one may think of individuals who have all of this but are poor, and other who have all of this who are rich. There is a difference in the kind of life that they enjoy. There is such a thing as life. There is such a thing as abundant life. ow that which is true in the physical life is true in the spiritual life. Every individual who is believed in the Lord Jesus Christ has spiritual life, but there is such a thing as abundant spiritual life. The Lord Jesus speaks of it here, “And that they might have it more abundantly.” What does it mean? Well it would be nice if we had another twenty or thirty minutes to talk about the things that characterize the abundant life. I think one thing that characterizes them is strength. The apostle speaks about, “Ministering in the arm of the Lord.” He tells the Corinthians to quit themselves like men. The work of the Lord demands strong workers, but many of us are simply weak. God would have us to know the truth of Isaiah chapter 40, verse 31,

the text that Dr. Gerstner spoke on a few weeks back, “But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.” That is more abundant life. 8. VI ES EXPOSITORY DICTIO ARY "Zoe (Greek for 'life') is used in the .T. "of life as a principle, life in the absolute sense, life as God has it, that which the Father has in Himself, and which He gave to the Incarnate Son to have in Himself, John 5:26, and which the Son manifested in the world, I John 1:2. From this life man has become alienated in consequence of the Fall, Eph. 4:18, and of this life men become partakers through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, John 3:15..." 9. BARCLAY'S .T. WORDS "...eternal life is nothing less than the life of God himself. ...We shall never enter into the full ideas of eternal life until we rid ourselves of the almost instinctive assumption that eternal life means primarily life which goes on forever." 10. Jamison, “am come that they might have life, and ... more abundantly ― not merely to preservebut impartLIFE, and communicate it in rich and unfailing exuberance. What a claim! Yet it is only an echo of all His teaching; and He who uttered these and like words must be either a blasphemer, all worthy of the death He died, or “God with us” - there can be no middle course. 11. Barnes, “thief cometh not ... - The thief has no other design in coming but to plunder. So false teachers have no other end in view but to enrich or aggrandize themselves. I am come that they might have life - See the notes at Joh_5:24. Might have it more abundantly - Literally, that they may have abundance, or that which abounds. The word denotes that which is not absolutely essential to life, but which is superadded to make life happy. They shall not merely have life - simple, bare existence - but they shall have all those superadded things which are needful to make that life eminently blessed and happy. It would be vast mercy to keep men merely from annihilation or hell; but Jesus will give them eternal joy, peace, the society of the blessed, and all those exalted means of felicity which are prepared for them in the world of glory. 12. Gill, “thief cometh not but for to steal,.... That is his first and principal view; to steal, is to invade, seize, and carry away another's property. Such teachers that come not in by the right door, or with a divine commission, seek to deceive, and carry away the sheep of Christ from him, though they are not able to do it; and to steal away their hearts from him, as Absalom stole the hearts of the people from their rightful lord and sovereign, David his father; and to subject them to themselves, that they might lord it over them, and make a property of them, as the Pharisees did, who, under a pretence of long prayers, devoured widows' houses. And to kill and to destroy; either the souls of men by their false doctrines, which eat as doth a cancer, and poison the minds of men, and slay the souls that should not die, subverting the faith of nominal professors, though they cannot destroy any of the true sheep of Christ; or the bodies of the saints, by their oppression, tyranny, and persecution, who are killed all the day long for the sake of Christ, and are accounted as sheep for the slaughter, by these men, they thinking that by so doing they do God good service. I am come that they might have life; that the sheep might have life, or the elect of God might have life, both spiritual and eternal; who, as the rest of mankind, are by nature dead in trespasses

and sins, and liable in themselves to an eternal death: Christ came into this world in human nature, to give his flesh, his body, his whole human nature, soul and body, for the life of these persons, or that they might live spiritually here, and eternally hereafter; and so the Arabic version renders it, "that they might have eternal life"; onnus calls it, "a life to come"; which is in Christ, and the gift of God through him; and which he gives to all his sheep, and has a power to give to as many as the Father has given him: and that they might have itmore abundantly; or, as the Syriac version reads, "something more abundant"; that is, than life; meaning not merely than the life of wicked men, whose blessings are curses to them; or than their own life, only in the present state of things; or than long life promised under the law to the observers of it; but even than the life Adam had in innocence, which was but a natural and moral, not a spiritual life, or that life which is hid with Christ in God; and also than that which angels live in heaven, which is the life of servants, and not of sons: or else the sense is, that Christ came that his people might have eternal life, with more abundant evidence of it than was under the former dispensation, and have stronger faith in it, and a more lively hope of it: or, as the words may be rendered, "and that they might have an abundance": besides life, might have an abundance of grace from Christ, all spiritual blessings in him now, and all fulness of joy, glory, and happiness hereafter. 13. Henry, “mischievous design of the thief (Joh_10:10): The thief cometh notwith any good intent, but to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. First,Those whom they steal,whose hearts and affections they steal from Christ and his pastures, they kill and destroyspiritually; for the heresiesthey privily bring inare damnable.Deceivers of souls are murderers of souls. Those that steal away the scripture by keeping it in an unknown tongue, that steal away the sacraments by maiming them and altering the property of them, that steal away Christ's ordinances to put their own inventions in the room of them, they kill and destroy;ignorance and idolatry are destructive things. Secondly,Those whom they cannot steal,whom they can neither lead, drive, nor carry away, from the flock of Christ, they aim by persecutions and massacres to kill and destroycorporally. He that will not suffer himself to be robbed is in danger of being slain. [2.] The gracious design of the shepherd; he is come, First, To give life to the sheep.In opposition to the design of the thief, which is to kill and destroy(which was the design of the scribesand Pharisees) Christ saith, I am come among men,1. That they might have life.He came to put life into the flock, the church in general, which had seemed rather like a valley full of dry bones than like a pasture covered over with flocks. Christ came to vindicate divine truths, to purify divine ordinances, to redress grievances, and to revive dying zeal, to seekthose of his flock that were lost,to bind up that which was broken(Eze_34:16), and this to his church is as life from the dead.He came to give lifeto particular believers. Life is inclusive of all good, and stands in opposition to the death threatened (Gen_2:17); that we might have life,as a criminal has when he is pardoned, as a sick man when he is cured, a dead man when he is raised; that we might be justified, sanctified, and at last glorified. 2. That they might have it more abundantly,kai perisson echōsin. As we read it, it is comparative,that they might have a life more abundantthan that which was lost and forfeited by sin, more abundant than that which was promised by the law of Moses, length of days in Canaan, more abundant than could have been expected or than we are able to ask or think.But it may be construed without a note of comparison, that they might have abundance,or might have it abundantly.Christ came to give life and perisson ti- something more,something better,life with advantage; that in Christ we might not only live, but live comfortably, live plentifully, live and rejoice. Life in abundance is eternal life,life without death or fear of death, life and much more.”

14. Bill Hybels, Leadership, “All he ever really wanted in life was more. He wanted more money, so he parlayed inherited wealth into a billion-dollar pile of assets. He wanted more fame, so he broke into the Hollywood scene and soon became a filmmaker and star. He wanted more sensual pleasures, so he paid handsome sums to indulge his every sexual urge. He wanted more thrills, so he designed, built, and piloted the fastest aircraft in the world. He wanted more power, so he secretly dealt political favors so skillfully that two U.S. presidents became his pawns. All he ever wanted was more. He was absolutely convinced that more would bring him true satisfaction. Unfortunately, history shows otherwise. This man concluded his life emaciated and colorless; with a sunken chest; fingernails in grotesque, inches-long corkscrews; rotting, black teeth; tumors; and innumerable needle marks from his drug addiction. Howard Hughes died believing the myth of more. He died a billionaire junkie, insane by all reasonable standards.”

11"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.
1. The good of the sheep is so high a priority with me that I will lay down my life for the sheep. I live for them and I will die for them. Sometimes a shepherd has to risk his life to protect the flock from the wolf who comes seeking to kill one of them. They sometimes need to be like David, who went after the lion and the bear, and when they rose up against him, did not flee, but caught them by the beard and slew them. 1B. William A. Quayle wrote, "I have deemed it wise to read the Greek as it is. The Greek text is "poiman ho kalos," "the beautiful Shepherd," and not "poiman ho agathos," "the good shepherd." While "kalos" often means "good" and is rightly enough so translated it is the legitimate and usual word for "beautiful." And so I have rendered the text, "I am the beautiful Shepherd." 2. Dr. William R. Crews. "The Greek word translated "good" is "KALOS," which means fair, choice, excellent, worthy - the meaning depending upon the context. Exactly what meaning is intended here may be determined by observing the law of first mention in John's Gospel. It is found in John 2:10, where there is found a reference to the water which our Lord had turned to wine. The Governor of the feast, after tasting it, said, "...Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good [Kalos] wine until now." Here the meaning is choice or excellent because it is contrasted with the poorer or inferior grade. In this light our Lord intended to convey the idea that He is the pre-eminently choice and excellent Shepherd in every way, transcending those shepherds who had gone before Him. Further strength is given to this idea when we consider the background in which these words are couched. In John 9, we find the Pharisees, the shepherds of Israel, casting out a poor sheep (who had been born blind) from the synagogue for confessing Christ. These shepherds were inferior or low grade shepherds, we may even say bad shepherds, when compared with Christ the choice, excellent, and good Shepherd Who came not to scatter or cast

away but to gather and receive." 3. John Macarthur, "He says, "I am the good one preeminent and excellent in every feature, I am the good, the beautiful one." That word is really packed. I am the shepherd, the excellent preeminent, lovely, beautiful one. That's what the word kalos meant. And that singles out Christ, friends. He's not just another shepherd. Two times a definite article, "I am The Shepherd...I am The preeminent, excellent, lovely, beautiful one." There is no other shepherd. He's above all shepherds. And, of course, to the Jewish mind, who in the history was the greatest shepherd? Who was it? It was David. And so what is Jesus saying here? In effect He's saying, "I'm greater than David. But I think there's even something beyond the claim to be greater than David. I think what He's doing really here is claiming deity. Look at the statement again. "I am," first of all could be reference to the name of God. But what He's saying here when He says, "I am the Good Shepherd," is really a profound statement in terms of His deity because of this. I read this morning in our opening Psalm 23, "The Lord is my...what?...shepherd." Psalm 80 calls God the Shepherd of Israel. The Jew knew that the true excellent Shepherd was God. And when Jesus comes along and says, "I am the one excellent kalos preeminently beautiful Shepherd," you know what He's claiming? Claiming equality with God. That's what He's claiming. He made Himself equal with the Jehovah of the Old Testament and He could do it because He was equal." In other words, Jesus is saying, "I am now what God has always been to Israel." 4. If a lion attacked the sheep the shepherd would have to scare the lion off, and if it did not flee, he would have to engage it in battle to save the sheep, and in so doing might lose his own life. Satan like a lion walks about seeking to devour the sheep of God, but Jesus came to defeat the devil and save the flock. He had to pay the ultimate price to do it, however. He did not kill the lion like David and Samson did by mere strength. He had to enter the very realm of Satan's power and defeat him on his own ground. This meant he had to die and descend into hell where he destroyed the hold Satan had on his sheep, and he set them free, so that the devil could never again hold captive those who followed the Good Shepherd. Jesus laid down his life so that he could give his sheep life abundant in time, and life eternal in heaven. 5. Going back to John Macarthur where he give us some fascinating word study on this life that Jesus laid down. He wrote, "If you notice carefully in verse 11 you'll see the word life. ow in the English version you never would understand the significance of this because it's not there. But listen to this. In the Greek there are two words for life, neither one of them is used here. One is bios from which we get our word biology which means life just the breathing part of life, you know, I exist, that's it, you know, as opposed to being dead. The other is zoe which means the circumstances of life. When Jesus gave His life He didn't just give up His biological breathing, He did not just forfeit the circumstances of life. You know what the word used here is? It's psuche, that's the word that's translated soul. It means the total man inside. When Jesus died, He wasn't just throwing His body up there, you want to read the verse right read it this way, "The Good Shepherd poured out His soul for the sheep," see. When Jesus died, friends, He was totally involved in that death. And to make sure we don't misunderstand that, God even wound Himself through the Greek language, picked out psuche and stuck it in there. Jesus did not in a detached fashion give up His zoe or bios, He poured out His psuche, His entire being into death. He didn't just do it in a detached way. Jesus said in Matthew 20:28, "The Son of Man gives His life a ransom for many," and right there His life

again is psuche. He poured out His soul. Listen, Jesus felt it all, friends. He felt the curse of sin. He felt the hurt of hate. He felt the pain of nails. He felt every excruciating agony that the sin of the world could put upon Him, and He felt every bit of it in His own soul. There was no detachment on the cross. This verse is loaded with theology." 6. Bob Utley, "“I am the good shepherd” This was an OT title for the Messiah (cf. Ezek. 34:23; Zech. 11; I Pet. 5:4) and for YHWH (cf. Ps. 23:1; 28:9; 77:20; 78:52; 80:1; 94:7; 100:3; Isa. 40:11; Jer. 23:1; 31:10; Ezek. 34:11-16). There are two Greek terms which can be translated “good”: (1) agathos, which is usually used in John for things, and (2) kalos, which was used in the Septuagint to refer to good as opposed to evil. In the T it has the meanings of “beautiful,” “noble,” “moral,” and “worthy.” These two terms are used together in Luke 8:15." 7. Constable, "Here is another "I am" claim. Jesus is the Good Shepherd in contrast to the bad shepherds just described (vv. 8, 10a). Rather than killing the sheep so He might live, as the bad shepherds did, Jesus was willing to sacrifice His life (Gr. psyche, the total self) so the sheep might live. It is this extreme commitment to the welfare of the sheep that qualified Jesus as the Good Shepherd.383 Good shepherding involves protecting, providing, and self sacrifice. "Good" (Gr. kalos) connotes nobility and worth, not merely gentleness. It contrasts Jesus with the unworthy and ignoble shepherds that He proceeded to describe (vv. 12-13). Laying down His life is a uniquely Johannine expression that describes a voluntary sacrificial death (cf. vv. 17, 18; 13:37-38; 15:13; 1 John 3:16). Likewise the preposition hyper ("for") usually connotes sacrifice (cf. 13:37; 15:13; Luke 22:19; Rom. 5:6- 8; 1 Cor. 15:3). Most shepherds do not intend to die for their sheep but to live for them; they only die for their sheep accidentally. Yet Jesus came to die for His sheep. Of course, Jesus also came to die for the whole world(6:51; 11:50-52).” 8. Barnes, "Verse 11. The good shepherd. The faithful and true shepherd, willing to do all that is necessary to defend and save the flock. Giveth his life. A shepherd that regarded his flock would hazard his own life to defend them. When the wolf comes, he would still remain to protect them. To give his life, here, means the same as not to fly, or to forsake his flock; to be willing to expose his life, if necessary, to defend them. Comp. Judges 12:3 "I put my life in my hands and passed over," &c.; 1 Samuel 19:5; 28:21. See John 10:15. The Messiah was often predicted under the character of a shepherd.” 9. Jamison, “am the good shepherd ― emphatically, and, in the sense intended, exclusively so (Isa_40:11; Eze_34:23; Eze_37:24; Zec_13:7). the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep ― Though this may be said of literal shepherds, who, even for their brute flock, have, like David, encountered “the lion and the bear” at the risk of their own lives, and still more of faithful pastors who, like the early bishops of Rome, have been the foremost to brave the fury of their enemies against the flock committed to their care; yet here, beyond doubt, it points to the struggle which was to issue in the willing surrender of the Redeemer’s own life, to save His sheep from destruction. 10. Clarek, “am the good shepherd - Whose character is the very reverse of that which has already been described. In Joh_10:7, Joh_10:9, our Lord had called himself the door of the sheep, as being the sole way to glory, and entrance into eternal life; here he changes the thought, and calls himself the shepherd, because of what he was to do for them that believe in him, in order to

prepare them for eternal glory. Giveth his life for the sheep - That is, gives up his soul as a sacrifice to save them from eternal death. will have the phrase here only to mean hazarding his life in order to protect others; but the 15th, 17th, and 18th verses, as well as the whole tenor of the new covenant, sufficiently prove that the first sense is that in which our Lord’s words should be understood.” 11. Gill, “am the good shepherd,.... A shepherd of his Father's appointing, calling, and sending, to whom the care of all his sheep, or chosen ones, was committed; who was set up as a shepherd over them by him, and was entrusted with them; and who being called, undertook to feed them; and being promised, was sent unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel; and under the character of a shepherd, died for them, and rose again, and is accountable to his Father for everyone of them; the shepherd, the great and chief shepherd, the famous one, so often spoken and prophesied of, Gen_49:24. And discharging his office aright, he is the good shepherd; as appears in his providing good pasture, and a good fold for his sheep; in protecting them from their enemies; in healing all their diseases; in restoring their souls when strayed from him; in watching over them in the night seasons, lest any hurt them; in searching for them, when they have been driven, or scattered in the dark and cloudy day; in caring for them, so that he lose none of them; and in nothing more than in what follows, the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep: not only exposes it to danger, as David did his, for the sake of his father's flock, but gives it away freely and voluntarily, for the sake of the sheep; in their room and stead, as a ransom for them, that they may be delivered from death, and might have eternal life: the Ethiopic version renders it, "the good shepherd gives his life for the redemption of his sheep"; so onnus paraphrases it, the "ransom price of his own sheep": this belongs to Christ's priestly office, and with the Jews priests were sometimes shepherds hence we read (q)of ‫" ,רועים כהנים‬shepherds that were priests". Philo the Jew speaks (r)of God as a shepherd and king; and of his setting his word, his firstborn Son, over the holy flock, to take care of it: and a good shepherd is thus described by the (s)Jews; "as ‫" ,רועה טוב‬a good shepherd", delivers the flock from the wolf, and from the lions, (see Joh_10:12) so he that leads Israel, if he is good, delivers them from the idolatrous nations, and from judgment below and above, and leads them to the life of the world to come, or eternal life; (see Joh_10:10).'' Which description agrees with Christ, the good shepherd; and so the Lord is said to be ‫,רועה טוב‬ "the good shepherd", and merciful, and there is none like him (t). 12. Henry, ggive his life for the sheep,and this that he might give life to them(Joh_10:11): The good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.1. It is the property of every good shepherd to hazard and expose his life for the sheep. Jacob did so, when he would go through such a fatigue to attend them, Gen_31:40. So did David, when he slew the lion and the bear.Such a shepherd of souls was St. Paul, who would gladly spend, and be spent,for their service, and counted not his life dear to him,in comparison with their salvation. But, 2. It was the prerogative of the great Shepherd to give his life to purchase his flock (Act_20:28), to satisfy for their trespass, and to shed his blood to wash and cleanse them.h 13. Calvin, “The good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. From the extraordinary affection which he bears towards the sheep, he shows how

truly he acts towards them as a shepherd; for he is so anxious about their salvation, that he does not even spare his own life. Hence it follows, that they who reject the guardianship of so kind and amiable a shepherd are exceedingly ungrateful, and deserve a hundred deaths, and are exposed to every kind of harm. The remark of Augustine is exceedingly just, that this passage informs us what we ought to desire, what we ought to avoid, and what we ought to endure, in the government of the Church. othing is more desirable than that the Church should be governed by good and diligent shepherds Christ declares that he is the good shepherd, who keeps his Church safe and sound, first, by himself, and, next, by his agents. Whenever there is good order, and fit men hold the government, then Christ shows that he is actually the shepherd But there are many wolves and thieves who, wearing the garb of shepherds, wickedly scatter the Church. Whatever name such persons may assume, Christ threatens that we must avoid them. 14. IVP commentary, "When Jacob had his vision he said, "How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God; this is the gate of heaven" (Gen 28:17). John wants us to have the same response. How awesome is this place--and the place is now this person in our midst, Jesus, the Son of God, the gate leading to God.The Good Shepherd Lays Down His Life for His Sheep (10:11-18) Jesus says, I am the good shepherd (v. 11), an "I am" saying that, like the others, ultimately concerns the issue of life. He has just promised life to the full (v. 10), and he now says this life comes through his death (vv. 11, 15, 17-18). Once again he starts with a familiar image in his audience's life, since shepherds commonly had to deal with the problem of wild animals (cf. Gen 31:39; 1 Sam 17:34-37). A good shepherd, one who is worthy of admiration (kalos), would risk his life to protect the sheep. But Jesus does not merely risk his life; he consciously gives his life for the sake of his sheep (vv. 15, 17-18; cf. Jeremias 1968:496 104). The idea of a voluntary and vicarious death for the sheep is not found in the Old Testament nor elsewhere (Jeremias 1968:496-97; Barrett 1978:374). The closest conceptual background is that of the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 (Brown 1966:398; Westcott 1908:2:57). While this servant is likened to a sheep rather than a shepherd (Is 53:7), it is said of him that "the Lord makes his life a guilt offering" (Is 53:10). The expression in John 10, lays down his life (tithemi ten psychen), could be taken as a translation of "makes his life" (sim naphsho, Is 53:10; Jeremias 1967c:710). For the sheep (hyper ton probaton) does not in itself necessarily speak of sacrifice, but in John it does (Barrett 1978:375). In every place the preposition hyper ("for") is used in John (6:51; 10:11, 15; 11:50-52; 13:37-38; 15:13; 17:19; 18:14), with two exceptions (1:30; 11:4), it is used of sacrifice in which "the death envisaged is on behalf of someone else" (Carson 1991:386). So again Jesus' death is seen to be central to his task. Another part of the conceptual background comes from the prophet Zechariah, who contrasts two shepherds. One is the messianic shepherd-king who is rejected by the people, which, in turn, results in their condemnation (Zech 11:4-14). The second is the worthless shepherd who deserts the flock (Zech 11:4-17). God's messianic shepherd will be struck down, causing the sheep to be scattered and leading to the judgment and refining of God's people (Zech 13:7-9). This rejection by the leaders of the people and their own condemnation is echoed in John, as is the striking of the shepherd, though with a different effect. It will indeed lead to the scattering of Jesus' flock for a brief time, but it will also be central in the gathering of his own flock from among the nations: "But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself" (Jn 12:32).

This death makes him the shepherd that is good (kalos). This word refers in such a context to that which is beautiful, noble, honorable, worthy of praise. In other words, Jesus is fulfilling his job as a shepherd in an exemplary fashion so that such goodness is able to be perceived (Grundmann 1965:548). He is the admirable shepherd, and there is something admirable, heroic and attractive in his death. Consequently, it is in his death that he will draw all men to himself (12:32). The beauty of the Lord's character attracts those whose hearts are able to receive divine beauty. This is far more than an admirable death of a martyr. For in this death we see the beauty of God himself, since God is love, and love, as John says (1 Jn 3:16), is the laying down of life. It is precisely because he was in the form of God that he poured himself out and laid down his life (Phil 2:6-8; cf. C. F. D. Moule 1972:97). In Jesus we see the divine character, and what we see is beautiful. When we are able to really see God as Jesus has revealed him we cannot help praising him if we have hearts that are open to God. Such a vision of God's beauty is at the heart of all true worship.” 15. Barclay, “This passage draws the contrast between the good and the bad, the faithful and the unfaithful shepherd. The shepherd was absolutely responsible for the sheep. If anything happened to a sheep, he had to produce some kind of proof that it was not his fault. Amos speaks about the shepherd rescuing two legs or a piece of an ear out of a lion's mouth (Am.3:12). The law laid it down: "If it is torn by beasts, let him bring it as evidence" (Exo.22:13). The idea is that the shepherd must bring home proof that the sheep had died, and that he had been unable to prevent the death. David tells Saul how when he was keeping his father's sheep, he had the battle with the lion and the bear (1Sam.17:34-36). Isaiah speaks of the crowd of shepherds being called out to deal with the lion (Isa.31:4). To the shepherd it was the most natural thing to risk his life in defense of his flock. Sometimes the shepherd had to do more than risk his life: sometimes he had to lay it down, perhaps when thieves and robbers came to despoil the flock. Dr W. M. Thomson in The Land and the Book writes: "I have listened with intense interest to their graphic descriptions of downright and desperate fights with these savage beasts. And when the thief and the robber come (and come they do), the faithful shepherd has often to put his life in his hand to defend his flock. I have known more than one case where he had literally to lay it down in the contest. A poor faithful fellow last spring, between Tiberias and Tabor, instead of fleeing, actually fought three Bedawin robbers until he was hacked to pieces with their khanjars, and died among the sheep he was defending." The true shepherd never hesitated to risk, and even to lay down, his life for his sheep.” 16. Daniel Parks, “The qualifications of Jesus Christ as the "good shepherd" of God's sheep are set forth throughout John 10. 1) Jesus Christ is the Good Shepherd because He is approved by God (vv.1-3a): "Most assuredly, 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. But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the doorkeeper opens." God will not permit His sheep to be led by anyone but Jesus Christ. 2) Jesus Christ is the Good Shepherd because He has given His own life for the sheep (v.11): "The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep." Thieves and robbers are concerned only for their own welfare and advancement, and will pursue it at the expense of the lives of their followers. Jesus Christ is concerned for the welfare and advancement of His sheep, and has sacrificed His own life for their salvation and safety. (Here is also set forth the doctrine of particular redemption or limited atonement, as Christ did not die for the sins of goats.) 3) Jesus Christ is the Good Shepherd because He knows each of His sheep (v.14): "I know My

sheep." Jesus Christ knows each of His sheep by name (v.3) and has a personal relationship with each of them, even though they are so many as to be "a great multitude which no one could number" (Revelation 7:9). one but the omniscient Son of God could be such a Good Shepherd. 4) Jesus Christ is the Good Shepherd because He will bring all His sheep into His fold (v.16): "And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice, and there will be one flock and one shepherd." These "other sheep" are God's elect who had not yet been converted when Jesus Christ uttered these words. Every one of God's elect will be added to the fold of Jesus Christ when they believe the gospel. And the fact that they will comprise "one flock" with "one shepherd" means that each will be known and loved in the same manner by Christ as are all the rest. one of the Good Shepherd's sheep is shown any less favor than is any other (see Galatians 3:28; Colossians 3:11). 5) Jesus Christ is the Good Shepherd because He will lose not even one of His sheep (v.28): "And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand." Some professing Christians speak of being "saved today but lost tomorrow." They evidently do not know this Good Shepherd. They evidently have instead believed "another gospel" and are following "another Jesus" (2 Corinthians 11:4). He who believes in Jesus Christ will never lose his salvation. 6) Jesus Christ is the Good Shepherd because He is divine (v.30): "I and My Father are one." Jesus Christ and His Father are two distinct persons of one divine essence, each being worthy of the same honor (John 5:23). God's sheep therefore praise Jesus Christ in the words of Psalm 23: "Jehovah is my shepherd; I shall not want...." He is their "good [or ideal] shepherd," their "great shepherd" (Hebrews 13:20), their "chief shepherd" (1 Peter 5:4), and "the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls" (1 Peter 2:25). Is Jesus Christ the Good Shepherd your Shepherd?” 17. Bob Deffinbaugh, “ ow we come to the really amazing part. Pseudo-shepherds do not care about the flock; they care about themselves. Thus, they use and abuse the flock, but they do not tenderly care for the flock. They come “to steal and kill and destroy.” The Good Shepherd intimately knows and tenderly cares for His flock, but He does far more. He places the interests of the flock above His own, and thus in order to save the flock, He lays down His life for His sheep. The hireling is interested in his wages more than the sheep he is paid to care for. If a wolf attacks the sheep under his care, he would be risking personal injury were he to seek to save the sheep. The hireling therefore forsakes the sheep to save his own skin. He runs from danger, rather than endanger himself by seeking to save the flock. The Good Shepherd does much more than simply put himself in harm’s way to save the sheep; He deliberately lays down His life in order to save the sheep. The sacrificial death of the Good Shepherd described here is not for “sheep” in general (all the sheep in the sheepfold of verses 15); it is for His sheep, the sheep in His flock, the elect whom the Father has given Him, whom He Himself has chosen: It is for the sheep—only for the sheep—that the good shepherd lays down his life. The design of the atonement is definitely restricted. Jesus dies for those who had been given to him by the Father, for the children of God, for true believers. This is the teaching of the Fourth Gospel throughout (3:16; 6:37, 39, 40, 44, 65; 10:11, 15, 29; 17:6, 9, 20, 21, 24). It is also the doctrine of the rest of Scripture. With his precious blood Christ purchased his church (Acts 20:28; Eph. 5:25-27); his people (Matt. 1:21); the elect (Rom. 8:32-35).179

However clearly this Gospel portrays Jesus as the Saviour of the world (4:42), the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (1:29, 36), it insists no less emphatically that Jesus has a peculiar relation with those the Father has given him (6:37ff.), with those he has chosen out of the world (15:16, 19). So here: Jesus’ death is peculiarly for his sheep, just as we elsewhere read that ‘Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her’ (Ephesians 5:25)”

18. Arthur Pink has lengthy comments here, and they are full of information. “The Pharisees were the shepherds of Israel. In casting out of the synagogue this poor sheep, the man that was born blind, for doing what was right, and for refusing to do what was wrong, they had shown what manner of spirit they were of. And this was but a sample of their accustomed oppression and violence. In them, then, did the prophecy of Ezekiel receive a fulfillment, that prophecy in which He had testified of those shepherds of His people who resembled thieves and robbers. Ezekiel 34 (which like all prophecy has a double fulfillment) supplies a sad commentary upon the selfish and cruel conduct of the scribes and Pharisees. The whole chapter should be read: we quote but a fragment—"And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God unto the shepherds; Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! should not the shepherds feed the flocks? Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool, ye kill them that are fed: but ye feed not the flock. The diseased have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed that which was sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken, neither have ye brought again that which was driven away, neither have ye sought that which was lost; but with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them" (verses 1-4). The same prophecy of Ezekiel goes on to present the true Shepherd of Israel, the Good Shepherd: "For thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I, even I, will both search my sheep, and seek them out. As a shepherd seeketh out his flock in the day that he is among his sheep that are scattered; so will I seek out my sheep, and will deliver them out of all places where they have been scattered in the cloudy and dark day... I will feed my flock, and I will cause them to lie down, saith the Lord God. I will seek that which was lost, and bring again that which was driven away, and will bind up that which was broken, and will strengthen that which was sick... And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd... Thus shall they know that I the Lord their God am with them, and that they, even the house of Israel, are my people, saith the Lord God. And ye my flock, the flock of my pasture, are men, and I am your God, saith the Lord God" (verses 11, 12, 15, 16, 23, 30, 31). Ezekiel is not the only prophet of the Old Testament who presents the Savior under the figure of a "shepherd." Frequently do the Old Testament Scriptures so picture Him. In His dying prediction, Jacob declared, "From thence (the mighty God of Jacob) is the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel" (Gen. 49:24). The Psalmist declared, "The Lord is my Shepherd" (Ps. 23:1). Through Isaiah it was revealed, "The Lord God will come with strong hand. and his arm shall rule for him: behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him. He shall feed his flock like a shepherd: he shall gather the lambs with his arm, and carry them in his bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young" (Ps. 40:10, 11). In Zechariah occurs that remarkable word "Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones" (Ps. 13:7).

In addition to the prophecies, the Old Testament is particularly rich in the types which foreshadow Christ in the character of a "shepherd." So far as we have been able to trace, there are five individual shepherds who pointed to Christ, and each of them supplies some distinctive line in the typical picture. First, Abel, for in Genesis 4:2 we are told that "Abel was a keeper of sheep." The distinctive aspect of typical truth which he exemplifies is the death of the Shepherd —slain by wicked hands, by his brother according to the flesh. The second is Jacob, and a prominent thing in connection with him as a shepherd is his care for the sheep—see Genesis 30:31; Genesis 31:38-40; and note particularly Genesis 33:13, 14. The third is Joseph: the very first thing recorded in Scripture about this favorite son of Jacob is that he fed the flock (Gen. 37:2). The fourth is Moses. Three things are told us about him: he watered, protected and guided the sheep: " ow the priest of Midian had seven daughters: and they came and drew water, and filled the troughs to water their father’s flock. And the shepherds came and drove them away: but Moses stood up and helpeth them, and watered their flock... ow Moses kept the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian: and he led the flock to the backside of the desert, and came to the mountain of God, even to Horeb" (Ex. 2:16, 17; 3:1). The fifth is David, and he is presented as jeopardizing his life for the sheep—"And David said unto Saul, Thy servant kept his father’s sheep, and there came a lion, and a bear, and took a lamb out of the flock: And I went out after him, and smote him, and delivered it out of his mouth: and when he arose against me, I caught him by his beard, and smote him, and slew him. Thy servant slew both the lion and the bear" (1 Sam. 17:34-36). There is one other individual "shepherd" referred to in the Old Testament and that is "the idol shepherd" (Zech. 11:16, 17), and he is the Antichrist—how significant that he is the sixth! The only other individual "shepherd" mentioned in Scripture is the Lord Jesus, and He is the seventh! Seven is the number of perfection, and we do not reach perfection till we come to Christ, the Good Shepherd! "I am the good shepherd." The word for "good" is a very comprehensive one, and perhaps it is impossible to embrace in a brief definition all that it included within its scope. The Greek word is "kalos" and is translated "good" seventy-six times: it is also rendered "fair," "meet," "worthy," etc. In order to discover the prime elements of the word we must have recourse to the law of first mention. Whenever we are studying any word or expression in Scripture, it is very important to pay special attention to the initial mention of it. The first time this word "good" occurs in the ew Testament is in Matthew 3:10, where we read, "Every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire." The word "tree" is there used metaphorically. It is the unregenerate who are in view. o unbeliever is able to bring forth "good fruit." The "good fruit," then, is what is produced in and through a Christian. What kind of "fruit" is it which a Christian bears? It is Divine fruit, spiritual fruit: it is the product of the new nature. It is Divine as contrasted from what is human; spiritual as contrasted from what is fleshly. Thus in the light of this first occurrence of the word "good" we learn that when Christ said, "I am the good shepherd" He signified, "I am the Divine and spiritual Shepherd." All other shepherds were human; He was the Son of God. The "shepherds" from whom He is here contrasting Himself were the Pharisees, and they were carnal; but He was spiritual. It will also repay us to note carefully the first occurrence of this word "good" in John’s Gospel. It is found in John 2:10. When the Lord Jesus had miraculously turned the water into wine, the servants bore it to the governor of the feast, and when he had tasted it, he exclaimed, "Every man at the beginning cloth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now." Here the meaning of the word "good" signifies choice, or excellent, yea, that which is pre-eminently excellent, for the "good wine" is here contrasted from the inferior. This usage of "kalos" helps us still further in ascertaining the

force of this adjective in John 10:11. When Christ said, "I am the good shepherd," He intimated that He was the pre-eminently excellent Shepherd, infinitely elevated above all who had gone before Him. "I am the good shepherd." This was clearly an affirmation of His absolute Deity. He was here addressing Israelites, and Israel’s "Shepherd" was none other than Jehovah (Ps. 23:1; 80:1). When then the Savior said, "I am the good shepherd." He thus definitely identified Himself with the Jehovah of the Old Testament. "I am the good shepherd." This, like every other of our Lord’s titles, views Him in a distinctive relationship. He was, says Dr. John Gill, "a Shepherd of His Father’s appointing, calling, and sending, to whom the care of all His sheep, or chosen ones, was committed; who was set up as a Shepherd over them by Him, and was entrusted with them; and who being called, undertook to feed them." In the Greek it is more emphatic than in the English: literally it reads, "I am the shepherd, the good." "The good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep" (verse 11). The word for "giveth’ is usually translated "layeth down." "For the sheep" signifies, on their behalf. The good Shepherd gave His life freely and voluntarily, in the room and stead of His people, as a ransom for them, that they might be delivered from death and have eternal life. The Ethiopic Version reads, "The good Shepherd gives His life for the redemption of the sheep." "The good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep." This is one of the many scriptures which clearly and definitely defines both the nature and extent of the Atonement. The Savior "gave his life" not as a martyr for the truth, not as a moral example of self-sacrifice, but for a people. He died that they might live. By nature His people are dead in trespasses and sins, and had not the Divinely-appointed and Divinely-provided Substitute died for them, there had been no spiritual and eternal life for them. Equally explicit is this verse concerning those for whom Christ laid down His life. It was not laid down for fallen angels, but for sinful men; and not for men in general, but for His own people in particular; for "the sheep," and not for "the goats." Such was the announcement of God through the prophets, "For the transgression of my people was he stricken" (Isa. 53:8). As said the angel to Mary, "Thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins" (Matthew 1:21); and as said the angel to the shepherds, "Behold I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all the people" (Luke 2:10). The same restriction to be observed in the words of Christ at the Supper: "This is my blood of the new testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins" (Matthew 26:28). (Cf. also Acts 20:28; Titus 2:14; Hebrews 2:17, etc.)”

12The hired hand is not the shepherd who owns the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it.

1. I am not like the hired hand who has no ultimate loyalty to the sheep. He will flee when danger threatens, and the sheep will suffer because of his faithlessness. o so with me, for I will fight all foes to protect my sheep. 1B. John Piper, “To the hireling sheep-tending is just a job. They don't really care about the sheep. They are doing this to earn a living, not because they love sheep. And so they say, " o job is worth your life. If you're just working for a living, then you sure don't need a job that might kill you." So if a pack of wolves attacks your sheep, and you're just a hired hand, you run. You don't risk your life and fight the wolves. Who cares about a few sheep? But the reason Jesus mentions these hired hands is to show that he's not like that. He's not a hired hand. He's the good shepherd and the owner of the sheep. Verse 14: "I am the good shepherd; and I know My own, and My own know Me." The difference is that the hired hand loves his life more than the sheep, but Jesus loves his sheep more than his life. Four times in this passage Jesus says he lays down his life for the sheep. Verse 11: "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep." Verse 15b: "I lay down my life for the sheep." Verse 17: "For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life." Verse 18: " o one has taken [my life] away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative." When Jesus laid down his life for the sheep he saved us from three destroying wolves: sin and death and judgment. He saw them coming; he went out to meet them; he drew them away from the flock and gave his life to kill them and take away their power so that they could not destroy the flock.” 2. Alan Carr, "Jesus explains the difference between the concerned shepherd and the hireling. The hireling is there only for the paycheck. When trouble comes, he runs away and leaves the sheep to be devoured by the wolves. The shepherd, on the other hand, owns the sheep and has a vested interested in their welfare. Therefore, the good shepherd is willing to pay any price to protect the sheep, even if it means that he has to give His very life for them." 3. John Macarthur, "Here are all these, you know, religious mucky-mucks from Israel standing there listening to Jesus. And now He hits them right between the eyes again and says, "You care nothing about the sheep, you are hirelings, you are religious mercenaries in it for the money and the prestige. And when any trouble comes you bail out and the sheep get ruined, scattered, crippled and devoured." In fact, they were even earlier called those who destroyed the sheep. But here he calls these false leaders mercenaries or hirelings. They work for the job, they don't care about the sheep, they only want the money. They have no love for the sheep, only love for the pay. And when the wolves attack the flock, the hireling forgot everything but the saving of his own hide and took off." 4. Barnes, "Verse 12. A hireling. A man employed to take care of the sheep, to whom wages is paid. As he does not own the sheep, and guards them merely for pay, rather than risk his life he would leave the flock to the ravages of wild beasts. The word translated hireling is often employed in a good sense; but here it denotes one who is unfaithful to his trust; and especially those ministers who preach only for support, and who are unwilling to encounter any danger or to practise any self-denial for the welfare of the church of God. They are those who have no boldness in the cause of their Master, but who, rather than lose their reputation or place, would

see the church corrupted and wasted by its spiritual foes. Whose own the sheep are not. Who does not own the sheep."leaveth the sheep" Ezekiel 34:2-6; Zechariah 11:17 5. Calvin, "But the hireling. By hirelings we are to understand those who retain the pure doctrine, and who proclaim the truth, as Paul says, to serve a purpose rather than from pure zeal. Though such persons do not serve Christ faithfully, yet we ought to hear them; for Christ wished that the Pharisees should be heard, because they sat in Moses' seat, (Matthew 23:2;) and, in like manner, we ought to give such honor to the Gospel, as not to shrink from its ministers, though they be not good men. And as even the slightest offenses render the Gospel distasteful to us, that we may not be hindered by such false delicacy, let us always remember what I have formerly suggested, that if the Spirit of Christ does not operate so powerfully in ministers, as to make it plainly evident that he is their shepherd, we suffer the punishment of our sins, and yet our obedience is proved. And he who is not the shepherd. Though Christ claims for himself alone the name of a shepherd, yet he indirectly states that, in some respects, he holds it in common with the agents by whom he acts. For we know that there have been many, since the time of Christ, who did not hesitate to shed their blood for the salvation of the Church; and even the prophets, before his coming, did not spare their own life. But in his own person he holds out a perfect example, so as to lay down a rule for his ministers. For how base and shameful is our indolence, if our life is more dear to us than the salvation of the Church, which Christ preferred to his own life! What is here said about laying down life for the sheep, may be viewed as an undoubted and principal mark of paternal affection. Christ intended, first, to demonstrate what a remarkable proof he gave of his love toward us, and, next, to excite all his ministers to imitate his example. Yet we must attend to the difference between them and him. He laid down his life as the price of satisfaction, shed his blood to cleanse our souls, offered his body as a propitiatory sacrifice, to reconcile the Father to us. othing of all this can exist in the ministers of the Gospel, all of whom need to be cleansed, and receive atonement and reconciliation to God by that single sacrifice. But Christ does not argue here about the efficacy or benefit of his death, so as to compare himself to others, but to prove with what zeal and affection [288] he is moved towards us, and, next, to invite others to follow his example. In short, as it belongs exclusively to Christ to procure life for us by his death, and to fulfill all that is contained in the Gospel, so it is the universal duty of all pastors or shepherds, to defend the doctrine which they proclaim, even at the expense of their life, and to seal the doctrine of the Gospel with their blood, and to show that it is not in vain that they teach that Christ has procured salvation for themselves and for others.

But here a question may be put. Ought we to reckon that man a hireling, who, for any reason whatever, shrinks from encountering the wolves? This was anciently debated as a practical question, when tyrants raged cruelly against the Church. Tertullian, and others of the same class, were, in my opinion, too rigid on this point. I prefer greatly the moderation of Augustine, who allows pastors to flee on the condition that, by their flight, they contribute more to the public safety than they would do by betraying the flock committed to their charge. And he shows that this is done, when the Church is not deprived of well-qualified ministers, and when the life of the pastor in particular is so eagerly sought, that his absence mitigates the rage of enemies. But it the flock -- as well as the pastor -- be in danger, [289] and if there be reason to believe that the pastor flees, not so much from a desire to promote the public advantage as from a dread of dying, Augustine contends that this is not at all lawful, because the example of his flight will do more injury than his life can do good in future. The reader may consult the Epistle to Bishop Honoratus, (Ep. 108) On this ground it was lawful for Cyprian to flee, who was so far from shuddering at death, that he nobly refused to accept the offer of saving his life by a treacherous denial of his Master. Only it must be held that a pastor ought to prefer his flock, or even a single sheep, to his own life. Whose own the sheep are not. Christ appears here to make all shepherds besides himself to be, without exception, hirelings; for, since he alone is shepherd, none of us have a right to say that the sheep which he feeds are his own But let us remember that they who are guided by the Spirit of God reckon that to be their own which belongs to their Head; and that not in order to claim power for themselves, but to keep faithfully what has been committed to their charge. For he who is truly united to Christ will never cease to take an interest in that which He valued so highly. This is what he afterward says: 6. IVP commentary, "Jesus goes on to contrast the shepherd who will risk his life for the sheep with a hireling who runs from the wolf and leaves the sheep behind to be attacked (harpazei, literally, "snatched" or "carried off") and scattered. They are not his sheep, and he does not care about them (Jn 10:12-13). This picture is not so much an allusion of Ezekiel 34 as a development from it. In Ezekiel the danger from wild animals arises after the sheep have been scattered (Ezek 34:5, 8), and the false shepherds are indeed shepherds, though like the hireling they care nothing for the sheep. So there are some general associations with Ezekiel, which may suggest that Jesus is continuing his condemnation of the leadership of Israel. But the main point seems to focus on the character of the Good Shepherd, specifically, his care for the sheep. His care for the sheep addresses two problems, the lack of care on the part of the hireling and the threat of scattering by the wolf. Elsewhere the wolf is an image of false teachers who come both from outside the community and from within (Mt 7:15; Acts 20:29-30). Such a problem was present in John's day in Ephesus, since Paul's prediction to the Ephesian elders (Acts 20:29-30) was already coming to pass in Paul's own day (cf. 1 Tim 1:3) and continued in John's time (cf. 1 John). Likewise, the problem of hirelings continued in the church, as seen in Peter's exhortation

to the elders to shepherd God's flock willingly and not just for money (1 Pet 5:2). 7. Jamison, ghireling ... whose own the sheep are not \ who has no property,in them. By this He points to His own peculiar relation to the sheep, the same as His Fatherfs, the great Proprietor and Lord of the flock, who styles Him gMy Shepherd, the Man that is My Fellowh (Zec_13:7), and though faithful under-shepherds are so in their Masterfs interest, that they feel a measure of His own concern for their charge, the language is strictly applicable only to gthe Son over His own househ (Heb_3:6). seeth the wolf coming \ not the devildistinctively, as some take it [Stier, Alford, etc.], but generally whoever comes upon the flock with hostile intent, in whatever form: though the wicked one, no doubt, is at the bottomof such movements [Luthardt].h 8. Barnes, ghireling - A man employed to take care of the sheep, to whom wages is paid. As he does not own the sheep, and guards them merely for pay, rather than risk his life he would leave the flock to the ravages of wild beasts. The word translated ghirelingh is often employed in a good sense; but here it denotes one who is unfaithful to his trust; and especially those ministers who preach only for support, and who are unwilling to encounter any danger or to practice any self-denial for the welfare of the church of God. They are those who have no boldness in the cause of their Master, but who, rather than lose their reputation or place, would see the church corrupted and wasted by its spiritual foes. Whose own the sheep are not - Who does not own the sheep. 9. Clarke, ghe that is a hireling - Or, as my old MS. Bible reads it, the marchaunt, he who makes merchandise of menfs souls; bartering them, and his own too, for filthy lucre. Let not the reader apply this, or any of the preceding censures, to any particular class or order of men: every religious party may have a hireling priest, or minister; and where the provision is the greatest there the danger is most. Whose own the sheep are not - A hireling priest, who has never been the instrument of bringing souls to God, will not abide with them in the time of danger or persecution. They are not the produce of his labor, faith, and prayers: he has no other interest in their welfare than that which comes from the fleece and the fat. The hireling counts the sheep his own, no longer than they are profitable to him; the good shepherd looks upon them as his, so long as he can be profitable to them. Among the ancient Jews some kept their own flocks, others hired shepherds to keep them for them. And every owner must naturally have felt more interest in the preservation of his flock than the hireling could possibly feel. 10. Gill, gBut he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd,.... That is, who is not the owner of the sheep, though he keeps them, yet only for reward: by whom are meant, not the faithful ministers of the word, who live upon the Gospel, as Christ has ordained, and who are worthy of their reward, and are not to be called hirelings by way of reproach; since they teach not for hire and reward, but for the good of souls, and the interest of the Redeemer; but such who seek only their gain, from their quarter, and mind their own things, and not the things of Jesus Christ: whose own the sheep are not; who have neither a propriety in them, nor an hearty affection for them, and so care not what becomes of them: such an one "seeth the wolf coming"; by whom may be meant, either Satan; so the Jews compare Israel to a flock of sheep, and Satan, they say, ‫" ,הוא הזאב‬he is the wolf" (u); or any false prophet, or teacher, who are ravenous wolves; though

sometimes in sheep's clothing; or any tyrant, oppressor, or persecutor of the saints: and leaveth the sheep; as the idol shepherd, against whom a woe is pronounced, Zec_11:17. And fleeth; not being willing to bear any reproach or persecution, for the sake of Christ; not such a keeper of the flock as David, who went after the lion and the bear, and when they rose up against him, did not flee, but caught them by the beard and slew them; nor like the Apostle Paul, who fought with beasts at Ephesus, and would turn his back on none, nor give place, no, not for an hour, that truth might continue; and the wolf catcheth them; some of them: and scattereth the sheep; the rest; so are the sheep of Christ and his churches sometimes scattered, by persecution raised against them; see Act_8:1. The Jews have a rule concerning such an hireling shepherd (w), which is this; "a shepherd that feeds his flock, and leaves it, and goes to the city, and a wolf comes and ravines, and the lion comes and tears in pieces, he is free; but if he leaves by it his staff and his scrip, he is guilty.'' Which Maimonides thus (x) expresses and explains; "a shepherd who can deliver that which is torn, and that which is carried captive, with other shepherds, and with staves, and does not call the other shepherds, nor bring the staves to deliver them, he is guilty: one that keeps freely, and one that keeps for hire; he that keeps freely, calls the shepherds, and brings the staves freely; and if he does not find them, he is not guilty; but he that keeps for hire, is obliged to hire shepherds and staves, in order to deliver them.'' 11. Henry, gChrist is a good shepherd,and not as a hireling. There were many that were not thieves, aiming to kill and destroy the sheep, but passed for shepherds, yet were very careless in the discharge of their duty, and through their neglect the flock was greatly damaged; foolish shepherds, idle shepherds,Zec_11:15, Zec_11:17. In opposition to these, [1.] Christ here calls himself the good shepherd(Joh_10:11), and again (Joh_10:14) ho poimēn ho kalos- that shepherd, that good Shepherd,whom God had promised. ote, Jesus Christ is the best of shepherds, the best in the world to take the over-sight of souls, none so skilful, so faithful, so tender, as he, no such feeder and leader, no such protector and healer of souls as he. [2.] He proves himselfso, in opposition to all hirelings, Joh_10:12-14. Where observe, First, The carelessness of the unfaithful shepherd described (Joh_10:12, Joh_10:13); he that is a hireling, that is employed as a servant and is paid for his pains, whose own the sheep are not,who has neither profit nor loss by them, sees the wolf coming,or some other danger threatening, and leaves the sheepto the wolf, for in truth he careth not for them.Here is plain reference to that of the idol-shepherd, Zec_11:17. Evil shepherds, magistrates and ministers, are here described both by their bad principles and their bad practices. a. Their bad principles,the root of their bad practices. What makes those that have the charge of souls in trying times to betray their trust, and in quiet times not to mind it? What makes them false, and trifling, and self-seeking? It is because they are hirelings,and care not for the sheep.That is, (a.) The wealth of the world is the chief of their good; it is because they are hirelings.They undertook the shepherds' office, as a trade to live and grow rich by, not as an opportunity of serving Christ and doing good. It is the love of money, and of their own bellies, that carries them on in it. ot that those are hirelings who, while they serve at the altar, live,and live comfortably, upon the altar.The labourer is worthy of his meat; and a scandalous maintenance will soon make a scandalous ministry. But those are hirelingsthat love the wages more than the work, and set their heartsupon that, as the hireling is said to do, Deu_24:15. See 1Sa_2:29; Isa_56:11; Mic_3:5, Mic_3:11. (b.) The work of their place is the least of their care.

They value not the sheep,are unconcerned in the souls of others; their business is to be their brothers' lords, not their brothers' keepers or helpers; they seek their own things,and do not, like Timothy, naturally care for the state of souls.What can be expected but that they will flee when the wolf comes.He careth not for the sheep,for he is one whose own the sheep are not.In one respect we may say of the best of the under-shepherds that the sheep are not their own,they have not dominion over them not property in them (feed my sheepand my lambs,saith Christ); but in respect of dearness and affection they should be their own.Paul looked upon those as his ownwhom he called his dearly beloved and longed for.Those who do not cordially espouse the church's interests, and make them their own, will not long be faithful to them. b. Their bad practices,the effect of these bad principles, Joh_10:12. See here, (a.) How basely the hireling deserts his post; when he sees the wolf coming,though then there is most need of him, he leaves the sheep and flees. ote, Those who mind their safety more than their duty are an easy prey to Satan's temptations. (b.) How fatal the consequences are! the hireling fancies the sheep may look to themselves, but it does not prove so: the wolf catches them,and scatters the sheep,and woeful havoc is made of the flock, which will all be charged upon the treacherous shepherd. The blood of perishing souls is required at the hand of the careless watchmen. Secondly, See here the grace and tenderness of the good Shepherd set over against the former, as it was in the prophecy (Eze_34:21, Eze_34:22, etc.): I am the good Shepherd.It is matter of comfort to the church, and all her friends, that, however she may be damaged and endangered by the treachery and mismanagement of her under-officers, the Lord Jesus is, and will be, as he ever has been, the good Shepherd.Here are two great instances of the shepherd's goodness.h 12. Barclay, “But, on the other hand, there was the unfaithful shepherd. The difference was this. A real shepherd was born to his task. He was sent out with the flock as soon as he was old enough to go; the sheep became his friends and his companions; and it became second nature to think of them before he thought of himself. But the false shepherd came into the job, not as a calling, but as a means of making money. He was in it simply and solely for the pay he could get. He might even be a man who had taken to the hills because the town was too hot to hold him. He had no sense of the height and the responsibility of his task; he was only a hireling. Wolves were a threat to a flock. Jesus said of his disciples that he was sending them out as sheep in the midst of wolves (Matt.10:16); Paul warned the elders of Ephesus that grievous wolves would come, not sparing the flock (Ac.20:29). If these wolves attacked, the hireling shepherd forgot everything but the saving of his own life and ran away. Zechariah marks it as the characteristic of a false shepherd that he made no attempt to gather together the scattered sheep (Zech.11:16). Carlyle's father once took this imagery caustically to his speech. In Ecclefechan they were having trouble with their minister; and it was the worst of all kinds of such trouble--it was about money. Carlyle's father rose and said bitingly: "Give the hireling his wages and let him go." Jesus' point is that the man who works only for reward thinks chiefly of the money; the man who works for love thinks chiefly of the people he is trying to serve. Jesus was the good shepherd who so loved his sheep that for their safety he would risk, and one day give, his life.” 13. Pink, “It seems evident that our Lord is here pointing once more to the Pharisees, the unfaithful shepherds of Israel. The hireling shepherd is not the owner of the sheep—note "whose own the sheep are not"; he has neither a proprietorship over them nor affection for them. The "hireling" is paid to guard and watch them, and all such mind their own things, and not the

things of the Lord. And yet in view of Luke 10:7—"The laborer is worthy of his hire"—and other Scriptures, we must be careful not to interpret the use of this figure here out of harmony with its context. "It is not the bare receiving of hire which demonstrates a man to be a hireling (the Lord hath ordained that they who preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel); but the loving of hire; the loving the hire more than the work; the working for the sake of the hire. He is a hireling who would not work, were it not for the hire" (John Wesley). The "hireling" in a word is a professing servant of God who fills a position simply for the temporal advantages which it affords. A hireling is a mercenary: has no other impulse than the lust of lucre. "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." We do not think that the "wolf" here has reference, directly, to Satan, for the false shepherds do not flee at his approach; rather does it seem to us that "the wolf" points to any enemy of the "sheep," who approaches to attack them. ote in passing the care of Christ here in the selection of His words: "the wolf catcheth them and scattereth the sheep," not devoureth, for no "sheep" of Christ can ever perish.”

13The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep.
1. He has no ultimate loyalty to the sheep, for he has no personal care for them. It is just a job by which he meets his own needs. He cares not for the needs of the sheep. They are just a means to an end that is self-centered. 2. Calvin, " The hireling fleeth. The reason is, because he careth not for the sheep, which means, that his heart is not moved by the scattering of the flock, because he thinks that it does not at all belong to him. For he who looks to the hire, and not to the flock, though he may deceive others, when the Church is in a state of tranquility, yet when he comes into the contest, will give proof of his treachery.h 3. Barnes, ghe is a hireling - he regards only his wages. He feels no special interest in the flock. 4. Gill, ghireling fleeth, because he is an hireling,.... And has no propriety in the sheep; had he, he would abide by them, and defend them; but because he has not, he will not expose himself to any danger, but leaves them: and careth not for the sheep; what becomes of them, providing only for his own safety. Abarbinel (y) has a note on Isa_40:11 which may serve to illustrate this passage: "he shall feed his flock like a shepherd"; not as he that feeds the flock of others, for the hire they give him, but as a shepherd that feeds his own flock; who has compassion more abundantly on it, because it is his own flock; and therefore he saith, "behold his reward is with him", for he does not seek a reward from another; "and his work is before him"; for he feeds what is his own, and therefore his eyes and his heart are there.'' Which is not the case of the hireling; he does not care for them, he has not their good at heart; but the good shepherd has, such an one as Christ is.h

5. Pink, gAt first glance this saying of Christfs seems very trite, yet a little reflection will show that it enunciates a profound principle\a man does what he does because he is what he is. There is ever a rigid consistency between character and conduct. The drunkard drinks because he is a drunkard. But he is a drunkard before he drinks to excess. The liar lies because he is a liar; but he is a liar before he tells a lie. The thief steals because he is a thief. 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. "The hireling fleeth because he is an hireling": this is a philosophical explanation of the fugitivefs deed. It was the flight which demonstrated the man. The same principle holds good on the other side. The Christian acts christianly because he is a Christian; but a man must be a Christian before he can live a Christian life. Christian profession is no adequate test, nor is an orthodox creed. The demons have a creed, and it causes them to tremble, but it will not deliver them from Hell; It is by our fruit that we are known: it is deeds which make manifest the heart. "The hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling." Character is revealed by our conduct in the crises of life. When is it that the hireling fleeth? It is when he seeth "the wolf coming." Ah! it is the wolf that discovers the hireling! You might never have known what he was had not the wolf come. Very suggestive is this figure. It has passed into our common speech, as when poverty and starvation is represented by "the wolf is at the door." It suggests a crisis of trial or fierce testing. St. Paul made use of this simile when addressing the Ephesian elders: "For I know this, that after my departing shall greivous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock" (Acts 20:29). This is all very searching. How do you act when you see "the wolff coming! Are you terror stricken? Or, does approaching danger, temptation, or trial, cast you back the more upon the Lord?# first glance this saying of Christfs seems very trite, yet a little reflection will show that it enunciates a profound principle\a man does what he does because he is what he is. There is ever a rigid consistency between character and conduct. The drunkard drinks because he is a drunkard. But he is a drunkard before he drinks to excess. The liar lies because he is a liar; but he is a liar before he tells a lie. The thief steals because he is a thief. 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. "The hireling fleeth because he is an hireling": this is a philosophical explanation of the fugitivefs deed. It was the flight which demonstrated the man.h

14"I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me—
1. On the other hand, I am the good shepherd and I have a personal relationship with the sheep. I know them by name, and they know me. We are not strangers, but we are family. 1B. Maclaren, “‘I am the Good Shepherd.’ Perhaps even Christ never spoke more fruitful words than these. Just think how many solitary, wearied hearts they have cheered, and what a wealth of encouragement and comfort there has been in them for all generations. The little child as it lays itself down to sleep, cries—

‘Jesus, tender Shepherd, hear me, Bless Thy little lamb to-night,’ and the old man lays himself down to die murmuring to himself, ‘Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of Death, I will fear no evil, for Thou art with me.’ ‘I am the Good Shepherd.’ o preaching can do anything but weaken and dilute the force of such words, and yet, though in all their sweet, homely simplicity they appeal to every heart, there are great depths in them that are worth pondering, and profound thoughts that need some elucidation. Christ does not say ‘I am a Shepherd,’ but He says, ‘I am the good Shepherd.’ At first sight that word ‘good’ is interpreted, as I have said, in a kind of sentimental, poetic way, as expressing our Lord’s tenderness and love and care; but I do not think that is the full meaning here. You find up and down this Gospel of St. John phrases such as, ‘I am the true bread,’ ‘I am the true vine,’ and the meaning of the word that is here translated ‘good’ is very nearly parallel with that idea. The true bread, the true vine, the true Shepherd—which comes to this, to use modern phraseology, that Jesus Christ, in His relation to you and me, fulfills all that in figure and shadow is represented to the meditative eye by that lower relationship between the material shepherd and his sheep. That is the picture, this the reality. There is another point to be made clear, and that is, that whilst the word ‘good’ is perhaps a fair enough representation of that which is employed by our Lord, there is a special force and significance attached to the original, which is lost in our Bible. I do not know that it could have been preserved; but still it is necessary to state it. The expression here is the one that is generally rendered ‘fair,’ or ‘lovely,’ or ‘beautiful,’ and it belongs to the genius of that wonderful tongue in which the ew Testament is written that it has a name for moral purity, considered as being lovely, the highest goodness, and the serenest beauty, which was what the old Greeks taught, howsoever little they may have practised it in their lives. And so here the thought is that the Shepherd stands before us, the realisation of all which that name means, set forth in such a fashion as to be infinitely lovely and perfectly fair, and to draw the admiration of any man who can appreciate that which is beautiful, and can admire that which is of good report.” 2. Alan Carr, "Jesus speaks of the bond that exists between the shepherd and his sheep. They know Him and will not follow another, and the shepherd knows his sheep. Ill. The individual sheep in a flock all look alike to the untrained eye. A good shepherd, however, can tell them apart--often because of their defects and peculiar traits. A man who was tending a large flock explained this to a Christian friend who expressed surprise at his familiarity with each animal. "See that sheep over there?" he asked. " otice how it toes in a little. The one behind it has a squint; the next one has a patch of wool off its back; ahead is one with a distinguishing black mark, while the one closest to us has a small piece torn out of its ear." Observing all of them, the believer thought about Christ, the Chief Shepherd, who also knows the individual weaknesses and failings of His flock and watches over the members with discerning love and sympathetic understanding. With infinite concern He notes the doubts, fears, trials, conflicts, and defeats that disturb their peace, and He swiftly comes to their aid." 3. Dr. William R. Crews, "The word translated "know" here is "GI OSKO" in the Greek. Sometimes when the word is used, it carries the idea not only of cognizance but of affection and approval. This we believe to be the meaning here. Those of Christ's sheep whom He says He knows are contrasted with those who are rejected when He returns. Listen to what He will say to

those religious people who will have vain hopes of heaven. "...I never knew you: depart from me..." (Matthew 7:23). Surely He did not convey that He did not know they existed. He meant that He had no affection for and approval of them. He did not know them in His benign purpose with intention of blessing them in a saving way. They lived despising His blood, government, and grace, and now at the end they are rejected in clear language they understand, "...I never knew you..." The Bible refers to this class of people as "goats" who shall be cast into outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. But the sheep of Christ are not thus treated and rejected. On the other hand they are graciously received at the end and with loving invitation are told, "...Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world," (Matthew 25:34). 4. Barnes, "Know my sheep. Know my people, or my church. The word know here is used in the sense of affectionate regard or love. It implies such a knowledge of their wants, their dangers, and their characters, as to result in a deep interest in their welfare. Thus the word "knoweth," in John 10:15, is in John 10:17 explained by the word "loveth." Jesus knows the hearts, the dangers, and the wants of his people, and his kindness as their shepherd prompts him to defend and aid them. Am known of mine. That is, he is known and loved as their Saviour and Friend. They have seen their sins, and dangers, and wants; they have felt their need of a Saviour; they have come to him, and they have found him and his doctrines to be such as they need, and they have loved him. And as a flock follows and obeys its kind shepherd, so they follow and obey him who leads them beside the still waters, and makes them to lie down in green pastures.h 5. Calvin, "And I know my sheep, and am known by mine. In the former clause, he again holds out his love towards us; for knowledge proceeds from love,and is accompanied by care. But it means also that he utterly disregards all who do not obey the Gospel, as he repeats in the second clause, and confirms what he had formerly said, that -- on the other hand -- he is known by the sheep.h 6. Constable, "The mutual knowledge of the shepherd and the sheep is very important. Therefore Jesus stressed His identity as the Good Shepherd again. The sheep must know their Shepherd, and they can know Him as the Son knows the Father. The Son must know the Father to follow His will, and the sheep must know the Shepherd to follow Him faithfully. Jesus implied that the relationship the sheep enjoy with Himself is unique, as His relationship with His Father is unique. Yet each person maintains his own identity. Man does not become God, as the ew Age movement, for example, teaches. The repetition of the Shepherd's sacrificial death in this verse also stresses that knowing the Shepherd involves appreciating the extent of His love."'Know' (ginosko) in this Gospel connotes more than the cognizance of mere facts; it implies a relationship of trust and intimacy." 7. IVP commentary,"The themes introduced in a general way (Jn 10:11-13) are then personalized and developed (10:14-18). Jesus' knowledge of his flock and their knowledge of him (v. 14) are compared to the knowledge the Father and the Son have of one another (v. 15). The conjunction translated just as (kathos) is most often used as a comparative, but it can have a causal sense (Wallace 1996:674). Both senses are true here, for "the relationship between God the Father and

his Son is the original model and reason for Jesus' fellowship with his own" (Schnackenburg 1980b:297). As always, Jesus' identity as the Son and his relationship with the Father are crucial for understanding what is being said. This knowledge is not simply a knowledge about one another or merely the knowledge of an acquaintance. Rather, it is an intimacy that is love. The intimacy of the Father and the Son is so close it is described as a oneness (10:30), and a similar oneness of life is affirmed between Jesus and his disciples (for example, 15:1-7). The believer is not stirred into some cosmic soup, as in false forms of mysticism, but rather there is a radical oneness that does not obliterate the distinctness of the person. As the holy Trinity is both One and Three, so the believer is one with God and yet distinct from God. This theme of intimacy has been introduced earlier, for example in Jesus' teaching that his followers must eat his flesh and drink his blood (see comments on 6:5357), and it will be unpacked in detail in the discourse in the upper room (chaps. 13--17). Its inclusion here provides important clarification regarding the nature of the new community Jesus is bringing into existence. This closeness includes the most intimate of relations between Jesus and each of his followers, and it is part of the union with God that they enter into in Christ through membership in his flock. 8. Henry, gis acquainted with all that are now of his flock(Joh_10:14, Joh_10:15), as the good Shepherd (Joh_10:3, Joh_10:4): I know my sheep and am known of mine. ote, There is a mutual acquaintance between Christ and true believers; they know one another very well, and knowledge notes affection. [a.] Christ knows his sheep.He knows with a distinguishingeye who are his sheep, and who are not; he knows the sheep under their many infirmities, and the goats under their most plausible disguises. He knows with a favourableeye those that in truth are his own sheep; he takes cognizance of their state, concerns himself for them, has a tender and affectionate regard to them, and is continually mindful of them in the intercession he ever lives to make within the veil; he visits them graciously by his Spirit, and has communion with them; he knowsthem, that is, he approves and accepts of them, as Psa_1:6; Psa_37:18; Exo_33:17. [b.] He is known of them.He observes them with an eye of favour, and they observe him with an eye of faith. Christ's knowing his sheep is put before their knowing him, for he knew and loved us first (1Jo_4:19), and it is not so much our knowing him as our being known of him that is our happiness, Gal_4:9. Yet it is the character of Christ's sheep that they know him;know him from all pretenders and intruders; they know his mind, know his voice, know by experience the power of his death. Christ speaks here as if he gloried in being known by his sheep, and thought their respect an honour to him. Upon this occasion Christ mentions (Joh_10:15) the mutual acquaintance between his Father and himself: As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father. ow this may be considered, either, First,As the groundof that intimate acquaintance and relation which subsist between Christ and believers. The covenant of grace, which is the bond of this relation, is founded in the covenant of redemption between the Father and the Son, which, we may be sure, stands firm; for the Father and the Son understood one another perfectly well in that matter, and there could be no mistake, which might leave the matter at any uncertainty, or bring it into any hazard. The Lord Jesus knows whom he hath chosen,and is sure of them (Joh_13:18), and they also know whom they have trusted,and are sure of him (2Ti_1:12), and the ground of both is the perfect knowledge which the Father and the Son had of one another's mind, when the counsel of peace was between them both.Or, Secondly,As an apt similitude, illustrating the intimacy that is between Christ and believers. It may be connected with the foregoing words, thus: I know my sheep, and am known of mine, even as the Father knows me, and I know the

Father;compare Joh_17:21. 1. As the Father knew the Son, and loved him, and owned him in his sufferings, when he was led as a sheep to the slaughter,so Christ knows his sheep, and has a watchful tender eye upon them, will be with them when they are left alone,as his Father was with him. 2. As the Son knew the Father, loved and obeyed him, and always did those things that pleased him, confiding in him as his God even when he seemed to forsake him, so believers know Christ with an obediential fiducial regard.h 9. Jamison, gam the good shepherd, and know my sheep\ in the peculiar sense of 2Ti_2:19. am known of mine \ the soulfs response to the voice that has inwardly and efficaciously called it; for of this mutual loving acquaintance ours is the effectof His. gThe Redeemerfs knowledge of us is the activeelement, penetrating us with His power and life; that of believers is the passiveprinciple, the reception of His life and light. In this reception, however, an assimilation of the soul to the sublime object of its knowledge and love takes place; and thus an activity, though a derived one, is unfolded, which shows itself in obedience to His commandsh [Olshausen]. From this mutual knowledge Jesus rises to another and loftier reciprocity of knowledge. 10. Clarke, g- know my sheep - know, ƒ◌ƒ¿ ƒ◌ƒֺƒ¿, them that are mine: I know their hearts, their ׁ ֳ wishes, their purposes, their circumstances; and I approve of them; for in this sense the word to know is often taken in the Scriptures. Homer represents the goatherds as being so well acquainted with their own, though mixed with others, as easily to distinguish them. Iliad. 2. 474. gAs goat-herds separate their numerous flocks With ease, though fed promiscuous.h And are known of mine - They know me as their father, protector, and Savior; they acknowledge me and my truth before the world; and they approve of me, my word, my ordinances, and my people, and manifest this by their attachment to me, and their zeal for my glory. The first clause of the 15th verse should be joined to the fourteenth.h 11. Gill, gknow my sheep; so as to call them all by their names: Christ has an universal, special, distinct, and exact knowledge of all his sheep, as they are the choice of his Father, as his Father's gift to him; and as his own purchase; he bears an affectionate love to them, and takes special care of them; indulges them with intimate communion with himself; and owns and acknowledges them as his, both here and hereafter: and I am known of mine; not in a general way, as devils and external professors may know him, but with a special, spiritual, and saving knowledge: Christ's own approve of him, as their shepherd and their Saviour, and desire no other; they love him above all, in the sincerity of their souls, and with a love as strong as death; they trust in him as their shepherd, believing they shall not want; and appropriate him to themselves, as their own; and care for him, his cause and interest, his Gospel, ordinances, and ministers; and are not ashamed to own him as theirs, in the most public manner.h 12. Barclay, “We may note two further points before we leave this passage. Jesus describes himself as the good shepherd. ow in Greek, there are two words for good. There is agathos which simply describes the moral quality of a thing; there is kalos which means that in the goodness there is a quality of winsomeness which makes it lovely. When Jesus is described as the good shepherd, the word is kalos. In him there is more than efficiency and more than fidelity;

there is loveliness. Sometimes in a village or town people speak about the good doctor. They are not thinking only of the doctor's efficiency and skill as a physician; they are thinking of the sympathy and the kindness and the graciousness which he brought with him and which made him the friend of all. In the picture of Jesus as the Good Shepherd there is loveliness as well as strength and power. The second point is this. In the parable the flock is the Church of Christ; and it suffers from a double danger. It is always liable to attack from outside, from the wolves and the robbers and the marauders. It is always liable to trouble from the inside, from the false shepherd. The Church runs a double danger. It is always under attack from outside and often suffers from the tragedy of bad leadership, from the disaster of shepherds who see their calling as a career and not as a means of service. The second danger is by far the worse; because, if the shepherd is faithful and good, there is a strong defence from the attack from outside; but if the shepherd is faithless and a hireling, the foes from outside can penetrate into and destroy the flock. The Church's first essential is a leadership based on the example of Jesus Christ.” 13. Pink, “There seem to be three lines of thought suggested by this figure of the "shepherd" as applied to the Lord Jesus. First, it refers to His mediatorial office. The shepherd is not the owner of the flock, but the one to whom the care of the sheep is entrusted. So Christ as Mediator is the One appointed by the Father to act as shepherd, the One to whom He has committed the salvation of His elect—note how in the types, Joseph, Moses, and David tended not their own flock, but those of their fathers. Second, the figure speaks of fellowship, the Savior’s presence with His own. The shepherd never leaves his flock. There is only one exception to this, and that is when he commits them into the care of the "porter" of the sheepfold; and that is at night-fall. How suggestive is this! During the night of Christ’s absence, the Holy Spirit has charge of God’s elect! Finally; the shepherd-character speaks of Christ’s care, faithfulness, solicitude for His own. In two other passages in the ew Testament is Christ presented as "the shepherd," and in each with a different descriptive adjective. In Hebrews 13:20 we read, " ow the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant.’’ Again in 1 Peter verse 4, we are told, "When the chief shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory which fadeth not away." There is a striking order to be observed in the three "shepherd" titles of our Lord. Here in John 10, the reference is plainly to the Cross, so that He is the "good" Shepherd in death, laying down His life for the sheep. In Hebrews 13 the reference is to the empty sepulcher, so that He is the "great" Shepherd in resurrection. While in 1 Peter 5:4 the reference is to His glorious return, so that He will be manifested as the "chief’ Shepherd. "I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep." Why does the Lord refer to His people under the figure of "sheep"? The figure is very suggestive and full. We shall not attempt to be exhaustive but merely suggestive. Under the Mosaic economy a sheep was one of the few clean animals: as such it suitably represents God’s people, each of which has been cleansed from all sin. A sheep is a harmless animal: even children will approach them without fear. So God’s people are exhorted to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves" (Matthew 10:16). Sheep are helpless: nature has endowed them neither with weapons of attack nor defense. Equally helpless is the believer in himself: "without me, says Christ, ye can do nothing. Sheep are gentle: what so tame and tractable as a lamb! This is ever a grace which ought to distinguish the followers of Christ: "gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits" (James 3:17). The sheep are entirely dependent upon the shepherd This is noticeably the case in the Orient. ot only must the sheep

look to the shepherd for protection against wild animals, but he must lead them to the pastures. May we be cast back more and more upon God. Sheep are preeminently characterized by a proneness to wander. Even when placed in a field with a fence all around it, yet if there be a gap anywhere, they will quickly get out and stray. Alas, that this is so true of us. Urgently do we all need to heed that admonition, "Watch and pray lest ye enter into temptation." A sheep is a useful animal. Each year it supplies a crop of wool. In this too it prefigures the Christian. The daily attitude of the believer should be, "Lord, what wouldst thou have me to do?" "I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep." Very blessed is this. The Lord Jesus knows each one of those whom the Father has given to Him with a special knowledge of approbation, affection, and intimacy. Though unknown to the world "the world knoweth us not" (1 John 3:l) —we are known to Him. And Christ only knoweth all His sheep. Ofttimes we are deceived. Some whom we regard as "sheep" are really "goats"; and others whom we look upon as outside the flock of Christ, belong thereto notwithstanding. Whoever would have concluded that Lot was a "righteous man" had not the ew Testament told us so! And who would have imagined that Judas was a devil when Christ sent him forth as one of the twelve! "And know my sheep": fearfully solemn is the contrast presented by Matthew 7:23—"I never knew you"!

15just as the Father knows me and I know the Father— and I lay down my life for the sheep.
1. God the Father knows me personally, and I know the Father, for we are family, and we include the sheep as part of the family, and they are of such importance in this family that I will lay down my life to assure that they will remain a part of this family forever. We will not abandon any member of our family, but pay whatever the cost to preserve them. 2. The Ethiopic version, as before, renders it, or rather explains it, "I lay down my life for the redemption of my sheep". 3. Calvin, "As the Father knoweth me. It is unnecessary, and is not even expedient, that we should enter into those thorny questions, How is it that the Father knows his Wisdom? For Christ simply declares that, so far as he is the bond of our union with God, he is placed between Him and us; as if he had said, that it is no more possible for him to forget us, than that he should be rejected or disregarded by the Father. At the same time, he demands the duty which we mutually owe to him, because, as he employs all the power which he has received from the Father for our protection, so he wishes that we should be obedient and devoted to him, as he is wholly devoted to his Father, and refers everything to him. 4. IVP, "This new community is based in his death (10:15). The very pattern of life in this new community is that of life laid down for one another, a cruciform life. The possibility of such a life

and the power for such a life come through the life of the Son of God poured out on the cross, thereby uniting God and mankind by taking away the sin of the world and revealing the glory of God. 5. Jamison, gthe Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father\ What claim to absolute equality with the Father could exceed this? (See on Mat_11:27). and I lay down my life for the sheep  \ How sublime this, immediately following the lofty claim of the preceding clause! It is the riches and the poverty of  gthe Word made flesh h - one glorious Person reaching at once up to the Throne and down even to the dust of death,  gthat we might live through Him. h A candid interpretation of the words,  gfor the sheep, h ought to go far to establish the special relation of the vicarious death of Christ to the Church. 6. Gill, gthe Father knoweth me,.... These words, with what follow, are in connection with Joh_10:14; and the sense is, that the mutual knowledge of Christ, and his sheep, is like that which his Father and he have of each other. The Father knows Christ as his own Son, and loves him as such, in the most strong and affectionate manner; and has entrusted him with the persons, grace, and glory, of all his people: even so know I the Father; or rather, "and I know the Father"; as he needs must, since he lay in his bosom, and still does, and knows his nature, perfections, purposes, and his whole mind and will; and loves him most ardently, which he has shown by his coming down from heaven, to do his will; and trusts in him for the accomplishment of everything he promised unto him: and I lay down my life for the sheep; which proves him to be the good shepherd, Joh_10:11. The Vulgate Latin version reads, "for my sheep"; which were his, by the Father's gift, and for no other has he laid down his life. The Ethiopic version, as before, renders it, or rather explains it, "I lay down my life for the redemption of my sheep". 7. Henry, gdeclares his purpose of dying for his flock(Joh_10:15): I lay down my life for the sheep. He not only ventured his life for them (in such a case, the hope of savingit might balance the fear of losing it), but he actually deposited it, and submitted to a necessity of dying for our redemption; tithēmi- I put itas a pawn or pledge; as purchase-money paid down. Sheep appointed for the slaughter, ready to be sacrificed, were ransomed with the blood of the shepherd. He laid down his life, huper tōn probatōn, not only for the good of the sheep, but in their stead. Thousands of sheep had been offered in sacrifice for their shepherds, as sin-offerings, but here, by a surprising reverse, the shepherd is sacrificed for the sheep. When David, the shepherd of Israel, was himself guilty, and the destroying angel drew his sword against the flock for his sake, with good reason did he plead, These sheep, what evil have they done? Let thy hand be against me,2Sa_24:17. But the Son of David was sinless and spotless; and his sheep, what evil have they not done? Yet he saith, Let thine hand be against me. Christ here seems to refer to that prophecy, Zec_13:7, Awake, O sword, against my shepherd;and, though the smiting of the shepherd be for the present the scattering of the flock, it is in order to the gathering of them in.h 8. Pink, “The word "knoweth" here, as frequently in Scripture, signifies a knowledge of approbation: it is almost the equivalent of loveth. The first part of this verse should be linked on to the last clause of the previous one, where Christ says, I "know my sheep, and am known of mine." The two clauses thus make a complete sentence, and a remarkable one it is. The mutual knowledge of Christ and His sheep, is like unto that which exists between the Father and the Son:

it is a knowledge, an affection, so profound, so spiritual, so heavenly, so intimate, so blessed, that no other analogy was possible to do it justice: as the Father knoweth the Son, and as the Son knoweth the Father, so Christ knows His sheep, and so the sheep know Him. "And I lay down my life for the sheep" (John 10:15). The precise significance of the preposition is unequivocally defined for us in Romans 5:6-8, where the same Greek term ("huper") occurs: "For when we were yet without strength in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." The word "for" here means not merely on the behalf of, but in the stead of: "the Greek expression for "dying for any one," never has any signification other than that of rescuing the life of another at the expense of one’s own" (Parkhurst’s Lexicon).”

16I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.
1. Jesus makes reference to the Gentiles who will be added to his flock making it universal. It will be the most all-inclusive flock in the history of mankind, for people of every race, tongue and nation will be a part of this flock of the Good Shepherd. In other words, you haven’t seen anything yet, for the plan of God is to be so all encompassing that it will spread throughout the entire world. Jesus is saying that his sheep pen is small now in comparison with what it is to become, for he will keep expanding it as the sheep from around the world keep coming into it. His voice will go out into all the world through the Gospel, and masses will hear his voice and follow him into the expanded sheep pen that is the kingdom of God. It will always be just one flock and one Shepherd in spite of its great diversity, for he is the only voice they all will know and follow. He is the one that unifies the whole flock. 1B. John Piper, “Just when the Jewish disciples begin to feel like they are the real select heirs of Abraham, Jesus strikes: "I have other sheep that are not even part of this Jewish fold -- among the Gentiles."Just when the early American Puritans were settling in to their "chosen" status as the ew Israel in the ew World, Jesus said to John Eliot, "I have other sheep that are not of this Puritan fold -- among the Algonquin Indians." And 100 years later to David Brainerd, "I have other sheep that are not of this Congregational fold -- among the Susquehanna." Just when the Particular Baptists of England were being frozen in the unbiblical ice of hypercalvinism Jesus spoke to William Carey: "I have other sheep that are not of this English fold -- in India." Just when the mission agencies and churches were growing content with the coastland successes around the world, Jesus stirred up Hudson Taylor, "I have other sheep that are not of this coastal fold -- inland, in the middle of China." And to David Livingston -- "inland, in the middle of Africa."

And when all of western Christendom began to feel content that every country of the world had been penetrated with the gospel, Jesus came to Cameron Townsend and said, "I have other sheep that are not of this visible worldwide fold -- among the hidden tribal peoples, thousands of them with not even a Scripture portion in their language." John 10:16 is THE GREAT missionary text in the Gospel of John. Every time we start to get comfortable with just us, it is like a thorn in the cushion on the pew. But it is far more than a goad. It is full of hope and power. And we need powerful encouragement when we begin to dream even bigger and longer than 90 by '90.” 2. John Macarthur, "Ephesians chapter 2:11 and following, "Wherefore remember that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh," now verse 13, "But now in Christ Jesus ye who once were far off were made near by the blood of Christ, for He is our peace who hath made both one," that is Jew and Gentile, "hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us, has abolished the enmity to make of the two one new man, that is Jew and Gentile made one." Verse 18, "For through Him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father." And so, Paul stresses that we are one. And then in Galatians 3 he says, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free, male nor female, you're all one in Christ." 2B. F.B. Hole, “The Lord's words in verse 16 add another unexpected development. He was about to find sheep who had been outside that fold. There was to be the calling of an election from among the Gentiles. We see the beginning of this early in the Acts — the Ethiopian in John 8, Cornelius and his friends in John 10. We have often dwelt upon the "must" which occurs several times in John 3: have we ever praised God for the "must" here? - "them also I MUST bring." Sinners of the Gentiles become the subjects of the Divine work. They hear the Shepherd's voice and are attached to Him. Then, as a result of this two-fold calling — from Jewish fold and from the straying Gentiles — there is to be established one flock, held together under the authority of the one Shepherd. The word in this verse is definitely "flock" and not "fold." Sheep held together by outward restrictions: that was Judaism. Sheep constituted a flock by the personal power and attraction of the Shepherd: that is Christianity.” 3. Barclay, “One of the hardest things in the world to unlearn is exclusiveness. Once a people, or a section of a people, gets the idea that they are specially privileged, it is very difficult for them to accept that the privileges which they believed belonged to them and to them only are in fact open to all men. That is what the Jews never learned. They believed that they were God's chosen people and that God had no use for any other nation. They believed that, at the best, other nations were designed to be their slaves, and, at the worst, that they were destined for elimination from the scheme of things. But here Jesus is saying that there will come a day when all men will know him as their shepherd. Even the Old Testament is not without its glimpses of that day. Isaiah had that very dream. It was his conviction that God had given Israel for a light to the nations (Isa.42:6; Isa.49:6; Isa.56:8) and always there had been some lonely voices which insisted that God was not the exclusive property of Israel, but that her destiny was to make him known to all men. At first sight it might seem that the ew Testament speaks with two voices on this subject; and some passages of the ew Testament may well trouble and perplex us a little. As Matthew tells the story, when Jesus sent out his disciples, he said to them: "Go nowhere among the Gentiles,

and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matt.10:5-6). When the Syro-Phoenician woman appealed to Jesus for help, his first answer was that he was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matt.15:24). But there is much to be set on the other side. Jesus himself stayed and taught in Samaria (Jn. 4:40); he declared that descent from Abraham was no guarantee of entry into the kingdom (Jn. 8:39). It was of a Roman centurion that Jesus said that he had never seen such faith in Israel (Matt.8:10); it was a Samaritan leper who alone returned to give thanks (Lk.17:18-19); it was the Samaritan traveller who showed the kindness that all men must copy (Lk.10:37); many would come from the east and the west and the north and the south to sit down in the Kingdom of God (Matt.8:11; Lk.13:29); the command in the end was to go out and to preach the gospel to all nations (Mk.16:15; Matt.28:19); Jesus was, not the light of the Jews, but the light of the world (Jn. 8:12). What is the explanation of the sayings which seem to limit the work of Jesus to the Jews? The explanation is in reality very simple. The ultimate aim of Jesus was the world for God. But any great commander knows that he must in the first instance limit his objectives. If he tries to attack on too wide a front, he only scatters his forces, diffuses his strength, and gains success nowhere. In order to win an ultimately complete victory he must begin by concentrating his forces at certain limited objectives. That is what Jesus did. Had he gone here, there and everywhere, had he sent his disciples out with no limitation to their sphere of work, nothing would have been achieved. At the moment he deliberately concentrated on the Jewish nation, but his ultimate aim was the gathering of the whole world into his love. There are three great truths in this passage. (i) It is only in Jesus Christ that the world can become one. Egerton Young was the first missionary to the Red Indians. In Saskatchewan he went out and told them of the love of God. To the Indians it was like a new revelation. When the missionary had told his message, an old chief said: "When you spoke of the great Spirit just now, did I hear you say, `Our Father'?" "Yes," said Egerton Young. "That is very new and sweet to me," said the chief. "We never thought of the great Spirit as Father. We heard him in the thunder; we saw him in the lightning, the tempest and the blizzard, and we were afraid. So when you tell us that the great Spirit is our Father, that is very beautiful to us." The old man paused, and then he went on, as a glimpse of glory suddenly shone on him. "Missionary, did you say that the great Spirit is your Father?" "Yes," said the missionary. "And," said the chief, "did you say that he is the Indians' Father?" "I did," said the missionary. "Then," said the old chief, like a man on whom a dawn of joy had burst, "you and I are brothers!" The only possible unity for men is in their common sonship with God. In the world there is division between nation and nation; in the nation there is division between class and class. There can never be one nation; and there can never be one class. The only thing which can cross the barriers and wipe out the distinctions is the gospel of Jesus Christ telling men of the universal fatherhood of God. (ii) In the King James Version there is a mistranslation. It has: "There shall be one fold and one shepherd." That mistranslation goes back to Jerome and the Vulgate. And on that mistranslation the Roman Catholic Church has based the teaching that, since there is only one fold, there can only be one Church, the Roman Catholic Church, and that, outside it there is no salvation. But the real translation beyond all possible doubt as given in the Revised Standard Version, is: "There shall be one flock, one shepherd," or, even better, "They shall become one flock and there shall be one shepherd." The unity comes from the fact, not that all the sheep are forced into one fold, but they all hear, answer and obey one shepherd. It is not an ecclesiastical unity; it is a unity of loyalty to Jesus Christ. The fact that there is one flock does not mean that there can be only

one Church, one method of worship, one form of ecclesiastical administration. But it does mean that all the different churches are united by a common loyalty to Jesus Christ. (iii) But this saying of Jesus becomes very personal; for it is a dream which every one of us can help Jesus to realize. Men cannot hear without a preacher; the other sheep cannot be gathered in unless someone goes out to bring them in. Here is set before us the tremendous missionary task of the Church. And we must not think of that only in terms of what we used to call foreign missions. If we know someone here and now who is outside his love, we can find him for Christ. The dream of Christ depends on us; it is we who can help him make the world one flock with him as its shepherd. 4. Clarke, gsheep I have - Gentiles and Samaritans. As if our Lord had said, Do not imagine that I shall lay down my life for the Jews, exclusively of all other people; no: I shall die also for the Gentiles; for by the grace, the merciful design and loving purpose of God, I am to taste death for every man, Heb_2:9; and, though they are not of this fold now, those among them that believe shall be united with the believing Jews, and made one fold under one shepherd, Eph_2:13-17. The original word, ƒ¿ƒ◌ׂƒֹƒ◌, which is here translated fold, dignifies properly a court. It is ֵ probable that our blessed Lord was now standing in what was termed the inner court, or court of the people, in the temple, see Joh_10:23; and that he referred to the outer court, or court of the Gentiles, because the Gentiles who were proselytes of the gate were permitted to worship in that place; but only those who were circumcised were permitted to come into the inner court, over the entrance of which were written, in large characters of gold, these words, Let no uncircumcised person enter here! Our Lord therefore might at this time have pointed out to the worshipers in that court, when he spoke these words, and the people would at once perceive that he meant the Gentiles. 5. Dave Guzik "There will be one flock: The early Christian Bible translator Jerome, when translating his influential Latin version mistakenly translated one fold instead of one flock in this verse. His Latin Vulgate reading is the erroneous foundation for a doctrine of Roman Catholic exclusiveness.h 6. Bob Utley, "This is an allusion to Isa. 56:6-8. The context seems to demand that this refers to (1) the Samaritans (cf. 4:1-42) or (2) the Gentile Church (cf. 4:43-54). This speaks of the unity of all who exercise faith in Christ.gand they will become one flock with one Shepherdh This has always been the goal of God (cf. Gen. 3:15, 12:3; Exod.19:5-6). The theological aspects of this unity are discussed in Eph. 2:11-3:13 and 4:1-6. gI lay down My life so that I may take it againh This implies the resurrection. Usually in the T it is the Father who raises the Son (cf. 18b) to show His acceptance of His sacrifice. But here the power of Jesus Himself in the resurrection is asserted. This phrase is an excellent opportunity to show that the T often attributes the works of redemption to all three persons of the Godhead: (1) God the Father raised Jesus (cf. Acts 2:24; 3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30,33,34,37; 17:31; Rom. 6:4,9; 10:9;I Cor. 6:14; II Cor. 4:14; Gal. 1:1;Eph. 1:20; Col. 2:12;h 7. Constable, "The other sheep in view refer to Gentiles outside the fold of Israel who would believe in Jesus (cf. vv. 3-4). This is one of the few intimations in the Gospels that a new body would replace Israel as the people of God in the present age (cf. 17:20; Eph. 2:11-22; 3:6). These sheep, with those from Israel, would compose one fold, namely, the church (cf. 1 Cor. 10:32). This

rules out the possibility of a Jewish church and a Gentile church. That fold would have one shepherd, namely, Jesus, who would become, to change the figure, the Head of the church. Jesus knew these sheep (vv. 14-15) as well as those who would believe on Him in Israel, "this fold" (cf. Ps. 100:3).h

8. Barnes, "Verse 16. Other sheep. There are others who shall be members of my redeemed church. I have. This does not imply that they were then his friends, but that they would be. There were others whom it was his purpose and intention to call to the blessings of the gospel and salvation. The purpose was so sure, and the fact that they would believe on him so certain, that he could use the present tense as if they were already his own. This purpose was in accordance with the promise (Isaiah 53:11), "He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied." An instance of a parallel expression occurs in Acts 18:10 "I have much people in this city" (Corinth). That is, it was the purpose of God to bless the preaching of Paul, and give him many souls as the seals of his ministry. It was so certain that they would believe in the Saviour, that it could be spoken of as if it were already done. This certainty could have existed only in consequence of the intention of God that it should be so. It did not consist in any disposition to embrace the gospel which was foreseen, for they were the most corrupt and licentious people of antiquity, and it must have been because God meant that it should be so. Declarations like these are full proof that God has a plan in regard to the salvation of men, and that the number is known and determined by him. Learn-1. That it is not a question of chance or uncertainty whether men shall be saved. 2. That there is encouragement for preaching the gospel. There are those whom God means to save, and if he intends to do it it will be done. ot of this fold. ot Jews. This is a distinct intimation that the gospel was to be preached to the Gentiles--a doctrine extremely offensive to the Jews. This prediction of the Saviour has been strikingly confirmed in the conversion of millions of the Gentiles to the gospel. Them also I must bring. Bring into the church and kingdom of heaven. This was to be done, not by his personal ministry, but by the labour of his apostles and other ministers. One fold. One church; there shall be no distinction, no peculiar national privileges. The partition between the Jews and the Gentiles shall be broken down, and there shall be no pre-eminence of rank or honour, Ephesians 2:14: "Christ hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;" Romans 10:12: "There is no difference between the Jew and the Greek." One shepherd. That is, the Lord Jesus--the common Saviour, deliverer, and friend of all true believers, in whatever land they were born and whatever tongue they may speak. This shows that Christians of all denominations and countries should feel that they are one--redeemed by the same blood, and going to the same eternal home. Comp. 1 Corinthians 12:13; Galatians 3:28; Colossians 3:11; Acts 17:26. 9. Dr. S. Lewis Johnson Jr. has an excellent study on this verse. " first to turn with me to Genesis chapter 12, and I want to read verses 1 through 3 and make a comment, and then we’ll read a section from the ew Testament also. In Genesis chapter 12 we have the first account of the

promises that God gave to Abraham, and Moses writes in verse 1, “ ow the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: (and I’d like for you to notice particularly this last clause) and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” The important thing to note here is that in the original Abrahamic promises blessings for the Gentiles were given. “In Thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” then later on in the Old Testament in the Book of Isaiah in the 42nd chapter as the prophet Isaiah speaks of the ministry of the Suffering Servant of Jehovah, the Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ we know from the ew Testament record, he announces here that this Suffering Servant of Jehovah shall have a ministry to the Gentiles, Isaiah 42 and verse 6. “I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles.” And then in chapter 49 verse 6, in the second of these songs of the Suffering Servant of Jehovah, the Messiah, we read, “And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.” So you can again see that the Messiah has a ministry to the Gentiles. ow let’s turn over to the ew Testament and you know the story of the Book of Acts. It is Luke the historian’s account of the opening months and years of the history of the church of Jesus Christ upon the earth. It is the story really of the historical rejection of the Lord Jesus by the nation Israel and of the apostles turning to the Gentiles in their ministry. And finally in the last chapter in the Book of Acts, Acts chapter 28, the Apostle Paul is speaking and in verse 25 of Acts chapter 28 we read, “And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers, Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive: For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. ( ow notice the 28th verse particularly) Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.” otice particularly, “And that they will hear it. And then one last passage in Romans chapter 15, the very next book of the ew Testament and verse 8, the apostle is discussing doubtful things in the Christian church and brings forward the Lord Jesus as an illustration, “Wherefore,” he says in verse 7 of Romans 15, “Receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God. ow I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers.” In other words, the Lord Jesus came as his first responsibility to confirm the promises made unto the Fathers, to accomplish all that it was said that the Messiah of Israel would do, but further verse 9, “And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name. And again he saith, (see these are various texts from the Old Testament.) Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people. And again, Praise

the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud him, all ye people. And again, Esaias saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust. ow the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost.” He goes on, "Another question that arises as a result of this text is this. Are there two peoples of God? Are there two groups of people who may be called the people of God, separate from one another who have two sets of promises, two destinies, two different destinies. Some Bible teachers have made the statement that there are two distinct purposes of God, one related to the earth, the other related to heaven. The one related to the earth dealing with an earthly people, the nation Israel, the other the heavenly purpose related to the heavenly people, the church of Jesus Christ. Another Bible teacher has said the church has promises and a destiny that are different from Israel’s. Well I’d like to dispute that. I do not think that that is true. Jesus Christ said, “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 flock and one shepherd.” ow the Bible makes it plain that Israel is to be distinguished from the Gentiles, always. So far as I can tell the usage of the term Israel is always of Israel, never of Gentiles. And so consequently it is fair to say Israel must be distinguished from the Gentiles, but to suggest because Israel is to be distinguished from the Gentiles that we have two peoples with two sets of promises, two inheritances, two destinies, one earthly, one heavenly is to go beyond the teaching of the Bible. The Bible teaches that there is one people of God, one people of God. While Israel is to be distinguished from the Gentiles, they both share in the promises made to Abraham. So, Israel is said to share in the promises made to Abraham. The church of Jesus Christ is also said by the apostles in the ew Testament to share in the promises made to Abraham. That is the teachings of Ephesians. It is the teaching of Romans. It is the teaching of other sections of the ew Testament. It is of course the teaching of the Old Testament right from the beginning, and God made his promises to Abraham and said, “In Thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” There is one people of God, one destiny of the people of God, one set of promises, and the Abrahamic promises as they are expanded through the progress of divine revelation that pertains to that one people.” 10. Calvin, “And I have other sheep. Though some refer this indiscriminately to all, both Jews and Gentiles, who were not yet disciples of Christ, yet I have no doubt that he had in his eye the calling of the Gentiles. For he gives the appellation fold to the assemblage of the ancient people, by which they were separated from the other nations of the world, and united into one body as the heritage of God. The Jews had been adopted by God in such a manner, that he surrounded them with certain enclosures, which consisted of rites and ceremonies, that they might not be confounded with unbelievers, though the door of the fold was the gracious covenant of eternal life confirmed in Christ. For this reason he calls those sheep which had not the same mark, but belonged to a different class, other sheep In short, the meaning is, that the pastoral office of Christ is not confined within the limits of Judea, but is far more extensive. Augustine's observation on this passage is undoubtedly true, that, as

there are many wolves within the Church, so there are many sheep without But this is not applicable, in every respect, to the present passage, which relates to the outward aspect of the Church, because the Gentiles, who had been strangers for a time, were afterwards invited into the kingdom of God, along with the Jews. Yet I acknowledge that Augustine's statement applies in this respect, that Christ gives the name of sheep to unbelievers, who in themselves were the farthest possible from being entitled to be called sheep And not only does he point out, by this term, what they will be, but rather refers this to the secret election of God, because we are already God's sheep, before we are aware that He is our shepherd. In like manner, it is elsewhere said that we were enemies, when he loved us, (Romans 5:10;) and for this reason Paul also says that we were known by God, before we knew him, (Galatians 4:9.) Them also I must bring. He means that the election of God will be secure, so that nothing of all that he wishes to be saved shall perish. [290] For the secret purpose of God, by which men were ordained to life, is at length manifested in his own time by the calling, -- the effectual calling, when he regenerates by his Spirit, to be his sons, those who formerly were begotten of flesh and blood. But it may be asked, How were the Gentiles brought to be associated with the Jews? For the Jews were not under the necessity of rejecting the covenant which God made with their fathers, in order to become Christ's disciples; and the Gentiles, on the other hand, were not under the necessity of submitting to the yoke of the Law, that, being ingrafted in Christ, they might be associated with the Jews. Here we must attend to the distinction between the substance of the covenant and the outward appendages. For the Gentiles could not assent to the faith of Christ in any other way than by embracing that everlasting covenant on which the salvation of the world was founded. In this manner were fulfilled the predictions, Strangers shall speak the language of Canaan, (Isaiah 19:18.) Again, Ten men of the Gentiles shall take hold of the cloak of one Jew, and say, We will go with you, (Zechariah 8:23.) Again, Many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, (Isaiah 2:4; Micah 4:2.)

Abraham was also called a father of many nations, (Genesis 17:5; Romans 4:17,) because they shall come from the East and from the West, who shall sit down with him in the kingdom of God, (Matthew 8:11.) As to ceremonies, they are the middle wall of partition, which, Paul informs us, hath been thrown down, (Ephesians 2:14.) Thus, we have been associated with the Jews in the unity of the faith, as to the substance; and the ceremonies were abolished, that there might be nothing to prevent the Jews from stretching out their hand to us. And there shall be one fold [291] and one shepherd That is, that all the children of God may be gathered and united [292] into one body; as we acknowledge that there is one holy universal Church, [293] and there must be one body with one head. There is one God, says Paul, one faith, one baptism. Therefore we ought to be one, as we are called into one hope, (Ephesians 4:4, 5.) ow though this flock appears to be divided into different folds, yet they are kept within enclosures which are common to all believers who are scattered throughout the whole world; because the same word is preached to all, they use the same sacraments, they have the same order of prayer, and every thing that belongs to the profession of faith. And they shall hear my voice. We must observe the way in which the flock of God is gathered. It is, when all have one shepherd, and when his voice alone [294] is heard These words mean that, when the Church submits to Christ alone, and obeys his commands, and hears his voice and his doctrine, [295] then only is it in a state of good order. If Papists can show us that there is any thing of this sort among them, let them enjoy the title of The Church, of which they vaunt so much. But if Christ is silent there, if his majesty is trodden under foot, if his sacred ordinances are held up to scorn, what else is their unity but a diabolical conspiracy, which is worse and far more to be abhorred than any dispersion? Let us therefore remember that we ought always to begin with the Head. Hence also the Prophets, when they describe the restoration of the Church, always join David the king with God; as if they said, that there is no Church where Christ does not reign, and that there is no kingdom of God, but where the honor of shepherd is granted to Christ. 11. IVP, "Before revealing more about his death, Jesus mentions that he has other sheep not of this sheep pen who must be brought also, so there shall be one flock and one shepherd (v. 16). The most natural reading, accepted by most commentators, is that Jesus is referring to sheep from

outside the fold of Judaism. There are Gentiles who will listen to his voice and be joined to his flock. Thus, in this section that speaks of Jesus' founding a community apart from official Judaism, Jesus himself speaks to one of the greatest points of controversy in the earliest church. He does not clearly specify on what terms the Gentiles are to be included, and so the church later had to discern his will whether or not Gentiles must become converts to Judaism in order to join his flock. But the present context, which describes a follower who has been expelled from the synagogue, hints at the answer. Most recent scholars think John is simply giving Jesus some lines that would address the later situation, but the potential ambiguity of the figure is typical of Jesus himself (cf. 21:22-23). They are already his sheep because they have been given to him by the Father (v. 16; cf. 10:29; 6:37-39; 17:2, 6, 24; Beasley-Murray 1987:171), yet they must hear his call and respond. So once again we see both divine sovereignty and human responsibility at play. In saying that he must bring them also he speaks of the love that goes in search of the lost, which is a theme running throughout this Gospel and indeed the ew Testament. He must (dei) do this; it is a divine necessity (cf. Grundmann 1964:22-24) that comes from the very character of God as love. But how will he bring the Gentiles? When Gentiles do come to him it signals his hour has finally arrived (12:20, 23), but Jesus himself is not seen going to the Gentiles. He will bring the Gentiles into the flock by the ministry of his disciples, whom he will send (20:21). Jesus will continue his own ministry through his people, which will be accomplished through the presence of the Spirit. They are the ones who will bring the Gentiles, but Jesus is saying it is he himself who is doing so. This is an example of the oneness between the shepherd and his flock. Similarly, the one shepherd unites the flock (Morris 1986-1988:380). The oneness comes from sharing the life of the one God in his Son by his Spirit. This flock is thus a spiritual entity yet not in the sense of being nonhistorical or only invisible any more than the incarnate Son who is its shepherd is such. This community has identifiable marks as a recognizable entity within history. Several marks are referred to in the ew Testament, but the main ones mentioned in this passage are the centrality of Christ, the confession of him as exemplified by the former blind man and the fact that this community is to be composed of both Jews and Gentiles. The centrality of Christ is especially strong, given his exclusivist claims. "The text does not suggest that this Good Shepherd will one day join a series of other shepherds who will then form a cooperative `shepherds' union'" (Bailey 1993:17). Thus, the oneness of the flock corresponds to the thought found throughout this Gospel that Jesus is the only way to the Father. 12. Henry, gis acquainted with those that are hereafter to be of this flock(Joh_10:16): Other sheep I have,have a right to and an interest in, which are not of this fold,of the Jewish church; them also I must bring.Observe, [a.] The eye that Christ had to the poor Gentiles. He had sometimes intimated his special concern for the lost sheep of the house of Israel;to them indeed his personal ministry was confined; but, saith he, I have other sheep.Those who in process of time should believe in Christ, and be brought into obedience to him from among the Gentiles, are here called sheep,and he is said to have them, though as yet they were uncalled,and many of them unborn,because they were chosen of God, and given to Christ in the counsels of divine love from eternity. Christ has a right, by virtue of the Father's donation and his own purchase, to many a soul of which he has not yet the possession; thus he had much peoplein Corinth, when as yet it lay in wickedness, Act_18:10. gThose other sheep I have,h saith Christ, gI have them on my heart, have them in my eye, am as

sure to have them as if I had them already.h ow Christ speaks of those other sheep, First,To take off the contempt that was put upon him, as having few followers,as having but a little flock,and therefore, if a goodshepherd, yet a poorshepherd: gBut,h saith he, gI have more sheep than you see.h Secondly,To take down the pride and vain-glory of the Jews, who thought the Messiah must gather all his sheep from among them. g o,h saith Christ, gI have others whom I will set with the lambs of my flock, though you disdain to set them with the dogs of your flock.h [b.] The purposes and resolves of his grace concerning them: gThem also I must bring,bring home to God, bring into the church, and, in order to this, bring off from their vain conversation, bring them back from their wanderings, as that lost sheep,h Luk_15:5. But why must he bring them? What was the necessity? First,The necessity of their case required it: gI must bring, or they must be left to wander endlessly, for, like sheep, they will never come back of themselves, and no other can or will bring them.h Secondly,The necessity of his own engagements required it; he must bring them, or he would not be faithful to his trust, and true to his undertaking. gThey are my own,bought and paid for, and therefore I must not neglect them nor leave them to perish.h He must in honor bring those with whom he was entrusted. [c.] The happy effect and consequence of this, in two things: - First,gThey shall hear my voice. ot only my voice shall be heard among them(whereas they have not heard, and therefore could not believe, now the sound of the gospel shall go to the ends of the earth), but it shall be heard by them;I will speak, and give to them to hear.h Faith comes by hearing, and our diligent observance of the voice of Christ is both a means and an evidence of our being brought to Christ, and to God by him. Secondly, There shall be one fold and one shepherd. As there is one shepherd, so there shall be one fold. Both Jews and Gentiles, upon their turning to the faith of Christ, shall be incorporated in one church, be joint and equal sharers in the privileges of it, without distinction. Being united to Christ, they shall unite in him; two sticks shall become one in the hand of the Lord. ote, One shepherd makes one fold; one Christ makes one church. As the church is one in its constitution, subject to one head, animated by one Spirit, and guided by one rule, so the members of it ought to be one in love and affection, Eph_4:3-6. b. Christ's offering up himself for his sheep is another proof of his being a good shepherd,and in this he yet more commended his love,Joh_10:15, Joh_10:17, Joh_10:18. (a.) He declares his purpose of dying for his flock(Joh_10:15): I lay down my life for the sheep. He not only ventured his life for them (in such a case, the hope of savingit might balance the fear of losing it), but he actually deposited it, and submitted to a necessity of dying for our redemption; tithēmi- I put itas a pawn or pledge; as purchase-money paid down. Sheep appointed for the slaughter, ready to be sacrificed, were ransomed with the blood of the shepherd. He laid down his life, huper tōn probatōn, not only for the good of the sheep, but in their stead. Thousands of sheep had been offered in sacrifice for their shepherds, as sin-offerings, but here, by a surprising reverse, the shepherd is sacrificed for the sheep. When David, the shepherd of Israel, was himself guilty, and the destroying angel drew his sword against the flock for his sake, with good reason did he plead, These sheep, what evil have they done? Let thy hand be against me,2Sa_24:17. But the Son of David was sinless and spotless; and his sheep, what evil have they not done? Yet he saith, Let thine hand be against me. Christ here seems to refer to that prophecy, Zec_13:7, Awake, O sword, against my shepherd;and, though the smiting of the shepherd be for the present the scattering of the flock, it is in order to the gathering of them in.h 13. Maclaren, “There were many strange and bitter lessons in this discourse for the false shepherds, the Pharisees, to whom it was first spoken. But there was not one which would jar more upon their minds, and as they fancied, on their sacredest convictions, than this, that God’s flock was wider than God’s fold. Our Lord distinctly recognises Judaism with its middle wall of

partition as a divine institution, and then as distinctly carries His gaze beyond it. To His hearers ‘this fold,’ their own national polity, held all the flock. Without were dogs, a doleful land, where ‘the wild beasts of the desert met with the wild beasts of the islands.’ And now this new Teacher, not content with declaring them hirelings, and Himself the only true Shepherd of Israel, breaks down the hedges and speaks of Himself as the Shepherd of men. o wonder that they said, ‘He hath a devil and is mad.’ During His earthly life our Lord, as we know, confined His own personal ministry for the most part to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. ot exclusively so, for He made at least one journey into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, teaching and healing; a Syro-Phoenician woman held His feet, and received her request; and one of His miracles, of feeding the multitude, was wrought for hungry Gentiles. But while His work was in Israel, it was for mankind; and while ‘this fold,’ generally speaking, circumscribed His toils, it did not confine His love nor His thoughts. More than once world-wide declarations and promises broke from His lips, even before the final universal commission, ‘Preach the Gospel to every creature.’ ‘I, if I be lifted up, will draw all men unto Me.’ ‘I am the Light of the world.’ These and other similar sayings give us His lofty consciousness that He has received ‘the heathen for His inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for His possession.’ Parallel with them in substance are the words before us, which, for our present purpose, we may regard as containing lessons from our Lord Himself of how He looked and would have us look on the heathen world, on His work and ours, and on the certain issues of both. Jesus Christ in that moment of lofty elevation when He looked onwards to giving His life for the sheep, looked outwards also, far afield, and saw in every nation and people souls that He knew were His, and would one day know Him, and be led by Him ‘in green pastures and beside still waters.’” 14. Pink, “It is clear that the Lord is here contemplating His elect among the Gentiles. ot only for the elect Jews would He "lay down his life," but for "the children of God that were scattered abroad" (John 11:52) as well. But note Christ does not here say, "other sheep I shall have," but "other sheep I have." They were His even then; His, because given to Him by the Father from all eternity. A parallel passage is found in Acts 18. The apostle Paul had just arrived in Corinth, and the Lord spoke to him in a vision by night, and said unto him, "Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace; for I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee, for I have much people in this city" (verses 9, 10). How positive, definite, and unequivocal these statements are! How they show that everything is to be traced back to the eternal counsels of the Godhead! "And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they, shall hear my voice" (John 10:16). Equally positive is this. This is no uncertainty, no contingency. There is no they are willing to listen." How miserably man perverts the truth of God, yea, how wickedly he denies it! It is not difficult to understand what is the cause of it; it is lack of faith to believe what the Scriptures so plainly teach. These "other sheep" Christ must bring because necessity was laid upon Him. He had covenanted with the Father to redeem them. And they would be brought, they would hear His voice, for there can be no failure with Him. The work which the Father gave His Son to do shall be perfectly performed and successfully accomplished. either man’s stubbornness nor the Devil’s malice can hinder Him. ot a single one of that favored company given to Christ by the Father shall perish. Each of these shall hear His voice, because they were predestinated so to do, and it is written, "As many as were ordained to eternal life believed" (Acts 13:48). "They shall hear my voice" was both a promise and a prophecy.

"And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice." Upon this verse the Puritan Trapp has some most suggestive thoughts in his excellent commentary—a commentary which, so far as we are aware, has been out of print for over two hundred years. "Other sheep—the elect Gentiles, whose conversion to Christ was, among other types, not obscurely foretold in Leviticus 19:23-25—‘And when ye shall come into the land, and shall have planted all manner of trees for food, then ye shall count the fruit thereof as uncircumcised; three years shall it be as uncircumcised unto you: it shall not be eaten of. But in the fourth year all the fruit thereof shall be holy to praise the Lord withal. And in the fifth year shall ye eat of the fruit thereof, that it may yield unto you the increase thereof: I am the Lord your God’. The first three years in Canaan, the Israelites were to cast away the fruits of the trees as uncircumcised. So our Savior planted the Gospel in that land for the first ‘three years’ of His public ministry: but the uncircumcision was cast away; that is, to the uncircumcised Gentiles, the Gospel was not preached. The fruit of the fourth year was consecrated to God: that is, Christ in the fourth year from His baptism, laid down His life for His sheep, rose again, ascended, and sent His Holy Spirit; whereby His apostles, and others were consecrated as the firstfruits of the Promised Land. But in the fifth year, the fruit of the Gospel planted by Christ began to be common, for the Gospel was no longer shut up within the narrow bounds of Judaism, but began to be preached to all nations for the obedience of faith!"[1] "And there shall be one fold, and one shepherd" (John 10:16). Everywhere else in the ew Testament the Greek word for "fold" is translated "flock," as it should be here, and as it is in the R. V. In the first part of this verse the Greek uses an entirely different word which is correctly rendered "fold"—"Other sheep I have which are not of this fold." "This fold" referred to Judaism, and the elect Gentiles were outside of it, as we read in Ephesians 2:11, 12, "Ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called uncircumcision by that which is called the circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world." But now the Lord tells us, "there shall be one flock, and one Shepherd.’ This has been already accomplished, though not yet is it fully manifested—"For he is our peace, who hath made both (believing Jews and believing Gentiles) one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition" (Eph. 2:14). 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."

17The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again.
1. Jesus gives a hint of the cross and resurrection here. God loves him because he is willing to pay the ultimate price to complete the plan for a universal family that will enjoy Godfs presence and glory for all eternity. He alone could do what is necessary to make sure that God would have an enormous family of the redeemed to be a part of the eternal kingdom. There was no other who could lay down his life for the sins of the world, and so if Jesus would not do it, the plan of a redeemed family would be impossible.

2. Clarke, gdoth my Father love me - I shall be shortly crucified by you, do not imagine that I am abandoned by my heavenly Father, and therefore fall thus into your hands. The Father loveth me particularly on this account, because I am going to lay down my life for the life of the world. Again, do not suppose that I shall be put to death by your rulers, because I have not strength to resist them. I Lay Down my life voluntarily and cheerfully; no one can take it away from me, see Joh_10:18; and I shall give you the fullest proof of my supreme power by raising, in three days, that very crucified, wounded body from the grave. 3. Constable, "Having declared the intimate knowledge that the Father and the Son share, Jesus now explained why the Father loved Him as He did. Jesus did not mean that the Father's love resulted from the Son's performance. It would still have existed if Jesus had failed to obey Him completely. The Father loved the Son unconditionally from the beginning. However the Son's full obedience to the Father's will resulted in the Father having a special love for the Son that obedience under testing produced. Similarly God loves all believers unconditionally, but when we obey Him we enjoy an intimacy with Him that only obedience produces (cf. 15:14). Jesus died sacrificially with His resurrection and glorification in view. He did not die thinking that He would remain dead. His death was an event in a larger chain of events that was always in view as Jesus anticipated the Cross.h 4. Calvin, "On this account the Father loveth me. There is, indeed, another and a higher reason why the Father loveth the Son; for it was not in vain that a voice was heard from heaven, This is my beloved Son, in whom the good-pleasure of God dwells, (Matthew 3:17; 17:5.) But as he was made man on our account, and as the Father delighted in him, in order that he might reconcile us to himself, we need not wonder if he declares it to be the reason why the Father loveth him, that our salvation is dearer to him than his own life. This is a wonderful commendation of the goodness of God to us, and ought justly to arouse our whole souls into rapturous admiration, that not only does God extend to us the love which is due to the only-begotten Son, but he refers it to us as the final cause. And indeed there was no necessity that Christ should take upon him our flesh, in which he was beloved, but that it might be the pledge of the mercy of his Father in redeemin us. That I may take it again. As the disciples might be deeply grieved on account of what they had heard about the death of Christ, and as their faith might even be greatly shaken, he comforts them by the hope of his resurrection, which would speedily take place; as if he said, that he would not die on the condition of being swallowed up by death, but in order that he might soon rise again as a conqueror. And even at the present day, we ought to contemplate the death of Christ, so as to remember, at the same time, the glory of his resurrection. Thus, we know that he is life, because, in his contest with death, he obtained a splendid victory, and achieved a noble triumph.h 5. Guzik, "That I may take it again . . . I have power to take it again: In this sense, we can say that Jesus "raised Himself" from the dead. He had the power to lay down His life, and He had the power to take it up again. It doesn't surprise us that Jehovah's Witnesses deny that Jesus could take His own life up again. But we are surprised to see Copeland, Hagin, Price and others teach that Jesus was a helpless victim in hell, saved only by the intervention of God the Fatherh.

6. IVP, "Jesus concludes this teaching by revealing more fully the mystery involved in the shepherd's laying down his life for the sheep (vv. 17-18). He says he lays down his life of my own accord (literally, "from myself," ap' emautou), which makes it clear that his life is not simply taken from him by his opponents. At no point in this Gospel are his actions determined by human agenda, and his death will be no different. It may look like the triumph of darkness over light, but it is not. Pilate may think he has the authority (19:10, exousia, "power" in the IV), but Jesus tells him, "You would have no power [exousia] over me if it were not given to you from above" (19:11). This does not mean that the human agents of God's power, both Pilate and Caiaphas, are without sin (19:11) but rather that there is an antinomy between divine sovereignty and human responsibility. Jesus' statement that he has the authority to lay down his life stretches the imagery of the shepherd. He next proceeds to transcend it altogether by saying he has the authority not only to lay down his life, but also to take it back again. This cryptic teaching will become clearer in the next chapter, when he speaks of resurrection. The theme of life has been central throughout John's Gospel, and soon it will be the focus of the climax of Jesus' public ministry in the raising of Lazarus (Jn 11). The abundant life that this shepherd has come to give (v. 10) is something far beyond anything ever before available. Those in the story cannot even begin to grasp what he is talking about. Despite this talk about having authority and acting from himself, the hallmark of his life is dependence on the Father. So he concludes by grounding all that he has said in this truth (v. 18). In laying down his life and taking it back he is obeying his Father. He knows his Father's voice and obeys, just as we are to hear his voice and obey. It is in this light that we must understand his statement that the reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life--only to take it up again (v. 17). This statement seems to imply that the Father's love is based on the Son's obedience, but it is clear that the Father's love for the Son is from all eternity (17:24; cf. 3:35; 5:20; 15:9; 17:23, 26). Furthermore, the Father loves the world, which is certainly not obedient (3:16), so the Father's love is not conditioned by obedience. Some commentators resolve this problem by looking at the character of the love between the Father and the Son and concluding that it is "eternally linked with and mutually dependent upon the Son's complete alignment with the Father's will and his obedience even unto death" (Barrett 1978:377; cf. Carson 1991:388). Others point to the effects of the obedience, either in terms of its revelation of the love between the Father and the Son (Bultmann 1971:384; Beasley-Murray 1987:171) or in terms of its accomplishment of the salvation of the world (Hoskyns 1940b:440; Beasley-Murray 1987:171). Rudolf Schnackenburg says the Father's love for the Son is mentioned here "to throw the Son's deed into relief" (Schnackenburg 1980b:301). Each of these efforts touch on Johannine themes, but what does it mean that the reason the Father loves the Son is that he lays down his life? The Father simply is love (1 Jn 4:8), and as a part of his very character his love is not contingent on the loveliness of the objects of his love. But it is possible to fall out of "the sphere of His active love" (Hoskyns 1940b:440), which is the condition of the world upon whom God's wrath abides (3:36). His wrath is his settled opposition toward that which disrupts the harmony of relations between himself and his creatures and which corrupts and destroys those whom he loves. In the case of Christ, his sinless obedience maintains the harmony of relationship between himself and his Father--therefore God's love

remains fulfilled toward him. Jesus refers to this when he says, "If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father's commands and remain in his love" (15:10). Such obedience is the expression of love (14:15, 21) and is the condition for intimacy (14:23). Thus, in our passage Jesus would be saying that the Father is able to fulfill his love for the Son because the Son does the Father's will. In this way, as the commentators have suggested, we see both the character of God's love and the effects of the Son's love, which is shown in obedience. The Jewish Opponents Remain Divided over Jesus (10:19-21) Jesus has addressed this profound teaching to "some Pharisees who were with him," who were surprised at the idea that they might be blind (9:40). These are the same folks who had been divided over Jesus due to his healing of the blind man (9:16), and they continue to be divided over him (10:19). For some, Jesus' teaching reinforces the idea that he is demon-possessed (v. 20; cf. 7:20; 8:48-52). To this they now add that he is raving mad, "since madness was thought to be the result of demonic possession (Brown 1966:387; cf. Mk 3:20-30; 5:1-20). Others counter the Pharisees' assertion, saying that a person who is demon-possessed does not speak like this and cannot open the eyes of the blind (v. 21). Thus, both Jesus' words and deeds combine to bear witness to him, but the revelation simply increases the division. The more light, the greater the polarization. 7. Henry, ghis laying down his life for the sheep was the condition, the performance of which entitled him to the honors and powers of his exalted state (Joh_10:17): gTherefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life. Upon these terms I am, as Mediator, to expect my Father's acceptance and approbation, and the glory designed me - that I become a sacrifice for the chosen remnant.h ot but that, as the Son of God, he was beloved of his Father from eternity, but as God - man,as Immanuel, he was therefore beloved of the Father because he undertook to die for the sheep; therefore God's soul delighted in him as his elect because herein he was his faithful servant(Isa_42:1); therefore he said, This is my beloved Son. What an instance is this of God's love to man, that he loved his Son the more for loving us! See what a value Christ puts upon his Father's love, that, to recommend himself to that, he would lay down his life for the sheep. Did he think God's love recompence sufficient for all his services and sufferings, and shall we think it too little for ours, and court the smiles of the world to make it up? Therefore doth my Father love me,that is, me, and all that by faith become one with me; me, and the mystical body, because I lay down my life. [b.] That his laying down his life was in order to his resuming it: I lay down my life, that I may receive it again. First,This was the effect of his Father's love, and the first step of his exaltation, the fruit of that love. Because he was God's holy one,he must not see corruption,Psa_16:10. God loved him too well to leave him in the grave. Secondly,This he had in his eye, in laying down his life, that he might have an opportunity of declaring himself to be the Son of God with power by his resurrection, Rom_1:4. By a divine stratagem (like that before Ai, Jos_8:15) he yielded to death, as if he were smitten before it, that he might the more gloriously conquer death, and triumph over the grave. He laid down a vilified body, that he might assume a glorified one, fit to ascend to the world of spirits; laid down a life adapted to this world, but assumed one adapted to the other, like a corn of wheat, Joh_12:24. 8. Barnes, glay down my life - give myself to die for my people, in Jewish and pagan lands. I offer myself a sacrifice to show the willingness of my Father to save them; to provide an atonement, and thus to open the way for their salvation. This proves that the salvation of man was an object dear to God, and that it was a source of special gratification to him that his Son was willing to lay down his life to accomplish his great purposes of benevolence. That I might take it again - Be raised up from the dead, and glorified, and still carry on the work of redemption. See this same

sentiment sublimely expressed in Phi_2:5-11. 9. Gill, gdoth my Father love me,.... Christ was the object of his Father's love from all eternity, and was loved by him on various accounts; first and chiefly, as his own Son, of the same nature with him, equal to him; and also as Mediator, engaging for, and on the behalf of his chosen people; and likewise as he was clothed with their nature, and even in his state of humiliation; and not only as subject to his ordinances, and obedient to his will, and doing what was pleasing in his sight, but likewise as suffering in their room and stead, and he loved him on this account; the bruising of him was a pleasure to him, not for the sake of that itself, but because hereby his counsels and decrees were accomplished, his covenant fulfilled, and the salvation of his people obtained: hence it follows here, because I lay down my life; that is, for the sheep; to ransom them from sin and Satan, the law, its curse and condemnation, and from death and hell, wrath, ruin and destruction: and the laying down his life on this account, was not only well pleasing to his Father, but likewise was done, with the following view; or at least this was the event of it, that I might take it again; as he did, by raising himself from the dead, by which he was declared to be the Son of God; and to have made full satisfaction to divine justice, for the sins of his people, and therefore rose again for their, justification; and to be the victorious conqueror over death, having now abolished it, and having in his hands the keys of it, the power over that, and the grave: and which life he took up again, by his divine power, and as the surety of his people, to use it for their good; by ascending to his God and theirs, entering into heaven as their forerunner, appearing in the presence of God for them, as their advocate, and ever living to make intercession for them. 10. Pink, gChrist is here speaking as the Mediator, as the Word who had become flesh. As one of the Godhead, the Father had loved Him from all eternity. Beautifully is this brought out in Proverbs 8:30: "Then I was by him, as one brought up with him, and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him"\the previous verses make it plain that it is the Son who is in view, personified as "Wisdom." But the Father also loved Christ in His incarnate form. At His baptism, the commencement of His mediatorial work, He declared, "This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased." Here the Son declares, "Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life that I might take it again", for the laying down of His life was the supreme example of His devotion to the Father as the next verse clearly shows\it was in obedience to the Father that He gave up His spirit. 11. Barclay on 17 and 18, gFew passages in the ew Testament tell us so much about Jesus in so short a compass. (i) It tells us that Jesus saw his whole life as an act of obedience to God. God had given him a task to do, and he was prepared to carry it out to the end, even if it meant death. He was in a unique relationship to God which we can describe only by saying that he was the Son of God. But that relationship did not give him the right to do what he liked; it depended on his doing always, cost what it may, what God liked. Sonship for him, and sonship for us, could never be based on anything except obedience. (ii) It tells us that Jesus always saw the Cross and the glory together. He never doubted that he must die; and equally he never doubted that he would rise again. The reason was his confidence in God; he was sure that God would never abandon him. All life is based on the fact that anything

worth getting is hard to get. There is always a price to be paid. Scholarship can be bought only at the price of study; skill in any craft or technique can be bought only at the price of practice; eminence in any sport can be bought only at the price of training and discipline. The world is full of people who have missed their destiny because they would not pay the price. o one can take the easy way and enter into glory or greatness; no one can take the hard way and fail to find these things. (iii) It tells us in a way that we cannot possibly mistake that Jesus' death was entirely voluntary. Jesus stresses this again and again. In the garden he bade his would-be defender put up his sword. If he had wished, he could have called in the hosts of heaven to his defence (Matt.26:53). He made it quite clear that Pilate was not condemning him, but that he was accepting death (Jn. 19:10-11). He was not the victim of circumstance. He was not like some animal, dragged unwillingly and without understanding to the sacrifice. Jesus laid down his life because he chose to do so. It is told that in the First World War there was a young French soldier who was seriously wounded. His arm was so badly smashed that it had to be amputated. He was a magnificent specimen of young manhood, and the surgeon was grieved that he must go through life maimed. So he waited beside his bedside to tell him the bad news when he recovered consciousness. When the lad's eyes opened, the surgeon said to him: "I am sorry to tell you that you have lost your arm." "Sir," said the lad, "I did not lose it; I gave it--for France." Jesus was not helplessly caught up in a mesh of circumstances from which he could not break free. Apart from any divine power he might have called in, it is quite clear that to the end he could have turned back and saved his life. He did not lose his life: he gave it. The Cross was not thrust upon him: he willingly accepted it-for us.h

18 o one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father."
1. Jesus was a volunteer for the task of redemption from sin for all the sheep who were lost and needed finding, and restoration to the family of God. It looked like the Pharisees took his life, but not so. He laid it down of his own free will. He could have outwitted them forever, and walked through their schemes to kill him over and over as he had done before. He never needed to be taken by force, but he chose to surrender to them for he had this as an assignment for his Father. He also had the power to take it up again, and so his death would not be final. Jesus knew he would die, and he knew he would rise again, and this may have made the suffering easier to endure, but, on the other hand, it would make the anticipation all the worse, for he had to live with this knowledge daily, and we see in the Garden of Gethsemane that it was no small sacrifice he was making. It was agony to anticipate the cruelty he would have to endure. His hope of the resurrection was a strong force that kept him on track all the way to the cross.

1B. Piper, g " o on takes my life from me." Thatfs astonishing. Didnft Judas take it? What about the mob in the garden? And Annas the high priest? And the false witnesses that came against him? And the crowds who cried, "Crucify him"? And Herod who sent him back to Pilate? And Pilate who handed him over? And the soldiers who hammered the nails? What does he mean, " o one takes my life from me?"He means, "At every point where it looks like I was under constraint -- every moment where it looks like I was being forced to do what I did not want to do -- I was not being forced. I was choosing it. I was embracing it. Indeed I and my Father were orchestrating it -- because we love you. o one takes my life from me. I lay it down on my own initiative. My love is free." 2. Henry, ghe was perfectly voluntary in his sufferings and death (Joh_10:18): g o one doth or can force my life from me against my will, but I freely lay it down of myself,I deliver it as my own act and deed, for I have(which no man has) power to lay it down, and to take it again.h First, See here the power of Christ, as the Lord of life, particularly of his own life, which he had in himself.1. He had power to keep his lifeagainst all the world, so that it could not be wrested from him without his own consent. Though Christ's life seemed to be taken by storm, yet really it was surrendered, otherwise it had been impregnable, and never taken. The Lord Jesus did not fall into the hands of his persecutors because he could not avoid it, but threw himself into their hands because his hour was come. o man taketh my life from me.This was such a challenge as was never given by the most daring hero. 2. He had power to lay down his life.(1.) He had ability to do it. He could, when he pleased, slip the knot of union between soul and body, and, without any act of violence done to himself, could disengage them from each other: having voluntarily taken upa body, he could voluntarily lay it down again, which appeared when he cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost. (2.) He had authority to do it, exousian. Though we could find instruments of cruelty, wherewith to make an end of our own lives, yet Id possumus quod jure possumus - we can do that, and that only, which we can do lawfully. We are not at liberty to do it; but Christ had a sovereign authority to dispose of his own life as he pleased. He was no debtor (as we are) either to life or death, but perfectly sui juris.3. He had power to take it again;we have not. Our life, once laid down, is as water spilt upon the ground;but Christ, when he laid down his life, still had it within reach, within call, and could resume it. Parting with it by a voluntary conveyance, he might limit the surrender at pleasure, and he did it with a power of revocation, which was necessary to preserve the intentions of the surrender. Secondly, See here the grace of Christ; since none could demand his life of him by law, or extort it by force, he laid it down of himself,for our redemption. He offered himself to be the Savior: Lo, I come;and then, the necessity of our case calling for it, he offered himself to be a sacrifice: Here am I, let these go their way; by which will we are sanctified,Heb_10:10. He was both the offerer and the offering, so that his laying down his life was his offering up himself.

3. Barnes, " o man taketh it from me. That is, no one could take it by force, or unless I was willing to yield myself into his hands. He had power to preserve his life, as he showed by so often escaping from the Pharisees; he voluntarily went up to Jerusalem, knowing that he would die; he knew the approach of Judas to betray him; and he expressly told Pilate at his bar that he could have no power at all against him except it were given him by his Father, John 19:11. Jesus had a right to lay down his life for the good of men. The patriot dies for his country on the field of battle; the merchant exposes his life for gain; and the Son of God had a right to put himself in the way of danger and of death, when a dying world needed such an atoning sacrifice. This shows the peculiar love of Jesus. His death was voluntary. His coming was voluntary-the fruit of love. His

death was the fruit of love. He was permitted to choose the time and mode of his death. He did. He chose the most painful, lingering, ignominious manner of death then known to man, and THUS showed his love. I have power. This word often means authority. It includes all necessary power in the case, and the commission or authority of his Father to do it. Power to take it again. This shows that he was divine. A dead man has no power to raise himself from the grave. And as Jesus had this power after he was deceased, it proves that there was some other nature than that which had expired, to which the term "I" might be still applied. one but God can raise the dead; and as Jesus had this power over his own body it proves that he was divine. This commandment. My Father has appointed this, and commissioned me to do it. 4. Calvin, " o man taketh it from me. This is another consolation, by which the disciples may take courage as to the death of Christ, that he does not die by constraint, but offers himself willingly for the salvation of his flock. ot only does he affirm that men have no power to put him to death, except so far as he permits them, but he declares that he is free from every violence of necessity. It is otherwise with us, for we are laid under a necessity of dying on account of our sins. True, Christ himself was born a mortal man; but this was a voluntary submission, and not a bondage laid upon him by another. Christ intended, therefore, to fortify his disciples, that, when they saw him shortly afterward dragged to death, they might not be dismayed, as if he had been oppressed by enemies, but might acknowledge that it was done by the wonderful Providence of God, that he should die for the redemption of his flock. And this doctrine is of perpetual advantage that the death of Christ is an expiation for our sins, because it was a voluntary sacrifice, according to the saying of Paul, By the obedience of one many were made righteous, (Romans 5:19.) But I lay it down of myself. These words may be explained in two ways; either that Christ divests himself of life, but still remains what he was, just as a person would lay aside a garment from his body, or, that he dies by his own choice. This commandment have I received from my Father. He recalls our attention to the eternal purpose of the Father, in order to inform us that He had such care about our salvation, that he dedicated to us his only-begotten Son great and excellent as he is; [296] and Christ himself, who came into the world to be in all respects obedient to the Father, confirms the statement, that he has no other object in view than to promote our benefit.h 5. Gregory J. Bitgoodk, gJesus is called "the second Adam" [I Cor.15:45 -47]. He was similar to Adam in two respects: 1. He was a representative man, His actions affected the entire human race; 2. He received His birth directly from God, therefore His body was perfect. We know that Jesus was not a mortal man in His earth walk. Mortality was passed down from generation to generation through the contamination of Adam's blood line. Jesus received His blood from a different source, He was fathered by God. M.R. DeHann, M.D., in his book The Chemistry of the Blood, gives us some enlightening scientific facts: "It is now definitely known that the blood which flows in an unborn baby's arteries and veins is not derived from the mother but is produced within the body of the fetus. Yet it is only after the sperm has entered the ovum and a fetus begins to develop that blood appears. ...God provided a way whereby that man (Jesus) would have a human body derived from Adam but have blood from a separate source."

And we know that source was the Holy Spirit. Jesus' body was exactly like that of Adam's before he sinned in the garden of Eden. We must ask: what was Adam's body like? One thing is for sure, Adam would have lived forever had he not eaten from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. God told him that the day he ate from it, he would die. We know that to mean Adam would die spiritually. But spiritual death also meant that Adam was excluded from eating from the tree of Life and thus he would not live forever in his body [Gen. 3:22]. Therefore we can say that mortality in Adam's case was a direct result of his spiritual death. This was not the case in respect to Adam's offspring; they died physically because mortality was passed down through the blood stream; their bodies came directly from his mortal body, therefore they were mortal. This dilemma was true of every man, except Jesus who was the second Adam. He had a sinless, perfect body, a body that would live forever. But the events of the Cross changed everything. We see Jesus being made the sin of the world, and with sin, receiving our nature, which was spiritual death. Then, and only then, could Jesus be considered mortal. Then, and only then, could Jesus die physically. We will present in the following chapter that Jesus went to Hell and suffered. I would not expect anyone to accept that statement unless it was substantiated by the Scripture. evertheless, for the sake of the point under discussion, let us consider what would precede such an experience. The Hebrew word for Hell is "Sheol;" it meant the place of departed spirits. Most commentators agree that the Greek word "Hades" is identical. (We will dispute this in the next chapter.) Whether they are the same or not is not the point here; what is important is that this is where the dead went. Even the righteous dead (those who believed in and lived for God) were sent to a place called Abraham's Bosom, which was located some place near Hell [Luke 16:19-30]. We must ask the question: why did the dead go to the underworld rather than to heaven? This is easily answered in the case of the wicked, they went to Hell because of their sins and because they were spiritually dead. But what of the righteous dead? The answer is the same: because of their sins and because they were spiritually dead. The only difference was they sought to serve God to the best of their ability and they placed faith in God to eventually send a Redeemer to forgive their sins. They could not go to heaven because they were spiritually dead and God couldn't give them spiritual life until their sins had been dealt with. ow if Jesus made His grave with the wicked in His death [Is. 53:9], then He would have gone to the place of suffering where the wicked dead go. And for Jesus to suffer in that place he would have to die spiritually first. To think that Jesus could go to the place of suffering to endure our punishment without entering our spiritual condition is like saying we can go to heaven without entering His spiritual condition (alive unto God). Jesus had to die spiritually in order to bear the full brunt of our guilt. And because that meant we must go to Hell, it meant Christ also must go to Hell and become answerable for our sins. We will attempt to substantiate this position in the next chapter and if you are convinced that there is enough scriptural evidence to say that Jesus suffered in Hell, the only conclusion possible is that Jesus died spiritually first. The evidence in this chapter is still not the final picture. The facts contained in the two-fold resurrection will also reveal the spiritual death of Jesus. Statements as "made alive in spirit," "first-born from the dead," etc., refer to the spiritual impartation of Life to our Lord in the heart of the earth. Therefore we will be referring back to this topic though we are leaving the chapter. This is necessary to maintain the chronological flow of the 3 days and nights. When we take any of the many evidences that we have presented here alone one might have room to speculate. But

when we add them all up, there seems to be overwhelming evidence that Jesus did, in fact, die spiritually.h 6. Jamison, gman taketh it from me, but I lay it down myself: I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again\ It is impossible for language more plainly and emphatically to express the absolute voluntariness of Christfs death, such a voluntariness as it would be manifest presumption in any mere creature to affirm of his own death. It is beyond all doubt the language of One who was conscious that His life was His own(which no creaturefs is), and therefore His to surrender or retain at will. Here lay the glory of His sacrifice, that it was purely voluntary. The claim of gpower to take it againh is no less important, as showing that His resurrection, though ascribed to the Father, in the sense we shall presently see, was nevertheless His own assertion of His own right to lifeas soon as the purposes of His voluntary death were accomplished. This commandment \ to glay down His - life, that He might take it again.h have I received of my Father \ So that Christ died at once by gcommandh of His Father, and by such a voluntary obedience to that command as has made Him (so to speak) infinitely dear to the Father. The necessity of Christfs death, in the light of these profound sayings, must be manifest to all but the superficial student. 7. Gill, gman taketh it from me,.... It was indeed taken away at the instigation of the Jews, and by the order of Pilate, and by means of the Roman soldiers, who crucified him; and the former of these are often charged with slaying him, and killing him, the Prince of life; and it is expressly said, "his life is taken from the earth", Act_8:33; and yet no man could, nor did take it away, without his Father's will, and determinate counsel and knowledge, by which he was delivered up into the hands of the above persons, and by which they did to him what they did, or otherwise they could have had no power over him; nor could any man, nor did any man, take away his life from him, without his own consent; he voluntarily surrendered himself, or he could never have been taken; he went freely to the cross, or he could never have been led there; he suffered himself to be nailed to the accursed tree, and when he hung on it, he could easily have disengaged himself, and come down; and when they had him there, they could not have taken away his life, had he not of himself given up the ghost, and breathed out his life and soul: but I lay it down of myself; of my own will, or of my own accord, as the Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions render it; which was done with the greatest patience and meekness, resolution, courage and magnanimity; and with a full will, and with the greatest cheerfulness and alacrity; and that as a ransom for his people, and that they might live through him: I have power to lay it down; this was not his life as God, but as man; and was so his own, as it was not his Father's, and was entirely at his own dispose; for it was the life of that individual human nature, which was united to his divine person; and so in a sense his, as it was not either the Father's or the Spirit's; and was so his own, as ours are not, which are from God, and dependent on him, and entirely to be disposed of by him, and not by ourselves: but Christ, the Prince of life, had a power of laying down his life of his own accord, as a ransom price for his sheep: and I have power to take it again; as he was the Son of God, and truly God, and as the surety of his people; having satisfied law and justice, by his obedience, sufferings, and death, and for the ends mentioned in note; see Gill on Joh_10:17,

this commandment have I received of my Father; which may respect both branches of his power, but is not the foundation of it, but the reason of is exercising it; because it was so agreeable to his Father's will, which is the same with his own, as he is the Son of God, and one with his Father, and equal to him; and what he delights in as Mediator, in which capacity he is considered as a servant; and in which he cheerfully became obedient, even unto death, to his Father's command, or in compliance with his will: the Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions read, "because this commandment have I received of my Father": this is a reason why he so readily exerted his power, both in laying down his life, and taking it again, because it was his Father's command and will, and which he received from him, with the utmost pleasure; his and his Father's love, good will, gracious ends and views towards the elect, herein being the same.h 8. Pink, “When Christ died, He did so of His own voluntary will. This is a point of vital importance. We must never give a place to the dishonoring thought that the Lord Jesus was powerless to prevent His sufferings, that when He endured such indignities and cruel treatment at the hands of His enemies, it was because He was unable to avoid them. othing could be farther from the truth. The treachery of Judas, the arrest in the Garden, the arraignment before Caiaphas, the insults from the soldiers, the trial before Pilate, the submission to the unjust sentence, the journey to Calvary, the being nailed to the cruel tree—all of these were voluntarily endured. Without His own consent none could have harmed a hair of His head. A beautiful type of this is furnished in Genesis 22:13, where we read that the ram, which was placed on the altar as a substitute for Isaac, was "caught in a thicket by his horns." The "horns" speak of strength and power (see Habakkuk 3:4, etc.). Typically they tell us that the Savior did not succumb to death through weakness, but that He gave up His life in the full vigor of His strength. It was not the nails, but the strength of His love to the Father and to His elect, which held Him to the Cross. The pre-eminence of Christ was fully manifested at the Cross. In birth He was unique, in His life unique, and so in His death. ot yet have we read aright the inspired accounts of His death, if we suppose that on the Cross the Savior was a helpless victim of His enemies. At every point He demonstrated that no man took His life from Him, but rather that He laid it down of Himself. See the very ones sent to arrest Him in the Garden, there prostrate on the ground before Him (John 18:6): how easily could He have walked away unmolested had it so pleased Him! Hear Him before Pilate, as He reminds that Roman officer, "Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above" (John 19:11). Behold Him on the Cross itself, so superior to His sufferings that He makes intercession for the transgressors, saves the dying robber, and provides a home for His widowed mother. Listen to Him as He cries with a loud voice (Matthew 27:46, 50)—no exhausted Sufferer was this! Mark how triumphantly He "gave up the ghost" (John 19:30). Verily "no man" took His life from Him. So evident was it that He triumphed in the hour of death itself, the Roman soldier was made to exclaim, "Truly this was the Son of God" (Matthew 27:54). "I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again" (John 10:18). Here our Lord ascribes His resurrection to His own power. He had done the same before, when, after cleansing the temple, the Pharisees had demanded from Him a sign: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up" (John 2:19) was His response. In Romans 6:4 we are told that Christ was "raised from the dead by the glory of the Father." In Romans 8:11 we read, "But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you." These passages are not contradictory, but complementary; they supplement one another; each contributing a separate ray of light on the glorious event of which they speak. Putting them together we learn that the

resurrection of the Savior was an act in which each of the three Persons of the Trinity concurred and co-operated. "This commandment have I received of my Father." This is parallel with what we read of in Philippians 2:8, "And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." It was to this our Lord referred in John 6:38, "For I came down from heaven not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me."

19At these words the Jews were again divided.
1. It is no surprise that they would be of two opinions, for his words were either total nonsense to the doubter, or mysterious prophecy to the seekers of truth. 1B. Pink, gThis had been foretold of old: "He shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offense to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem" (Isa. 8:14). Similarly, Simeon announced in the temple, when the Savior was presented to God, "Behold, this child is set (appointed) for the fall and rising again of many in Israel" (Luke 2:34). So had the Savior Himself declared. "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword" (Matthew 10:34). From the Divine side this is a profound mystery to us. It had been an easy matter for God to have subdued the enmity in menfs hearts and brought them all as worshippers to the feet of Christ. But instead of this, He permitted His Son to be despised and rejected by the great majority, and He permitted this because He Himself eternally decreed it (see Acts 2:23; 1 Peter 2:8, etc).h 2. Calvin, "A division therefore arose again. The advantage gained by Christ's discourse was, that it procured him some disciples; but as his doctrine has also many adversaries, hence arises a division, so that they are split into parties, who formerly appeared to be one body of the Church. for all, with one consent, professed that they worshipped the God of Abraham and complied with the Law of Moses; but now, when Christ comes forward, they begin to differ on his account. If that profession had been sincere, Christ, who is the strongest bond of charity, and whose office it is to gather those things which are scattered, would not break up their agreement. But Christ, by the light of his Gospel, exposes the hypocrisy of many who, while they had nothing but a false and hypocritical pretense, boasted that they were the people of God. Thus, the wickedness of many is still the reason why the Church is troubled by divisions, and why contentions are kindled. Yet those who disturb the peace, throw the blame on us, and call us Schismatics; for the principal charge which the Papists bring against us is, that our doctrine has shaken the tranquility of the Church. Yet the truth is, that, if they would yield submissively to Christ, and give their

support to the truth, all the commotions would immediately be allayed. But when they utter murmurs and complaints against Christ, and will not allow us to be at rest on any other condition than that the truth of God shall be extinguished, and that Christ shall be banished from his kingdom, they have no right to accuse us of the crime of schism; for it is on themselves, as every person sees, that this crime ought to be charged. We ought to be deeply grieved that the Church is torn by divisions arising among those who profess the same religion; but it is better that there are some who separate themselves from the wicked, to be united to Christ their Head, than that all should be of one mind in despising God. Consequently, when schisms arise, we ought to inquire who they are that revolt from God and from his pure doctrine. 3. Barclay on 19-21, gThe people who listened to Jesus on this occasion were confronted with a dilemma which is for ever confronting men. Either Jesus was a megalomaniac madman, or he was the Son of God. There is no escape from that choice. If a man speaks about God and about himself in the way in which Jesus spoke, either he is completely deluded, or else he is profoundly right. The claims which Jesus made signify either insanity or divinity. How can we assure ourselves that they were indeed justified and not the world's greatest delusion? (i) The words of Jesus are not the words of a madman. We could cite witness after witness to prove that the teaching of Jesus is the supreme sanity. Thinking men and women in every generation have judged the teaching of Jesus the one hope of sanity for a mad world. His is the one voice which speaks God's sense in the midst of man's delusions. (ii) The deeds of Jesus are not the deeds of a madman. He healed the sick and fed the hungry and comforted the sorrowing. The madness of megalomania is essentially selfish. It seeks for nothing but its own glory and prestige. But Jesus' life was spent in doing things for others. As the Jews themselves said, a man who was mad would not be able to open the eyes of the blind. (iii) The effect of Jesus is not the effect of a madman. The undeniable fact is that millions upon millions of lives have been changed by the power of Jesus Christ. The weak have become strong, the selfish have become selfless, the defeated have become victorious, the worried have become serene, the bad have become good. It is not madness which produces such a change, but wisdom and sanity. The choice remains--Jesus was either mad or divine. o honest person can review the evidence and come to any other conclusion than that Jesus brought into the world, not a deluded madness, but the perfect sanity of God. 4. Jamison, gwas a division ... again among the Jews for these sayings\ the light and the darkness revealing themselves with increasing clearness in the separation of the teachable from the obstinately prejudiced. The one saw in Him only ga devil and a madmanh; the other revolted at the thought that such wordscould come from one possessed, and sight be given to the blind by a demoniac; showing clearly that a deeper impression had been made upon them than their words expressed. 5. Henry, ghave here an account of the people's different sentiments concerning Christ, on occasion of the foregoing discourse; there was a division, a schism,among them; they differed in their opinions, which threw them into heats and parties. Such a ferment as this they had been in

before (Joh_7:43; Joh_9:16); and where there has once been a division again. Rents are sooner made than made up or mended. This division was occasioned by the sayings of Christ, which, one would think, should rather have united them all in him as their centre; but they set them at variance, as Christ foresaw, Luk_12:51. But it is better that men should be dividedabout the doctrine of Christ than unitedin the service of sin, Luk_11:21. See what the debate was in particular.h

20Many of them said, "He is demon-possessed and raving mad. Why listen to him?"
1. The majority were of the opinion that he was a raving maniac who spoke nothing short of blasphemy. They had it with this madman and refused to hear anymore. They heard enough to conclude that he is not worth listening to. 2. Gill writes, g..he is a lunatic, he is distracted, he is a madman; how can you bear to hear such ranting blasphemous stuff, which no man in his, senses would ever utter? nor is anything he says to be regarded, since he is not in his right mind; but is under the power and influence of some evil spirit, which instills these wild and frantic notions into him, and puts him upon venting them; but surely no sober man will ever heed to them. g 3. Calvin, "He hath a devil. They employ the most offensive reproach which they can devise, in slandering Christ, that all may shudder at the thought of hearing him. For wicked men, that they may not be forced to yield to God, in a furious manner, and with closed eyes, break out into proud contempt of him, and excite others to the same rage, so that not a single word of Christ is heard in silence. But the doctrine of Christ has sufficient power in itself to defend it against slanders. And this is what believers mean by their reply,h 4. Guzik, "He has a demon and is mad: Jesus made such radical claims about Himself that people divided over Him. Some believe He was whom He said He was. Others believed that anyone who claimed to be God as Jesus claimed must either have a demon or be mad. William Barclay was right when wrote, "Either Jesus was a meglo-maniac madman, or he was the Son of God." By what we know of Jesus, is if fair to say that He was a madman? The words of Jesus were not the words of a madman; instead, they are supreme sanity. The deeds of Jesus aren't the deeds of a meglo-maniac; instead, they were utterly unselfish. The effect of Jesus isn't the effect of a madman; instead, He has changed millions for the good.h 5. John Macarthur, "You know, there are some people who think Jesus is a madman. That is a tragic sinful and damnable conclusion. Boy, that's what they concluded in Matthew 12, you know. They said, "What He does He does by the power of Satan." And Jesus said, "For that you will not be forgiven." If a man sees all the revelation of Christ, everything He's ever done and said, if those people stood there and saw all His miracles and heard all His words and concluded He did it by Satan, they were beyond the possibility of salvation because they rejected total revelation.

That is blasphemy and there are blasphemers today, plenty of them. Perhaps the most prominent one is Madeline Murray O'Hare, but there are many in her bag who just don't have her platform. But then you have the other pole and society often divides itself in to these polarized ends. Verse 21, "Others said," and I like them, they're on the verge of salvation. "Others said, These are not the words of Him that hath a demon." Listen to what He says. His lucid conversation, the majestic calm of His words, their strength, the strains thrill that His words sent through their soul. These are not the words of a demon-possessed man. And I like that little last shot, "Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?" So the world is polarized regarding Jesus. What's His relation to the world? On the one hand they think He's a madman. On the other hand, they're just hanging on the balance of faith. And it is to group B that Christ will commit Himself, John 7:17, "If any man wills to know His will, He shall know of the doctrine." If you're going to be in one of these two groups, I hope you're in Group B. 6. Clarke, ghath a devil, and is mad - , then, a demoniac and a madman were not exactly the same in the apprehension of the Jews; no more than the effect is the same with the cause which produces it. Some will have it that, when the Jews told our Lord that he had a demon, they meant no more than that he was deranged; but here these matters are evidently distinguished. They believed him to be possessed by a demon, who deranged his faculties, and that he must have been a wicked man, and a deceiver, thus to be put under the power of such a spirit.h 7. Henry, gupon this occasion spoke ill of Christ and of his sayings, either openly in the face of the assembly, for his enemies were very impudent, or privately among themselves. They said, He has a devil, and is mad, why do you hear him?1. They reproach him as a demoniac. The worst of characters is put upon the best of men. He is a distracted man, he raves and is delirious, and no more to be heard than the rambles of a man in bedlam. Thus still, if a man preaches seriously and pressingly of another world, he shall be said to talk like an enthusiast; and his conduct shall be imputed to fancy, a heated brain, and a crazed imagination. 2. They ridicule his hearers: gWhy hear you him?Why do you so far encourage him as to take notice of what he says?h ote, Satan ruins many by putting them out of conceit with the word and ordinances, and representing it as a weak and silly thing to attend upon them. Men would not thus be laughed out of their necessary food, and yet suffer themselves to be laughed out of what is more necessary. Those that hear Christ, and mix faith with what they hear, will soon be able to give a good account why they hear him.h

21But others said, "These are not the sayings of a man possessed by a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?"
1. The debate is still going on about the blind man from birth being healed by Jesus. This was not an easy miracle to ignore even by these opponents of Jesus. They had doubts about opposing him,

and he spoke with such authority that some of them were not going along with those who were blind to all that was good in this man. They were doubting their doubt, and felt he was worth listening to more, for he was not talking like a madman, but like a prophet. Madmen just do not go about doing marvelous miracle of healing, and so lets give him the benefit of the doubt. 2. Clarke, gare not the words of him that hath a devil - he were deranged by an unclean spirit, his words would bear a similitude to the spirit that produced them; but these are words of deep sense, soberness, and piety: besides, could a demoniac open the eyes of blind men? This is not the work of a demon. ow we have seen that this man has restored a man who was born blind. Therefore it is demonstrably evident that he is neither a madman nor a demoniac. Behold the usage which the blessed Lord received from his creatures! And behold with what meekness and gentleness he conducts himself! - not a word of impatience proceeds from his lips; nor a look of contempt or indignation is seen in his face. And what was he doing to merit all this? Why, he was instructing the ignorant, and telling the wretched that he was just going to die to save their souls! Amazing love of God, and ingratitude and obduracy of men! Let not the disciple suppose that, in this respect, he shall be above his master. When a minister of Christ has done his utmost to do good to his fellow creatures, let him not be surprised if he meet with nothing from many but reproaches and persecutions for his pains. The grand point is to take Jesus for an example of suffering, and to be armed with the same mind. It appears that the words spoken by the friendly Jews prevailed; and that the others were obliged to abandon the field. 3. Barnes, g ot the words ... - words are sober, grave, pious, full of wisdom. The preaching of Jesus always produced effect. It made bitter enemies or decided friends. So will all faithful preaching. It is not the fault of the gospel that there are divisions, but of the unbelief and mad passions of men. 4. Gill, gOthers said, these are not the words of him that hath a devil,.... o madman or demoniac, one possessed of a devil, and under the influence of Satan, would ever talk in so divine a manner, and speak such words of truth and soberness: these were, some of the wiser sort, and were well disposed to Christ, who reasoned thus, and they were but few: whereas those that charged him with madness and distraction were many, as in the preceding verse; can a devil open the eyes of the blind? referring to the late instance, of Christ's curing a man that was blind from his birth; if it was in the power of a devil to do such an action, which it is not, yet it is not in his nature, it is not usual with him to do any good; but to do all the hurt he can, both to the bodies and souls of men: in one of Beza's copies it is read, "can one that has a devil open the eyes of the blind?" so the Persic version, can a "demoniac", &c.? which reading suits best with what is before said; and then the sense is, can a madman, one that is a lunatic, one possessed with the devil, either talk in the manner this man does, or do such wonderful actions as he has done, particularly cure a man that was born blind? 5. Henry, g Others stood up in defence of him and his discourse, and, though the stream ran strong, dared to swim against it; and, though perhaps they did not believe on him as the Messiah, they could not bear to hear him thus abused. If they could say no more of him, this they would maintain, that he was a man in his wits, that he had not a devil, that he was neither senseless nor graceless. The absurd and most unreasonable reproaches, that have sometimes been cast upon Christ and his gospel, have excited those to appear for him and it who otherwise had no great affection to either. Two things they plead: - 1. The excellency of his doctrine: gThese are not the

words of him that hath a devil;they are not idle words; distracted men are not used to talk at this rate. These are not the words of one that is either violently possessed with a devil or voluntarily in league with the devil.h Christianity, if it be not the true religion, is certainly the greatest cheat that ever was put upon the world; and, if so, it must be of the devil, who is the father of all lies: but it is certain that the doctrine of Christ is no doctrine of devils, for it is levelled directly against the devil's kingdom, and Satan is too subtle to be divided against himself. So much of holiness there is in the words of Christ that we may conclude they are not the words of one that has a devil,and therefore are the words of one that was sent of God; are not from hell, and therefore must be from heaven. 2. The power of his miracles: Can a devil,that is, a man that has a devil, open the eyes of the blind? either mad men nor bad men can work miracles. Devils are not such lords of the power of nature as to be able to work such miracles; nor are they such friends to mankind as to be willing to work them if they were able. The devil will sooner put out men's eyes than open them. Therefore Jesus had not a devil.h

The Unbelief of the Jews 22Then came the Feast of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter,
1. Arthur Pink, gIt is by no means a simple task either to analyze or to summarize the second half of John 10. The twenty-second verse clearly begins a new section of the chapter, but it is equally clear that what follows is closely related to that which has gone before. The Lord is no longer talking to "the Pharisees," but to "the Jews." evertheless, it is in His shepherd character, as related to His own, that He is here viewed. Yet while there is this in common between the first and second halves of John 10, there is a notable difference between them. In the former, Christ is seen in His mediatorship; in the latter, it is His essential glories which are the more prominent. In the first part of John 10 it is Christ in "the form of a servant" which is before us. He gains entrance to the sheepfold by "the porter opening to him" (verse 3). He is the "door" into Godfs presence (verse 9), the Way unto the Father. There, He is seen as the One who was to "give his life for the sheep" (verse 11). There, we behold Him in the place of obedience, in subjection to the "commandment" of the father (verse 18). But mark the contrast in the second half of John 10. Here, He presents Himself as the One endowed with the sovereign right to "give eternal life" to His own (verse 28); as One possessed of almighty power, so that none can pluck them out of His hand (verse 28); as one with the Father (verse 30); as "the Son of God" (verse 36). It seems evident then that the central design of the passage before us is to display the essential glories of the person of the God-man. It is not so much the Godhood of Christ which is here in view, as it is the Deity of the One who humbled Himself to become man.

What is recorded in the latter half of John 10 provided a most pertinent, though tragic, conclusion to the first section of the Gospel. It was winter-time (verse 22); the season of ingathering was now over; the "sun of righteousness" had completed His official circuit, and the genial warmth of summer had now given place to the season of chilling frosts. The Jews were celebrating "the feast of the dedication," which commemorated the purification of the temple. But for the true Temple, the One to whom the temple had pointed\God tabernacling in their midst\they had no heart. The Lord Jesus is presented as walking in the temple, but it is to be carefully noted that He was "in Solomonfs porch" (verse 23). which means that He was on the outside of the sacred enclosure, Israelfs "house" was left unto them desolate (cf. Matthew 23:38)! While here in the porch, "the Jews" (the religious leaders) came to Christ with the demand that He tell them openly if He were "the Christ" (verse 24), saying, "How long dost thou make us to doubt?" This was the language of unbelief, and uttered at that late date, showed the hopelessness of their condition. Following this interview of the Jews with Christ, and their unsuccessful attempt to apprehend Him, the Lord retires beyond Jordan, "unto the place where John at first baptized" (verse 40). Thus did Israelfs Messiah return to the place where He had formally dedicated Himself to His mission. 1B. Bruce Goettsche, gVerse 22 comes about three months after last verse 21. The setting is the southern walkway of the temple courts. It is the time of Chanukah. This was an annual festival that was 8 successive days which is observed in the third month of the Jewish calendar and is in our month of December. This was a celebration of the restoring of the temple from a time of great defilement at the hand of the wicked Antiochus Epiphenes. All this is to bear out the significance of the time that Jesus met with these men. It was a holy time. A time of celebration. A time when many people would have been around. The leaders of the Jews try to get Jesus to stumble and create a riot. They ask His specifically if He is the Messiah. If He says yes, they will draw the wrong conclusions because their idea of the Messiah was wrong. But, If He says " o", He lies. Rather than either of those options, Jesus returns to a familiar metaphor . . .that of the Shepherd and His Sheep.h 1C. Ron Daniel, g10:22-23 The Feast Of The Dedication. Why have we not read of the Feast of Dedication in our studies of Leviticus? Because its origin is from Jewish history between the time of the Old and ew Testaments. A wicked man named Antiochus Epiphanes came to power over Syria. He first conquered Egypt, then turned against Israel. He entered Jerusalem with a might army. He entered the temple and carried off the golden furniture from the Holy Place - the altar of incense, the lamp stand, the table, and stripped the place bare of every treasure that was there. Antiochus commanded that everyone in his kingdom give up their customs and religion. He erected an altar on top of the Altar of Sacrifice, and the books of the Law of God were outlawed many were torn to pieces and burned with fire. Circumcision was forbidden. Many Jews were put to death for practicing their faith. A man named Judas Maccabeus lead the Jews in revolt against these pagan Gentiles. After many miraculous victories, Judas Maccabeus was able to cleanse the temple and dedicate it. They rebuilt and remade all of the things which had been stolen or defiled. The temple was dedicated on the 25th of Chislev, which is near the end of December. Today, we know this holiday as Hanukah.h 1D. Gill has a complete account of this event as he writes, gThat is, of the temple; not as built by

Solomon, as onnus in his paraphrase suggests; or as rebuilt by Zerubabel, for there were no annual feasts appointed in commemoration of either of these; and besides, they were neither of them in the winter time; the dedication of Solomon's temple was in autumn, at the feast of tabernacles, about September, 1Ki_8:2; and the dedication of the house in Zorobabel's time, was in the spring, about February, Ezr_6:15; but this was the feast of dedication, appointed by Judas Maccabaeus and his brethren, on account of the purging the temple, and renewing the altar, after the profanation of them by Antiochus; which feast lasted eight days, and began on the twenty fifth of the month Cisleu, which answers to part of our December; see the Apocrypha: 2. Ray Stedman, "Winter in Israel is the rainy season. The "portico of Solomon" was a large roofed-in enclosure supported by beautiful columns that filled one side of the temple arena. There, sheltered from the rain, our Lord resumed his teaching ministry during the Feast of Hanukkah. Hanukkah celebrates the purification and rededication of the temple after its defilement under the Syrian king, Antiochus Epiphanes, in the year 165 BC. The feast looks back on that dramatic, exciting period in Israel's history when the Maccabee family revolted against Israel's Syrian overlords. After a terrible time of murder and slaughter, and defilement of the temple courts by the offering of pigs on the altars of Judah, Judas Maccabeus and his sons drove out the Syrians, reclaimed the temple for the Lord and dedicated it anew. That event is celebrated down to this day in the Feast of Hanukkah." " ow on the five and twentieth day of the ninth month, which is called the month Casleu, in the hundred forty and eighth year, they rose up betimes in the morning, 56 And so they kept the dedication of the altar eight days and offered burnt offerings with gladness, and sacrificed the sacrifice of deliverance and praise. 59 Moreover Judas and his brethren with the whole congregation of Israel ordained, that the days of the dedication of the altar should be kept in their season from year to year by the space of eight days, from the five and twentieth day of the month Casleu, with mirth and gladness.'' (1 Maccabees 4) 3. CLARKE, gThe feast of the dedication - was a feast instituted by Judas Maccabeus, in commemoration of his purifying the temple after it had been defiled by Antiochus Epiphanes. This feast began on the twenty-fifth of the month Cisleu, (which answers to the eighteenth of our December), and continued for eight days. When Antiochus had heard that the Jews had made great rejoicings, on account of a report that had been spread of his death, he hastened out of Egypt to Jerusalem, took the city by storm, and slew of the inhabitants in three days forty thousand persons; and forty thousand more he sold for slaves to the neighboring nations. ot contented with this, he sacrificed a great sow on the altar of burnt offerings; and, broth being made by his command of some of the flesh, he sprinkled it all over the temple, that he might defile it to the uttermost. See Prideauxfs Connection, vol. iii. p. 236, edit. 1725. After this, the whole of the temple service seems to have been suspended for three years, great dilapidations having taken place also in various parts of the buildings: see 1 Maccabees 4:36, etc. As Judas Maccabaeus not only restored the temple service, and cleansed it from pollution, etc., but also repaired the ruins of it, the feast was called the renovation. It was winter -, or, it was stormy or rainy weather. And this is the reason, probably, why our Lord is represented as walking in Solomonfs porch, or portico, Joh_10:23. Though it certainly was in winter when this feast was held, yet it does not appear that the word above refers so much to the time of the year as to the state of the weather. Indeed, there was no occasion to add it was winter,

when the feast of the dedication was mentioned, because every body knew that, as that feast was held on the twenty-fifth of the month Cisleu, it was in the winter season. John has here omitted all that Jesus did from the time when he left Jerusalem, after the feast of tabernacles in September was ended, until the feast of the dedication in the December following: and he did it probably because he found that the other evangelists had given an account of what our Lord did in the interval. St. Luke relates what our Lord did on his way from Galilee to Jerusalem, to this feast, Luke 17:11-37; Luk_18:1-14. Observe, likewise, that this time here mentioned was the fourth time (according to Johnfs account) that Jesus went up to the feasts at Jerusalem in about a year: for, first, he went up to the feast of the passover, Joh_2:13; next to the feast of pentecost, as it seems to have been, Joh_5:1; then to the feast of tabernacles, Joh_7:2, Joh_7:10; and, lastly, to the feast of the passover in which he was crucified. John seems purposely to have pointed out his presence in Jerusalem at these four feasts, because all the other evangelists have omitted the mention of every one of them. See Bishop Pearce; and see the note on Joh_5:1. 4. Barnes, gThe feast of the dedication. Literally, the feast of the renewing, or of the renovation. This feast was instituted by Judas Maccabaeus, in the year 164 B.C. The temple and city were taken by Antiochus Epiphanes in the year 167 B.C. He slew forty thousand inhabitants, and sold forty thousand more as slaves. In addition to this, he sacrificed a sow on the altar of burntofferings, and a broth being made of this, he sprinkled it all over the temple. The city and temple were recovered three years afterward by Judas Maccabaeus, and the temple was purified with great pomp and solemnity. The ceremony of purification continued through eight days, during which Judas presented magnificent victims, and celebrated the praise of God with hymns and psalms (Josephus, Ant., b. xii. ch. 11). "They decked, also, the forefront of the temple with crowns of gold and with shields, and the gates and chambers they renewed and hanged doors upon them," 1 Mac. iv. 52-59. On this account it was called the feast of renovation or dedication. Josephus calls it the feast of lights, because the city was illuminated, as expressive of joy. The feast began on the twenty-fifth day of Chisleu, answering to the fifteenth day of December. The festival continued for eight days, with continued demonstrations of joy.It was winter. The feast was celebrated in the winter. The word here implies that it was cold and inclement, and it is given as a reason why he walked in Solomon's porch. The porch or covered way on the east of the temple.h 5. Calvin, "And it was the feast of Dedication. The Greek word (enkainia) which we have translated dedication, [298] properly signifies renovations; because the temple, which had been polluted, was again consecrated by the command of Judas Maccabaeus; and at that time it was enacted that the day of the new dedication or consecration should be celebrated every year as a festival, that the people might recall to remembrance the grace of God, which had put an end to the tyranny of Antiochus. Christ appeared in the temple at that time, according to custom, that his preaching might yield more abundant fruit amidst a large assembly of men.h 6. Constable, "The eight-day feast of Dedication, now called Chanukah (or Hanukkah), the feast of Lights, was not one of the feasts prescribed in the Mosaic Law. The Jews instituted it during the inter-testamental period (cf. 1 Macc.4:36-59; 2 Macc. 1:9, 18; 10:1-8). "Christ's testimony at

Hanukkah, and its place in the Gospel of John, which stresses the theme of light, is a testimony to Christians that Hanukkah emphasizes His great work of providing salvation to a spiritually blindworld." It commemorated the purification and rededication of the temple by Judas Maccabeus ("Judas the Hammer") on the twenty-fifth of Chislev (modern late December and early January), 164 B.C. The Syrian invader Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) had profaned the temple three years earlier by replacing the brazen altar with a pagan one on which he offered a pig as a sacrifice to Jupiter. Antiochus attempted to Hellenize Judea, but the Jewish patriot Judas Maccabeus was able to lead a guerilla revolt that has borne his name ever since. After three years he defeated the Syrians and liberated the Jews. "It was the last great deliverance that the Jews had known, and therefore it must have been in people's minds a symbol of their hope that God would again deliver his people."In warmer weather Jesus would have taught in one of the open-air courtyards of the temple. Because it was winter He taught what follows in Solomon's colonnade on the temple courtyard's eastern side. Perhaps John mentioned this detail because it was in Solomon's colonnade that the first Christians gathered regularly (Acts 3:11; 5:12).h 7. IVP, "This teaching occurs at the Feast of Dedication (v. 22), about two months after the Feast of Tabernacles. This feast commemorates the rededication of the temple in 164 B.C. (1 Macc 4:36-59; 2 Macc 10:1-8; Josephus Antiquities of the Jews 12.316-26). The Seleucid king Antiochus IV Epiphanes had forbidden Jews to continue to practice their religion and had tried to force them to worship Zeus. He had an altar set up in the temple in Jerusalem and sacrifice was offered on this altar on the 25th of Chislev, 167 B.C. This led to a revolt known as the Maccabean Revolt. It was initiated by a priest named Mattathias and then carried on under the leadership of his son Judas, known as Maccabeus, "the hammer" (1 Macc 1--3; 2 Macc 5--9; Josephus Antiquities of the Jews 12.248-315). The revolt was successful, and the temple was restored and rededicated, with proper sacrifice being offered once again, beginning on the 25th of Chislev, 164 B.C. An eight-day feast was held and has continued each year from that time, and it is known today as Hanukkah. A hallmark of the festival is the lighting of lamps and a sense of joy. Jesus has withdrawn from the temple (8:59) and begun to gather around him a community distinct from official Judaism (chap. 9). He has interpreted his activity as the divine shepherd's gathering the flock of God (10:1-21) and has concluded with a reference to the authority God has given him to lay down his life and take it back again (10:18), echoing what he had said in his first public teaching to these Jewish leaders concerning his body, the temple (2:19-22). ow he returns to the vicinity of the temple, though not to the temple proper. Solomon's Colonnade (10:23) was an open, roofed 45-foot walkway with double columns that were 38 feet tall. It was situated along the east side of the Court of Gentiles (Westerholm 1988:772). Although it was part of the temple complex, it was not considered to be part of the actual temple (Brown 1966:402), as evidenced by the fact that Gentiles were not allowed into the temple but they could be present in Solomon's Colonnade. Thus, Jesus' departure from the temple at the end of chapter 8 was final. But now, right next to the temple, at a feast commemorating the rededication of the temple, Jesus gives his clearest teaching about his own identity. It is this identity that is the grounds for his replacement of the temple as the place where forgiveness of sins is available and God is to be met. "Christ in fact perfectly accomplished what the Maccabees wrought in a figure, and dedicated a new and abiding temple" (Westcott 1908:2:64). Jesus also clearly spells out the separation between himself and the Jewish leaders. 8. Bob Utley, "10:22 gthe feast of the Dedicationh Josephus calls this the gFestival of Lights.h It is

known in our day as Hanukkah. It was an eight day feast that occurred around the middle of December. It celebrates the rededication of the Temple in Jerusalem after the military victory of Judas Maccabeus in 164 B.C. In 168 B.C., Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who was a Seleucid leader, tried to force the Jews into Hellenistic practices (cf. Dan. 8:9-14). He turned the Temple in Jerusalem into a pagan shrine with even an altar to Zeus in the Holy Place. Judas 8. Henry, ghave here another rencounter between Christ and the Jews in the temple, in which it is hard to say which is more strange, the gracious words that came out of his mouth or the spiteful ones that came out of theirs. I. We have here the time when this conference was: It was at the feast of dedication, and it was winter,a feast that was annually observed by consent, in remembrance of the dedication of a new altar and the purging of the temple, by Judas Maccabaeus, after the temple had been profaned and the altar defiled; we have the story of it at large in the history of the Maccabees (lib. 1, cap. 4); we have the prophecy of it, Dan_8:13, Dan_8:14. See more of the feast, 2 Macc. 1:18. The return of their liberty was to them as life from the dead, and, in remembrance of it, they kept an annual feast on the twenty-fifth day of the month Cisleu,about the beginning of December,and seven days after. The celebrating of it was not confined to Jerusalem, as that of the divine feasts was, but every one observed it in his own place, not as a holy time(it is only a divine institution that can sanctify a day), but as a good time,as the days of Purim, Est_9:19. Christ forecasted to be now at Jerusalem, not in honour of the feast, which did not require his attendance there, but that he might improve those eight days of vacation for good purposesh. 9. Pink, g"And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter." Here, as always in Scripture, there is a deeper meaning than the mere historical. The mention of "winter" at this point is most significant and solemn. This tenth chapter of John closes the first main section of the fourth Gospel. From this point onwards the Lord Jesus discourses no more before the religious leaders. His public ministry was almost over. The Jews knew not their "day of visitation," and henceforth the things which "belonged to their peace" were hidden from their eyes (Luke 19:42). So far as they were concerned the words of Jeremiah applied with direct and solemn force: "The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and we are not saved" (John 8:20). For them there was nothing but an interminable "winter." Significant and suitable then is this notice of the season of coldness and barrenness as an introduction to what follows. What we have just pointed out in connection with the moral force of this reference to "winter" encourages us to look for a deeper significance in this mention here of "the feast of the dedication." owhere else in Scripture is this particular feast referred to. This makes it the more difficult to ascertain its significance here. That there is some definite reason for the Holy Spirit noticing it, and that there is a pertinent and profound meaning to it when contemplated in its connections, we are fully assured. What, then, is it? As already pointed out, the last half of John 10 closes the first great section of Johnfs Gospel, a section which has to do with the public ministry of Christ. The second section of this Gospel records His private ministry, concluding with His death and resurrection. The distinctive character of these two sections correspond exactly with the two chief purposes of our Lordfs incarnation, which were to present Himself to Israel as their promised Messiah, and to offer Himself as a sacrifice for sin. What, then, remained? Only the still more important work which was to be accomplished by His death and resurrection. He had presented Himself to Israel; now, shortly, He would offer Himself as a sacrifice to God. It is to this "the dedication" here points.

It is in this Gospel, alone of the four, that the Lord Jesus is hailed as "the lamb of God," and if the reader will turn back to Exodus 12 he will find that the "lamb" was to be separated from the flock some days before it was to be killed (see verses 3, 5, 6). In keeping with this, note how in this passage (and nowhere else) the Lord Jesus speaks of Himself as the One whom the Father had "sanctified" (verse 36), and mark how at the end of the chapter He is seen leaving Jerusalem and going away "beyond Jordan" (verse 40)! That the Holy Spirit has here prefaced this final conversation between the Savior and the Jews by mentioning "the feast of the dedication" is in beautiful and striking accord with the fact that from this point onwards Christ was now dedicated to the Cross, as hitherto He had been engaged in manifesting Himself to Israel. The interpretation suggested above is confirmed and established by two other passages in the ew Testament. The Greek word rendered "dedication" occurs nowhere else in the ew Testament, but it is found twice in its verbal form. In Hebrews 9:18 we read, "Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood" (Heb. 9:18). In Hebrews 10:19, 20 we are told, "Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest, by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way, which he hath consecrated [dedicated] for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh." In each of these instances "dedication" is connected with blood-shedding! And it was to this, the shedding of His precious blood, that the Lord Jesus was now (after His rejection by the ation) dedicated! An additional item still further confirming our exposition is found in the fact that the historical reference in John 10:22 was to the dedication of the temple, and in John 2:19 the Savior refers to Himself as "this temple"\"destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." The antitypical dedication of the temple was the Savior offering Himself to God! Most fitting then was it that the Holy Spirit should here mention the typical dedication of the temple immediately after the Lord had thrice referred to His "laying down" His life (see verses 15, 17, 18)!h 10. Barclay on 22-28, gAs Jesus walked in Solomon's Porch the Jews came to him. "How long," they said to him, "are you going to keep us in suspense? Tell us plainly, are you or are you not God's promised Anointed One?" There is no doubt that behind that question were two attitudes of mind. There were those who genuinely wished to know. They were on an eager tip-toe of expectation. But there were others who beyond a doubt asked the question as a trap. They wished to inveigle Jesus into making a statement which could be twisted either into a charge of blasphemy with which their own courts could deal or a charge of insurrection with which the Roman governor would deal. Jesus' answer was that he had already told them who he was. True, he had not done so in so many words; for, as John tells the story, Jesus' two great claims had been made in private. To the Samaritan woman he had revealed himself as the Messiah (Jn. 4:26) and to the man born blind he had claimed to be the Son of God (Jn. 9:37). But there are some claims which do not need to be made in words, especially to an audience well-qualified to perceive them. There were two things about Jesus which placed his claim beyond all doubt whether he stated it in words or not. First, there were his deeds. It was Isaiah's dream of the golden age: "Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf unstopped; then shall the lame man leap like a hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing for joy" (Isa.35:5-6). Every one of Jesus' miracles was a claim that the Messiah had come. Second, there were his words. Moses had forecast that God would raise up the Prophet who must be listened to (Deut.18:15). The very accent of authority with which Jesus spoke, the way in which he regally abrogated the old law and put his own teaching in its place,

was a claim that God was speaking in him. The words and deeds of Jesus were a continuous claim to be the Anointed One of God. But the great majority of the Jews had not accepted that claim. As we have seen in Palestine the sheep knew their own shepherd's special call and answered it; these were not of Jesus' flock. In the fourth gospel there is behind it all a doctrine of predestination, things were happening all the time as God meant them to happen. John is really saying that these Jews were predestined not to follow Jesus. Somehow or other the whole ew Testament keeps two opposite ideas in balance-the fact that everything happens within the purpose of God and yet in such a way that man's free-will is responsible. These had made themselves such that they were predestined not to accept Jesus; and yet, as John sees it, that does not make them any the less to be condemned. But though most did not accept Jesus, some did; and to them Jesus promised three things. (i) He promised eternal life. He promised that if they accepted him as Master and Lord, if they became members of his flock, all the littleness of earthly life would be gone and they would know the splendour and the magnificence of the life of God. (ii) He promised a life that would know no end. Death would not be the end but the beginning; they would know the glory of indestructible life. (iii) He promised a life that was secure. othing could snatch them from his hand. This would not mean that they would be saved from sorrow, from suffering and from death; but that in the sorest moment and the darkest hour they would still be conscious of the everlasting arms underneath and about them. Even in a world crashing to disaster they would know the serenity of God.h

23and Jesus was in the temple area walking in Solomon's Colonnade.
1. Gill wrote, gTo keep himself warm, and to secure him the better from the inclemency of the weather: in Solomon's porch; which was covered over, and the outside of it was enclosed with a wall, which made it very convenient for such a purpose: this was on the outside of the temple eastward, and was a very magnificent structure: the account Josephus (n) gives of it is this; "there was a porch without the temple, overlooking a deep valley, supported by walls of four hundred cubits, made of four square stone, very white; the length of each stone was twenty cubits, and the breadth six; the work of king Solomon, who first founded the whole temple.'' ow, though this was not the porch that was built by Solomon, yet as it was built on the same spot, and in imitation of it, it bore his name; mention is made of it in Act_3:11. 1B. Pink, gJosephus informs us (Antiq. John 8:3) that Solomon, when he built the temple, filled up a part of the valley adjacent to mount Zion, and built a portico over it toward the East. This was a magnificent structure, supported by a wall four hundred cubits high, made out of stones of vast bulk. It continued to the time of Agrippa, which was several years after the death of Christ. Twice more is mention made of "Solomonfs porch" in the ew Testament, and what is found in

these passages points a sharp contrast from the one now before us. In Acts 3:11 we are told that, following the healing of the lame beggar by Peter and John, "all the people ran together unto them in the porch that is called Solomonfs, greatly wondering." But here in John 10:23, following our Lordfs healing of the blind beggar, there is no hint of any wonderment among the people! Again in Acts 5:12 we read, "And they were all with one accord in Solomonfs porch." This is in evident contrast, designed contrast, from what is before us in our present passage. Here, immediately after the reference to our Lord walking in Solomonfs porch, we read, "then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt?" They were manifestly out of accord with Him. They were opposed to Him, and like beasts of prey sought only His life. Thus we see once more the importance and value of comparing scripture with scripture. By thus linking together these three passages which make mention of "Solomonfs porch" we discern the more clearly how that the design of our passage is to present the God-man as "despised and rejected of men." 2. Clarke, gSolomonfs porch - By what we find in Josephus, Ant. b. xx. c. 8, s. 7, a portico built by Solomon, on the east side of the outer court of the temple, was left standing by Herod, when he rebuilt the temple. This portico was four hundred cubits long, and was left standing, probably, because of its grandeur and beauty. But when Agrippa came to Jerusalem, a few years before the destruction of the city by the Romans, and about eighty years after Herod had begun his building, (till which time what Herod had begun was not completed), the Jews solicited Agrippa to repair this portico at his own expense, using for argument, not only that the building was growing ruinous, but that otherwise eighteen thousand workmen, who had all of them, until then, been employed in carrying on the works of the temple, would be all at once deprived of a livelihood. 3. Calvin, "And Jesus was walking in the temple, in Solomon's porch. The Evangelist gives to Solomon's porch the designation of the temple; not that it was the sanctuary, but only an appendage to the temple or does he mean the ancient porch which was built by Solomon, which had been altogether destroyed by the Chaldeans, but that which the Jews -perhaps immediately after their return from the Babylonish captivity -built after the pattern of the ancient porch, and gave it the same name, that it might be more highly honored; and Herod afterwards built a new temple. 4. Guzik, "(23-29) Jesus tells who He is and why they don't believe it.And Jesus walked in the temple, in Solomon's porch. Then the Jews surrounded Him and said to Him, "How long do You keep us in doubt? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly." Jesus answered them, "I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father's name, they bear witness of Me. But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand." a. The works I do in My Father's name, they bear witness of Me: The works Jesus did said that He was from God, and that He was true to His word. b. You do not believe, because you are not My sheep: Jesus carries on the same "spiritual parentage" theme seen in John 8. Their lack of belief betrays the fact that they are not the sheep

of Jesus. c. either shall anyone snatch them out of My hand: We would expect that the Good Shepherd would take good care of His sheep. The sheep are safe and secure in hand of the Good Shepherd.h 5. Henry, gThe place where it was (Joh_10:23): Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch;so called (Act_3:11), not because built by Solomon, but because built in the same place with that which had borne his name in the first temple, and the name was kept up for the greater reputation of it. Here Christ walked, to observe the proceedings of the great sanhedrim that sat here (Psa_82:1); he walked,ready to give audience to any that should apply to him, and to offer them his services. He walked, as it should seem, for some time alone,as one neglected; walked pensive, in the foresight of the ruin of the temple. Those that have any thing to say to Christ may find him in the temple and walk with him there.h

24The Jews gathered around him, saying, "How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly."

1. Gill wrote, gWho might be walking there on the same account, and seeing Jesus, took this opportunity, and got about him in great numbers, and hemmed him in; having a design upon him to ensnare him, if possible: and said unto him, how long dost thou make us doubt? or as the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions literally render it, "how long dost thou take away our soul?" that is, deprive us of the knowledge of thee; onnus renders it, "wherefore dost thou steal away our minds with words?" so Jacob when he went away privately, without the knowledge of Laban, is said to steal away the heart of Laban, as it is in the Hebrew text, in Gen_31:20 (o). In like manner the Jews charge Christ with taking away their soul, or stealing away their heart, or hiding himself from them; not telling them plainly, who he was: therefore say they, if thou be the Christ, tell us plainly; freely, boldly, openly, in express words; this they said, not as desirous of knowing who he was, or for the sake of information, but in order to ensnare him; that should he say he was not the Christ, as they might hope he would, for fear of them, now they had got him by himself, hemmed him in, it would then lessen his credit among the people; and should he say he was the Messiah, they would have whereof to accuse him to the Roman governor, as an enemy to Caesar, as one that set up for king of the Jews.h 2. Calvin, "The Jews therefore surrounded him. This was undoubtedly a cunning attack on Christ, at least on the part of those with whom the scheme originated. For the common people might, without any fraud, desire that Christ would openly declare that God had sent him to be a deliverer; but a few persons, by trick and stratagem, wished to draw this word from him amidst the crowd, that he might be killed by a mob, or that

the Romans might lay hands on him. How long dost thou keep our soul in suspense? By complaining of being kept in suspense, they pretend that they are so ardently desirous of the promised redemption, that their minds are eagerly and incessantly occupied by the expectation of Christ. And this is the true feeling of piety, to find nowhere else than in Christ alone, what will satisfy our minds, or give them true composure; as he himself says, Come to me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will refresh you, and your souls shall find rest, (Matthew 11:28, 29.) Therefore, those who come to Christ ought to be prepared in the same manner as those men pretend to be. But they are wrong in accusing Christ, as if he had not hitherto confirmed their faith; for it was entirely their own fault that they had not a full and perfect knowledge of him. But this is always the case with unbelievers, that they choose rather to remain in doubt than to be founded on the certainty of the word of God. Thus, in our own day, we see many who voluntarily shut their eyes, and spread the clouds of their doubt, in order to darken the clear light of the Gospel. We see also many light spirits, who fly about in idle speculations, and never find, throughout their whole life, a permanent abode. Tell us plainly. When they demand that Christ shall declare himself freely, or openly and boldly, their meaning is, that he may no longer convey his meaning indirectly, and in a circuitous manner. Thus they charge his doctrine with obscurity, which, on the contrary, was abundantly plain and distinct, if the men who heard it had not been deaf. ow this history warns us, that we cannot avoid the artifices and slanders of wicked men, if we are called to preach the Gospel. Wherefore, we ought to be on the watch, and not to be surprised at it as a new thing, when the same thing happens to us as to our Master. 3. Constable, "Jesus had often hinted at being the Messiah when He spoke publicly to the Jews. Still He had not plainly claimed to be the Messiah as He had when conversing with the Samaritan woman (4:26). The reason the Jews wanted Jesus to make His claim clear here appears to have been so they could accuse and eventually kill Him. This motivation is more apparent when we notice how Jesus responded to their request than it is when we examine what they said. Jesus did not give them the unambiguous answer that they requested. Jesus had made clear claims about His identity, and many of the Jews had believed on Him. It was His critics' determined unbelief that made His claims obscure to them, not His inability or unwillingness to reveal Himself. Furthermore for Jesus to have claimed to be the Jews' Messiah publicly would have encouraged a political movement that He did not want to stimulate.

4. IVP, "These leaders surround Jesus in the colonnade (v. 24), perhaps so he could not escape as he had before (8:59) or perhaps just out of intense earnestness. They keep asking him (elegon, an imperfect), How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly (v. 24). They are tired of the figures of speech (cf. 10:6). Jesus realizes he has not been speaking plainly (16:25) in that he hasn't said simply, "I am the Messiah." But he also can reply, I did tell you (v. 25), for if one puts his words and deeds together, the message is plain enough. The problem lies not in his lack of clarity, but in their lack of faith (v. 25), for they are not his sheep (v. 26). In this way Jesus continues to work with the imagery of sheep and shepherd, and now he applies it to his opponents. He is speaking more plainly, for earlier he had not actually said these opponents were not of his flock, though the thought was expressed rather clearly through the images he used. After saying that these Jewish leaders are not his sheep Jesus describes something of the blessings of those who are his sheep. He repeats his earlier teaching that each of his sheep hear his voice, are known by him, follow him (v. 27; cf. vv. 3, 4, 14, 16) and have eternal life (v. 28; cf. vv. 9-10). He concludes with a dramatic emphasis on the security of his sheep: no one can snatch them out of my hand (v. 28). In the light of the danger to the sheep from thieves, robbers and wolves this comes as a great comfort. The security of the sheep rests on the shepherd. Jesus' reference to himself as the one able to protect his flock from all dangers is yet another aspect of the incredible claims he is making in this chapter. As always, however, he is not acting on his own apart from the Father: My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand (v. 29). Again we see the primacy of the Father, the one who these opponents think is their God. In threatening Jesus and his followers they are up against God himself. In this passage of infinite comfort this Gospel touches once again upon the mysteries of divine sovereignty and human responsibility. We have both the call of God and the response of faith on the part of the sheep. B. F. Westcott captures the balance well when he says we must distinguish between the certainty of God's promises and His infinite power on the one hand, and the weakness and variableness of man's will on the other. If man falls at any stage in his spiritual life, it is not from want of divine grace, nor from the overwhelming power of adversaries, but from his neglect to use that which he may or may not use. We cannot be protected against ourselves in spite of ourselves. He who ceases to hear and to follow is thereby shown to be no true believer, 1 John ii.19. . . . The sense of the divine protection is at any moment sufficient to inspire confidence, but not to render effort unnecessary. (Westcott 1908:2:67)h 5. Barnes, gus plainly - Messiah was predicted as a shepherd. Jesus had applied that prediction to himself. They supposed that that was an evidence that he claimed to be the Messiah. He also performed miracles, which they considered as evidence that he was the Christ, Joh_7:31. Yet the rulers made a difficulty. They alleged that he was from Galilee, and that the Messiah could not come from thence, Joh_7:52. He was poor and despised. He came contrary to the common expectation. A splendid prince and conqueror had been expected. In this perplexity they came to him for a plain and positive declaration that he was the Messiah. 6. Clarke, glong dost than make us to doubt? - , How long dost thou kill us with suspense? , literally, How long wilt thou take away our life? Mr. Markland would read for which amounts nearly to the same sense with the above. The Jews asked this question through extreme perfidiousness: they wished to get him to declare himself king of the Jews, that they might accuse

him to the Roman governor; and by it they insolently insinuated that all the proofs he had hitherto given them of his Divine mission were good for nothing. 7. Henry, gweighty question put to him by the Jews, Joh_10:24. They came round about him,to tease him; he was waiting for an opportunity to do them a kindness, and they took the opportunity to do him a mischief. Ill-will for good-will is no rare and uncommon return. He could not enjoy himself, no, not in the temple, his Father's house, without disturbance. They came about him, as it were, to lay siege to him: encompassed him about like bees.They came about him as if they had a joint and unanimous desire to be satisfied; came as one man, pretending an impartial and importunate enquiry after truth, but intending a general assault upon our Lord Jesus; and they seemed to speak the sense of their nation, as if they were the mouth of all the Jews: How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ tell us. (1.) They quarrel with him, as if he had unfairly held them in suspense hitherto. Tēn psuchēn hēmōn aireis- How long dost thou steal away our hearts?Or, take away our souls?So some read it; basely intimating that what share he had of the people's love and respect he did not obtain fairly, but by indirect methods, as Absalom stole the hearts of the men of Israel; and as seducers deceive the hearts of the simple,and so draw away disciples after them,Rom_16:18; Act_20:30. But most interpreters understand it as we do: gHow long dost thou keep us in suspense?How long are we kept debating whether thou be the Christ or no, and not able to determine the question?h ow, [1.] It was the effect of their infidelity, and powerful prejudices, that after our Lord Jesus had so fully proved himself to be the Christ they were still in doubt concerning it; this they willingly hesitated about, when they might easily have been satisfied. The struggle was between their convictions, which told them he was Christ, and their corruptions, which said, o, because he was not such a Christ as they expected. Those who choose to be sceptics may, if they please, hold the balance so that the most cogent arguments may not weigh down the most trifling objections, but scales may still hang even. [2.] It was an instance of their impudence and presumption that they laid the blame of their doubting upon Christ himself, as if he made them to doubt by inconsistency with himself, whereas in truth they made themselves doubt by indulging their prejudices. If Wisdom's sayings appear doubtful, the fault is not in the object, but in the eye; they are all plain to him that understands. Christ would make us to believe; we make ourselves to doubt. (2.) They challenge him to give a direct and categorical answer whether he was the Messiah or no: gIf thou be the Christ,as many believe thou art, tell us plainly,not by parables, as, I am the light of the world,and the good Shepherd,and the like, but totidem verbis - in so many words,either that thou art the Christ, or, as John Baptist, that thou art not,h Joh_1:20. ow this pressing query of theirs was seemingly good;they pretended to be desirous to know the truth, as if they were ready to embrace it; but it was really bad,and put with an ill design; for, if he should tell them plainly that he was the Christ, there needed no more to make him obnoxious to the jealousy and severity of the Roman government. Every one knew the Messiah was to be a king, and therefore whoever pretended to be the Messiah would be prosecuted as a traitor, which was the thing they would have been at; for, let him tell them ever so plainly that he was the Christ, they would have this to say presently, Thou bearest witness of thyself,as they had said, Joh_8:13.h 8. Stedman, “In this remarkable scene, it is evident that the Jews deliberately encircled our Lord (that is what John suggests in the word he uses here) so that he could not get away, forcing him to face their question, "Are you the Messiah, or aren't you? If you are, tell us plainly." Our Lord's answer was, "I have already told you." According to John's account he never had really said to these men, "I am the Messiah." He did say that to the woman at the well of Samaria, and he did

say to the man who was born blind (John 9), "I am the Son of God," but to these Jewish leaders, these Pharisees, he had never said, "I am the Messiah." The reason, of course, was that their idea of what the Messiah would do and Jesus' fulfillment of the predictions of the Messiah were wide apart. They pictured the Messiah as a conquering hero who, like the family of Judas Maccabeus, would drive out the Romans, free the temple and enable the Jewish nation to again gain control of the land. But Jesus gave no indication that he ever intended to do that. Therefore, for him to say to them, "I am the Messiah" would have been to arouse totally false hopes in their minds. But he did tell them by other means that he was the Messiah.” 9. Pink, “The appropriateness of this incident at the close of John 10, and the force of this request of the Jews—obviously a disingenuous one—should now be apparent to the reader. Coming as it does right at the close of the first main section of this Gospel, a section which is concerned with the public ministry of Christ before Israel, this demand of the religious leaders makes it plain how useless it was for the Messiah to make any further advances toward the ation at large, and how justly He might now abandon them to that darkness which they preferred to the light;, By now, it was ,unmistakably plain that the religious leaders received him not, and this request of theirs for Him to tell them "plainly" or "openly" if He were the Messiah, was obviously made with no other purpose than to gain evidence that they might apprehend Him as a rebel against the Roman government. But, if such was their evil design, did they not already have the needed evidence to formulate the desired charge against Him? The answer is, o, not evidence sufficiently explicit. "How long dost thou make us to doubt? if thou be the Christ, tell us plainly." It is a significant thing that the Lord Jesus had not declared, plainly and openly in public, that He was the Messiah. He had avowed His Messiahship to His disciples (John 1:41, 49, etc.); to the Samaritans (John 4:42), and to the blind beggar (John 9:37); but He had not done so before the multitudes or to the religious leaders. This designed omission accomplished a double purpose: it made it impossible for the authorities to lawfully seize Him before God’s appointed time, and it enforced the responsibility of the ation at large. That the Lord Jesus was the One that the prophets announced should come, had been abundantly attested by His person, His life, and His works; yet the absence of any formal announcement in public served as an admirable test of the people. His miraculous works—ever termed "signs" in John’s Gospel—were more than sufficient to prove Him to be the Messiah unto those who were open-minded; but yet they were not such as to make it possible for the prejudiced to refuse their assent. This is ever God’s way of dealing with moral agents. There are innumerable tokens for the existence of a Divine Creator, sufficient to render all men "without excuse"; yet are these tokens of such a nature as not to have banished atheism from the earth. There are a thousand evidences that the Holy Scriptures are the inspired Word of God, yet are there multitudes who believe them not. There is a great host of unimpeachable witnesses who testify daily to the Savior hood of the Lord Jesus, yet the great majority of men continue in their sins. Before we pass from this verse a word should be said upon the turpitude of these Jews. "How. long dost thou make us to doubt?" was inexcusable wickedness. They were seeking to transfer to Him the onus of their unbelief. They argued that He was responsible for their unreasonable and God-dishonoring doubting. This is ever the way with the unregenerate. When God arraigned Adam, the guilty culprit answered, "The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat" (Gen. 3:12). So it is today. Instead of tracing the cause of unbelief to his own evil heart, the sinner blames God for the insufficiency of convincing evidence.

25Jesus answered, "I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father's name speak for me,
1. What could be more clear a message that he was from God than his miracles that no one in history had ever done before. If they could not see the truth by these signs, then more words were of no value. Jesus is saying you have all the evidence anyone needs to believe, and you still donft so forget it, I am done trying to persuade you. 1B. Pink, g The Lord had told them that He was "the Son of man," and that as such the Father had "given him authority to execute judgment" (John 5:27). He had told them that He was the One of whom Moses wrote (John 5:46). He had told them that He was the "living bread" which had come down from heaven (John 6:51). He had told them that Abraham had rejoiced to see His day (John 8:56). All of these were statements which intimated plainly that He was the promised One of the Old Testament Scriptures. In addition to what He had taught concerning His own person, His "works" bore conclusive witness to His Messianic office. His "works" were an essential part of His credentials, as is clear from Luke 7:19-23: "And John calling unto him two of his disciples sent them to Jesus, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another?... Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached. And blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in me." These were the precise verifications as to what was to take place when the Messiah appeared\compare Isaiah 35:5, 6.h 2. Clarke, gI told you, etc. - That is, I told you before what I tell you now again, that the works which I do, bear testimony to me. I have told you that I am the light of the world: the Son of God: the good shepherd: that I am come to save - to give life - to give liberty - to redeem you: that, in order to this, I must die, and rise again; and that I am absolute master of my life, and of my death. Have you not noticed my omniscience, in searching and discovering the very secrets of your hearts? Have you not seen my omnipotence in the miracles which I have wrought? Have not all these been sufficient to convince you? - and yet ye will not believe! - See the works which bore testimony to him, as the Messiah, enumerated, Mat_11:5(note). CLARKE 3. Barnes, gTell us plainly. The Messiah was predicted as a shepherd. Jesus had applied that prediction to himself. They supposed that that was an evidence that he claimed to be the Messiah. He also wrought miracles, which they considered as evidence that he was the Christ, John 7:31. Yet the rulers made a difficulty. They alleged that he was from Galilee, and that the Messiah could not come from thence, John 7:52. He was poor and despised. He came contrary to the common expectation. A splendid prince and conqueror had been expected. In this perplexity they came to him for a plain and positive declaration that he was the Messiah. "make us to doubt", or, "hold us in suspense"

I told you. It is not recorded that Jesus had told them in so many words that he was the Christ, but he had used expressions designed to convey the same truth, and which many of them understood as claiming to be the Messiah. See John 5:19; 8:36,56; 10:1. The expression "the Son of God" they understood to be equivalent to the Messiah. This he had often used of himself in a sense not to be mistaken. The works. The miracles, such as restoring the blind, curing the sick, &c. In my Father's name. By the power and command of God. Jesus was either the Messiah or an impostor. The Pharisees charged him with being the latter (Matthew 26:60,61; 27:63; John 4:36); but God would not give such power to an impostor. The power of working miracles is an attestation of God to what is taught. See Barnes "Matthew 4:24". "the works that I do" John 5:36 4. Calvin, "I have told you. Our Lord Jesus [299] does not conceal that he is the Christ, and yet he does not teach them as if they were willing to learn, but rather reproaches them with obstinate malice, because, though they had been taught by the word and works of God, they had not yet made any progress. Accordingly, that they do not know him, he imputes to their own fault, as if he said: "My doctrine is easily enough understood, but the blame lies with you, because you maliciously resist God." The works which I do. He speaks of his works, in order to convict them of being doubly obstinate; for, besides the doctrine, they had a striking testimony in his miracles, if they had not been ungrateful to God. He twice repeats the words, You do not believe, in order to prove that, of their own accord, they were deaf to doctrine, and blind to works; which is a proof of extreme and desperate malice. He says that he did the works in the name of his Father; because his design was, to testify the power of God in them, by which it might be openly declared that he came from God. 5. Gill, ganswered them, I told you, and ye believed not,.... He had often said, what amounted to it, in his ministry and doctrine; as that God was his Father, and he was the light of the world, and the good shepherd, and the like; but they gave no heed nor credit to his words, even though he told them, that unless they believed he was such a person, they should die in their sins: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me; such as healing the sick, dispossessing devils, cleansing lepers, giving sight to the blind, causing the deaf to hear, the dumb to speak, and the lame to walk, and raising the dead to life; suggesting, that besides his words, his doctrine and ministry, they had his miracles before them, which plainly showed who he was; so that they need not have been in any doubt of mind, or suspense about him; nor had they any reason to complain of his hiding himself from them, or depriving them of the knowledge of him. 6. Henry, gHe condemns them for their obstinate unbelief, notwithstanding all the most plain and powerful arguments used to convince them: gYou believed not;and again, You believed not.You still are what you always were, obstinate in your unbelief.h But the reason he gives is very surprising:

gYou believed not, because you are not of my sheep:you believe not in me, because you belong not to me.h [1.] gYou are not disposed to be my followers, are not of a tractable teachable temper, have no inclination to receive the doctrine and law of the Messiah; you will not herd yourselves with my sheep, will not come and see, come and hear my voice.h Rooted antipathies to the gospel of Christ are the bonds of iniquity and infidelity. [2.] gYou are not designedto be my followers; you are not of those that were given me by my Father, to be brought to grace and glory. You are not of the number of the elect; and your unbelief, if you persist in it, will be a certain evidence that you are not.h ote, Those to whom God never gives the grace of faith were never designed for heaven and happiness. What Solomon saith of immorality is true of infidelity, It is a deep ditch, and he that is abhorred of the Lord shall fall therein,Pro_22:14.h

26but you do not believe because you are not my sheep.
1. You clearly do not get my message because you are not my sheep, and so you do not hear my voice even when I speak the truth to you. These Jewish rulers were not chosen by God to follow Jesus, and they did not choose to follow Jesus. They were false shepherds who were leaders of God's people, and it took this kind of situation in Israel in order for there to be the kind of men who would put the Son of God to death to atone for the sins of the world. If all of them followed Jesus like some did, there would be no basis for his crucifixion, and so God allowed those who were not his sheep to come to this point of being leaders in Israel. He needed a corrupt body of leaders to accomplish his purpose in the crucifixion. In a very clear way we can say thank God for these rascals, for they were blind, stupid, and wicked, but they were needed to fullfil the plan of salvation. God can use the worst to accomplish the best. 1B. Pink, “ Unspeakably solemn was this word. They were reprobates, and now that their characters were fully manifested the Lord did not hesitate to tell them so. The force of this awful statement is definite and clear, though men in their unbelief have done their best to befog it. Almost all the commentators have expounded this verse as though its clauses had been reversed. They simply make Christ to say here to these Jews that they were unbelievers. But the truth is that the Lord said far more than that. The commentators understand "the sheep" to be nothing more than a synonym for born-again and justified persons, whereas in fact it is equivalent to God’s elect, as the sixteenth verse of this chapter clearly shows. The Lord did not say "Because ye are not of my sheep ye believe not," but, "Ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep." Man always turns the things of God upside down. When he comes to something in the Word which is peculiarly distasteful, instead of meekly submitting to it and receiving it in simple faith because God says it, he resorts to every imaginable device to make it mean something else. Here Christ is not only charging these Jews with unbelief, but He also explains why faith had not been granted to them―they were not "of his sheep": they were not among the favored number of God’s elect. If further proof be required for the correctness of this interpretation, it is furnished below. A man does not have to believe to become one of Christ’s "sheep": he "believes" because he is one of His sheep. "But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you." To what is our Lord

referring? When had He previously avowed that these Jews were not of God’s elect? When had He formerly classed them among the reprobates? The answer is to be found in chapter eight of this same Gospel. There we find this same company―"the Jews" (see verse 48)―antagonizing Him, and to them He says, "Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word" (verse 43). This is strictly parallel with "ye believe not" in John 10:26. Then, in John 8, He explains why they could not "hear his word"―it was because they were "of their father the devil" (verse 44). Again, in the forty-seventh verse of the same chapter He said to the Jews, "He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God." Strictly parallel is this with John 10:26. They "heard not" because they were not of God: they "believed not" because they were not of His sheep. In each instance He gives as the reason why they received Him not the solemn fact that they belonged not to God’s elect: they were numbered among the reprobates.” 2. S. Lewis Johnson, "In John 8 and verse 47 Jesus said, "He that is of God heareth God's words. Ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God." The one who is of God hears the words of God. Jesus said, "My sheep hear my voice." So they are the elect of the nation Israel. In chapter 10 in verse 26 later on Jesus will say, "But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me." You see, Jesus makes a division in mankind. There are those who are his sheep and those who are not his sheep. Those who are his sheep hear his voice. Those who believe not believe not because they are not his sheep. These are the words of the Lord Jesus Christ. 3. Calvin, "Because you are not of my sheep. He assigns a higher reason why they do not believe either in his miracles or in his doctrine. It is, because they are reprobate. We must observe Christ's design; for, since they boasted of being the Church of God, that their unbelief may detract nothing from the authority of the Gospel, he affirms that the gift of believing is a special gift. And, indeed, before that men know God, they must first be known by him, as Paul says, (Galatians 4:9.) On the other hand, those to whom God does not look must always continue to look away from him. If any one murmur at this, arguing that the cause of unbelief dwells in God, because he alone has power to make sheep; I reply, He is free from all blame, for it is only by their voluntary malice that men reject his grace. God does all that is necessary to induce them to believe, but who shall tame wild beasts? [300] This will never be done, till the Spirit of God change them into sheep They who are wild will in vain attempt to throw on God the blame of their wildness, for it belongs to their own nature. In short, Christ means that it is not wonderful, if there are few who obey his Gospel, because all whom the Spirit of God does not subdue to the obedience of faith are wild and fierce beasts. So much the more unreasonable and absurd is it, that the authority of the Gospel should depend on the belief of men; but believers ought rather to consider, that they are the more strongly bound to God, because, while others remain in a state of blindness, they are drawn to Christ by the illumination of the Spirit. Here, too, the ministers of the Gospel have ground of consolation, if their labor be not profitable to all.

4. Barnes, “not of my sheep - not my people, my followers. You do not possess the spirit of meek and humble disciples. Were it not for pride, and prejudice, and vainglory for your false notions of the Messiah, and from a determination not to believe, you would have learned from my declarations and works that I am the Christ. 5. Gill, “ye believe not,.... In me, as the Messiah: because ye are not of my sheep; they were not among the sheep given him by his Father, were they, they would have come to him; that is, have believed in him, according to Joh_6:37, they were not the chosen of God, predestinated unto eternal life; for as many as are ordained of God to eternal happiness, do believe in God's own time, Act_13:48; but these not being the elect of God, had not the faith of God's elect. Christ, as the omniscient God, knew this, that they were not the chosen of God; for he was present, when the names of God's elect were written in the book of life; had they been his sheep, he must have known them, for he knows all the sheep, and calls them by name; had they been given him by the Father, he must have known it, and would have owned them as such; but so it was not, and therefore they were left to hardness and unbelief: as l said unto you: which seems to refer to what follows, since he had said before, that the sheep bear the voice of the shepherd, and follow him, and that he knows them, Joh_10:4. This clause is omitted in the Vulgate Latin version, and in onnus, but is in the Greek copies, and Oriental versions. 6. Henry, “He condemns them for their obstinate unbelief, notwithstanding all the most plain and powerful arguments used to convince them: “You believed not;and again, You believed not.You still are what you always were, obstinate in your unbelief.” But the reason he gives is very surprising: “You believed not, because you are not of my sheep:you believe not in me, because you belong not to me.” [1.] “You are not disposed to be my followers, are not of a tractable teachable temper, have no inclination to receive the doctrine and law of the Messiah; you will not herd yourselves with my sheep, will not come and see, come and hear my voice.” Rooted antipathies to the gospel of Christ are the bonds of iniquity and infidelity. [2.] “You are not designedto be my followers; you are not of those that were given me by my Father, to be brought to grace and glory. You are not of the number of the elect; and your unbelief, if you persist in it, will be a certain evidence that you are not.” ote, Those to whom God never gives the grace of faith were never designed for heaven and happiness. What Solomon saith of immorality is true of infidelity, It is a deep ditch, and he that is abhorred of the Lord shall fall therein,Pro_22:14. on esse electum, non est causa incredulitatis propriè dicta, sed causa per accidens. Fides autem est donum Dei et effectus praedestinationis - The not being included among the elect is not theproper cause of infidelity, but merely theaccidental cause. But faith is the gift of God, and the effect of predestination.So Jansenius distinguishes well here.”

27My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.
1.You do not listen to my voice, and that is how I know you are not my sheep. My sheep are

known to me by the fact that they listen and then follow me. You do not listen and do not follow, and so it is clear that you are not my sheep. 1B. John Piper, “"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them" (v. 27). Jesus knows those who are his. What is this knowledge? John 10:3 is a close parallel to verse 27. It says, "The sheep hear his voice, he calls his own sheep by name, and he leads them out." So when it says, "Jesus knows them" (v. 27), it means at least that he knows them by name; that is, he knows them individually and intimately. They are not anonymous, lost in the flock. Verse 14 provides another insight: "I am the good shepherd, and I know my own and my own know me, even as the Father knows me and I know the Father." There is a real similarity between the way Jesus knows his Father in heaven and the way he knows his sheep. Jesus sees himself in the Father, and he sees himself in his disciples. To some degree Jesus recognizes his own character in his disciples. He sees his own brand mark on the sheep. He is like a husband waiting for his wife at the airport, watching as each person disembarks from the plane. When she appears, he knows her, he recognizes her features, he delights in her, she is the only one he embraces. The apostle Paul puts it like this: "The firm foundation of God stands, having this seal, 'The Lord knows those who are his'" (2 Timothy 2:19; cf. Galatians 4:9; 1 Corinthians 8:3; Psalm 1:6; 37:18; Exodus 33:12, 17; Amos 3:2). It is hard to overemphasize what a tremendous privilege it is to be known personally, intimately, lovingly by the Son of God. It is a precious gift to all his sheep, and it contains within it the promise of eternal life. If the thought of unending life for trillions and trillions of years is oppressive to you because of the threat of boredom, remember this: though it is not fully comprehensible to us, an infinite God is infinitely inexhaustible in the treasures of power and wisdom and love and beauty which we can spend an eternity discovering and enjoying and applying to daily life in the new earth. We will never sit down like Alexander the Great and weep that there are no more worlds to conquer. Our joyous quest to attain the heights of God's wisdom and love will never be ended. When, after a million years, we pull ourselves with unspeakable exhilaration over the massive peak of some glorious divine truth, we will be utterly astonished to find ourselves not at the top, but merely in the foothills, and before us, as far as the eye can see, mountains and valleys and forests and height and light that we could have never imagined. There will be no boredom in the age to come. O, to be there and not in hell!” 2. Dr. William R. Crews, "v. 27, "My sheep hear my voice..." Christ not only has known His sheep with an affectionate, benign purpose to bring to them spiritual blessings and benefits, but He in time gathers them into His fold by His divine and effectual call. The Scriptures represent us all as sheep having gone astray and having each one turned to his own way. (Isaiah 53:6). We have been scattered into an alien country by the fall of Adam. Christ comes to us in time and woos us unto Himself. He affectionately and tenderly calls us by His Spirit through His Word. What a sweet, charming, quickening, powerful voice He has to draw us to Him. You see, we are as dumb as sheep who when wandering away from the fold cannot find their way back but are dependent upon the initiative and effective efforts of the shepherd. The Bible says that Christ came to seek and save that which has been lost. When He finds us He calls us with such a penetrating and energizing voice as that which Lazarus experienced when Christ called him from the grave. This experience also unites us with the Shepherd and gives us a sure and special knowledge of Him." 3. Clarke, 3gMy sheep hear my voice - But ye will not hear: - my sheep follow me; but ye will neither follow nor acknowledge me. Any person who reads without prejudice may easily see, that

our Lord does not at all insinuate that these persons could not believe, because God had made it impossible to them; but simply because they did not hear and follow Christ, which the whole of our blessed Lord3fs discourse proves that they might have done. The sheep of Christ are not those who are included in any eternal decree, to the exclusion of others from the yearnings of the bowels of eternal mercy; but they are those who hear, believe in, follow, and obey the Savior of the world.3h 4. Barnes, "Verse 27. My sheep. My church, my people, those who have the true spirit of my followers. The name is given to his people because it was an illustration which would be well understood in a country abounding in flocks. There is also a striking resemblance, which he proceeds to state, between them. Hear my voice. See John 10:3,4. Applied to Christians, it means that they hear and obey his commandments. I know them. See John 10:14. They follow me. A flock follows its shepherd to pastures and streams, John 10:3. Christians not only obey Christ, but they imitate him; they go where his Spirit and providence lead them; they yield themselves to his guidance, and seek to be led by him. When Jesus was upon earth many of his disciples followed or attended him from place to place. Hence Christians are called his followers, and in Revelation 14:4 they are described as "they that follow the Lamb." 5. Gill, “sheep hear my voice,.... The voice of Christ in his Gospel, both externally and internally; See Gill on Joh_10:4, See Gill on Joh_10:16; and since therefore these Jews did not, it was a plain case they were not of his sheep: and I know them; See Gill on Joh_10:14; but Christ knew not these as the elect of God, or as the Father's gift to him, and therefore they could not be his sheep: and they follow me; both in the exercise of grace, and in the discharge of duty, and whithersoever he the good shepherd leads them; See Gill on Joh_10:3, See Gill on Joh_10:4. But now, whereas these Jews did not follow Christ, but turned their backs on him, and rejected him, it was notorious that they were none of his sheep; but both happy and safe are those persons, that are the sheep of Christ, as appears from what is next said of them.” 6. Henry, “convince them that they were not his sheep, he tells them what were the characters of his sheep. First,They hear his voice(Joh_10:27), for they know it to be his (Joh_10:4), and he has undertaken that they shall hear it, Joh_10:16. They discern it, It is the voice of my beloved,Son_2:8. They delight in it, are in their element when they are sitting at his feet to hear his word. They do according to it, and make his word their rule. Christ will not account those his sheep that are deaf to his calls, deaf to his charms, Psa_58:5. Secondly,They follow him;they submit to his guidance by a willing obedience to all his commands, and a cheerful conformity to his spirit and pattern. The word of command has always been, Follow me.We must eye him as our leader and captain, and tread in his steps,and walk as he walked - follow the prescriptions of his word, the intimations of his providence, and the directions of his Spirit - follow the Lamb(the dux gregis - the leader of the flock) whithersoever he goes.In vain do we hear his voiceif we do not follow him. [2.] To convince them that it was their great unhappiness and misery not to be of Christ's sheep, he here describes the blessed state and case of those that are, which would likewise serve for the support and comfort of his poor despised followers, and keep them from envying the power and grandeur of those that were not of his sheep.

First, Our Lord Jesus takes cognizanceof his sheep: They hear my voice,and I know them.He distinguishes them from others (2Ti_2:19), has a particular regard to every individual (Psa_34:6); he knows their wants and desires, knows their souls in adversity, where to find them, and what to do for them. He knows others afar off, but knows them near at hand.”

7. Calvin, "My sheep hear my voice. He proves by an argument drawn from contraries, that they are not sheep, because they do not obey the Gospel. For God effectually calls all whom he has elected, so that the sheep of Christ are proved by their faith. And, indeed, the reason why the name of sheep is applied to believers is, that they surrender themselves to God, to be governed by the hand of the Chief Shepherd, and, laying aside the fierceness of their nature, become mild and teachable. It is no small consolation to faithful teachers, that, though the greater part of the world do not listen to Christ, yet he has his sheep whom he knows, and by whom he is also known Let them do their utmost to bring the whole world into the fold of Christ; but when they do not succeed according to their wish, let them be satisfied with this single consideration, that they who are sheep will be gathered by their agency. The rest has been already explained. I quote from my own study on the voice of Jesus. It is clearly a loud voice. It may not always be as loud as the voice of the Father who scared the wits out of people when he spoke and shook the very mountain, but it is loud enough to be clearly heard so that there is no excuse for not obeying it. In Rev. 1:10 John writes, “..,I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet…” He turned to see and discovered it was Jesus. Jesus knows how to speak loud enough to get man’s attention. Revelation 3: 20 has Jesus speaking, “Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hears my voice, and opens the door, I will come in to him, and will fellowship with him, and he with me.” He knocks loud enough to be heard. 8. Unknown author, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me…”His voice is always loud and clear enough for us to hear and open the door to Him, or to follow Him in obedience as our Shepherd. Two hymn writers have conveyed the idea that we can clearly hear and we can respond in obedience to the voice of Jesus. Hark, the voice of Jesus calling, 党Who will go and work today? Fields are ripe and harvests waiting, Who will bear the sheaves away?” Long and loud the Master calls us, Rich reward He offers free; Who will answer, gladly saying, 党Here am I, send me, send me”?

The voice of God is calling its summons in our day;

Isaiah heard in Zion and we now hear God say: 党Whom shall I send to succor my people in their need? Whom shall I send to loosen the bonds of shame and greed?” 党I hear My people crying in slum and mine and mill; o field or mart is silent, no city street is still. I see My people falling in darkness and despair. Whom shall I send to shatter the fetters which they bear?” We heed, O Lord, Your summons, and answer: Here are we! Send us upon Your errand, let us Your servants be. Our strength is dust and ashes, our years a passing hour; But You can use our weakness to magnify Your power. From ease and plenty save us; from pride of place absolve; Purge us of low desire; lift us to high resolve; Take us, and make us holy; teach us Your will and way. Speak, and behold! We answer; command, and we obey! Another hymn writer made it clear that all who will listen can hear the voice of Jesus calling them into the family of God. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God. This voice of Jesus is going out over our planet constantly by means of radio, video and print, and it is loud enough so that many daily make the choice to listen and respond. In 1846 Horatio Bonar wroteI heard the voice of Jesus say, "Come unto me and rest; lay down, thou weary one, lay down thy head upon my breast." I came to Jesus as I was, so weary, worn, and sad; I found in him a resting place, and he has made me glad. I heard the voice of Jesus say, "Behold, I freely give the living water; thirsty one, stoop down and drink, and live." I came to Jesus, and I drank of that life-giving stream; my thirst was quenched, my soul revived, and now I live in him. I heard the voice of Jesus say, "I am this dark world's light; look unto me, thy morn shall rise, and all thy day be bright." I looked to Jesus, and I found in him my Star, my Sun; and in that light of life I'll walk

till traveling days are done. One day the voice of Jesus will be so loud that it will wake the dead. “Truly, truly, I say to you, the hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.” (John 5:25) When John says, “and now is,” he is referring to the fact that those dead in sin now can hear the voice of Jesus and rise from the dead to new life in Jesus. The ultimate will be, however, when Jesus comes again and by His voice raise all who are in the graves to face their judgment and reward. Ray Stedman gives an account of just how loud and powerful a voice Jesus has in raising the dead in sin to newness of life. He writes, 党Yesterday morning I gathered with about 650 other people to hear former Senator Harold Hughes, ex-Governor of Iowa, tell how God had drastically changed his life. When he was a hopeless alcoholic, wallowing in his own vomit, so despairing he was ready to take his own life, God met him and delivered him through much struggle and pain, and led him to a place of prominence and power. I sat on the platform watching people hanging on his every word, listening to a man describe what God could do. Listening to Senator Hughes, I was again impressed by this phenomenon. He spoke of reaching a point in his life where his wife and children had left him and he had lost his work. He ended up drunk, sitting in a bathtub, with the barrel of a gun in his mouth and his finger on the trigger. He sensed within an agonizing cry of despair. Then he called out to God and immediately felt a spreading sense of peace within that delivered him from the crisis of the moment. Through much pain, heartache, and failure, God led him along until he was at last free from the grip of alcohol. He eventually became the governor of his state and a United States senator.” The voice of Jesus is loud enough and power enough to accomplish all that God wants to do in history and in lives. 9. RAY STEDMA "How can you tell a true believer from a mere professor?" Here are three marks: First, "My sheep hear my voice." That is, they are drawn to what Jesus has to say. They believe that what he says is the truth, and they long to hear more. One of the things that has encouraged me through 34 years of ministry (by the way, I began ministering here at Palo Alto exactly 34 years ago next Sunday), has been the hunger of people for the word of Jesus. How it has drawn people, and ministered to them, and fed them, and how they love to hear it! What brings out such a large crowd as we have here today on a holiday Sunday when you could be out in the mountains or down at the beach, as most people are? It is the voice of Jesus. It is his insight into life, his understanding of the secrets of existence, his solution to the problems with which every one of us wrestle, his offer of deliverance from the inner bondage which we experience as we seek to live life and find ourselves continually trapped and enmeshed in wrong things, in hurt and anguish and pain. It is the word of Jesus that brings you here, the word declared in the Scriptures and by the confirmation of the Spirit within. That is the first characteristic of a true sheep: One who longs to hear the word of God. He wants to know more. He reads and studies and learns and comes regularly to hear the word of God. "My sheep hear my voice." Secondly, "I know them." When the sheep read the Word they have a sense of welcome from the Lord himself. They know that this word of deliverance, this word of healing, applies to them. They feel accepted. They know they belong. They feel a Father's arms around them and a Father's heart beating in their concern and their care. They know that there is a personal

relationship established. They have become the "children of God." That is what Jesus means. One of the marks of true believers is they always have a sense they belong to God, that they are his children, part of his family, and welcomed by the Lord Jesus himself. This is what Paul refers to in Romans 8, "his spirit bears witness with our spirit that we are the children of God," {cf, Rom 8:16}. Then the third mark: "They follow me." That is, they obey Jesus; they do what he commands. This does not mean that they always do so instantaneously, without struggle. All of us struggle at times with what our Lord says; all of us resist at times. Sometimes the word needs to be brought clearly and sharply into focus in our life. But the point of it is, once we see what Jesus wants, the attitude of a true sheep is, "Lord, even though it hurts, even though it costs, I will do what you say. I will follow you." Jesus himself made that clear when he said, "If anyone will come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross daily and follow me," {Matt 16:24, Mark 8:34, Luke 9:23}. This is the mark of a true sheep: He obeys what the Lord says. We do not follow the world, we follow the Lord. The two are going in opposite directions. When the choice is made, it is a choice in favor of obeying the Lord Jesus. The Apostle Paul says the same thing in his letter to Timothy: "The foundation of the Lord stands sure, having this seal, the Lord knows them that are his," {cf, 2 Tim 2:19a}. There is divine recognition. But that is not all: "Let him that names the name of Christ depart from iniquity," {cf, 2 Tim 2:19b}. Let him turn his back on what is wrong and obey and follow his Lord. That is the mark of a sheep. Anybody who is not doing that has no right to call himself or herself a Christian. If we are resisting the Lord in an area that we know to be right and if we insist on living that way we have no right to the title of Christian.” 10. SPURGEO , “We should follow our Lord as unhesitatingly as sheep follow their shepherd, for he has a right to lead us wherever he pleases. We are not our own, we are bought with a pricelet us recognize the rights of the redeeming blood. The soldier follows his captain, the servant obeys his master, much more must we follow our Redeemer, to whom we are a purchased possession. We are not true to our profession of being Christians, if we question the bidding of our Leader and Commander. Submission is our duty, caviling is our folly. Often might our Lord say to us as to Peter, "What is that to thee? Follow thou me." Wherever Jesus may lead us, he goes before us. If we know not where we go, we know with whom we go. With such a companion, who will dread the perils of the road? The journey may be long, but his everlasting arms will carry us to the end. The presence of Jesus is the assurance of eternal salvation, because he lives, we shall live also. We should follow Christ in simplicity and faith, because the paths in which he leads us all end in glory and immortality. It is true they may not be smooth paths-they may be covered with sharp flinty trials, but they lead to the "city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God." "All the paths of the Lord are mercy and truth unto such as keep his covenant." Let us put full trust in our Leader, since we know that, come prosperity or adversity, sickness or health, popularity or contempt, his purpose shall be worked out, and that purpose shall be pure, unmingled good to every heir of mercy. We shall find it sweet to go up the bleak side of the hill with Christ; and when rain and snow blow into our faces, his dear love will make us far more blest than those who sit at home and warm their hands at the world's fire. To the top of Amana, to the dens of lions, or to the hills of leopards, we will follow our Beloved. Precious Jesus, draw us, and we will run after thee. 11. Pink, “Here the Lord contrasts the elect from the non-elect. God’s elect hear the voice of the Son: they hear the voice of the Shepherd because they belong to His sheep: they "hear" because a

sovereign God imparts to them the capacity to hear, for "The hearing ear and the seeing eye, the Lord hath made even both of them" (Prov. 20:12). Each of the sheep "hear" when the irresistible call comes to them, just as Lazarus in the grave heard when Christ called him. "And I know them, and they follow me" (John 10:27). Each of the sheep are known to Christ by a special knowledge, a knowledge of approbation. They are valued by Him because entrusted to Him by the Father. As the Father’s love gift, He prizes them highly. The vast crowd of the non elect He "never knew" (Matthew 7:23) with a knowledge of approbation; but each of the elect are known affectionately, personally, eternally. "And they follow me." They "follow" the example He has left them; they follow in holy obedience to His commandments; they follow from love, attracted by His excellent person; they follow on to know Him better.”

28I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand.
1. Jesus is speaking judgment here to these doubters and rejecters, for he exalts those who follow him to the highest heaven. He gives those who follow him eternal life, and no one else has ever been able to give such a gift. They have a security like none have ever had since history began. They will never perish and no one can rob them of my gift, for my hand will never let them go, and no enemy can snatch them from me. I just thought I would let you know of what you are giving up by your rejection of me. You are sheep without a shepherd, and you have no hope of eternal life, and of the abundant life I am giving to my sheep. You have no such security, and yet you refuse to believe. You are giving up the greatest gift God ever offered to mankind, but I can no longer debate with you and offer more evidence. I have to move on to deal with the sheep who will listen and follow. 2. Here is a strong text for supporting eternal security, for the life that is given in Christ is eternal, and if it does not last it is nonsense to call it eternal. one can change their status by robbing them from the sheepfold of Christ. He will not permit any robber to enter and steal one of his sheep. They are secure in his hand, and no other hand will be able to snatch them away. 3. Alan Carr writes about the need for this kind of security in order feel safe in our going out to serve our Lord. He wrote, "Golden Gate Bridge – 23 workers fell to their deaths in the San Francisco Bay. After that, the city erected huge nets beneath the bridge. After they were in place, only a handful fell, and they were safe, and the work was completed in record time and with record safety. Why? The workers could concentrate on their jobs and not have to worry about dying!) To be a productive Christian you need to know that your future is absolutely secure. If you are to do a great work for Jesus, then you need to be able to focus on the task at hand, instead of always worrying about your future. This type of fear and doubt cripples us and prevents us from reaching our fullest potential as believers. It also prevents some from bring saved. They fear that they do have the ability to live the Christian life. Fact is, they don’t, but neither do they understand that it is Christ living in the believer that makes Christianity possible!"

4. Clarke, “shall never perish - ? Because they hear my voice, and follow me; therefore I know, I approve of and love them, and give them eternal life. They who continue to hear Christ’s voice, and to follow him, shall never perish. They give themselves up to God - believe so on Jesus that he lives in their hearts: God hath given unto them eternal life, and this life is in his Son; and he that hath the Son hath life, 1Jo_5:11, 1Jo_5:12. ow it is evident that only those who have Christ living in and governing their souls, so that they possess the mind that was in him, are his sheep are those that shall never perish, because they have this eternal life abiding in them: therefore to talk of a man3fs being one of the elect - one that shall never perish - one who shall have eternal life - who shall never be plucked out of the hand of God, etc., while he lives in sin, has no Christ in his heart, has either never received or fallen away from the grace of God, is as contrary to common sense as it is to the nature and testimonies of the Most High. Final perseverance implies final faithfulness - he that endures to the end shall be saved - he that is faithful unto death shall have a crown of life. And will any man attempt to say that he who does not endure to the end, and is unfaithful, shall ever enter into life?

5. BAR ES, "I give unto them eternal life. Shall never perish. To perish here means to be destroyed, or to be punished in hell. Matthew 10:28: "Which is able to destroy (the same word) both soul and body in hell." Matthew 18:14: "It is not the will of your Father which is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish." John 3:15: "That whosoever believeth in him should not perish." Romans 2:12: "They who have sinned without law shall also perish without law." John 17:12; 1 Corinthians 1:18. In all these places the word refers to future punishment, and the declaration of the Saviour is that his followers, his true disciples, shall never be cast away. The original is expressed with remarkable strength: "They shall not be destroyed for ever." Syriac: "They shall not perish to eternity." This is spoken of all Christians--that is, of all who ever possess the character of true followers of Christ, and who can be called his flock. Shall any. The word any refers to any power that might attempt it. It will apply either to men or to devils. It is an affirmation that no man, however eloquent in error, or persuasive in infidelity, or cunning in argument, or mighty in rank; and that no devil with all his malice, power, cunning, or allurements, shall be able to pluck them from his hand. Pluck them. In the original to rob; to seize and bear away as a robber does his prey. Jesus holds them so secure and so certainly that no foe can surprise him as a robber does, or overcome him by force. My hand. The hand is that by which we hold or secure an object. It means that Jesus has them safely in his own care and keeping. Comp. Romans 8:38,39. 6. Spurgeon, “The Christian should never think or speak lightly of unbelief. For a child of God to mistrust his love, his truth, his faithfulness, must be greatly displeasing to him. How can we ever grieve him by doubting his upholding grace? Christian! it is contrary to every promise of God's precious Word that thou shouldst ever be forgotten or left to perish. If it could be so, how could he be true who has said, "Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? Yea, they may forget, yet will I never forget thee." What were the value of that promise-"The mountains shall depart, and the hills be removed; but my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed, saith the Lord that hath mercy on thee." Where were the truth of Christ's words-"I give unto my sheep eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." Where were the doctrines of grace? They would be all disproved if one child of

God should perish. Where were the veracity of God, his honour, his power, his grace, his covenant, his oath, if any of those for whom Christ has died, and who have put their trust in him, should nevertheless be cast away? Banish those unbelieving fears which so dishonor God. Arise, shake thyself from the dust, and put on thy beautiful garments. Remember it is sinful to doubt his Word wherein he has promised thee that thou shalt never perish. Let the eternal life within thee express itself in confident rejoicing. "The gospel bears my spirit up: A faithful and unchanging God Lays the foundation for my hope, In oaths, and promises, and blood." 7. Unknown author, “There is a reason for this representation, and we do well to consider it. o one should conclude from these remarks that Christ has no interest in the world, or that His atoning death was not for them. This is not, however, how Christ's love is proclaimed. In the Divine economy, God turns the saved over to Jesus. They are referred to as those whom God has given to Christ. He trusts His Son to bring them home. * "And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand" (John 10:28-29). * "This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day" (John 6:39). * "I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours" (John 17:9). * " ow I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are" (John 17:11). * "Father, I desire that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the foundation of the world" (John 17:24). * "And again: 'I will put My trust in Him.' And again: 'Here am I and the children whom God has given Me'" (Heb 2:13). These are the people Christ shepherds (John 10:11,14), leads (John 10;3), teaches (Eph 4:20-21), and for whom He faithfully intercedes (Heb 7:25). His mediatorship is exclusively for them (Heb 12:24), and He is bringing them alone "to glory" (Heb 2:10). He is the "Captain of their salvation" (Heb 2:10), and ministers in "the true tabernacle" exclusively for them (Heb 8:2). He is actually ruling the entire world with them in mind, marshaling favorable forces for them.” 8. Bob Utley, "“they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of My hand” This is a DOUBLE EGATIVE with an AORIST MIDDLE SUBJU CTIVE. This is one of the strongest

passages on the security of the believer anywhere in the T (cf. 6:39). It is obvious that the only one who can separate us from God’s love is ourselves (cf. Rom. 8:38-39; Gal. 5:2-4). Assurance must be balanced with perseverance. Assurance must be based on the character and actions of the Triune God. The Gospel of John asserts the assurance of those who continue to put their faith in Christ. It starts with an initial decision of repentance and faith and issues in lifestyle faith. The theological problem is when this personal relationship is perverted into a product that we possess (“once saved, always saved”). Continuing faith is the evidence of a true salvation (cf. Hebrews, James, and I John). 9. Gill, “I give unto them eternal life,.... Christ gives eternal life to his sheep, or people now; he gives them a spiritual life, or a life of grace, which issues in eternal life; he gives them himself, who is the true God and eternal life, and whoever has him has life; he gives them the knowledge of himself, which is life eternal; and he gives them his righteousness, which is their justification of life, or what entitles them to eternal life; and he gives them the foretastes of it, in faith and hope, in the enjoyment of himself, and the discoveries of his love; he gives them the earnest and pledge of it, his own Spirit; and they have this life in him as their representative, and it is hid with him in God, and is safe and secure for them; and he will actually give it to them in their own persons, to be for ever enjoyed by them; and because of the certainty of it, he is said to do it now: this is a pure gift, it is of grace, and not of works; and it is in the gift of Christ as Mediator, who has power to give it to as many as the Father has given him: and they shall never perish; though they were lost in Adam, and in a perishing condition in themselves, during their state of unregeneracy; in which condition they see themselves to be, when convinced by the Spirit of God; and come as persons ready to perish to Christ, as a Saviour, resolving, that if they perish, they will perish at his feet: and though after conversion, they are subject to many falls and spiritual declensions, and lose their peace, joy, and comfort, and imagine their strength and hope are perished, or at least fear they shall one day perish through one sin, or snare, or temptation or another, yet they shall never perish in such sense as the wicked will; they will not be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and the glory of his power: neither shall any pluck them out of my hand; Christ's sheep are in his hands, being put there by God the Father, both as an instance of his love to Christ, and them; and this was done from all eternity, even when they were chosen in him; so that they were in the hands of Christ, before they were in the loins of Adam; and were preserved in him, notwithstanding Adam's fall, and through the ruins of it. To be in the hands of Christ, is to be high in his esteem and favour; the saints are a crown of glory in the hand of the Lord, and a royal diadem in the hand of their God; they are a signet on his right hand that shall never be plucked off; they are engraven on the palms of his hands: to be in the hands of Christ, is to be in his possession, and at his dispose, as all the elect of God are; and to be under his guidance, care, and protection, as they be; they are fed according to the integrity of his heart, and guided by the skilfulness of his hands; they are always under his care and watchful eye, who protects them from all their enemies, and hides them in the hollow of his hand: hence, because they are so, they are called "the sheep of his hand", Psa_95:7. And none shall ever pluck them from thence; no man can do it, not any false teacher can remove them from Christ, by all the art and cunning he is master of; nor any violent persecutor, by all the force and power he can use; nor can any sin, or snare, or temptation, draw them out of Christ's hands; nor any adversity whatever separate them from him: they must be safe, and always abide there, who are in the hands of Christ; for his hands have laid the foundations of the heavens and the earth, they grasp the whole universe, and hold all things together; and who then can pluck any out of

these hands? Moreover, Christ, as Mediator, has all power in heaven and earth; and even as man, he is the man of God's right hand, made strong for himself. 10. Henry, “He has provided a happiness for them, suited to them: I give unto them eternal life,Joh_10:28. 1. The estate settled upon them is rich and valuable; it is life, eternal life. Man has a living soul; therefore the happiness provided is life, suited to his nature. Man has an immortal soul: therefore the happiness provided is eternal life, running parallel with his duration. Life eternalis the felicity and chief good of a soul immortal.2. The manner of conveyance is free: I give itto them; it is not bargained and sold upon a valuable consideration, but given by the free grace of Jesus Christ. The donor has power to give it. He who is the fountain of life, and Father of eternity, has authorized Christ to give eternal life, Joh_17:2. ot I willgive it, but I dogive it; it is a present gift. He gives the assurance of it, the pledge and earnest of it, the first-fruits and foretastes of it, that spirituallife which is eternallife begun, heaven in the seed, in the bud, in the embryo. Thirdly, He has undertaken for their security and preservation to this happiness. a. They shall be saved from everlasting perdition. They shall by no means perish for ever;so the words are. As there is an eternal life, so there is an eternal destruction; the soul not annihilated,but ruined;its being continued, but its comfort and happiness irrecoverably lost. All believers are saved from this; whatever cross they may come under, they shall not come into condemnation.A man is never undone till he is in hell, and they shall not go down to that. Shepherds that have large flocks often lose some of the sheep and suffer them to perish; but Christ has engaged that none of his sheep shall perish, not one. b. They cannot be kept from their everlasting happiness;it is in reserve, but he that gives it to them will preserve them to it. (a.) His own power is engaged for them: either shall any man pluck them out of my hand.A mighty contest is here supposed about these sheep. The Shepherd is so careful of their welfare that he has them not only within his fold, and under his eye, but in his hand,interested in his special love and taken under his special protection (all his saints are in thy hand,Deu_33:3); yet their enemies are so daring that they attempt to pluck them out of his hand hiswhose ownthey are, whose carethey are; but they cannot, they shall not, do it. ote, Those are safe who are in the hands of the Lord Jesus. The saints are preserved in Christ Jesus:and their salvation is not in their own keeping, but in the keeping of a Mediator. The Pharisees and rulers did all they could to frighten the disciples of Christ from following him, reproving and threatening them, but Christ saith that they shall not prevail.” 11. Spurgeon, “ “I give unto them eternal life.” This gift is, first of all, life. You will make strange confusion of God’s Word if you confound life with existence, for they are very different things. All men will exist forever, but many will dwell in everlasting death! They will know nothing whatever of life. Life is a distinct thing altogether from existence, and implies in God’s Word something of activity and of happiness! In the text before us it includes many things. ote the difference between the stone and the plant. The plant has vegetable life. You know the difference between the animal and the plant. While the plant has vegetable life, yet it is altogether dead in the sense in which we speak of living creatures. It has not the sensations which belong to animal life. Then, again, if we turn to another and higher grade, namely, mental life, an animal is dead so far as that is concerned. It cannot enter at all into the mysterious calculations of the mathematician, nor revel in the sublime glories of poetry. The animal has nothing to do with the life of the intellectual mind―as to mental life it is dead. ow, there is a grade of life which is higher than the mental life―a higher life quite unknown to the philosopher― not put down in Plato, nor spoken of by Aristotle―but understood by the very least of the

children of God! It is a phase of life called, “spiritual life.” It is a new form of life altogether which does not belong to man naturally, but is given to him by Jesus Christ. The first man, Adam, was made a living soul and all his descendants are made like unto him. The second Adam is made a quickening spirit, and until we are made like the second Adam we know nothing of spiritual life. If God has given you eternal life, that comprehends all the future. Your spiritual existence will flourish when empires and kingdoms decay. Your life will live on when the heart of this great world shall grow cold, when the pulse of the great sea shall cease to beat, when the eye of the bright sun shall grow dim with age! You possess eternal life! When, like a moment’s foam which melts into the wave that bears it, the whole universe shall have gone and left not a wreck behind, it shall be well with you, for you have eternal life! You have an existence that will run parallel with the existence of the Deity. Eternal life! Oh, what an avenue of glory is opened by those words―Eternal Life! “Because I live,” said Christ, “you shall live also.” As long as there is a Christ there shall be a happy soul, and you shall be that happy soul! As long as there is a God there shall be a beatified existence, and you shall enjoy that existence, for Jesus gives you eternal life. Spin on, old world, until your axle is worn out. Fly on, Old Father Time, until your hour-glass is broken and you shall cease to be! Come, mighty angel! Plant your feet upon the sea and upon the land and swear by Him that lives that time shall be no more, for even then every Christian shall still live, because Christ gives unto them eternal life! Does not the next sentence also look into the future?―“They shall never perish”? They shall never cease to exist in perpetual blessedness! They shall never cease to be like God in their natures―never! Think about your having been in Heaven a thousand years―can you imagine it? A thousand years’ blessed communion with the Lord Jesus! A thousand years in His bosom! A thousand years with the sight of Him to ravish your spirit! Well, but you will have just as long to be there as if you had never begun, for you shall never, never perish! When the millennium shall come, or when the judgment shall sit―and when all the great transactions of prophecy shall be fulfilled, these need not distress you, for if you trust Christ you shall never―oh, turn that word over―you shall never, never, never, never, EVER perish! What an eternity of glory! What unspeakable delight is wrapped up in this promise―“They shall never perish!” Then, surely, this is another glance into the future―“And none shall pluck them out of My hand.” We shall be in His hand forever! We shall be in His heart forever! We shall be in His very Self forever―one with Him―and none shall pluck us out of His hand! Happy, happy is the man who can lay claim to such a promise as this!” 12. Pink, “The connection between this and what has gone before should not be lost sight of. Christ had been speaking about His approaching death, His laying down His life for the sheep (verse 15, etc.). Would this, then, imperil the sheep? o, the very reverse. He would lay down His life in order that it might be imparted to them. This "life," Divine and eternal, would be given to them, not sold or bartered. Eternal life is neither earned as a wage, merited as a prize, nor won as a crown. It is a free gift, sovereignly bestowed. But, says the carping objector, All this may be true, but there are certain conditions which must be fulfilled if this valuable gift is to be retained, and if these conditions are not complied with the gift will be forfeited, and the one who receives it will be lost. To meet this legalistic skepticism, the Lord added, "and they shall never perish." ot only is the life given "eternal," but the ones on whom this precious gift is bestowed shall never perish: backslide they may, "perish" they shall not, and cannot, while the Shepherd lives!

Hypocrites and false professors make shipwreck of the faith (not their faith, for they never had any), but no real saint of God did or will. There are numerous cases recorded in Scripture where individuals backslided, but never one of a real saint apostatizing. A believer may fall, but he shall not be utterly cast down (Ps. 37:24). Quite impossible is it for a sheep to become a goat, for a man who has been born again to be unborn. " either shall any man (any one) pluck them out of my hand." Here the Lord anticipates another objection, for the fertile mind of unbelief has rarely evidenced more ingenuity than it has at this point, in opposing the blessed truth of the eternal security of God’s children. When the objector has been forced to acknowledge that this passage teaches that the life given to the sheep is "eternal," and that those who receive it shall "never perish," he will next make shift by replying, True, no believer will destroy himself, but what of his many enemies, what of Satan, ever going about as a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour? Suppose a believer falls into the toils of the Devil, what then? This, assures our Lord, is equally impossible. The believer is in the hand of Christ, and none is able to pluck from thence one of His own. Tease and annoy him the Devil may, but seize the believer he cannot. Blessed, comforting, re-assuring truth is this! Weak and helpless in himself, nevertheless, the sheep is secure in the hand of the Shepherd.”

29My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand.

1. The hand of Jesus is the same as the hand of the Father. It is the same hand, and the one and only hand that can never be robbed. In his hand there is eternal security. In case you think the hand of Christ is not secure enough, Jesus goes on to say that no one is more powerful than the Father, and it is also his hand that hold the sheep in solid security. o power in the universe can rob them from the hand of God. 1B. Pink, “Here the Lord anticipates one more objection. He knew full well that there would be some carping quibblers who would be foolish enough to say, True, the Devil is unable to pluck us from the hand of Christ, but we are still "free agents," and therefore could jump out if we chose to do so. Christ now bars out this miserable perversion. He shows us how that it is impossible for a sheep to perish even if it desired to—as though one ever did! The "hand of Christ" (verse 28) is beneath us, and the "hand" of the Father is above us. Thus are we secured between the clasped hands of Omnipotence! o stronger passage in all the Word of God can be found guaranteeing the absolute security of every child of God. ote the seven strands in the rope which binds them to God. First, they are Christ’s sheep, and it is the duty of the shepherd to care for each of his flock! To suggest that any of Christ’s sheep may be lost is to blaspheme the Shepherd Himself. Second, it is said "They follow" Christ, and no exceptions are made; the Lord does not say they ought to, but declares they do. If then the sheep "follow" Christ they must reach Heaven, for that is where the Shepherd is gone! Third, to the sheep is imparted "eternal life": to speak of eternal life ending is a contradiction in terms. Fourth, this eternal life is "given" to them: they did nothing to merit it,

consequently they can do nothing to demerit it. Fifth, the Lord Himself declares that His sheep "shall never perish," consequently the man who declares that it is possible for a child of God to go to Hell makes God a liar. Sixth, from the Shepherd’s "hand" none is able to pluck them, hence the Devil is unable to encompass the destruction of a single one of them. Seventh, above them is the Father’s "hand," hence it is impossible for them to jump out of the hand of Christ even if they tried to. It has been well said that if one soul who trusted in Christ should be missing in Heaven, there would be one vacant seat there, one crown unused, one harp unstrung; and this would grieve all Heaven and proclaim a disappointed God. But such a thing is utterly impossible.” 2. BAR ES, "Is greater. Is more powerful than all. Than all others--men, angels, devils. The word includes everything--everything that could attempt to pluck them away from God; in other words, it means that God is supreme. It implies, farther, that God will keep them, and will so control all other beings and things that they shall be safe. one is able. one has power to do it. In these two verses we are taught the following important truths: 1st. That Christians are given by God the Father to Christ. 2nd. That Jesus gives to them eternal life, or procures by his death and intercession, and imparts to them by his Spirit, that religion which shall result in eternal life. 3rd. That both the Father and the Son are pledged to keep them so that they shall never fall away and perish. It would be impossible for any language to teach more explicitly that the saints will persevere. 4th. That there is no power in man or devils to defeat the purpose of the Redeemer to save his people. We also see our safety, if we truly, humbly, cordially, and daily commit ourselves to God the Saviour. In no other way can we have evidence that we are his people than by such a persevering resignation of ourselves to him, to obey his law, and to follow him through evil report or good report. If we do that we are safe. If we do not that we have no evidence of piety, and are not, cannot be safe.” 3. Calvin, "And they shall never perish. It is an inestimable fruit of faith, that Christ bids us be convinced of our security when we are brought by faith into his fold. But we must also observe on what foundation this certainty rests. It is because he will be a faithful guardian of our salvation, for he testifies that our salvation is in his hand And if this were not enough, he says that they will be safely guarded by the power of his Father This is a remarkable passage, by which we are taught that the salvation of all the elect is not less certain than the power of God is invincible. Besides, Christ did not intend to throw this word foolishly into the air, but to give a promise which should remain deeply axed in their minds; and, therefore, we infer that the statement of Christ is intended to show that the elect are absolutely certain of their salvation. We are surrounded, indeed, by powerful adversaries, and so great is our weakness, that we are every moment in imminent danger of death; but as He who keeps what we have committed to

him (2 Timothy 1:12) is greater or more powerful than all, we have no reason to tremble as if our life were in danger. Hence, too, we infer how mad is the confidence of the Papists, which relies on free-will, on their own virtue, and on the merits of their works. Widely different is the manner in which Christ instructs his followers, to remember that, in this world, they may be said to be in the midst of a forest, surrounded by innumerable robbers, and are not only unarmed and exposed as a prey, but are aware that the cause of death is contained in themselves, so that, relying on the guardianship of God alone, they may walk without alarm. In short, our salvation is certain, because it is in the hand of God; for our faith is weak, and we are too prone to waver. But God, who has taken us under his protection, is sufficiently powerful to scatter, with his breath alone, all the forces of our adversaries. It is of great importance for us to turn our eye to this, that the fear of temptations may not dismay us; for Christ even intended to point out the way in which sheep are made to live at ease in the midst of wolves. And none can wrest them out of my Father's hand. The word and, in this passage, means therefore For, since the power of God is invincible, Christ infers that the salvation of believers is not exposed to the ungovernable passions of their enemies, because, ere they perish, God must be overcome, who has taken them under the protection of his hand. 4. IVP, "His sheep are safe in his hand (v. 28) and his Father's hand (v. 29). The implication of such a juxtaposition comes with Jesus' climactic claim, I and the Father are one (v. 30). What is this oneness? In the context Jesus is speaking of God's love, care and power and his own claim to share in these. Such a claim to oneness with God is not a claim to deity, since the same unity with God is true of Christians, who share in God's very life and are participants in his will, love, activity and power. Thus Jesus is one with the Father in the same way believers are. But even when this language is used of Christians it is made clear that their oneness with God is mediated to them by Christ (17:22-23). Jesus' own oneness with the Father includes these aspects, but it also is of a completely different order (cf. 8:58). The Father not only gave Jesus life, as he has done for believers, but has made him the giver of life (5:21), a divine attribute illustrated in what Jesus says about the bread (chap. 6) and the water (chap. 7) and which will be climactically demonstrated in the raising of Lazarus (chap. 11). So this figure of the hand is not just about sharing in God's power or exercising God's power; it is part of his claim to equality with God. It implies a oneness in essence since "infinite power is an essential attribute of God; and it is impossible to suppose that two beings distinct in essence could be equal in power" (Westcott 1908:2:68; cf. Chrysostom In John 61.2; Augustine In John 48.7). Here, then, is a powerful claim to deity. The opponents take it as such (v. 33), and Jesus does not deny that interpretation. The word used here for one is the neuter form, hen, rather than the masculine, heis. If the masculine had been used, it could have suggested that the Son is the Father, thus losing the distinctness of each, a heresy known later as Monarchianism or Sabellianism (Tertullian Against Praxeas 25; Augustine In John 36.9). But the Gospel throughout has been true to the insight revealed in the first verse of its first chapter: the Word is God, yet it is "with God," distinct from God. This truth is also found in this verse in the plural form of the verb are. "He did not say, `I

and the Father am one,' but are one" (Hippolytus Against eotus 7; Augustine In John 36.9). So although this passage is not expressed in philosophical categories, it is clear, as the church has understood and given expression in the creeds, that "some kind of metaphysical unity is presupposed, even if not articulated" (Carson 1991:395; cf. Pollard 1957). The opponents have asked Jesus about his identity as the Messiah, and in reply he has continued his claim to deity. If they had accepted Jesus' identity as somehow divine, as at least some sort of agent of God, then they would have been able to receive him as Messiah. Jesus does not claim to be Messiah in their understanding of that term, but all of his words and deeds have been those of the Messiah in truth. But the Jews were not expecting a messiah who shared in God's divinity, and thus these opponents could not see his messiahship and were scandalized by his claims to equality with God. So, as before, they picked up stones to stone him (v. 31; cf. 8:59). But this time instead of slipping away (8:59), he discusses his claim with them. This is a most amazing scene. They are standing there with stones and are ready to kill him, and he calmly tries to help them see their error. Here is sovereign calmness that comes from being centered in God's will, the will of the Father who is greater than all. And by continuing to try to help them come to faith even as they are seeking to stone him Jesus manifests amazing grace. He is graciously calling them to reconsider, for they know not what they do. These men are seeking to kill the one who is offering them life--offering it to them even in the midst of their attack against him. The glory of God, which is his grace, continues to shine brightly at this point. 5. Bob Utley, "The question is what is the object of the phrase, “greater than”: (1) the people God has given Jesus ( RSV, TEV) or (2) God Himself ( ASB, KJV, JB). The second part of this verse implies someone may try to snatch Jesus’ followers. Theologically the second option seems best. See Special Topic on assurance at 6:37. This is a wonderful passage on the assurance of the believer based on the power of the Father! The security of the believer, like all biblical truths, is presented in a tension-filled, covenantal pattern. Believers’ hope and assurance of salvation is in the character of the Triune God, His mercy and grace. However, the believer must continue in faith. Salvation begins with an initial Spirit-led decision of repentance and faith. It must also issue in continuing repentance, faith, obedience, and perseverance! Salvation is not a product (life insurance, ticket to heaven), but a growing personal relationship with God through Christ. The conclusive evidence of a right relationship with God is a changed and changing life of faith and service (cf. Matt. 7). There is such little biblical evidence for carnal Christians (cf. I Cor. 2-3). The norm is Christlikeness now, not just heaven when you die. There is no lack of biblical security and assurance to those who are growing, serving, even struggling with sin. But, no fruit, no root! Salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, but true salvation will issue in “good works” (cf. Eph. 2:10; James2:14-26). 6. Barclay on 29-30, “This passage show's at one and the same time the tremendous trust and the tremendous claim of Jesus. His trust was something which traced everything back to God. He has just been speaking about his sheep and his flock; he has just been saying that no one will ever snatch his own from his hand, that he is the shepherd who will keep the sheep for ever safe. At first sight, and if he had stopped there, it would have seemed that Jesus put his trust in his own keeping power. But now we see the other side of it. It is his Father who gave him his sheep; that both he and his sheep are in his Father's hand. Jesus was so sure of himself because he was so sure of God. His attitude to

life was not self-confidence, but God-confidence. He was secure, not in his own power, but in God's. He was so certain of ultimate safety and ultimate victory, not because he arrogated all power to himself, but because he assigned all power to God. ow we come to the supreme claim. "I and the Father are one," said Jesus. What did he mean? Is it absolute mystery, or can we understand at least a little of it? Are we driven to interpret it in terms of essence and hypostasis and all the rest of the metaphysical and philosophic notions about which the makers of the creeds fought and argued? Has one to be a theologian and a philosopher to grasp even a fragment of the meaning of this tremendous statement? If we go to the Bible itself for the interpretation, we find that it is in fact so simple that the simplest mind can grasp it. Let us turn to the seventeenth chapter of John's gospel, which tells of the prayer of Jesus for his followers before he went to his death: "Holy Father, keep them in thy name, which thou hast given me, that they may be one, even as we are one" (Jn. 17:11). Jesus conceived of the unity of Christian with Christian as the same as his unity with God. In the same passage he goes on: "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one" (Jn. 17:20-22). Jesus is saying with simplicity and a clarity none can mistake that the end of the Christian life is that Christians should be one as he and his Father are one. What is the unity which should exist between Christian and Christian? Its secret is love. "A new commandment I give to you, That you love one another; even as I have loved you, that you also love one another" (Jn. 13:34). Christians are one because they love one another; even so, Jesus is one with God because of his love of God. But we can go further. What is the only test of love? Let us go again to the words of Jesus. "If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love; just as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love" (Jn. 15:10). "If a man loves me, he will keep my word" (Jn. 14:23-24). "If you love me, you will keep my commandments" (Jn. 14:15). "He who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me" (Jn. 14:21). Here is the essence of the matter. The bond of unity is love; the proof of love is obedience. Christians are one with each other when they are bound by love, and obey the words of Christ. Jesus is one with God, because as no other ever did, he obeyed and loved him. His unity with God is a unity of perfect love, issuing in perfect obedience. When Jesus said: "I and the Father are one," he was not moving in the world of philosophy and metaphysics and abstractions; he was moving in the world of personal relationships. o one can really understand what a phrase like "a unity of essence" means; but any one can understand what a unity of heart means. Jesus' unity with God came from the twin facts of perfect love and perfect obedience. He was one with God because he loved and obeyed him perfectly; and he came to this world to make us what he is.” 7. Jamison, “Father, which gave them me ― (See on Joh_6:37-39). is greater than all ― with whom no adverse power can contend. It is a general expression of an admitted truth, and what follows shows for what purpose it was uttered, “and none is able to pluck them out of My Father’s hand.” The impossibility of true believers being lost, in the midst of all the temptations which they may encounter, does not consist in their fidelity and decision, but is founded upon the power of God.Here the doctrine of predestination is presented in its sublime and sacred aspect; there is a predestination of the holy, which is taught from one end of the Scriptures to the other;

not, indeed, of such a nature that an “irresistible grace” compelsthe opposing will of man (of course not), but so that that will of man which receives and loves the commands of God is producedonly by God’s grace (Olshausen - a testimony all the more valuable, being given in spite of Lutheranprejudice). 8. Gill, “Father which gave themme,.... So the sheep came to be Christ's, and to be in his hand; the Father gave them to him, put them into his hands, and made them his care and charge: is greater than all; than all gods, than all beings, than all creatures, angels and men, and than all the enemies of his people; this must be allowed: the Vulgate Latin version, and so some of the ancients read, "what my Father gave to me, is greater than all"; meaning, that the church given to him, and built on him, is stronger than all its enemies: and none is able to pluck themout of my Father's hand; so that these sheep have a double security; they are in the hands of Christ, and they are in the hands of the Father of Christ; wherefore could it be thought, which ought not to be, that they could be plucked out of Christ's hands, yet it can never be imagined, that any can pluck them out of the hands of God the Father; and there is no more reason to think that they can be plucked out of the hands of the one, than there is that they can be plucked out of the hands of the other, as is clear from what follows in Joh_10:30; see the Apocrypha: "But the souls of the righteous are in the hand of God, and there shall no torment touch them.'' (Wisdom 3:1). 9. Henry, “Father's power is likewise engaged for their preservation, Joh_10:29. He now appeared in weakness, and, lest his security should therefore be thought insufficient,he brings in his Father as a further security. Observe, [a.] The power of the Father: My Father is greater than all;greater than all the other friendsof the church, all the other shepherds, magistrates or ministers, and able to do that for them which they cannot do. Those shepherds slumber and sleep, and it will be easy to pluck the sheep out of their hands; but he keeps his flock day and night. He is greater than all the enemies of the church, all the opposition given to her interests, and able to secure his own against all their insults; he is greater than allthe combined force of hell and earth. He is greater in wisdom than the old serpent,though noted for subtlety; greater in strength than the great red dragon, though his name be legion,and his title principalities and powers.The devil and his angels have had many a push, many a pluck for the mastery, but have never yet prevailed, Rev_12:7, Rev_12:8. The Lord on high is mightier.[b.] The interest of the Father in the sheep, for the sake of which this power is engaged for them: “It is my Father that gave them to me,and he is concerned in honour to uphold his gift.” They were given to the Son as a trust to be managed by him, and therefore God will still look after them. All the divine power is engaged for the accomplishment of all the divine counsels. [c.] The safety of the saints inferred from these two. If this be so, then none(neither man nor devil) is able to pluck them out of the Father's hand,not able to deprive them of the grace they have, nor to hinder them from the glory that is designed them; not able to put them out of God's protection, nor get them into their own power. Christ had himself experienced the power of his Father upholdingand strengtheninghim, and therefore puts all his followers into his hand too. He that secured the glory of the Redeemer will secure the glory of the redeemed. Further to corroborate the security, that the sheep of Christ may have strong consolation, he asserts the union of these two undertakers: “I and my Father are one,and have jointly and severally undertaken for the protection of the saints and their perfection.” This denotes more than the harmony, and consent, and good understanding, that were between the Father and the Son in the work of man's redemption. Every good man is so far one with God as to concur with him; therefore it must be meant of the oneness of the natureof

Father and Son, that they are the same in substance, and equal in power and glory. The fathers urged this both against the Sabellians, to prove the distinction and plurality of the persons, that the Father and the Son are two, and against the Arians, to prove the unity of the nature, that these two are one.If we should altogether hold our peace concerning this sense of the words, even the stones which the Jews took up to cast at him would speak it out, for the Jews understood him as hereby making himself God (Joh_10:33) and he did not deny it. He proves that none could pluck them out of his handbecause they could not pluck them out of the Father's hand,which had not been a conclusive argument if the Son had not had the same almighty power with the Father, and consequently been one with him in essence and operation.”

30I and the Father are one."
1. Gill gets deeply theological here as he writes, “ ot in person, for the Father must be a distinct person from the Son, and the Son a distinct person from the Father; and which is further manifest, from the use of the verb plural, "I and my Father", εσµεν, "we are one"; that is, in nature and essence, and perfections, particularly in power; since Christ is speaking of the impossibility of plucking any of the sheep, out of his own and his Father's hands; giving this as a reason for it, their unity of nature, and equality of power; so that it must be as impracticable to pluck them out of his hands, as out of his Father's, because he is equal with God the Father, and the one God with him. The Jew (p) objects, that "if the sense of this expression is, that the Father and the Son are one, as the azarenes understand and believe it, it will be found that Jesus himself destroys this saying, as it is written in Mar_13:32, for saith Jesus, "that day and that hour, there is knoweth, not the angels, nor the Son, but the Father only"; lo, these words show, that the Father and the Son are not one, since the Son does not know what the Father knows.'' But it should be observed, that Christ is both the Son of God, and the son of man, as the Christians believe; as he is the Son of God, he lay in the bosom of his Father, and was privy to all his secrets, to all his thoughts, purposes, and designs; and as such, he knew the day and hour of judgment, being God omniscient; and in this respect is one with the Father, having the same perfections of power, knowledge, &c. but then as the son of man, he is not of the same nature, and has not the same knowledge; his knowledge of things was derived, communicated, and not infinite; and did not reach to all things at once, but was capable of being increased, as it was: and it is with regard to him as the son of man, that Jesus speaks of himself in Mar_13:32; whereas he is here treating of his divine sonship, and almighty power; wherefore considered in the relation of the Son of God, and as possessed of the same perfections with God, he and his Father are one; though as man, he is different from him, and knew not some things he did: so that there is no contradiction between the words of Christ in one place, and in the other; nor is he chargeable with any blasphemy against God, or any arrogance in himself, by assuming deity to himself; nor deserving of punishment, even to be deprived of human life, as the Jew suggests; nor is what he produces from a Socinian writer, of any moment, that these words do not necessarily suppose, that the Father and the Son are of the same essence; since it may be said of two men, that they

are one, end yet are not the same man, but one is one man, and the other another; for we do not say they are one and the same person, which does not follow from their being of one and the same nature, but that they are one God, and two distinct persons.” 1B. Pink, “The R.V. correctly renders this verse, "I and the Father are one." The difference between these two translations is an important one. Wherever the Lord Jesus says, my rather, He is speaking as the Mediator, but whenever He refers to "the Father," He speaks from the standpoint of His absolute Deity. Thus, "my Father is greater than I" (John 14:28) contemplates Him in the position of inferiority. "I and the Father are one" affirms Their unity of nature or essence, one in every Divine perfection. "I and the Father are one." There are those who would limit this oneness between the Father and Son to unity of will and design―the Unitarian interpretation of the passage. Dr. John Brown has refuted the error of this so ably and simply that we transcribe from his exposition: "Harmony of will and design, is not the thing spoken of here; but harmony or union of power and operation. Our Lord first says of Himself, ‘I give unto my sheep eternal life, and none shall pluck them out of my hand.’ He then says the same thing of the Father―‘ one is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.’ He plainly, then, ascribes the same thing to Himself that He does to the Father, not the same will, but the same work―the same work of power, therefore the same Power. He mentions the reason why none can pluck them out of the Father’s hands,―because He is the Almighty, and no created Power is able to resist Him. The thing spoken of is power,―Power irresistible. And in order to prove that none can pluck them out of HIS hand, He adds, ‘I and the Father are one.’ One in what? unquestionably in the work of power whereby He protects His sheep and does not suffer them to be plucked out of His hand. What the Father is, that the Son is. What the work of the Father is, that the work of the Son is. As the Father is almighty, so is the Son likewise. As nothing can resist the Father, so nothing can resist the Son. Whatsoever the Father hath, the Son hath likewise. The Father is in the Son, and the Son in the Father. These two are one―in nature, perfection and glory." "I and the Father are one." It is most blessed to observe the connection between this declaration and what had preceded it. All the diligent care and tender devotion of the Shepherd for the sheep but expresses the mind and heart of the Owner toward the flock. The Shepherd and the Owner are one, one in their relation and attitude toward the flock; one both in power and in Their loving care for the sheep. Immutably secure then is the believer. It was the laying hold of these precious truths which caused our fathers to sing, How firm a foundation Ye saints of the Lord, Is laid for your faith, In His excellent Word. What more can He say, Than to you He hath said, To you who to Jesus For refuge have fled. 2. Clarke, “and my Father are one - Jesus Christ were not God, could he have said these words without being guilty of blasphemy? It is worthy of remark that Christ does not say, I and My Father, which my our translation very improperly supplies, and which in this place would have

conveyed a widely different meaning: for then it would imply that the human nature of Christ, of which alone, I conceive, God is ever said to be the Father in Scripture, was equal to the Most High: but he says, speaking then as God over all, I and The Father, the Creator of all things, the Judge of all men, the Father of the spirits of all flesh - are One, One in nature, One in all the attributes of Godhead, and One in all the operations of those attributes: and so it is evident the Jews understood him. See Joh_17:11, Joh_17:22. 3. BAR ES, "I and my Father are one. The word translated "one" is not in the masculine, but in the neuter gender. It expresses union, but not the precise nature of the union. It may express any union, and the particular kind intended is to be inferred from the connection. In the previous verse he had said that he and his Father were united in the same object--that is, in redeeming and preserving his people. It was this that gave occasion for this remark. Many interpreters have understood this as referring to union of design and of plan. The words may bear this construction. In this way they were understood by Erasmus, Calvin, Bucer, and others. Most of the Christian fathers understood them, however, as referring to the oneness or unity of nature between the Father and the Son; and that this was the design of Christ appears probable from the following considerations: 1st. The question in debate was not about his being united with the Father in plan and counsel, but in power. He affirmed that he was able to rescue and keep his people from all enemies, or that he had power superior to men and devils--that is, that he had supreme power over all creation. He affirmed the same of his Father. In this, therefore, they were united. But this was an attribute only of God, and they thus understood him as claiming equality to God in regard to omnipotence. 2nd. The Jews understood him as affirming his equality with God, for they took up stones to punish him for blasphemy (John 10:31,33), and they said to him that they understood him as affirming that he was God, John 10:33. 3rd. Jesus did not deny that it was his intention to be so understood. See Barnes "John 10:34", also on Matthew 10:35-37. 4th. He immediately made another declaration implying the same thing, leaving the same impression, and which they attempted to punish in the same manner, John 10:37-39. If Jesus had not intended so to be understood, it cannot be easily reconciled with moral honesty that he did not distinctly disavow that such was his intention. The Jews were well acquainted with their own language. They understood him in this manner, and he left this impression on their minds. 4. Calvin, "I and my Father are one. He intended to meet the jeers of the wicked; for they might allege that the power of God did not at all belong to him, so that he could promise to his disciples that it would assuredly protect them. He therefore testifies that his affairs are so closely united to those of the Father, that the Father's assistance will never be withheld from himself and his sheep The ancients made a wrong use of this passage to prove that Christ is (homoousios) of the same essence with the Father. For Christ does not argue about the unity of substance, but about the agreement which he has with the Father, so that whatever is done by Christ will be confirmed by the power of his

Father. 5. Constable, "This verse has been at the center of serious discussions about Jesus' nature that have taken place over the centuries. Those who believe that Jesus was fully God and fully man (the orthodox) and those who believe that Jesus was not fully God (Arians) have appealed to it to support their positions. Therefore we need to look at it carefully. First, Jesus' claim to oneness does not in itself prove the Son's unity in essence with the Father. In 17:22, Jesus prayed that His disciples might be one as He and the Father were one, namely, in their purpose and beliefs. Second, other passages in the Gospel declare that the Father and the Son are one in more than just their purpose and beliefs (cf. 1, 18; 8:58; 12:41; 20:28). Third, the context of this verse also implies that Jesus did everything His Father did (cf. 5:19) and that Jesus and the Father united in fulfilling a divine will and a divine task. Fourth, this Gospel has consistently presented Jesus as a unique Son of God, not one of many sons. Fifth, 17:55 uses the Father Son unity as the basis for the disciple disciple unity in the analogy, not the other way around, implying that the former is the more fundamental unity.390 In short, this verse does not say that Jesus was claiming to be of the same essence as God. Here He claimed to function in union with the Father. However the context and other statements in this Gospel show that His unity with the Father extended beyond a functional unity and did involve essential metaphysical unity. The Jews had asked Jesus for a plain statement about His messiahship. Jesus gave them far more, a claim that He fully and completely carried out the Father's will that strongly hinted at Jesus' deity. This statement is the climax of the preceding discussion (vv. 22-29; cf. 5:18; 8:59). 5. Guzik, "(30-33) Jesus declares His unity with the Father. "I and My Father are one." Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, "Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?" The Jews answered Him, saying, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God." a. I an My Father are one: This is an important statement regarding the deity of Jesus and the nature of the godhead. I and My Father refutes the "Jesus Only" doctrine (anciently known as Sabelianism). Are one refutes the teaching that Jesus isn't God (anciently known as Arianism). Opponents of the deity of Jesus say that the oneness Jesus had with the Father was only a unity of purpose and mission - even as a husband and wife or father and son may have a unity of purpose of mission, and still they are not the same person. This, however, misses the point. First, we never argue that the Bible teaches that the Father and the Son are the same Person - they are one God, but distinct in Person. Second, it misses the most obvious point: that even true unity of purpose and mission between a husband and wife or father and son exist only because they are each equally and totally human. You can't really speak of even a unity of purpose and mission between a human and a dog; isn't the distance between God and man even greater? Even if the unity described by Jesus was merely a unity of purpose and mission (and it is more than that), even that would only be possible if the Father and Son were equally and totally God.

The Jews took up stones again to stone Him: Some would lessen the power of I and the Father are one by saying it only refers to a unity of purpose and will. But how could a statement like that be considered blasphemy by the Jews who heard Jesus say these words? The Jews of Jesus' day see clearly what the Jehovah's Witnesses and others seem to miss: that Jesus clearly claimed to be God (because You, being a Man, make Yourself God). Jesus wanted us to be one as He and the Father are one (John 17:11, 17:21). Such oneness cannot exist without an equality of essence, and all believers have this equality (Galatians 3:26-28), even as the Father and Son have this equality. 6. Unknown author, “It is true that we cannot comprehend fully how the miraculous conception the union of God and man - took place in the womb of Mary, but we can accept it by faith. In fact, if we do not believe that Jesus is come in the flesh we have an antichrist spirit (II John 7), but if we do accept this doctrine of Christ we will have both the Father and the Son (II John 9). Both Father and Son are revealed in Christ (John 10:30; 14:6-11). The mystery of God in flesh was a great stumbling block to the Jews. They never could understand how Jesus, being a man, could also be God (John 10:33). Because He claimed to be God they rejected Him and sought to kill Him (John 5:18; 10:33). Even today, many Jews cannot accept Jesus for this reason. In a conversation, an Orthodox Jewish rabbi told us he could never accept Jesus as God. [13] He felt that since God is an omnipresent, invisible Spirit He can never be seen by man and cannot be visible in flesh. His reasoning reminded us of the Jews in Jesus' day. Like this rabbi, they tried to limit God by their own preconceived ideas of how God should act. Furthermore, they did not have a thorough knowledge of the Old Testament Scriptures that proclaim the deity of the Messiah. While it is humanly difficult to understand how the infinite God could dwell in flesh, yet the Scriptures declare it to be so. We reminded the rabbi of God's appearance in the form of a man to Abraham in Genesis 18. He admitted this was a problem for him, but he tried to explain it in terms of an anthropomorphism or figurative language. Then we referred to other verses of Scripture such as Isaiah 7:14, 9:6, Jeremiah 23:6, and Micah 5:2 to show that the Messiah would be Jehovah God. The rabbi had no answer except to say that our translations of these verses of Scripture were possibly incorrect. He promised to study them further.” 7. Jamison, “and my Father are one― Our language admits not of the precision of the original in this great saying. “Are” is in the masculinegender - “we (two persons) are”; while “one” is neuter“one thing.” Perhaps “one interest” expresses, as nearly as may be, the purport of the saying. There seemed to be some contradiction between His saying they had been given by His Father into His ownhands, out of which they could not be plucked, and then saying that none could pluck them out of His Father’shands, as if they had not been given out of them. “ either have they,” says He; “though He has given them to Me, they are as much in His own almighty hands as ever - they cannot be,and when given to Me they are not, given away from Himself; for HE A D I HAVE ALL I COMMO .” Thus it will be seen, that, though oneness of essenceis not the precise thing here affirmed, that truth is the basis of what is affirmed,without which it would not be true. And Augustine was right in saying the “We are” condemns the Sabellians(who denied the distinction of Personsin the Godhead), while the “one” (as explained) condemns the Arians(who denied the unity of their essence).

8. Henry, “to corroborate the security, that the sheep of Christ may have strong consolation, he asserts the union of these two undertakers: “I and my Father are one,and have jointly and severally undertaken for the protection of the saints and their perfection.” This denotes more than the harmony, and consent, and good understanding, that were between the Father and the Son in the work of man's redemption. Every good man is so far one with God as to concur with him; therefore it must be meant of the oneness of the natureof Father and Son, that they are the same in substance, and equal in power and glory. The fathers urged this both against the Sabellians, to prove the distinction and plurality of the persons, that the Father and the Son are two, and against the Arians, to prove the unity of the nature, that these two are one.If we should altogether hold our peace concerning this sense of the words, even the stones which the Jews took up to cast at him would speak it out, for the Jews understood him as hereby making himself God (Joh_10:33) and he did not deny it. He proves that none could pluck them out of his handbecause they could not pluck them out of the Father's hand,which had not been a conclusive argument if the Son had not had the same almighty power with the Father, and consequently been one with him in essence and operation. 9. DA IEL SHUBI , "I am my father are one. This short statement does not deal with a unity of persons into an indivisible entity, but is a continuation of the passage beginning at John 10:25. Jesus spoke with the Pharisees regarding his right and privilege to act as agent on behalf of Jehovah God because he is Messiah. The thinking, that is, attitude of both father and son was identical on every matter. This Jesus stated in the words, “The father is in me and I am in the father.” John 10:38. A physical correlation to this is community law of a married couple. (In California either spouse has legal right to make legal decisions on behalf of both of them, and the other spouse is obligated to follow suit without question. This is similar to joint bank accounts, where both have equal access to deposit, withdraw, and decide on allocation of funds. Either spouse can make a legally binding contract on behalf of both of them. The wife can speak on behalf of her husband and the husband can do likewise because they are legally married.) The Bible considers a legally married couple one person. Gen 2:24. Even though they are 2 distinct and separate entities, the Bible refers to them as one person. This is not because of the physical union, but due to a psychological and intellectual union and harmony that develops as a result of the marriage. A husband and wife should know each other well enough that one can act as agent for another and the other trusting the decision without doubt. In a spiritual sense the same concept can apply to a father and son. The example provided by the Jewish sages is the following: Though his father die, yet he is as though not dead: for he has left one behind him who is like himself. Sirach 30:4. In this passage of Jewish wisdom, this son inherited all the non-material qualities of his father, that when the father passed away the son continued in his footsteps, having identical attitude, intent, and intellect as did the father. The Pharisees were no doubt familiar with the passage and so were able to make the connection very easy when Jesus stated he was son of Jehovah God. This harmony is further mentioned in the following passages.

Holy father, keep them in your name which You have given me, that they may be one even as we are one. John 17:11. That they may be one even as you Father are in me and I am in You, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that You have sent me. The glory which You have given me I have given to them that they may be one even as we are one. I in them and You in me that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that You have sent me and have loved them even as You have loved me. John 17:21-23. This is a psychological and intellectual harmony and cohesion between the apostles and Jehovah God their father, learning about the Father from Jesus to such an extent that a familiarity forms. They know the Father so well that they can speak on His behalf. The apostles knowing Jehovah God so well as the type of son mentioned above would be a witness of Jesus as sent by Jehovah God. This spiritual union is the unity or “one” that is described in this prayer.” 10. Ron Daniels, “ ow, they wanted Him to say something clearly. Well, here it is! John 10:30 "I and the Father are one."How's that for clarity? Unfortunately, some have cluttered this up so bad with heretical theology that it is hard to read this with clarity anymore. The Bible asserts that Jesus is certainly God: Isa. 9:6 For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. 2Cor. 4:4 ...Christ, who is the image of God. Hebr. 1:8 But of the Son He says, THY THRO E, O GOD, IS FOREVER A D EVER... John 20:28-29 Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed." Titus 2:13 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus. Peter also called Him this, writing to those who... 2Pet. 1:1 ...have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ. There can be no mistaking that Jesus is God.”

31Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him,
1. Pink, “This is quite sufficient to settle the meaning of the previous verse. These Jews had no difficulty in perceiving the force of what our Lord had just said to them. They instantly recognized that He had claimed absolute equality with the Father, and to their ears this was blasphemy. Instead of saying anything to correct their error, if error it was, Christ went on to say that which must have confirmed it. "Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him." Fearful wickedness was this! Who could imagine that any heart would have been so base, or any hand so cruel, as to have armed themselves with instruments of death, against such a Person, while speaking such words! Yet we behold these Jews doing just this thing, and that within the sacred precincts of the Temple! A frightful exhibition of human depravity was this. Christ had done these Jews no wrong. They hated Him without a cause. They hated Him because of His holiness; and this, because of their sinfulness. Why did Cain hate Abel? "Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s

righteous" (1 John 3:12). Why did the Jews hate Christ?―"But me it hateth, because I testify of it that the works thereof are evil" (John 7:7). And in that measure in which believers are like Christ, in the same proportion will they be hated by unbelievers: "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you" (John 15:18).” 1B. They had just tried to stone him at the end of chapter 8, and now they are at it again, for they are offended at his teaching. 2. Henry, “rage, the outrage, of the Jews against him for this discourse: The Jews took up stones again,Joh_10:31. It is not the word that is used before (Joh_8:59), but ebastasan lithous- they carried stones- great stones, stones that were a load,such as they used in stoning malefactors. They broughtthem from some place at a distance, as it were preparing things for his execution without any judicial process; as if he were convicted of blasphemy upon the notorious evidence of the fact, which needed no further trial. The absurdity of this insult which the Jews offered to Christ will appear if we consider, 1. That they had imperiously,not to say impudently,challenged him to tell them plainly whether he was the Christ or no; and yet now that he not only said hewas the Christ, but proved himself so, they condemned him as a malefactor. If the preachers of the truth propose it modestly,they are branded as cowards; if boldly,as insolent; but Wisdom is justified of her children.2. That when they had before made a similar attempt it was in vain; he escaped through the midst of them(Joh_8:59); yet they repeat their baffled attempt. Daring sinners will throw stones at heaven, though they return upon their own heads; and will strengthen themselves against the Almighty, though none ever hardened themselves against him and prospered. 3. BAR ES, "Verse 31. The Jews took up stones. Stoning was the punishment of a blasphemer, Leviticus 24:14-16. They considered him guilty of blasphemy because he made himself equal with God, John 10:33. Again. They had before plotted against his life (John 5:16,18) and once at least they had taken up stones to destroy him, John 8:59. 4. Calvin, "Then the Jews again took up stones. As true religion, in maintaining the glory of God, burns with its own zeal which the Spirit of God directs, so unbelief is the mother of rage, and the devil hurries on the wicked in such a manner, that they breathe nothing but slaughter. This result shows with what intention they put the question to Christ; for the open confession, of which they pretended to be desirous, instantly drives them to madness. And yet, though they are hurried along, with such violence, to oppress Christ, there can be no doubt that they assigned some plausible reason for their judgment, as if they were acting according to the injunction of the Law, by which God commands that false prophets shall be stoned, (Deuteronomy 13:5.) 5. RAY STEDMA , “Many hold that Jesus never claimed to be God, but the Jews clearly understood this to be such a claim and their immediate reaction is to run and find stones (that is what is suggested by the word John uses here), in order to put him to death. They did so because the Law directed that if a man claimed to be God he was a dangerous person; he might influence others to think he was God, so he must be eliminated from society, put to death by stoning. On hearing these words of Jesus, the Jews thought, "Aha, we've got him now. He has made a claim that is so clear we don't even have to wait for the Romans to rule on this. We'll stone him right here in the temple courts and put him to death according to the Law because of what he said."

6. Constable, "10:31-33 Clearly the Jews understood Jesus to be claiming more than simple agreement with God in thought and purpose but equality with the Father as deity. They prepared to stone Him for blasphemy.391 They believed Jesus was blaspheming because He was claiming to be God (cf. 5:18; 8:59). Before they could act Jesus asked them for which of His many noble, beautiful works (Gr. erga kala) they were stoning Him. This question confronted them with the incongruity of executing a man for restoring people who had suffered from handicaps. Jesus' miracles testified that He was doing divine work. However the Jews did not think this through but responded that it was not for His works but for His words that they were going to kill Him. The reader should realize by now that Jesus was exactly who He claimed to be, one with the Father and more than a mere mortal. A man was not making Himself out to be God, but God had made Himself a man (1:1, 14, 18). If Jesus did not really claim to be God, He could easily have corrected the Jews' misunderstanding here. The fact that He did not is further proof that the Jews correctly understood that He was claiming to be God. 7. Barclay on 31-39k, “To the Jews Jesus' statement that he and the Father were one was blasphemy. It was the invasion by a man of the place which belonged to God alone. The Jewish law laid down the penalty of stoning for blasphemy. "He who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him" (Lev.24:16). So they made their preparations to stone Jesus. The Greek really means that they went and fetched stones to fling at him. Jesus met their hostility with three arguments. (i) He told them that he had spent all his days doing lovely things, healing the sick feeding the hungry, and comforting the sorrowing, deeds so full of help and power and beauty that they obviously came from God. For which of these deeds did they wish to stone him? Their answer was that it was not for anything he had done that they wished to stone him, but for the claim he was making. (ii) This claim was that he was the Son of God. To meet their attack Jesus used two arguments. The first is a purely Jewish argument which is difficult for us to understand. He quoted Ps.82:6. That psalm is a warning to unjust judges to cease from unjust ways and defend the poor and the innocent. The appeal concludes: "I say, `You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you.'" The judge is commissioned by God to be god to men. This idea comes out very clearly in certain of the regulations in Exodus. Exo.21:1-6 tells how the Hebrew servant may go free in the seventh year. As the King James Version has it, Exo.21:6 says "Then his master shall bring him unto the judges." But in the Hebrew, the word which is translated judges is actually 'elohiym, which means gods. The same form of expression is used in Exo.22:9; Exo.22:28. Even scripture said of men who were specially commissioned to some task by God that they were gods. So Jesus said: "If scripture can speak like that about men, why should I not speak so about myself?" Jesus claimed two things for himself. (a) He was consecrated by God to a special task. The word for to consecrate is hagiaze in the verb from which comes the adjective hagios, holy. This word always has the idea of rendering a person or a place or a thing different from other persons and places and things, because it is set aside for a special purpose or task. So, for instance, the Sabbath is holy (Exo.20:11). The altar is holy (Lev.16:19). The priests are holy (2Chr.26:18). The prophet is holy (Jer.1:5). When Jesus said that God had consecrated him, made him holy, he meant that he had set him apart from other men, because he had given him a special task to do. The very fact that Jesus used this word shows how conscious he was of his special task. (b) He said that God had despatched him into the world. The word used is the one which would be used

for sending a messenger or an ambassador or an army. Jesus did not so much think of himself as coming into the world, as being sent into the world His coming was an act of God; and he came to do the task which God had given him to do. So Jesus said: "In the old days it was possible for scripture to speak of judges as gods, because they were commissioned by God to bring his truth and justice into the world. ow I have been set apart for a special task; I have been despatched into the world by God; how can you then object if I call myself the Son of God? I am only doing what scripture does." This is one of those biblical arguments the force of which it is difficult for us to feel; but which to a Jewish Rabbi would have been entirely convincing. (iii) Jesus went on to invite the acid test. "I do not ask you, he said in effect," to accept my words. But I do ask you to accept my deeds."A word is something about which a man can argue; but a deed is something beyond argument. Jesus is the perfect teacher in that he does not base his claims on what he says, but on what he is and does. His invitation to the Jews was to base their verdict on him, not on what he said, but on what he did; and that is a test which all his followers ought to be able and willing to meet. The tragedy is that so few can meet it, still less invite it.”

32but Jesus said to them, "I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?"
1. Here we see the humorous side of Jesus coming out. He is facing a dangerous crowd who wants his blood, and he is cracking a joke. Before you start hurling your stones to kill me, I would like to know which one of my marvelous miracles that healed and changed lives for the good is provoking you to this great anger. 1B. Ron Daniels, 3gStoning was the Jews' way of administering capital punishment. The convicted person would be surrounded by the crowd, as large rocks were hurled at them until they were dead. Remember that the temple had been under construction for the last 46 years. There were huge pieces of marble lying around in the construction sites. The Pharisees and elders grabbed the largest ones they could throw and held them over their heads. I love Jesus' demeanor. At the moment when most men would prepare to meet their Maker, or drop to their knees and plead for their life, Jesus says, John 10:32 ..."I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?" You've just got to love Jesus!3h 2. Henry, 3gChrist's tender expostulation with them upon occasion of this outrage (Joh_10:32): Jesus answeredwhat they did,for we do not find that they said any thing,unless perhaps they stirred up the crown that they had gathered about him to join with them, crying, Stone him, stone him,as afterwards, Crucify him, crucify him.When he could have answered them with fire from heaven, he mildly replied, Many good works have I shown you from my Father: for which of those works do you stone me?Words so very tender that one would think they should have melted a heart of stone. In dealing with his enemies he still argued from his works (men evidence what they areby what they do), his good works- kala ergaexcellent, eminent works. Opera eximia vel

praeclara;the expression signifies both great worksand good works. 1. The divine power of his works convicted them of the most obstinate infidelity. They were works from his Father,so far above the reach and course of nature as to prove him who did them sent of God,and acting by commission from him. These works he showedthem; he did them openly before the people, and not in a corner. His works would bear the test, and refer themselves to the testimony of the most inquisitive and impartial spectators. He did not show his works by candlelight, as those that are concerned only for show,but he showed them at noon-day before the world, Joh_18:20. See Psa_111:6. His works so undeniably demonstratedthat they were an incontestable demonstrationof the validity of his commission. 2. The divine grace of his works convicted them of the most base ingratitude. The works he did among them were not only miracles, but mercies; not only works of wonder to amaze them, but works of love and kindness to do them good, and so make them good, and endear himself to them. He healed the sick, cleansed the lepers, cast out devils, which were favours, not only to the persons concerned, but to the public; these he had repeated, and multiplied: “ ow for which of these do you stone me?You cannot say that I have done you any harm, or given you any just provocation; if therefore you will pick a quarrel with me, it must be for some good work, some good turn done you; tell me for which.” ote, (1.) The horrid ingratitude that there is in our sins against God and Jesus Christ is a great aggravation of them, and makes them appear exceedingly sinful. See how God argues to this purpose, Deu_32:6, Jer_2:5; Mic_6:3. (2.) We must not think it strange if we meet with those who not only hate us without cause, but are our adversaries for our love, Psa_35:12; Psa_41:9. When he asks, For which of these do you stone me?as he intimates the abundant satisfaction he had in his own innocency, which gives a man courage in a suffering day, so he puts his persecutors upon considering what was the true reason of their enmity, and asking, as all those should do that create trouble to their neighbour, Why persecute we him?As Job advises his friends to do, Job_19:28. 3. Clarke, 3gMany good works have I showed you - I have healed your sick, delivered those of you who were possessed from the power of demons; I have fed multitudes of your poor, and I have taught you in all places, at all times, without expense, with patience; and is this my reward? To show good works or good things is a Hebraism, which signifies to do them really, to give good things liberally. The phrase is similar to the following: Who will Show us any good? Psa_4:6; i.e. who shall give us good things. Show us thy mercy, Psa_85:7; i.e. give us to feel the effects of thy mercy. Thou hast Showed thy people hard things, Psa_60:3; i.e. thou hast treated them with rigor. Thou hast Showed me great and sore troubles, Psa_71:20; i.e. thou hast exposed me to terrible hardships.3h 4. BAR ES, "Verse 32. Many good works. Many miracles of benevolence--healing the sick, &c. His miracles were good works, as they tended to promote the happiness of men, and were proofs of his benevolence. He had performed no other works than those of benevolence; he knew that they could charge him with no other, and he confidently appealed to them as witnesses of that. Happy would it be if all, when they are opposed and persecuted, could appeal even to their persecutors in proof of their own innocence.” 5. Calvin, "Many good works I have shown you. Here Christ not only says that they have no reason for their cruelty, but accuses them of ingratitude, in making so unjust a requital for God's favors. or does he only state that he has done them a service by one or two works, but that in many

ways he has been kind to them. ext, he upbraids them with being ungrateful, not only to himself, but rather to God, when he says that he is the minister of the Father, who openly manifested his power, that it might be known and attested to them. For when he says that the good works were from the Father, he means that God was the Author of them. The meaning may be thus summed up, "God intended to make known to you, by me, distinguished benefits; he has conferred them upon you by my hand. Banish me as much as you please, I have done nothing that does not deserve praise and good-will. In persecuting me, therefore, you must show your rage against the gifts of God." But the question has greater force to pierce their consciences than if he had made a direct assertion. 6. IVP, "He appeals to them on the basis of their own experience and the Scriptures. He begins with the deeds he has done: I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me? (v. 32). These deeds (erga, "works") are from the Father, from the one they claim as their God. They are great (kalos), the same word used to described the shepherd as "good" (10:11, 14). His deeds are not just great, they are admirable. "It is impossible to find a single English word equivalent to the Greek, which suggests deeds of power and moral excellence, resulting in health and well-being" (Barrett 1978:383). These are deeds that should have provoked awe and admiration and praise, not anger and hostility. They are kalos precisely because they are from the Father. othing is truly kalos except that which proceeds from the Father, the source of all that is good and true and worthy. The opponents have been divided over what to make of Jesus, but a sufficient number of them have decided his scandalous claims are clear enough, whatever might be the explanation of the miracles, to warrant putting his followers out of the synagogue and stone Jesus himself: We are not stoning you for any of these . . . but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God (v. 33). The understanding of blasphemy in later sources has to do with pronouncing the divine name, the Tetragrammaton (YHWH; m. Sanhedrin 7:5). In Jewish literature the only case of calling oneself God reflects fairly clearly the debates between church and synagogue over the claims of Jesus (y. Ta'anit 2; 65b; 59; Exodus Rabbah 29:5; cf. Barrett 1978:383-84). Presumably there would not need to be a law for such a thing--it is unthinkable that one would make such a claim. But if such a claim were made, it would not take a lot of deliberation to determine that this was blasphemy against the one God. The tradition may speak of the Torah and Wisdom as divine and even hypothesize them (see comment on 1:1-2), but it would be something quite different for a human being to claim such status. 7. Gill, “answered them, many good works,.... Such as healing the sick, and all manner of diseases; dispossessing devils, cleansing lepers, giving sight to the blind, causing the dumb to speak, the deaf to hear, and the lame to walk; which were not only works of power, but of mercy and beneficence; and therefore are called good works, as well as they were great and miraculous ones: have I showed you from my Father; which Christ did in the name, and by the command and authority of the Father; who gave him them to do, and did them by him; and which were evident and notorious, and were done so openly and publicly, that they could not be denied: for which of these works do ye stone me? suggesting, that his public life had been a continued

series of such kind actions to the sons of men, and it could be for nothing else surely, that they took up stones to stone him; wherefore the part they acted, was a most ungrateful, cruel, and barbarous one.”

33"We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."
1. They now admit that Jesus claimed to be God, which he clearly did, but they are offended by the claim and want to rid him from their midst by stoning. 2. Gill wrote, “..which they concluded very rightly, from his saying, Joh_10:30, that God was his Father, and that he and his Father were one; that is, in nature and essence, and therefore he must be God; but then this was no blasphemy, but a real truth, as is hereafter made to appear; nor is there any contradiction between his being man, and being God; he is truly and really man, but then he is not a mere man, as the Jews suggested; but is truly God, as well as man, and is both God and man in one person, the divine and human nature being united in him, of which they were ignorant: two mistakes they seem to be guilty of in this account; one that Christ was a mere man, the other that he made himself God, or assumed deity to himself, which did not belong to him, and therefore must be guilty of blasphemy; neither of which were true: the phrase is used by the Jews, of others who have taken upon them the name and title of God; as of Hiram king of Tyre, of whom they say, ‫" ,שעשה עצמו אלוה‬that he made himself God" (r); the same they say of ebuchadnezzar; and the modern Jews still continue the same charge against Jesus, as their ancestors did, and express it in the same language, and say of him, that he was a man, and set himself up for God (s).h 3. Henry, g Their vindication of the attempt they made upon Christ, and the cause upon which they grounded their prosecution, Joh_10:33. What sin will want fig-leaves with which to cover itself, when even the bloody persecutors of the Son of God could find something to say for themselves? 1. They would not be thought such enemies to their country as to persecute him for a good work: For a good work we stone thee not.For indeed they would scarcely allow any of his works to be so. His curing the impotent man (ch. 5) and the blind man (ch. 9) were so far from being acknowledged good services to the town, and meritorious, that they were put upon the score of his crimes, because done on the sabbath day. But, if he had done any good works, they would not own that they stoned him for them,though these were really the things that did most exasperate them, Joh_11:47. Thus, though most absurd, they could not be brought to own their absurdities. 2. They would be thought such friends to God and his glory as to prosecute him for blasphemy: Because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.Here is, (1.) A pretended zeal for the law. They seem mightily concerned for the honour of the divine majesty, and to be seized with a religious horror at that which they imagined to be a reproach to it. A blasphemer was to be stoned,Lev_24:16. This law, they thought, did not only justify, but

sanctify, what they attempted, as Act_26:9. ote, The vilest practices are often varnished with plausible pretences. As nothing is more courageousthan a well-informed conscience, so nothing is more outrageousthan a mistaken one. See Isa_66:5; Joh_16:2. (2.) A real enmity to the gospel, on which they could not put a greater affront than by representing Christ as a blasphemer. It is no new thing for the worst of characters to be put upon the best of men, by those that resolve to give them the worst of treatment. [1.] The crime laid to his charge is blasphemy,speaking reproachfully and despitefully of God. God himself is out of the sinner's reach, and not capable of receiving any real injury; and therefore enmity to God spits its venom at his name, and so shows its ill-will. [2.] The proof of the crime: Thou, being a man, makest thyself God.As it is God's glory that he is God,which we rob him of when we make him altogether such a one as ourselves, so it is his glory that besides him there is no other,which we rob him of when we make ourselves, or any creature, altogether like him. ow, First,Thus far they were in the right, that what Christ said of himself amounted to this - that he was God, for he had said that he was one with the Fatherand that he would give eternal life;and Christ does not deny it, which he would have done if it had been a mistaken inference from his words. But, secondly,They were much mistaken when they looked upon him as a mere man,and that the Godhead he claimed was a usurpation, and of his own making. They thought it absurd and impious that such a one as he, who appeared in the fashion of a poor, mean, despicable man, should profess himself the Messiah, and entitle himself to the honours confessedly due to the Son of God. ote, 1. Those who say that Jesus is a mere man,and only a made God,as the Socinians say, do in effect charge himwith blasphemy, but do effectually prove it upon themselves. 2. He who, being a man, a sinful man, makes himself a god as the Pope does, who claims divine powers and prerogatives, is unquestionably a blasphemer,and thatantichrist. 4. Clarke, gBut for blasphemy - I have elsewhere shown that the original word, when applied to men, signifies to speak injuriously of their persons, character, connections, etc.; but when applied to God it signifies to speak impiously, i.e. contrary to his nature, perfections, the wisdom of his providence, or goodness of his works. Thou, being a man - That is, only a man - makest thyself God. When Christ said before, Joh_10:30, I and the Father are one, had the Jews understood him (as many called Christians profess to do) as only saying he had a unity of sentiments with the Father, they would not have attempted to treat him for this as a blasphemer; because in this sense Abraham, Isaac, Moses, David, and all the prophets, were one with God. But what irritated them so much was that they understood him as speaking of a unity of nature. Therefore they say here, thou makest thyself God; which word they understood, not in a figurative, metaphorical, or improper sense, but in the most literal meaning of the term.” 5. Calvin, "We stone thee not for a good work. Though wicked men carry on open war with God, yet they never wish to sin without some plausible pretense. The consequence is, that when they rage against the Son of God, they are not content with this cruelty, but bring an unprovoked accusation against him, and constitute themselves advocates and defenders of the glory of God. A good conscience must therefore be to us a wall of brass, by which we boldly repel the reproaches and calumnies with which we are assailed. For whatever plausibility may adorn their malice, and whatever reproach they may bring on us for a time, if we fight for the cause of God, he will not refuse to uphold

his truth. But as the wicked never want pretences for oppressing the servants of God, and as they have also hardened impudence, so that, even when vanquished, they do not cease to slander, we have need of patience and meekness, to support us to the end. But for blasphemy. The word blasphemy, which among profane authors denotes generally every kind of reproach, Scripture refers to God, when his majesty is offended and insulted. Because thou, being a man, makest thyself God. There are two kinds of blasphemy, either when God is deprived of the honor which belongs to him, or when anything unsuitable to his nature, or contrary to his nature, is ascribed to him. They argue therefore that Christ is a blasphemer and a sacrilegious person, because, being a mortal man, he lays claim to Divine honor. And this would be a just definition of blasphemy, if Christ were nothing more than a man. They only err in this, that they do not design to contemplate his Divinity, which was conspicuous in his miracles.h 6. Jamison, ga blasphemy\ whose legal punishment was stoning (Lev_24:11-16). thou, being a man \ that is, a man only. makest thyself God \ Twice before they understood Him to advance the same claim, and both times they prepared themselves to avenge what they took to be the insulted honor of God, as here, in the way directed by their law (Joh_5:18; Joh_8:59). 7. Pink, “It was most appropriate for this to be recorded in John’s Gospel, the great design of which is to present the Deity of the Savior. The carnal mind is "enmity against God," and never was this more fully evidenced than when God incarnate appeared in the midst of men. During His infancy, an organized effort was made to slay Him (Matthew 2). In one of the Messianic Psalms there is more than a hint that during the years Christ spent in seclusion at azareth, repeated attempts were made upon His life—"I am afflicted and ready to die from my youth up" (Ps. 88:15. The very first word spoken by Him in the azareth synagogue after His public ministry began, was followed by an attempt to murder Him (Luke 4:29). And from that point onwards to the Cross, His steps were dogged by implacable foes who thirsted for His blood. Wonderful beyond comprehension was that grace of God which suffered His Son to sojourn in such a world of rebels. Divine was that infinite forbearance which led Christ to endure "the contradiction of sinners against himself." Deep, fervent, and perpetual should be our praise for that love which saved us at such a cost! "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me and I in him" (John 10:34-38). Upon these verses we cannot do better than quote from the excellent remarks of Dr. John Brown: "Our Lord’s reply consists of two parts. In the first, He shows that the charge of blasphemy,

which they founded on His calling Himself the Son of God, was a rash one, even though nothing more could have been said of Him, than that He had been ‘sanctified and sent by the Father’; and secondly, that His miracles were of such a kind, as that they rendered whatever He declared of Himself, as to His intimate connection with the Father, however extraordinary, worthy of credit. "Our Lord’s argument in the first part of this answer is founded on a passage in the Psalm 82:6; ‘I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most high.’ These words are plainly addressed to the Jewish magistrates, commissioned by Jehovah to act as His vicegerents in administering justice to His people: who judged for God—in the room of God; whose sentences, when they agreed with the law, were God’s sentences; whose judgment, was God’s judgment, and rebels against whom, were rebels against God. "The meaning and force of our Lord’s argument is obvious. If, in a book which you admit to be of Divine authority, and all whose expressions are perfectly faultless, men which have received a Divine communication to administer justice to the people of God are called ‘gods’ and sons of the Highest; is it not absurd to bring against One who has a higher commission than they (One who had been sanctified and sent by the Father), and who presented far more evidence of His commission, a charge of blasphemy, because He calls Himself ‘the Son of God’? You dare not charge blasphemy on the Psalmist;—why do you charge it on Me?... He reasoned with the Jews on their own principles. Were the Messiah nothing more than you expect Him to be, to charge One who claims Messiahship with blasphemy, because He calls Himself the Son of God, is plainly gross inconsistency. Your magistrates are called God’s sons, and may not your Messiah claim the same title? "The second part of our Lord’s reply is contained in the thirty-seventh and thirty-eighth verses. It is equivalent to—I have declared that I and the Father are one—one in power and operation. I do not call on you to believe this merely because of My testimony, but I do call on you to believe on My testimony supported by the miracles I have performed, works which nothing but a Divine power could accomplish. These works are the voice of God, and its utterance is distinct: it speaks plainly, it utters no dark saying. You cannot refuse to receive the doctrine that I and the Father are one, that the Father is in Me, and I in Him, without contradicting His testimony and calling Him a liar." Let us notice one or two details in these verses before we turn to the conclusion of our chapter. The word "gods" in the eighty-second Psalm, quoted here by Christ, has occasioned difficulty to some. The magistrates of Israel were so called because of their authority and power, and as representing the Divine majesty in government. Mark how in verse 35 the Savior said, "The scripture cannot be broken." What a high honor did He here place upon the written Word! In making use of this verse from the Psalmist against His enemies, the whole point of His argument lay in a single word—"gods"—and the fact that it occurred in the book Divinely inspired. The Scriptures were the final court of appeal, and here the Lord insists on their absolute authority and verbal inerrancy.”

34Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are gods?

1. Henry's reply to their accusation of him (for such their vindication of themselves was), and his making good those claims which they imputed to him as blasphemous (Joh_10:34, etc.), where he proves himself to be no blasphemer, by two arguments: - By an argument taken from God's word. He appeals to what was written in their law,that is, in the Old Testament; whoever opposes Christ, he is sure to have the scripture on his side.It is written (Psa_82:6), I have said, You are gods. It is an argument a minore ad majus - from the less to the greater. If they were gods, much more am I. 2. Jesus, uses Psalm 82:6 to emphasize they we all are gods (representatives of God). Why then am I accused of blasphemy when I say I am his unique son? It is a common ancient argument from the lesser to the greater. 3. Gill I said, ye are gods? which is spoken to civil magistrates, so called, because of their authority and power; and because they do, in some sort, represent the divine majesty, in the government of nations and kingdoms. Many of the Jewish writers, by "gods", understand "the angels". The Targum paraphrases the words thus: "I said ye are accounted as angels, as the angels on high, all of you;'' and to this sense some of their commentators interpret it. Jarchi's gloss is, ye are gods; that is, angels; for when I gave the law to you, it was on this account, that the angel of death might not any more rule over you: the note of Aben Ezra is, "and the children of the Most High": as angels; and the sense is, your soul is as the soul of angels: hence the (x) Jew charges Christ with seeking refuge in words, that will not profit, or be any help to him, when he cites these words, showing that magistrates are called gods, when the sense is only, that they are like to the angels in respect of their souls: but let it be observed, that it is not said, "ye are as gods", as in Gen_3:5, but "ye are gods"; not like unto them only, but are in some sense gods; and besides, to say that they are like to angels, with respect to their souls, which come from above, is to say no more of the judges of the earth, than what may be said of every man: to which may be added, that this objector himself owns, that judges are called ‫" ,אלהים‬gods", as in Exo_22:9; the cause of both parties shall come before ‫" ,אלהים‬the judges"; and that even the word is used in this sense in this very psalm, from whence these words are cited, Psa_82:1, "he judgeth among" ‫" ,אלהים‬the gods"; and both Kimchi and Ben Melech interpret this text itself in the same way, and observe, that judges are called gods, when they judge truly and aright: all which is sufficient to justify our Lord in the citation of this passage, and the use he makes of it. 4. Clarke, “Is it not written in your law - The words which our Lord quotes are taken from Psa_82:6, which shows that, under the word law, our Lord comprised the Jewish sacred writings in general. See also Joh_12:34; Joh_15:25. Ye are gods? - That is, judges, who are called ‫ אלהים‬elohim. That judges are here meant appears from Psa_82:2, etc., and also from what follows here. And this is probably the only place where the word ‫ אלהים‬is applied to any but the true God.” 5. Barnes, “your law - Psa_82:6. The word law here, is used to include the Old Testament. I said The Psalmist said, or God said by the Psalmist. Ye are gods - This was said of magistrates on

account of the dignity and honor of their office, and it shows that the Hebrew word translated god, ‫ ,אלהים‬in that place might be applied to man. Such a use of the word is, however, rare. See instances in Exo_7:1; Exo_4:16.” 6. Stedman, “Notice that point: "Scripture cannot be broken." It can never be wrong. It cannot be set aside. It is not filled with errors. It cannot be broken. This is our Lord's view of the whole Old Testament, the Law, the Prophets and the Writings. It cannot be wrong, therefore if it calls men "gods" they must, in some sense, be gods. [Scripture says these men are gods, therefore] "do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?" {John 10:36 RSV} Again, many hold that Jesus never claimed to be the Son of God. Well, mark this in your Bible. This is where he clearly quotes himself as claiming to be the Son of God. ote the force of his argument. The 82nd Psalm begins, God has taken his place in the divine council; In the midst of the gods he holds judgment: {Psa 82:1 RSV} This psalm deals with the judges of Israel, the human judges who settled disputes -- the Supreme Court, if you like -- of Israel. What the psalm is saying is that these men are acting as agents of God: God is in their midst; the judgment they pronounce is the judgment of God. The psalm clearly calls them "gods." Verse 6 of this Psalm, the verse Jesus quoted, says, I say, "You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you; nevertheless, you shall die like men, and fall like any prince." {Psa 82:6-7 RSV} His argument is, "If men, plain vanilla men just like other men, who serve as judges and do God's work in that way can be called gods without blasphemy -- even the Scriptures do it and they cannot be wrong -- how can you accuse me of blasphemy when I claim to be a Son of God and do the work of God?" Many people think that that is all Jesus meant to claim: That all he is saying is, "I am just like these other men in the Old Testament who were judges. They could be called gods and weren't stoned for blasphemy, why, then, are you stoning me when I say I am a Son of God? The psalm says, 'You are the sons of the Most High,' so why should I be accused of blasphemy for saying the same thing?" Some of the scholars claim this is what Jesus is claiming -- that he is merely a man doing the work of God. But that ignores the words of Jesus here that go far, far beyond that. What he said was, "Do you say of him whom the Father sanctified. (consecrated), and sent into the world...?" That is a claim no mere man can make. He is saying, "I existed before I came to earth. Before I appeared as a man I existed. I came from God. I was sent of God. I was one with God." This, without doubt, is a claim for the sharing of deity. His argument then becomes, "If mere men who do God's work can be called "gods" without blasphemy, how then can you charge one who is one with God and comes from God a blasphemer?" Then he rests it again on the unshakable evidence: "If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me;" {John 10:37 RSV} Isn't that amazing? Jesus said, "Do not believe me just because of my words, my claims. If God does not confirm what I say by works then you do not have to believe me." "but if I do them [the works of God], even though you do not believe

me, believe the works, that you may know and understand [the most vital truth in all the universe] that the Father is in me and I am in the Father." {John 10:38 RSV} What a startling claim! "Either Jesus is a totally mad person, on a par," as C. S. Lewis put it, "with a man who claims to be a poached egg -- out of his mind, uttering meaningless, garbled, rambling, megalomaniacal statements -- or he is telling the truth. And if he is telling the truth he is the most important Being in the universe. He is at the center of everything: He is the center of life, the giver of truth. Jesus of azareth is the center of everything. To ignore him is to grope in darkness, to live in rebellion, to miss out on joy, peace and love, and end at last as part of the world's fiery judgment." But all who heard Jesus do not reject him. John goes on to tell us: Again they tried to arrest him, but he escaped from their hands. He went away again across the Jordan to the place where John at first baptized [that is where he began his ministry] and there he remained. And many came to him; and they said, "John did no sign, but everything that John said about this man was true." And many believed in him there. {John 10:40-42 RSV} They saw the confirmation of the word of John {the Baptist} in the works of Jesus. Here is where Jesus rests his case. It is interesting that nobody today ever seriously makes the claim that Jesus was a mad man! I have never seen any serious attempt to claim that he was out of his mind. His works were so true, so helpful, so delivering, such a blessing to everyone. His words and his works have released people for centuries. obody claims he is mad. The only conclusion left is that he is indeed God become man. The mystery of his existence is this: He is the God-man. We are called to worship him, to follow him, and obey him. This is the only way we can find our way safely through life.

7. Bob Utley, “YOU ARE GODS” Jesus used a quote from Ps. 82:6. It used Elohim to refer to human judges. These judges (though wicked) are called “sons of the Most High.” These Jews were attacking Jesus because although He was a man He claimed to be one with God. Yet, other men, (cf. Exod. 4:16; 7:1; 22:8,9; Ps. 82:6; 138:1) were called “gods.” Jesus’ rabbinical argument seems to follow this line: the Scriptures are true, men are called Elohim; therefore, why do you call Me a blasphemer for asserting that I am the Son of God? The term Elohim is PLURAL in Hebrew but translated SI GULAR and used a SI GULAR verb when referring to the OT Deity. This may be a typical Johannine word play: (1) a term that has two connotations, and (2) a Greek question that expects a “yes” answer.”

8. BAR ES, "Verses 34-38. Jesus answered them. The answer of Jesus consists of two parts. The first (John 10:34-36) shows that they ought not to object to his use of the word God, even if he were no more than a man. The second (John 10:37,38) repeats substantially what he had before said, left the same impression, and in proof of it he appealed to his works. Verse 34. In your law. Psalms 82:6. The word law here, is used to include the Old Testament.I said. The Psalmist said, or God said by the Psalmist. Ye are gods. This was said of magistrates on account of the dignity and honor of their office, and it shows that the word translated "god" in that place might be applied to man. Such a use of the word is, however, rare. See instances in

Exodus 7:1; 4:16. 9. Calvin, "Is it not written in your Law? He clears himself of the crime charged against him, not by denying that he is the Son of God, but by maintaining that he had justly said so. Yet he adapts his reply to the persons, instead of giving a full explanation of the fact; for he reckoned it enough for the present to expose their malice. In what sense he called himself the Son of God he does not explain fully, but states indirectly. The argument which he employs is not drawn from equals, but from the less to the greater. I said, You are gods. Scripture gives the name of gods to those on whom God has conferred an honorable office. He whom God has separated, to be distinguished above all others, is far more worthy of this honorable title. Hence it follows, that they are malicious and false expounders of Scripture, who admit the first, but take offense at the second. The passage which Christ quotes is in Psalm 82:6, I have said, You are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High; where God expostulates with the kings and judges of the earth, who tyrannically abuse their authority and power for their own sinful passions, for oppressing the poor, and for every evil action. He reproaches them that, unmindful of Him from whom they received so great dignity, they profane the name of God. Christ applies this to the case in hand, that they receive the name of gods, because they are God's ministers for governing the world. For the same reason Scripture calls the angels gods, because by them the glory of God beams forth on the world. We must attend to the mode of expression: 10 Constable, "Jesus proceeded to point out that the Jews' authoritative revelation, the Old Testament, proved His claim. He cited Psalm 82:6 to show that the Old Testament used the word "god" (Heb. elohim) to refer to persons other than God Himself. If God spoke of people as "gods," why should the Jews object if Jesus implied that He was a god? The identity of the people whom God addressed as gods in Psalm 82:6 is debatable. The most popular and probable view is that they were Israel's judges who were functioning as God's representatives and so were in that sense little gods (Ps. 82:1-4; cf. Exod. 21:6; 22:8).392 Another view is that these gods were angels.393 This seems unlikely since the contrast in view in the psalm is between God and mere man, not angels. A third view is that God was addressing the whole nation of Israel when He gave them the Law. He spoke to the people as His sons and in this sense meant that they were gods.394 However the contrast between God as the true Judge (Ps. 82:1, 8) and the people whom He rebuked for judging falsely (Ps. 82:2-7) seems to favor the first view.”

11. Guzik "(34-39) Jesus reasons with them on the basis of Scripture (quoting from Psalm 82) and His works. Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, "You are gods"'? If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'? If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him." Therefore they sought again to seize Him, but He escaped out of their hand. a. Is it not written in your law, "I said, 'You are gods'": The judges of Psalm 82 were called "gods" because in their office they determined the fate of other men. Also, in Exodus 21:6 and 22:8-9, God calls earthly judges "gods." b. If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came: Jesus is saying "If God gives these unjust judges the title 'gods' because of their office, why do you consider it blasphemy that I call Myself the 'Son of God' in light of the testimony of Me and My works?" c. Jesus is not taking the statement "you are gods" in Psalm 82 and applying it to all humanity, or to all believers. The use of gods in Psalm 82 was a metaphor - and Jesus is exposing both the ignorance and inconsistency of His accusers here. 12. IVP, "Jesus defends his claim using language they should be able to understand, through an appeal to the law. He cites a text that uses the word god of those who are not God: Is it not written in your Law, "I have said you are gods"? (v. 34). It is unclear who is being referred to in Psalm 82:6. Of the several proposals made by scholars (cf. Beasley-Murray 1987:176-77), the most likely takes this as a reference either to Israel's judges or to the people of Israel as they receive the law. The latter is a common understanding among the rabbis (for example, b. 'Aboda Zara 5a; Exodus Rabbah 32:7), but the former is also represented in Jewish interpretation (Midrash Psalms; b. Sanhedrin 6b; 7a; b. Sota 47b). Jesus' explanation that these gods are those to whom the word of God came (v. 35) might point to the Israelites receiving the law. In this case the contrast between these gods and Jesus would be that Jesus is the one who both fulfills the law and is greater than the law. But this expression to whom the word of God came could also refer to the judges (as suggested by the rest of Ps 82) who have received a commission from God to exercise the divine prerogative of judgment on his behalf. The psalm is actually a condemnation of the judges for not exercising their responsibility faithfully, thus corresponding both to the condemnation of these Jewish leaders in John and to Jesus as the true judge. To make his point Jesus uses an argument from the lesser to the greater, a very common form of argument in the ancient world, not least among the rabbis. He compares the people who are called gods to himself, the Son of God. They merely received the word of God, whereas he is the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world (v. 36). Here is a succinct summary of the central truth of his identity, which has been emphasized throughout this Gospel. He is using the language of an agent (see note on 5:21), but the implication is that he existed with the Father before coming into the world. Thus, he is putting himself in the category of the law that was given by God rather than in the category of one of the recipients of that law. By saying he was set apart ("consecrated," hagiazo) he is claiming a status similar to the temple, whose reconsecration these opponents are celebrating at this feast.


What he means by the title Son of God goes beyond anything they had thought before, but it is not a denial of the truths of Scripture. Indeed, the Scripture itself, as illustrated by Psalm 82:6, contains hints of such a revelation, and the Scripture cannot be broken (v. 35); the Scripture cannot be kept from fulfillment (Brown 1966:404). This parenthetical comment spoken by Jesus shows how important this line of argument is for Jesus and John. But, as with all other arguments, it only makes sense if the listener is open to entertaining the truth of who Jesus is. So the Scriptures indicate that they should not be put off by his claims and therefore should be open to the evidence of the deeds he has done. Jesus presses this line of evidence: Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does. But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles (vv. 37-38; cf. 5:19-28). His deeds are like the deeds of God, both in power and in graciousness. Miracles alone are not enough to confirm the truth of one who speaks for God (see comment on 9:33). But the point of these signs is not simply that they are powerful or awesome or supernatural but that they are in keeping with God's own character--they manifest his gracious love. 13. "What Did Jesus Mean When He Quoted the Scripture 'You Are Gods'?" I have heard ew Agers claim that even the Bible makes the claim that we (people) are gods. They use the words of Jesus in John 10:34. This verse has always puzzled me. What did Jesus mean when he quoted this scripture? Thank you for your question. Let me see if I can shed a little light on it. The contexts in both John 10 and the Old Testament Psalm which Jesus quoted (Psalm 82:6) are very important in understanding our Lord's answer to the Jews which were about to stone Him. As they pick up stones, Jesus says, "I've shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning me?" They say, "For a good work we do not stone you, but for blasphemy; and because you, being a man, make Yourself out to be God." (John 10:32-33). Then Jesus refers to Psalm 82:6 and says, "Hasn't it been written in your Law, 'I said, you are gods'? If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say to Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming'; because I said, 'I am the Son of God'? If I do not do the works of my Father, do not believe Me..." (John 10:34-37) ow let us look at Psalm 82 to determine its context and the theme/purpose of the Psalm. The entire psalm is a scathing rebuke aimed at unjust judges in contrast to the just Judge of all the earth. In reality, Asaph, the author of the psalm, is crying out for God to do something about the corrupt judges of his day; they show partiality, they neglect caring for the downtrodden, the weak, the afflicted, etc. Then in verse 6, God Himself speaks, and says: "I said, 'You are gods (Elohim), And all of you are the sons of the Most High." Some observations: 1. The words, "Elohim" (God)," and "Yahweh" (Lord), are the two major names of God in the Old Testament. It is Elohim that is used here in verse 6.

2. Its meaning in Psalm 82:6 does not imply that men are gods. It rather refers specifically to the fact that God has appointed judges to act in a dignified, God-like manner in the discharge of their God-appointed responsibilities. 3. Actually, the word "Elohim" is also used in verse 1 of both God and men: "Elohim (God) takes His stand in His own congregation; He (God) judges in the midst of the Elohim (corrupt judges who are acting like Gods--said in sarcasm)." otice in John 10 that Jesus reminds these accusers from the first half of Psalm 82:6 that God is the one who appoints the human judges with their awesome responsibility: "Ye are gods." He goes on in the second half of the verse to remind them that sons are supposed to resemble their Fathers: "And all of you are the sons of the Most High." either the judges in the psalm nor the Jewish leaders confront Him were reflecting this. 4. In jurisprudence there are two types of authority: de facto and de jure. The Most High God (Elohim Himself) has de facto authority. It is an un-derived authority. He has it because He is God. De jure authority, on the other hand, is derived, or delegated authority. And delegated authority makes one responsible to the one who did the delegating! The second half of verse 6 is a solemn reminder that these judges are called "Sons" of God, because they are to represent faithfully a justice which reflects their "Father," the Judge of all the earth. 5. ow the words of Jesus in John 10 make a lot more sense. If you or I had come to earth as the Messiah, we would probably have been moving about and taking every opportunity possible with people to verbally emphasize who we really were: Elohim. But Jesus didn't do that. He chose rather to imply His identity through the miracles, through the Parables, through His actions. It was as if He was careful that a person came to the conclusion that He was Elohim solely of their own accord, and with no pressure or persuasion on His part, though He was eager for them to come to this very conclusion. 6. otice that in the dialogue in John 10 with these angry Jews, Jesus could have taken the "bait" and said, "I am Elohim!" But He doesn't. He claims identity with the second half of Psalm 82:6, the one that models a relationship to His Father exactly like what God is desiring from the judges in Psalm 82. Even though Christ is Elohim, He functions during the Incarnation in a de jure capacity to the Father and faithfully carries forth His responsibilities to His Father: accomplishing His mission to redeem the human race (John 3:16). I hope this answers your question. Jimmy Williams, Founder Probe Ministries 13. "YOU ARE GODS"? SPIRITUALITY A D A DIFFICULT TEXT — STEPHE L. HOMCY e. e. cummings wrote: " o man, if men are gods; but if gods must be men, the sometimes only

man is this... a fiend, if fiends speak truth."The idea that men could be gods appears in the first few chapters of the Bible, and in that setting indeed it was fiends that the serpent sought to create with his enticement. Yet in the near vicinity of the text we find that man was created in God's image (Gen 1:27). In 1:26 God says, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." The T reinforces this teaching. Man is the "image and glory of God" according to 1 Cor 11:7, and Jas 3:9 affirms that people "have been made in God's likeness." So far so good. Although lively theological discussion concerning the nature and implications of the imago Dei continues, 2 the Biblical understanding that man bears the image of God is an accepted fact among evangelicals. In John 10:34-36, however, a related but more problematic issue surfaces: Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are gods'? If he called them 'gods' to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken—what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, 'I am God's Son' ?" The address "you are gods" on the lips of Jesus raises a new question: Does this indicate that human beings in general, or Christians in particular, are in some sense "gods"? A recent popularlevel response to the controversial Seduction of Christianity claims that "according to this scripture [John 10:34-36], believers are gods." 3 This is by no means an isolated opinion; it represents a growing consensus in some circles of the evangelical community. In view of this kind of mishandling of the text, Stephen Homcy is instructor of ew Testament and Greek at Christ For The ations Institute of Biblical Studies in Stony Brook, ew York. JETS 32/4 (December 1989) 486 14.From a study titled JETS, “ careful exegesis of John 10:34-36 with special consideration of the "you are gods" citation is warranted. I. CHRIST A D MA I JOH 'S GOSPEL We will begin by briefly contrasting some aspects of the nature of Christ and the nature of man as presented in the fourth gospel in order to set the message of 10:34-36 in a broader framework of Johannine thought. John's first verse points to the divine nature of the Logos: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." All that follows in the gospel helps to explain how the invisible God is encountered by men and women in and through the one whom he has sent. o one has ever seen God (1:18), for God is spirit (4:24). Yet Jesus says, "Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father" (14:9b), and "When [anyone] looks at me, he sees the one who sent me" (12:45). Furthermore Jesus tells his disciples: "The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father living in me, who is doing his work" (14:10b). C. K. Barrett correctly perceives that in the fourth gospel "the term God may point either to the invisible Father who is revealed, or to the visible Son who reveals him, for John is at pains to point out that the revealer

is himself God." 4 o man but Jesus could ever fulfill this role as the revealer of God. He, and only he, is God made known among men. John 1:1 also points to Jesus' preexistence as the Logos: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God." While he became (egeneto) "flesh" at a specific point in time (1:14), the Word already was (eƒn) in the beginning of time as we know it. Along the same lines Jesus makes an astounding claim to his Jewish antagonists in 8:58: "Before Abraham came into existence, I am." The sacred name of the God of Israel seems to underlie this claim, and in any case the attribute of preexistence is clearly emphasized. But even more is implied here. The contrast between the verbs genesthai (aorist) as applied to Abraham and eimi (present) as applied to Christ is striking. C. H. Dodd puts it this way: The implication is that Jesus does not stand within the temporal series of great men, beginning with Abraham and continuing through the succession of the prophets, so as to be compared with them. His claim is not that He is the greatest of the prophets, or even greater than Abraham himself. He belongs to a different order of being. The verb genesthai is not applicable to the Son of God at all. He stands outside the range of temporal relations. As great as Abraham was in God's purposes, he was only human and thus inferior to the eternal Son of God. And who but the sinless Son of God could issue the challenge of John 8:46, in which Jesus asks his accusers: "Can any of you prove me guilty of sin?" Throughout the fourth gospel human beings are viewed as darkness-dwellers in desperate need of the light of Christ so that they might not remain condemned to God's wrath because of their sinful deeds (3:18-21). Jesus did not entrust himself to anyone, according to 2:24-25, because he knew what was in man, and it was not good. Through faith in the Messiah a person may gain his spiritual sight, but only as he acknowledges his sinful condition. The Messiah himself says, "If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your sin remains" (9:41). Jesus' challenge to those who would stone the woman caught in adultery went unanswered then as it would today. The world has yet to see a human hand unstained by the blood of sin to cast that first stone. In faith-relationship with Christ, human beings may share his life, his light, and even his glory (17:22). But all these flow from him to them, as vital nutrients from the vine to the branches (15:1-17). As the branch cannot sustain itself apart from the vine, neither can anyone sustain his spiritual life apart from the life-giving Savior. Although the Father "has granted the Son to have life in himself" (5:26), sinful people are not autonomous but eternally dependent on Christ for their very life. We might picture the relationship of the Father, Jesus, and Jesus' disciples in the fourth gospel as three circles positioned one under the other. 7 The top circle represents the Father's nature and intersects the circle directly underneath, which represents Jesus' nature. That area of intersection is the basis for Jesus' statement in 10:30 ("I and the Father are one") and his other claims to deity in the gospel. The bottom circle represents the disciples' nature. The disciples' circle intersects Jesus' circle without intersecting the top circle. "I know my sheep and my sheep know me," proclaims the Good Shepherd, "just as the Father knows me and I know the Father" (10:14-15). This is not to say that the sheep do not know the Father, but they only know him through the one whom he has sent. Jesus (or allos parakleƒtos, the Holy Spirit) will be "in" the disciples and they "in him" (14:20; 15:4). He is the mediator between the Father and the disciples. Apart from Jesus they can do nothing (15:5).

Thus if this somewhat crude representation be accepted the disciples do not partake of the nature of the Father in the same way Jesus does. His nature uniquely intersects the Father's in a way that no man's ever could. The disciples' nature "intersects" that of Jesus, the God-man, and thereby they partake of the life of the Father through the Son. Along the same lines James Dunn states: There is still a sense that the Son's relationship with the Father is something that can be shared by his disciples. They too can be said to be "sent into the world" (17.18; 20.21); they too can abide in the Father and he in them (14.23; 17.21; I John 2.24; 4.15; 5.20). But here too a clear qualitative distinction is present in the Johannine writings as nowhere else: for one thing Jesus is the "only begotten," the "unique" Son of God ... and for another the Johannines make a consistent distinction between Jesus the Son (huios) and believers who are exclusively "children of God."... Unlike other T writers John cannot think of Jesus as elder brother, first-born in the eschatological family;... his sonship is of a wholly different order. 8 II. CHRIST A D "THE JEWS" I JOH 10 "The Jews" is a slippery and controversial term as employed in John's gospel. At the risk of cutting too simply through the red tape of much scholarly discussion, we take this expression to mean those Jews (especially leaders) who consistently and (eventually) vehemently opposed Jesus' ministry. John 10:22-39 deals with the unbelief of "the Jews" and their increasing antagonism toward Jesus. This section is tied to 10:1-21 through the continued use of the shepherd/sheep metaphor: "The Jews" do not believe because they are not among his sheep and therefore do not hear his voice. He has already told them what they want to know if only they have ears to hear (vv. 24-26). What they do hear clearly enough are Jesus' claims concerning his relationship to the Father. He does miracles in the Father's name (v. 25), and the sheep are secure in Jesus' hand because they are secure in the Father's hand (vv. 28-29). The last straw for Jesus' audience is the explicit statement of what is implied in these claims: "I and the Father are one" (v. 30). The reply of "the Jews" indicates that they consider this statement tantamount to a claim of deity. It follows (in the gospel account, though not necessarily according to rabbinic sources 10 that Jesus is guilty of blasphemy and worthy of death by stoning. Jesus does not then seek to deny the basis of the charge but rather to legitimize his right to such a claim based on the law 11 of his accusers. His quotation of Ps 82:6 (LXX 81:6) focuses on the term "gods." If the unjust judges addressed in the Psalm can be called "gods" because they received the word of God, how much more can the title "Son of God" (with its implications of divinity) be legitimately applied to the one who is the Word of God incarnate? Can we possibly miss the theological import of Logos in v. 35 at this point in view of its function in John's gospel as a whole? III. EXEGETICAL CO SIDERATIO S Three exegetical considerations especially warrant our attention in this passage. First, Jesus is quoting from Ps 82:6 in which unjust judges of Israel are reprimanded for their irresponsible, less-than-godly conduct. Ancient and recent investigations of Psalm 82 have made us aware that ‫ב‬e†lo„h‫מ‬m in vv. 1, 6 may not refer to human judges at all. Pagan gods, 12 angels, 13 and other suggestions have been defended as better referents for the term. For our purposes, however, it is sufficient to note that the context in John 10 involves a contrast between man and

God (especially evident in v. 33) and that Jesus, as John presents him here, puts the quote from Psalm 82 into service in this context. Thus it seems certain that, as employed in John 10, the term theoi quoted from Psalm 82 refers to men. This would accord well with the majority rabbinic view that the Psalm was addressed to Israel just after they had received the law, 14 which is most likely behind its use in John 10 as A. T. Hanson has suggested. 15 In what sense then are these unjust judges addressed as "gods" in the Psalm? According to Jesus in John 10:35, the judges were those to whom ho logos tou theou egeneto—that is, they had been entrusted with the oracles of God as part of a divine call to judge Israel. 16 This terminology has its roots in the narrative of Exod 21:6; 22:8-9, in which the judges (‫ב‬e†lo„h‫מ‬m) of Israel have authority to render decisions in civil law cases. Clearly, authority and responsibility concerning God's revealed purposes are at stake when ‫ב‬e†lo„h‫מ‬m is used of these leaders. It is the former of these that men are most eager to attain but the latter that God prizes more highly. Psalm 82 expresses the failure of Israel's judges to wield their authority in keeping with God's standards of justice. They have been especially lax in the area of God's greatest concern, the welfare of the poor and needy. "How long will you defend the unjust and show partiality to the wicked? Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless; maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed. Rescue the weak and needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked" (vv. 2-4). By their actions they have proven themselves to be only human after all. The rebuke they receive is well founded: "I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High.' But you will die like mere men; you will fall like any other ruler" (vv. 6-7). In fact the Psalm concludes by affirming that only God can truly judge by JETS 32/4 (December 1989) 490 his righteous standards. The lessons of Israel's history teach us that men prove unworthy bearers of the title "god." It is worth noting that the quote in John 10:34 does not continue so as to include vv. 6b-7 of the Psalm. Dodd has correctly emphasized that the whole of v. 6 is essential to Jesus' argument. 17 We would argue that v. 7 should also be seen lurking behind Jesus' words here. It is linked with v. 6 in the Hebrew text (v. 7 begins with ‫ב‬a„ke„n) and is part and parcel of the message of the Psalm. If Jesus' hearers were familiar with Psalm 82 it seems likely that their thoughts would have continued through v. 7, even though the quote in John does not. Second, Jesus is addressing antagonistic "Jews" and answering the charge that he, "a mere man," claims to be God. If the preceding analysis is correct, Psalm 82 presents an inviting text for Jesus' answer to his antagonists. They suppose themselves heirs to the sacred authority and responsibility to guard and interpret the same law given to the judges of Israel. Yet they also have failed to act righteously in using this authority. In Matthew 23 Jesus says that the teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in "Moses' seat" but fail to administer justice fairly. Furthermore, he adds, they love the title "rabbi" for themselves. But men should not seek out titles like "master," "father" and "teacher," for such seeking demonstrates pride. Instead they should serve in humility: "For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted" (Matt 23:12). "The Jews" confronting Jesus in John 10 are hardly candidates for the title ‫ב‬e†lo„h‫מ‬m any more than the unjust judges of Psalm 82 proved to be. In fact Jesus does not direct the "you are gods" address to his audience. Instead he refers them back to the Psalm and reminds them that their Scriptures, which cannot be broken, contain this address to (mere) men.

Christ is more than a man and has so demonstrated through his words and deeds. In this same passage in John he appeals to his miracles as signs of his identity, saying that "even if you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father" (10:38). Since miracles have not convinced his opponents he appeals to the law (i.e. the Scriptures) they regard as sacred. In pointing out the address to men as ‫ב‬e†lo„h‫מ‬m, Jesus sets up his qal wa„h»o„mer argument without commenting further on Psalm 82. It is sufficient for him to cite a passage familiar to his hearers that ties in with the issue at hand and to move on to his main point. Third, Jesus' argumentation is qal wa„h»o„mer: He cites Ps 82:6 as applied to (mere) men in order to drive home the "how much more" end of the argument regarding his legitimate claim to deity. From John's perspective the Word of God that had come to Israel and made them worthy of the designation ‫ב‬e†lo„h‫מ‬m was supremely manifested in the flesh in Christ (John 1:14; cf. Heb 1:1-2), who existed with the Father as the Logos in the beginning. In this sense Hanson is correct when he expresses the argument in these terms: If to be addressed by the pre-existent Word justifies men in being called gods, indirect and mediated though that address was .... far more are we justified in applying the title Son of God to the human bearer of the preexistent Word, sanctified and sent by the Father as he was, in unmediated and direct presence. The reason Jesus cites Psalm 82 is not to demonstrate that men are "gods." As we have seen above, this Psalm provides no support for such a claim. Instead he is answering the charge put to him concerning his own identity. He is not expounding on the nature of man but on the nature of God's Son, who is both God and man. He alone among men is worthy to bear the titles of deity and the names of the God of Israel. IV. CO CLUSIO John 10:34-36 cannot be used to support the claim that believers or any human beings are gods. It is clear that the intent of this passage is to teach about the person of Christ. Only Jesus' deity is emphasized, and the "you are gods" citation is simply part of the means to that end. Jesus' audience in this setting consists of men who do not believe the Son and who therefore do not know the Father. Far from being themselves "gods," they actively oppose the one true God and his purposes.

35If he called them 'gods,' to whom the word of God came —and the Scripture cannot be broken—
1. GILL Joh 10:35 - If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came,.... The Syriac version reads, "because the word of God came to them"; either the divine "Logos", the essential word, the Son of God, who appeared to Moses, and made him a God to Pharaoh, and who appointed rulers and magistrates among the Jews; and who is the King of kings, and Lord of lords, from whom all receive their power and dominion: this sense is favoured by the Ethiopic

version, which renders it, "if he called them gods to whom God appeared, the word of God was with them": or else the commission from God, authorizing them to act in the capacity of rulers and governors, is here meant; or rather the word of God, which, in the passage of Scripture cited, calls them so, as it certainly does: and the Scripture cannot be broken; or be made null and void; whatever that says is true, there is no contradicting it, or objecting to it: it is a Jewish way of speaking, much used in the Talmud (y); when one doctor has produced an argument, or instance, in any point of debate, another says, ‫" ,איכא למיפרך‬it may be broken"; or objected to, in such and such a manner, and be refuted: but the Scripture cannot be broken, that is not to be objected to, there can be no confutation of that. 2. Clarke, “Unto whom the word of God came - Bishop Pearce thinks that “the word λογος, here, is put for λογος κρισεως, the word or matter of judgment, as in 2Ch_19:6, where Jehoshaphat, setting up judges in the land of Judah, says: Take heed what ye do: judge not for men, but for the Lord, who is with you in judgment - λογοι της κρισεως, in the words or matters of judgment, Sept., which is nearly according to the Hebrew to ‫ בדבר משפט‬bedebar mishpat, in the word or matter of judgment. In Deu_1:17, when a charge is given to the judges that they should not be afraid of the face of man, this reason is given: for the judgment is God’s. Hence it appears probable that λογος is here used for λογος κρισεως: and it is called λογος Θεου, because it is the judgment that properly belongs to God, and which they who give it on earth give only as acting in the stead of God. A way of speaking very like to this is found in Heb_4:13, where the writer says, προς ὁν ἡµιν ὁ λογος, with whom we have to do, i.e. by whom we are to be judged.” But the words λογος Θεου may be here understood for the order, commission, or command of God; and so it properly signifies, Luk_3:2; and in this sense it is found often employed in the Old Testament. When it is there said that the word of the Lord came, etc., it means, God gave an order, commission, etc., to such a person, to declare or do such and such things. And the scripture cannot be broken - Λυθηναι, dissolved, rendered of none effect, i.e. it cannot be gainsayed or set aside; every man must believe this, because it is the declaration of God. If those were termed gods who were only earthly magistrates, fallible mortals, and had no particular influence of the Divine Spirit; and that they are termed gods is evident from that scripture which cannot be gainsayed; what greater reason then have I to say, I am the Son of God, and one with God, when, as Messiah, I have been consecrated, sent into the world, to instruct and save men; and when, as God, I have wrought miracles which could be performed by no power less than that of omnipotence? 3. Barnes, "Verse 35. Unto whom the word of God came. That is, who were his servants, or who received their dignity and honour only because the law of God was intrusted to them. The word of God here means the command of God; his commission to them to do justice. The scripture cannot be broken. See Matthew 5:19. The authority of the Scripture is final; it cannot be set aside. The meaning is,"If, therefore, the Scripture uses the word god as applied to magistrates, it settles the question that it is right to apply the term to those in office and authority. If applied to them, it may be to others in similar offices. It can not, therefore, be blasphemy to use this word as applicable to a personage so much more exalted than mere magistrates as the Messiah." 4. Calvin, "To whom the word of God was addressed. For Christ means that they were authorized by an undoubted command of God. Hence we infer that

empires did not spring up at random, nor by the mistakes of men, but that they were appointed by the will of God, because he wishes that political order should exist among men, and that we should be governed by usages and laws. For this reason Paul says, that all who resist the power are rebels against God, because there is no power but what is ordained by God, (Romans 13:1, 2.) It will, perhaps, be objected, that other callings also are from God, and are approved by him, and yet that we do not, on that account, call farmers, or cowherds, or cobblers, gods I reply, this is not a general declaration, that all who have been called by God to any particular way of living are called gods; but Christ speaks of kings, whom God has raised to a more elevated station, that they may rule and govern. In short, let us know that magistrates are called gods, because God has given them authority. Under the term Law, Christ includes the whole doctrine by which God governed his ancient Church; for since the prophets were only expounders of the Law, the Psalms are justly regarded as an appendage to the Law. That the Scripture cannot be broken means, that the doctrine of Scripture is inviolable. 5. Constable, ""It means that Scripture cannot be emptied of its force by being shown to be erroneous." Jesus' statement affirms the unity, authority, and inerrancy of Scripture. Jesus held a very high view of Scripture. His point was that it was inconsistent for the Jews to claim the Old Testament as their authority (v. 34) and then to disregard something that it said because they did not agree with it. It was inconsistent for them specifically to stone Jesus for claiming to be God and the Son of God when the Old Testament spoke of humans as gods and as God's sons. "In the singular he graphe usually means a single passage of Scripture, and the verb translated broken (luo) is used in v. 18 of disregarding the letter of the law. The meaning here is 'this passage of Scripture cannot be set aside as irrelevant to the matter under discussion'."396 Jesus did not use this argument to claim that He was God. He used it to stall His critics. He wanted them to see that the divine terms that He was using to describe Himself were terms that the Old Testament itself also used of human beings. They could not logically accuse Him of blasphemy because the Father had set Him aside and sent Him into the world with a special mission. He was a legitimate Son of God for this reason. As the Jews had sanctified their temple after its desecration by Antiochus Epiphanies, so God had sanctified His Son. The Jews celebrated the sanctification of their physical temple with the feast of Dedication, but they were unwilling to accept the spiritual temple that replaced it, namely, Jesus." 6. Henry, “How he explains the text (Joh_10:35): He called them gods to whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken. The word of God's commission came to them, appointing them to their offices, as judges, and therefore they are called gods, Exo_22:28. To some the word of God came immediately, as to Moses; to others in the way of an instituted ordinance. Magistracy is a divine institution; and magistrates are God's delegates, and therefore the scripture calleth them gods; and we are sure that the scripture cannot be broken, or broken

in upon, or found fault with. Every word of God is right; the very style and language of scripture are unexceptionable, and not to be corrected, Mat_5:18. 7. Jamison on 35 and 36, “If he called them gods unto whom the word of God came ... Say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest — The whole force of this reasoning, which has been but in part seized by the commentators, lies in what is said of the two parties compared. The comparison of Himself with mere men, divinely commissioned, is intended to show (as eander well expresses it) that the idea of a communication of the Divine Majesty to human nature was by no means foreign to the revelations of the Old Testament; but there is also a contrast between Himself and all merely human representatives of God - the one “sanctified by the Father and sent into the world”; the other, “to whom the word of God (merely) came,” which is expressly designed to prevent His being massed up with them as only one of many human officials of God. It is never said of Christ that “the word of the Lord came to Him”; whereas this is the well-known formula by which the divine commission, even to the highest of mere men, is expressed, as John the Baptist (Luk_3:2). The reason is that given by the Baptist himself (see on Joh_3:31). The contrast is between those “to whom the word of God came” - men of the earth, earthy, who were merely privileged to get a divine message to utter (if prophets), or a divine office to discharge (if judges) - and “Him whom (not being of the earth at all) the Father sanctified (or set apart), and sent into the world,” an expression never used of any merely human messenger of God, and used only of Himself. because, I said, I am the Son of God — It is worthy of special notice that our Lord had not said, in so many words, that He was the Son of God, on this occasion. But He had said what beyond doubt amounted to it - namely, that He gave His sheep eternal life, and none could pluck them out of His hand; that He had got them from His Father, in whose hands, though given to Him, they still remained, and out of whose hand none could pluck them; and that they were the indefeasible property of both, inasmuch as “He and His Father were one.” Our Lord considers all this as just saying of Himself, “I am the Son of God” - one nature with Him, yet mysteriously of Him. The parenthesis (Joh_10:35), “and the Scripture cannot be broken,” referring to the terms used of magistrates in the eighty-second Psalm, has an important bearing on the authority of the living oracles. “The Scripture, as the expressed will of the unchangeable God, is itself unchangeable and indissoluble” [Olshausen]. (Compare Mat_5:17).” the Lord came, etc., it means, God gave an order, commission, etc., to such a person, to declare or do such and such things. And the scripture cannot be broken , dissolved, rendered of none effect, i.e. it cannot be gainsayed or set aside; every man must believe this, because it is the declaration of God. If those were termed gods who were only earthly magistrates, fallible mortals, and had no particular influence of the Divine Spirit; and that they are termed gods is evident from that scripture which cannot be gainsayed; what greater reason then have I to say, I am the Son of God, and one with God, when, as Messiah, I have been consecrated, sent into the world, to instruct and save men; and when, as God, I have wrought miracles which could be performed by no power less than that of omnipotence?

The scripture cannot be broken. See Matthew 5:19. The authority of the Scripture is final; it cannot be set aside. The meaning is, "If, therefore, the Scripture uses the word god as applied to magistrates, it settles the question that it is right to apply the term to those in office and authority. If applied to them, it may be to others in similar offices. It can not, therefore, be blasphemy to use this word as applicable to a personage so much more exalted than mere

magistrates as the Messiah."

36what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, 'I am God's Son'?
1. GILL, gSay ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified,.... ot by making his human nature pure and holy, and free from all sin, and by bestowing the holy Spirit on him without measure, though both true; but these were upon, or after his mission into the world; whereas sanctification here, designs something previous to that, and respects the eternal separation of him to his office, as Mediator, in the counsel, purposes, and decrees of God, and in the covenant of his grace, being pre-ordained thereunto, before the foundation of the world; which supposes his eternal existence as a divine person, and tacitly proves his true and proper deity: and sent into the world; in human nature, to obtain eternal redemption and salvation his people: to save them from sin, Satan, the world, law, hell and death, which none but God could do: thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Son of God; for what he had said in Joh_10:30 is equivalent to it; and in it he was rightly understood by the Jews, and what he here and afterward says confirms it: the argument is what the Jews call ‫" ,קל וחומר‬from the lesser to the greater", and stands thus; that if mere frail mortal men, and some of them wicked men, being made rulers and judges in the earth are called gods, by God himself, to whom the word of God came in time, and constituted them gods, or governors, but for a time; and this is a fact stands recorded in Scripture, which cannot be denied or disproved, then surely it cannot be blasphemy in Christ, to assert himself to be the Son of God, who existed as a divine person from all eternity; and was so early set apart to the office of prophet, priest, and king; and in the fulness of time was sent into this world, to be the author of eternal salvation to the sons of men. 2. Barnes, "Verse 36. Whom the Father hath sanctified. The word sanctify with us means to make holy; but this is not its meaning here, for the Son of God was always holy. The original word means to set apart from a common to a sacred use; to devote to a sacred purpose, and to designate or consecrate to a holy office. This is the meaning here. God has consecrated or appointed his Son to be his Messenger or Messiah to mankind. See Exodus 28:41; Leviticus 8:30. And sent into the world. As the Messiah, an office far more exalted than that of magistrates. I am the Son of God. This the Jews evidently understood as the same as saying that he was equal with God. This expression he had often applied to himself. The meaning of this place may be thus expressed: "You charge me with blasphemy. The foundation of that charge is the use of the name God, or the Son of God, applied to myself; yet that same term is applied in the Scriptures to magistrates. The use of it there shows that it is right to apply it to those who sustain important offices. And especially you, Jews, ought not to attempt to found a charge of blasphemy on the application of a word to the Messiah which in your own Scriptures is applied to all magistrates." And we may remark here,

1st. That Jesus did not deny that he meant to apply the term to himself. 2nd. He did not deny that it was properly applied to him. 3rd. He did not deny that it implied that he was God. He affirmed only that they were inconsistent, and were not authorized to bring a charge of blasphemy for the application of the name to himself. 3. Calvin, "Whom the Father hath sanctified. There is a sanctification that is common to all believers. But here Christ claims for himself something far more excellent, namely, that he alone was separated from all others, that the power of the Spirit and the majesty of God might be displayed in him; as he formerly said, that him hath God the Father sealed, (John 6:27.) But this refers strictly to the person of Christ, so far as he is manifested in the flesh. Accordingly, these two things are joined, that he has been sanctified and sent into the world. But we must also understand for what reason and on what condition he was sent It was to bring salvation from God, and to prove and exhibit himself, in every possible way, to be the Son of God. Do you say that I blaspheme? The Arians anciently tortured this passage to prove that Christ is not God by nature, but that he possesses a kind of borrowed Divinity. But this error is easily refuted, for Christ does not now argue what he is in himself, but what we ought to acknowledge him to be, from his miracles in human flesh. For we can never comprehend his eternal Divinity, unless we embrace him as a Redeemer, so far as the Father hath exhibited him to us. Besides, we ought to remember what I have formerly suggested, that Christ does not, in this passage, explain fully and distinctly what he is, as he would have done among his disciples; but that he rather dwells on refuting the slander of his enemies. 4. Henry, ghe applies it. Thus much in general is easily inferred, that those were very rash and unreasonable who condemned Christ as a blasphemer, only for calling himself the Son of God, when yet they themselves called their rulers so, and therein the scripture warranted them. But the argument goes further (Joh_10:36): If magistrates were called Gods, because they were commissioned to administer justice in the nation, say you of him whom the Father hath sanctified, Thou blasphemest? We have here two things concerning the Lord Jesus: - [1.] The honor done him by the Father,which he justly glories in: He sanctified him,and sent him into the world. Magistrates were called the sons of God,though the word of God only came to them, and the spirit of government came upon them by measure, as upon Saul; but our Lord Jesus was himself the Word,and had the Spirit without measure .They were constituted for a particular country, city, or nation; but he was sent into the world,vested with a universal authority, as Lord of all. They were sent to,as persons at a distance; he was sent forth,as having been from eternity with God. The Father sanctified him,that is, designed him and set him apart to the office of Mediator, and qualified and fitted him for that office. Sanctifying him is the same with sealing him, Joh_6:27. ote, Whom the Father sends he sanctifies; whom he designs for holy purposes he prepares with

holy principles and dispositions. The holy God will reward, and therefore will employ, none but such as he finds or makes holy. The Father's sanctifying and sending him is here vouched as a sufficient warrant for his calling himself the Son of God;for because he was a holy thing he was called the Son of God,Luk_1:35. See Rom_1:4. [2.] The dishonor done him by the Jews, which he justly complains of - that they impiously said of him, whom the Father had thus dignified, that he was a blasphemer,because he called himself the Son of God: Say you of him so and so? Dare you say so? Dare you thus set your mouths against the heavens? Have you brow and brass enough to tell the God of truth that he lies, or to condemn him that is most just?Look me in the face, and say it if you can. What! say you of the Son of God that he is a blasphemer?h If devils, whom he came to condemn, had said so of him, it had not been so strange; but that men,whom he came to teach and save, should say so of him, be astonished, O heavens! at this. See what is the language of an obstinate unbelief; it does, in effect, call the holy Jesus a blasphemer. It is hard to say which is more to be wondered at, that men who breathe in God's air should yet speak such things, or that men who have spoken such things should still be suffered to breathe in God's air. The wickedness of man, and the patience of God, as it were, contend which shall be most wonderful. 5. Pink, “Observe here Christ’s use of the word "sanctified" in verse 36 refutes many modem heretics. There are those who teach that to be sanctified is to have the carnal nature eradicated. They insist that sanctification is moral purification. But how thoroughly untenable is such a definition in the light of what the Master says here. He declares that He was "sanctified." Certainly that cannot mean that He was cleansed from sin, for He was the Holy One. Here, as everywhere in Scripture, the term sanctified can only mean set apart. Observe the order: Christ was first sanctified and then sent into the world. The reference is to the Father’s eternal appointment of the Son to be the Mediator.”

37Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does.
1. Barnes, "Verse 37. The works of my Father. The very works that my Father does. See John 5:17: "My Father worketh hitherto, and I work." See Barnes "John 5:17". The works of his Father are those which God only can do. As Jesus did them, it shows that the name "Son of God," implying equality with God, was properly applied to him. This shows conclusively that he meant to be understood as claiming to be equal with God. So the Jews naturally understood him John 10:39 and they were left with this impression on their minds.h 2. Calvin, " If I do not the works Lest the Jews might reply that it was in vain for him to boast of sanctification, and of all that depended on it, he again draws their attention to his miracles, in which there was a sufficiently evident proof of his Divinity. This is in the shape of a concession, as if he had said, "I do not wish you to be bound to give me credit on any other condition than that you see the fact plainly before your eyes. [303] You may safely reject me, if God has not openly given testimony to me."The works of my Father. He gives them this name, because those works were truly Divine, and because so great power shone in them, that they could not be ascribed to a man.h

3. Henry, gan argument taken from his own works,Joh_10:37, Joh_10:38. In the former he only answered the charge of blasphemy by an argument ad hominem - turning a man's own argument against himself;but he here makes out his own claims, and proves that he and the Father are one (Joh_10:37, Joh_10:38): If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. Though he might justly have abandoned such blasphemous wretches as incurable, yet he vouchsafes to reason with them. Observe, (1.) From what he argues - from his works, which he had often vouched as his credentials, and the proofs of his mission. As he proved himself sent of God by the divinity of his works, so we must prove ourselves allied to Christ by the Christianity of ours. [1.] The argument is very cogent; for the works he did were the works of his Father,which the Father only could do, and which could not be done in the ordinary course of nature, but only by the sovereign over-ruling power of the God of nature. Opera Deo propria - works peculiar to God,and Opera Deo Digna - works worthy of God- the works of a divine power. He that can dispense with the laws of nature, repeal, altar, and overrule them at his pleasure, by his own power, is certainly the sovereign prince who first instituted and enacted those laws. The miracles which the apostles wrought in his name, by his power, and for the confirmation of his doctrine, corroborated this argument, and continued the evidence of it when he was gone. [2.] It is proposed as fairly as can be desired, and put to a short issue. First, If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. He does not demand a blind and implicit faith, nor an assent to his divine mission further than he gave proof of it. He did not wind himself into the affections of the people, nor wheedle them by sly insinuations, nor impose upon their credulity by bold assertions, but with the greatest fairness imaginable quitted all demands of their faith, further than he produced warrants for these demands. Christ is no hard master, who expects to reap in assents where he has not sown in arguments. one shall perish for the disbelief of that which was not proposed to them with sufficient motives of credibility, Infinite Wisdom itself being judge. Secondly,gBut if I do the works of my Father, if I work undeniable miracles for the confirmation of a holy doctrine, though you believe not me,though you are so scrupulous as not to take my word, yet believe the works:believe your own eyes, your own reason; the thing speaks itself plainly enough.h As the invisible things of the Creator are clearly seen by his works of creation and common providence (Rom_1:20), so the invisible things of the Redeemer were seen by his miracles, and by all his works both of power and mercy; so that those who were not convinced by these works were without excuse.h 4. Gill, ”If I do not the works of my Father,.... ot only what the Father had given him to finish, and which he wrought by him as man, but such as were as great as the Father had done, and were equal to them; and which could not be done by any, but by the Father, or by one that is equal with him: believe me not: Christ appeals to his miracles as proofs of his deity, sonship, and Messiahship, and desires no other credit than what they demand; see Mat_11:3.”

38But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father."

1. GILL, “But if I do,.... Works, which none but God can do: though ye believe not me; what Christ said in his doctrine and ministry, though they paid no regard to that, and did not receive his testimony, on the credit of him the testifier, as they ought to have done: believe the works; not only that they are true and real, and not imaginary and delusory; but for the sake of them believe the above assertion, that Christ is the Son of God, he and his Father being one; or take such notice of these works and miracles, consider the nature, evidence, and importance of them, and the divine power that attends them, that ye may know and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him; or "in the Father", as one of Beza's exemplars; the Vulgate Latin, Persic, and Ethiopic versions read, or "in my Father", as read the Syriac and Arabic versions; that they are one in nature, distinct in person, equal in power, and have a mutual inhabitation and communion in the divine essence; all which is manifest, by doing the same works, and which are out of the reach and power of any mere creature.” 2. Calvin, "But if I do. He shows that they are held plainly convicted of unbelieving and sacrilegious contempt, because they render no reverence or honor [304] to what are undoubtedly the works of God. This is a second concession, when he says, "Though I allow you to doubt of my doctrine, you cannot deny, at least, that the miracles which I have performed are from God. You therefore openly reject God, and not a man." That you may know and believe. Though he places knowledge before faith, as if faith were inferior to it, he does so, because he has to do with unbelieving and obstinate men, who never yield to God, until they are vanquished and constrained by experience; for rebels wish to know before they believe And yet our gracious God indulges us so far, that he prepares us for faith by a knowledge of his works. But the knowledge of God and of his secret wisdom comes after faith, because the obedience of faith opens to us the door of the kingdom of heaven. That the Father is in me, and I in him. He repeats the same thing which he had said before in other words, I and my Father are one All tends to this point, that in his ministry there is nothing contrary to his Father. "The Father, he says, is in me; that is, Divine power is manifested in me." And I am in my Father; that is, "I do nothing but by the command of God, so that there is a mutual connection between me and my Father." For this discourse does not relate to the unity of essence, but to the manifestation of Divine power in the person of Christ, from which it was evident that he was sent by God. 3. IVP, "His conclusion again transcends the category of agent: that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father (v. 38). They are standing there with rocks in their hands (though perhaps not, since the rocks used for stoning were large; cf. m.

Sanhedrin 6:4), and he is appealing to them to accept the evidence of their senses, as witnessed to by the Scriptures, that he is uniquely related to God. Again we see the antinomy between divine sovereignty and human responsibility. These are the folk Jesus said could not believe because they were not of his sheep (v. 26), but here he is appealing to them to believe. The Gospel is to be shared with everyone, even persecutors, for who knows--one may turn out to be a Saul (Acts 9:119). But the appeal is in vain at this point: Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp (v. 39). They had not grasped his message so they tried to grasp him to kill him. "They failed to apprehend Him, because they lacked the hand of faith" (Augustine In John 48.11). The Father who is greater than all will protect those who believe in Jesus (v. 29), so how much more will he protect Jesus himself. Jesus leaves Jerusalem and goes back across the Jordan to the place where John had been baptizing in the early days (v. 40; cf. 1:28). John's witness was reported extensively in chapter 1 and then referred to a couple of times 3:23-30; 5:33-36). This reference ties together the first ten chapters and therefore signals the conclusion of a major section of the Gospel. Jesus' next great deed, the raising of Lazarus, reveals the heart of what his whole ministry has been about, but it takes place in a semiprivate setting. Thus the public ministry of Jesus now concludes--"the narrative of the Lord's ministry closes on the spot where it began" (Westcott 1908:2:73). 4. Barnes, ”the works - you do not credit me, yet consider my works, for they prove that I came from God. o one could do them unless he was sent of God. Father is in me ... - Most intimately connected. See Joh_5:36. This expression denotes most intimate union - such as can exist in no other case. See Mat_11:27; otes, Joh_17:21. 5. Clarke, “Believe the works - ye do not now credit what I have said to you, yet consider my works, and then ye will see that these works prove that I am in the Father and the Father in me; and, consequently, that I and the Father are one. This seems to be the force of our Lordfs argument; and every man must see and feel that it is conclusive. There was no possibility of weakening the force of this reasoning but by asserting that these miracles were not wrought by the power of God; and then they must have proved that not only a man, but a bad man, such as they said Jesus was, could work these miracles. As this was impossible, then the argument of Christ had a complete triumph.” 6. Henry, “But if I do the works of my Father, if I work undeniable miracles for the confirmation of a holy doctrine, though you believe not me,though you are so scrupulous as not to take my word, yet believe the works:believe your own eyes, your own reason; the thing speaks itself plainly enough.h As the invisible things of the Creator are clearly seen by his works of creation and common providence (Rom_1:20), so the invisible things of the Redeemer were seen by his miracles, and by all his works both of power and mercy; so that those who were not convinced by these works were without excuse. (2.) For what he argues - that you may know and believe,may believe it intelligently, and with an entire satisfaction, that the Father is in me and I in him;which is the same with what he had said (Joh_10:30): I and my Father are one.The Father was so in the Son as that in him dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead,and it was by a divine power that he wrought his miracles; the Son was so in the Father as that he was perfectly acquainted with the whole of his mind, not by communication, but by consciousness, having lain in his bosom. This we must know;not know

and explain(for we cannot by searching find it out to perfection), but know and believeit; acknowledging and adoring the depth, when we cannot find the bottom.h

39Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp.
1. Jesus was slippery, and he could escape as often as it was necessary. He could have kept this up until all of the Pharisees had died, but there was a point at which he had to let them catch him to fulfill the purpose for which he came. 1B. Pink, “This signifies that these Jews sought to apprehend the Lord Jesus so that they might bring Him before the Sanhedrin, but they were unable to carry out their evil designs. Soon He would deliver Himself into their hands, but until the appointed hour arrived they might as well attempt to harness the wind as lay hands on the Almighty. "And went away again beyond Jordan into the place where John at first baptized; and there he abode. And many resorted unto him, and said, John did no miracle: but all things which John spake of this man were true. And many believed on him there" (John 10:40-42). We have already pointed out the significance of this move of Christ. In leaving Jerusalem \to which He did not return until the appointed "hour" for His death had arrived \and in going beyond Jordan to where His forerunner had been, the Lord gave plain intimation that His public ministry was now over. The ation at large must be left to suffer the due reward of their iniquities. In what follows we have a beautiful illustration of this present dispensation: "Outside the camp" Christ now was, but in this place, as the despised and rejected One, many resorted to Him. God would not allow His beloved Son to be universally unappreciated, even though organized Judaism had turned its back upon Him. Here beyond Jordan He works no public miracle (as He does not today), but many believed on Him because of what John had spoken. So it is now. It is the Word which is the means God uses in bringing sinners to believe on the Savior. Happy for these men that they knew the day of their visitation, and improved the brief visit of Christ. 2. Gill, “Therefore they sought again to take him,.... ot to take away his life by stoning him, as before, in the manner the furious zealots did, and was the part they were about to act just now; but to lay hold upon him and bring him before the sanhedrin, as they had done in Joh_5:18, he being so far from clearing himself from the charge of blasphemy, they had brought against him, that in their opinion he had greatly strengthened it; and they thought they had now sufficient proof and evidence to convict him as a blasphemer, in their high court of judicature; and therefore attempted to lay hands on him, and bring him thither: but he escaped out of their hands; either by withdrawing from them in some private way; or by open force, exerting his power, and obliging them on every side to fall back, and give way to him; or by rendering himself invisible to them; and this he did, not through fear of death, but because his time was not yet come, and he had other work to do, before he suffered and died.

3. Barnes, "Sought again to take him. They evidently understood him as still claiming equality with God, and under this impression Jesus left them. or can it be doubted that he intended to leave them with this impression; and if so, then he is divine.h 4. Calvin, "Therefore they sought again to seize him. This was undoubtedly that they might drive him out of the temple, and immediately stone him; for their rage was not at all abated by the words of Christ. As to what the Evangelist says, that he escaped out of their hands, this could not be accomplished in any other way than by a wonderful exertion of Divine power. This reminds us that we are not exposed to the lawless passions of wicked men, which God restrains by his bridle, whenever he thinks fit. 5. Constable, "Jesus' critics correctly understood His latest words (v. 38) as a claim to equality with the Father. Therefore they again tried to seize Him. Jesus eluded them again because it was not yet time for His passion (cf. 7:30; 8:20). This act was the climax of official antagonism during this period of Jesus' ministry so far.h 6. Jamison, “they sought again to take him\ true to their original understanding of His words, for they saw perfectly well that He meant to make Himself God throughout all this dialogue. he escaped out of their hand \ (See on Luk_4:30; Joh_8:59). 7. Clarke, “sought again to take him - could not reply to his arguments but by stones. The evidence of the truth could not be resisted; and they endeavored to destroy the person who spoke it. Truth may confound the obstinately wicked, but it does not convert them; and it is a just judgment of God, to leave those to perish in their gainsayings who obstinately continue to gainsay and disbelieve. But he escaped - In such a way as we know not, for the evangelist has not specified the manner of it.h 8. Henry, “have here the issue of the conference with the Jews. One would have thought it would have convinced and melted them, but their hearts were hardened. Here we are told, I. How they attacked him by force. Therefore they sought again to take him,Joh_10:39. Therefore, 1. Because he had fully answered their charge of blasphemy, and wiped off that imputation, so that they could not for shame go on with their attempts to stone him, therefore they contrived to seize him, and prosecute him as an offender against the state. When they were constrained to drop their attempt by a popular tumult, they would try what they could do under colour of a legal process. See Rev_12:13. Or, 2. Because he persevered in the same testimony concerning himself, they persisted in their malice against him. What he had said before he did in effect say again, for the faithful witness never departs from what he has once said; and therefore, having the same provocation, they express the same resentment, and justify their attempt to stone him by another attempt to take him. Such is the temper of a persecuting spirit, and such its policy, malè facta malè factis tegere ne perpluant- to cover one set of bad deeds with another, lest the former should fall through. II. How he avoided them by flight; not an inglorious retreat, in which there was any thing of human infirmity, but a glorious retirement, in which there was much of a divine power. He escaped out of their hands,not by the interposal of any friend that helped him, but by his own wisdom he got clearof them; he drew a veil over himself, or cast a mist before their eyes, or tied

the hands of those whose hearts he did not turn. ote, o weapon formed against our Lord Jesus shall prosper, Psa_2:4. He escaped,not because he was afraid to suffer, but because his hour was not come. And he who knew how to deliver himself no doubt knows how to deliver the godly out of temptation,and to make a way for them to escape.”

40Then Jesus went back across the Jordan to the place where John had been baptizing in the early days. Here he stayed
1. GILL, “And went away again beyond Jordan,.... Where he had been before; and whither he went; not merely for the security of his person, much less to indulge himself in ease, but to preach the Gospel, work miracles, and bring many souls to believe on him, as did: and he went into the place where John at first baptized; that is, Bethabara, where he baptized before he was at Aenon, near Salim, Joh_1:28, and was the place where Christ himself was baptized, and where John bore such a testimony of him: and there he abode; how long is not certain, perhaps till he went to Bethany, on account of raising Lazarus from the dead. 2. Calvin, "He went away beyond Jordan. Christ passed beyond Jordan, that he might not have to fight continually without any advantage. He has therefore taught us, by his example, that we ought to avail ourselves of opportunities, when they occur. As to the place of his retreat, the reader may consult the observations which I have made at Chapter 1, verse 28. 3. Constable, "John presented Jesus' departure from Jerusalem as the result of official rejection of Him. The event had symbolic significance that the evangelist probably intended. Jesus withdrew the opportunity for salvation from the people there because they refused to accept His gracious offer of salvation. Evidently Jesus went from Jerusalem back to Bethany in Perea on the east side of the Jordan River where the Jewish rulers had no authority to pursue Him (cf. 1:28). 4. IVP, "The opponents in Jerusalem have rejected him, but now, across the Jordan, many come to him and believe in him (vv. 41-42). They have received John's witness concerning Jesus: Though John never performed a miraculous sign, all that John said about this man was true (v. 41). o miracles are associated with John in the ew Testament, Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews 18.116-19) or any other source (Bammel 1965:183-88). This is striking because "the praise of a man of God who did not perform miracles was completely unknown in Jewish sources" (Bammel 1965:191). This makes John's witness to Jesus stand out even more as the great accomplishment of his ministry. From a Christian point of view, such witness is a great work for it enables people to do the work of God, to believe in the one sent from God (6:29).

The people say that all that John said about this man was true (v. 41). The focus here is not so much on Jesus' deeds, since not all that John said had yet been accomplished, for example, taking away the sins of the world or baptizing with the Holy Spirit (1:29, 33; cf. Brown 1966:411). Rather, the focus is on Jesus' identity as the one who was to come (1:26-27, 30-31), as summarized in John's testimony: "I have seen and I testify that this is the Son of God" (1:34). ow, in the light of all Jesus has said and done, the truth of this testimony has been made evident to those who are able to see. 5. Henry. “he disposed of himself in his retirement: He went away again beyond Jordan,Joh_10:40. The bishop of our souls came not to be fixed in one see, but to go about from place to place, doing good. This great benefactor was never out of his way, for wherever he came there was work to be done. Though Jerusalem was the royal city, yet he made many a kind visit to the country, not only to his own country Galilee, but to other parts, even those that lay most remote beyond Jordan. ow observe, 1. What shelter he found there. He went into a private part of the country, and there he abode;there he found some rest and quietness, when in Jerusalem he could find none. ote, Though persecutors may drive Christ and his gospel out of their own city or country, they cannot drive him or it out of the world. Though Jerusalem was not gathered, nor would be, yet Christ was glorious, and would be. Christ's going now beyond Jordan was a figure of the taking of the kingdom of God from the Jews, and bringing it to the Gentiles. Christ and his gospel have often found better entertainment among the plain country-people than among the wise, the mighty, the noble,1Co_1:26, 1Co_1:27. 2. What successhe found there. He did not go thither merely for his own security, but to do good there; and he chose to go thither, where John at first baptized (Joh_1:28), because there could not but remain some impressions of John's ministry and baptism thereabouts, which would dispose them to receive Christ and his doctrine; for it was not three years since John was baptizing, and Christ was himself baptized here at Bethabara. Christ came hither now to see what fruit there was of all the pains John Baptist had taken among them, and what they retained of the things they then heard and received.” 6. Barclay on 40-42, “For Jesus the time was running out; but he knew his hour. He would not recklessly court danger and throw his life away; nor would he in cowardice avoid danger to preserve his life. But he desired quietness before the final struggle. He always armed himself to meet men by first meeting God. That is why he retired to the other side of Jordan. He was not running away: he was preparing himself for the final contest. The place to which Jesus went is most significant. He went to the place where John had been accustomed to baptize, the place where he himself had been baptized. It was there that the voice of God had come to him and assured him that he had taken the right decision and was on the right way. There is everything to be said for a man returning every now and then to the place where he had the supreme experience of his life. When Jacob was up against it, when things had gone wrong and badly wrong, he went back to Bethel (Gen.35:1-5). When he needed God, he went back to the place where he had first found him. Jesus, before the end, went back to the place where the beginning had happened. It would often do our souls a world of good to make a pilgrimage to the place where we first found God. Even on the far side of Jordan the Jews came to Jesus, and they too thought of John. They remembered that he had spoken with the words of a prophet; but had done no mighty deeds. They saw that there was a difference between Jesus and John. To John's proclamation Jesus added God's power. John could diagnose the situation; Jesus brought the power to deal with the

situation. These Jews had looked on John as a prophet; now they saw that what John had foretold of Jesus was true, and many of them believed. It often happens that a man for whom a great future is painted, and who sets out with the hopes of men upon him, disappoints that future and belies these hopes. But Jesus was even greater than John had said he would be. Jesus is the one person who never disappoints those who set their hopes upon him. In him the dream always comes true.”

41and many people came to him. They said, "Though John never performed a miraculous sign, all that John said about this man was true."
1. John the Baptist was one of the greatest men ever, and yet God did not empower him to do a single miracle. We need not feel left out if we have no such power, for many of God's special servants never had that power. It is a special gift for special purposes, and not a gift God gives out in abundance. 2. Gill, “And many resorted to him,.... From all the parts adjacent, having heard of his being there, and of the fame of him; and many of them doubtless personally knew him; these came to him, some very likely to be healed by him, others to see his person and miracles, and others to hear him preach: and said, John did no miracle; though it was now three years ago, yet the name, ministry, and baptism of John, were fresh in the memory of men in those parts; and what they say one to another, was not to lessen the character of John, but to exalt Jesus Christ, and to give a reason why they should receive and embrace him; for if John, who did no miracle, who only taught and baptized, and directed men to the Messiah, was justly reckoned a very great person, and his doctrine was received, and his baptism was submitted to, then much more should this illustrious person be attended to; who, besides his divine doctrine, did such great and amazing miracles; to which they add, though John did no miracle to confirm his mission, ministry, and baptism, but all things that John spake of this man, were true; as that he was greater than he, was the Lamb of God, yea, the Son of God, the Savior of the world, and true Messiah, who should baptize men with the Holy Ghost and with fire. 3. Calvin, "And many came to him. This large assembly shows that Christ did not seek solitude, in order to cease from the discharge of his duty, but to erect a sanctuary of God in the wilderness, when Jerusalem, which was his own abode and dwelling-place, [306] had obstinately driven him out. And indeed this was a dreadful vengeance of God, that, while the temple chosen by God was a den of robbers, (Jeremiah 7:11; Matthew 21:13,) the Church of God was collected in a despised place. John indeed did no miracle. They infer that Christ is more excellent

than John, because he has distinguished himself by so many miracles, while John did not perform a single miracle ot that we ought always to judge from miracles, but that miracles, when united with doctrine, have no small weight, as has already been repeatedly mentioned. Their argument is defective; for they compare Christ with John, but they express only one part of the comparison. Besides, they take for granted, that John was an eminent prophet of God, and that he was endued with extraordinary grace of the Holy Spirit. They justly argue, therefore, that Christ ought to be preferred to John, because it was only by the fixed Providence of God that it was brought about that John, though in other respects a very great prophet, yet was not honored by performing any miracle. Hence they conclude, that this was done on Christ's account, that he might be more highly esteemed. But all that John said. It appears that this was not spoken by themselves, but was added by the Evangelist, in order to show that there were two reasons which induced them to believe in Christ. On the one hand, [307] they saw that the testimony which John had given to him was true; and, on the other hand, [308] the miracles of Christ procured for him greater authority.h 4. Constable, "10:41-42 John the Baptist was by this time dead. However many people from Perea recognized that Jesus fulfilled what John the Baptist had predicted of Messiah. Their attitude contrasts with the hatred and unbelief of many in Jerusalem. They accepted John the Baptist's testimony about Jesus because it proved to be true so far, not because the forerunner had performed signs. He had not. The witness of John the Baptist continued to bear fruit even after his death because he pointed people to Jesus, and Jesus did not disappoint them. John probably identified Jesus' destination as he did to imply the ending of Jesus' public ministry that John the Baptist introduced. References to John the Baptist form an inclusio that brackets the record of Jesus' public ministry to the multitudes in this Gospel (1:19\10:42). 5. Henry, “That they reasoned in his favor, and sought arguments to induce them to close with him as much as those at Jerusalem sought objections against him. They said very judiciously, John did no miracle, but all things that John spoke of this man were true. Two things they considered, upon recollecting what they had seen and heard from John, and comparing it with Christ's ministry. [1.] That Christ far exceeded John Baptist's power, for John did no miracle,but Jesus does many; whence it is easy to infer that Jesus is greater than John. And, if John was so great a prophet, how great then is this Jesus! Christ is best known and acknowledged by such a comparison with others as sets him superlatively above others. Though John came in the spirit and power of Elias, yet he did not work miracles, as Elias did, lest the minds of people should be made to hesitate between him and Jesus; therefore the honor of working miracles was reserved for Jesus as a flower of his crown, that there might be a sensible demonstration, and undeniable one, that though he came after John, yet he was preferred far before him.[2.] That Christ exactly answered John Baptist's testimony. John not only did no miracle to divert people from Christ, but he said a great deal to direct them to Christ, and to turn them over as apprentices to him, and this came to their minds now:all things that John said of this man were true,that he should be the Lamb of God,should baptize with Holy Ghost and with fire. Great things John had said of him, which raised their expectations; so that though they had not zeal enough to carry them into his

country to enquire after him, yet, when he came into theirs, and brought his gospel to their doors, they acknowledged him as great as John had said he would be. When we get acquainted with Christ, and come to know him experimentally, we find all things that the scripture saith of him to be true; nay, and that the reality exceeds the report, 1Ki_10:6, 1Ki_10:7. John Baptist was now dead and gone, and yet his hearers profited by what they had heard formerly, and, by comparing what they heard then with what they saw now, they gained a double advantage; for, First,They were confirmed in their belief that John was a prophet,who foretold such things, and spoke of the eminency to which this Jesus would arrive, though his beginning was so small. Secondly,They were prepared to believe that Jesus was the Christ,in whom they saw those things accomplished which John foretold. By this we see that the success and efficacy of the word preached are not confined to the life of the preacher, nor do they expire with his breath, but that which seemed as water spilt upon the ground may afterwards be gathered up again. See Zec_1:5, Zec_1:6. 6. Barnes, miracle - did not confirm his mission by working miracles, but he showed that he was a prophet by foretelling the character and success of Jesus. Either miracle or prophecy is conclusive proof of a divine mission, for no man can foretell a future event, or work a miracle, except by the special aid of God. It may be remarked that the people of that place were properly prepared by the ministry of John for the preaching of Jesus. The persecution of the Jews was the occasion of his going there, and thus the wrath of man was made to praise him. It has commonly happened that the opposition of the wicked has resulted in the increased success of the cause which they have persecuted. God takes the wise in their own craftiness, and brings glory to himself and salvation to sinners out of the pride, and passions, and rage of wicked men.h 7. Life Without Miracles by F.B. Meyer “John did no miracle: but all things that John spake of this man were true.h John 10:41 Beyond the Jordan! To the Jew living in Jerusalem that meant banishment indeed. The district there was called Perea, and it was comparatively desert. There were a few mountain torrents which made their impetuous way down to the Jordan, patches of fruitful soil, and a few scattered villages; but for the most part the population was poor and sparse, and destitute of the culture which reigned in Jerusalem. Why then did our Lord come hither to spend the last hours of His life? Would not azareth welcome Him to His early home, or Capernaum provide Him a resting place in a marble palace washed by the caressing waters of the lake He loved so well? Would He not be better lodged at Jerusalem in the palace of Caiaphas, the pretorium of Herod, or even the temple itself ? Alas! All these were shut against Him by the relentless hate of His enemies. Perea alone could offer Him a resting place. There was a peculiar fascination attached to Perea. It was the place where John had first baptized. Those desolate hills had been black with crowds gathered from all the land to hear the crying of that trumpet voice; those waters had been the scene of countless baptisms; the people around had many a story to tell of the appearance and life of the grand young prophet who had met his tragic end in the dungeons of Herod's castle. And as the disciples wandered over the ground in company with Christ, memory recalled the spot

where some of them had been baptized, or others had seen him designate Jesus as the Lamb of God. Christ's own mind must have been strangely moved by conflicting thoughts as He contrasted the radiant dawn of His ministry in this spot with the overcast skies that had since darkened above Him. o sooner did our Lord find Himself in comparative safety than He threw Himself into His much-loved work of preaching the gospel, working miracles, and healing all who were diseased. Crowds gathered around Him - many from the immediate neighborhood, some from a greater distance; but as they stood on that memorable spot, old memories were stirred; the place, with its surroundings, even to the stones that lay in the riverbed, forcefully reminded them of the great life set as a jewel in these rugged scenes. They confessed the mighty gulf which severed him from Christ - "John did no miracle;" but they gladly emphasized the fact that all things which he had spoken of Christ were true. I. GOD'S VI DICATIO OF APPARE T FAILURE To the eye of the casual observer the Baptist seemed to have failed. The morning star had paled before the sunrise; the crowds who had gathered round the Bridegroom's friend ebbed slowly and steadily away to follow the Bridegroom Himself. His disciples half reproachfully said, "Master, He to whom thou barest witness beyond Jordan, the same has commenced to baptize, and all men come to Him." The faithful few that gathered around him must have deeply felt that they were the adherents of a dwindling cause, which was destined gradually to come to an end. And this was only a prelude to the immuring of this brave soul within the dark walls of Herod's dungeons. Like an eagle with broken wing, the Baptist lay spent and powerless. And there, the captivity, the lack of the ministry of nature, the inability to understand why Christ did not deliver him - if He were indeed the Messiah - led to a still greater lapse, and he sent to ask whether Jesus of azareth were after all what he had announced Him to be. "Art Thou He that should come, or look we for another?" Finally down the long corridor, the executioner came to his cell, the sword gleamed, the severed head fell from the body, and from that subterranean prison his spirit returned to God. How sad and disastrous seemed such a termination to a life which had once been the centre of the national thought and movement! Was it not all a failure? Had not John made a profound mistake in following his lofty ideals? Had not God Himself deserted His faithful servant? Was it after all a real voice that spoke from the opened heaven? Then God took up the cause of His faithful martyr, and vindicated him through the tribute which the crowds paid his memory as they gathered in Perea. "John was true," the people said. "What he said has been verified by the event." He had said that Christ was from heaven, and above all, and it was true.

He had said that Christ was the true Bridegroom of faithful souls, and it was true. He had said that the Father did not give Him the Holy Spirit by measure and it was true. He had said that He was the Lamb of God taking away the sins of the world, and it was true. John had said many other things about Christ, which they had treasured and now recalled. But among them all there was no statement made about Christ which was not true. This strengthened their faith in the Lord Jesus, but it also vindicated the Baptist as the true prophet of the Most High. Thus it has often been since, and may be for you and me: Around that mother's grave you may gather and say, "She was not brilliant or greatly remarkable, but she spoke true words of Jesus Christ which will never die." Of some Sundayschool teacher, or minister, who seems to have been a voice crying in the wilderness, and to have passed away before accomplishing any lasting monument: " He did no miracle, but he spoke true words for Christ." Do not look for success or dread failure. Go on day by day fulfilling the task of the day, and leaving the results with God. You know not what you are doing; you are scattering seeds which will yield harvests when you lie beneath the sod of the valley. God will vindicate you, and some day, as men recall your memory, if they say that you wrought no miracle, they will also say that whatever you spoke of this Man was true. II. THE TEST OF EXPERIE CE These are days in which the Bible is greatly discredited. There are those who appear to delight in hunting out discrepancies in the venerable record of God's dealings with men. The higher critics in many cases appear to me to be devoid of that reverence for the Spirit of God and the religious life of men which should make one inclined to trust them. In many points they contradict each other, and few of their decisions are likely to remain unchallenged when a few more years have passed over. In the meanwhile, it is doubtless a matter of concern to many Christians to know how to hold to their confidence in that sacred volume which they had been accustomed to consider the authoritative Word of the Most High. To read the books which are constantly pouring from the press would take more time than most of us can afford; to understand and combat their objections would take greater scholarship than is within our reach. Even if we were to canvass the matter to the bottom, it is not probable that our evidence would be taken, in the court of general opinion, as against scholars and literalists. What, then can we do? May we not adopt the method suggested by our text, and vindicate the truth of the Bible by comparing its statements with what we have discovered through personal association with the Lord Jesus ?

The Bible says that the peace of God comes to those who trust in Him who died on the cross under Pontius Pilate, and was raised again according to the Scriptures. We have come, and trusted, and found peace. All that the Bible said in this respect is true. The Bible says that if we open our hearts to the Spirit of God He will infill them with a holy hatred of sin, and with the hunger and thirst of a new life. We have acted upon the suggestion and have been delivered from sins which had cursed and defiled our whole life. All that the Bible said in this respect is true. The Bible says that if we make our requests known to God through Jesus Christ He will abundantly answer them; and hundreds of answered prayers, as we review them, attest that what the Bible said in this respect also is true. The Bible says that Christ's gospel is the antidote of death; that for those who believe in Him death is abolished, and the fear of it at an end. ow, we had been all our lifetime subject to bondage, but have forgotten to fear since Christ has shed upon our hearts the rays of immortality and life. In this also what the Bible said was true. In these and in many other particulars we have verified for ourselves the Word of God, and are able to affirm, from the platform of personal experience, that all it says of Jesus Christ is true, and therefore it shall still be our guide through the unknown. III. THE OPPORTU ITY OF MODERATE ABILITY You may be very discontented with yourself. You are no genius, have no brilliant gifts, and are inconspicuous for any special faculty. Mediocrity is the law of your existence. Your days are remarkable for nothing but sameness and insipidity, always spent within the same small room, tethered by the same short string, and surrounded by the same ignorant and uncongenial people. Yet you may live a great life, and one on which angels on their way home to God may loiter to look with admiration. John did no miracle, but Jesus said among those that were born of women there had not appeared a greater than he. Set yourself to say true things about Jesus Christ. Perhaps you cannot preach the set speech or studied discourse, but you may always set forth what you have known and seen of Him who still manifests Himself to loving and believing hearts. John's main business was to bear witness to the Light, that all men through Him might believe; and this business may be yours and mine also. Do it privately John did not only speak of Jesus to the throng, but when standing with two of his disciples, looking upon Jesus as He walked, he said, "Behold the Lamb of God!" Let us use the opportunities of daily life to speak of our dearest Lord. Do it experientially

"I saw, and bare record" said John. We cannot have the opened heaven and the audible voice, as he, but these are not the best evidences. For though John had enjoyed them, he doubted. We have a more sure basis, because we may daily see and handle the good Word of life. Do it unostentatiously John was content to be only a voice, if men would think of Christ. Be willing to be only a voice, heard but not seen; a mirror whose surface is lost to view, because it reflects the dazzling glory of the sun; a breeze that springs up just before daylight, and says, "The dawn! The dawn!" and then dies away. But this can never be till we are altogether taken up with Christ; and when that happens there will be no effort to speak of Him, nothing unnatural, forced, or strained, no breach of the laws of Christian courtesy. "You should have told him to mind his own business," said a gentleman to his wife, when she told him that a man of God had spoken to her about her soul. "If you had heard him speak," was the reply, "you would have thought that that was his business." Do not long after wealth. The men who have done most for the world have been those who could truly say, "Silver and gold have I none." Do not long after position. Some of the worst men that ever lived were nobly born, while the uncrowned kings of the race have sprung from the ranks of poverty. Do not long for genius. It is very doubtful whether mere genius has done much for the world. It is inclined to be spasmodic, fluctuating, unreliable. Be content if you can do no miracle; live to give the world a true conception of the unseen Lord. Put away self-indulgence, whether of the sense or thought, for this will undermine the better qualities of the heart. Carefully check impatience, uncharity, and insincerity of speech or manner. Embody in heart and life the meekness and gentleness, the purity and truth of the Lord Jesus. Do the commonest and smallest things as beneath His eye Are you beset with chafing irritations and annoyances ? Bear them as the martyrs endured the pillory and the torture chamber. If you must live with uncongenial people, set to their conquest by love. If you have made a great mistake in your life, do not let it becloud all of it, but, locking the secret in your breast, compel it to yield strength and sweetness. You may do all these things by the peace of God, and without brilliant talent; and acting thus you will do more real good than:

Rank - with its aristocratic bearing, Wealth - with its golden shower, and Genius - with its meteoric flash. We are doing more good than we know, sowing seeds, starting streamlets, giving men true thoughts of Christ, to which men will refer one day as the first things that started them thinking of Him; and of my part, I shall be satisfied if no great mausoleum is raised over my grave, but that simple souls shall gather there when I am gone, and say, "He was a good man; he wrought no miracles, but he spake words about Christ which led me to know Him for myself."

42And in that place many believed in Jesus.
1. It was not all futile, for in spite of the blindness of the leader, many of the Jews were impressed with Jesus and the wonder of his miracles, and they believed he was the Messiah they had long awaited. 2. Clarke, “believed on him there - The people believed on him: 1. because of the testimony of John the Baptist whom they knew to be a good and a wise man, and a prophet of the Lord; and they knew he could neither deceive nor be deceived in this mater; and, 2. they believed because of the miracles which they saw Jesus work. These fully proved that all that John had said of him was true. The scribes and Pharisees with all their science could not draw a conclusion so just. Truth and common sense are often on the side of the common people, whom the insolently wise, the unsanctifiedly learned, and the tyrannically powerful sometimes disingenuously brand with the epithets of mob and swinish multitude. This and the preceding chapter contain two remarkable discomfitures of the Jewish doctors. In the former they were confounded by the testimony of a plain uneducated man, simply appealing to the various circumstances of a matter of fact, at which they cavilled, and which they endeavored to decry. In this chapter the wise are taken in their own craftiness: the Pharisees are confounded by that wisdom which is from above, speaking of and manifesting the deep things of God. Sometimes God himself stops the mouths of gainsayers; at other times he makes the simplest of his followers too mighty for the most learned among the doctors. Ancient and modern martyrologies of the people of God abound with proofs of both these facts. And the persecutions of the Protestants by the Papists in the reign of Queen Mary afford a very large proportion of proofs. In these the mighty power of God, and the prevalence of truth, were gloriously apparent. Both the word of God and the Protestant cause were nobly illustrated by those transactions. May that abomination that maketh desolate never more sit in the holy place!

It must be remarked, by every serious reader, that our Lord did frequently speak of himself to

the Jews, as being not only sent of God as their Messiah, but as being one with him. And it is as evident that in this sense the priests and Pharisees understood him; and it was because they would not credit this that they accused him of blasphemy. ow, if our Lord was not the person they understood him to state himself to be, he had the fairest opportunity, from their strong remonstrances, to correct their misapprehension of his words, if they really had mistaken his meaning -but this he never attempts. He rather strengthens his assertions in his consequent discourses with them; which, had not his positions been true, he could not have done, even as an honest man. He not only asserted himself to be equal with God, but wished them to believe it to be true; and he amply confirmed this heavenly doctrine by the miracles he wrought. 3. Gill, “And many believed on him there., Through the doctrine he preached, the miracles he wrought, and through comparing these things with what John had said of him: this shows the reason of Christ's leaving Jerusalem, and coming into these parts; there were others that were to believe in his name: the word "there", is left out in the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Persic versions. 4. Henry, g That many believed on him there. Believing that he who wrought such miracles, and in whom John's predictions were fulfilled, was what he declared himself to be, the Son of God, they gave up themselves to him as his disciples, Joh_10:42. An emphasis is here to be laid, [1.] Upon the persons that believed on him; they were many. While those that received and embraced his doctrine at Jerusalem were but as the grape-gleanings of the vintage, those that believed on him in the country, beyond the Jordan, were a full harvest gathered in to him. [2.] Upon the place where this was; it was where John had been preaching and baptizing and had had great success; there many believed on the Lord Jesus. Where the preaching of the doctrine of repentance has had success, as desired, there the preaching of the doctrine of reconciliation and gospel grace is most likely to be prosperous. Where John has been acceptable, Jesus will not be unacceptable. The jubilee-trumpet sounds sweetest in the ears of those who in the day of atonement have afflicted their souls for sin.h

Dr. William R. Crews list of doors that are not the one and only door of Jesus. The door of good deeds. There are honest and sincere people who try to have enough good deeds to merit for them the opening of Heaven's door. Such is impossible inasmuch as God will not open Heaven's door by anything we do. God has ordained Christ as the only door. Perhaps I am talking to someone who has had the mistaken idea that your good deeds will get you to heaven or at least help you get there. Suppose you could begin at this point and never sin again but have the rest of your life filled with perfectly good deeds. How much goodness could you possibly accumulate? Could you accumulate enough to put over against the sins of your past to entirely wipe out all the sins you have committed? o, for it is absolutely impossible to gain a surplus of goodness to overbalance the evil of the past. The door of good character is another door by which people attempt to be saved. Character is important, but it is not attainment. Character is what one is rather than what one does. We all really have a bad character until we have Christ's righteous robe put around us and His

righteous nature placed within us. Then and only then can we have that kind of character which is acceptable to God. The story has been told of a Confucian who challenged a Christian missionary when he claimed salvation. The Confucian said, "I would consider it egotistical to claim that I had already attained salvation." The missionary replied, "So would I consider it egotistical to claim the attainment of salvation, but since my salvation is an obtainment, not an attainment, I do not consider it egotistical to claim I have it. What has been given me, I know I have. My salvation is a gift from Christ." The door of sincerity is another door by which people attempt to be saved. There are indeed too many well-meaning, devoted people who think that if one is sincere in what he believes or practices, he will be accepted by God. This is a false view and one completely foreign to the Bible. Sincerity alone is not accepted or approved by God whether it is in heathenism or Christianity. The heathen individual who sincerely worships the sun or the jungles or some animal or some unseen, angry deity by throwing his children to the crocodiles or offering them as a sacrifice by pitching them into the fire is surely to be rejected by God. Sincerity did not make him right. It did not lead him to the door, nor open it for him. Moreover, it was not God's only ordained door. Christ said, "I am the door..." We surely pity the heathen, and we ought to. We ought also to pity those who are part of Christendom who are as sincere as the heathen and likewise as lost and condemned. Those who are a part of the Christian religion at least are exposed to more light and, hence, are more responsible to know the truth as it is in Christ as revealed in the Word of God. These shall surely have the greater condemnation. It is a great privilege to live in a land where there are so many Bibles, churches, and Christian radio programs and TV programs, but it is also a great responsibility. We have no excuse for our ignorance of what the Bible says about the way of salvation. We have every reason to know that sincerity is insufficient to save us. Really, those who are associated with Christianity who believe that if they are sincere they are all right in God's sight are in worse condition than the heathen in the darkest and remotest jungles who have never heard the Gospel of Christ. Have you, my friend, been trusting your sincerity to save you? Have you thought that everything will turn out well for you if you are sincere? ow, you know better. What will you do with the light you have received today? May you turn to the Lord and enter into the real family of God by going through the Lord Jesus Christ, the true and living door. Christ not only said, "I am the door...," He also said, "...He that entereth not by the door...but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber." (John 10:1) The door of law-keeping or commandment-obeying is another door by which people attempt to be saved. Baptism, keeping the Sabbath, tithing, abstaining from alcohol, refraining from pork or any other meat will not save us. Prayers, ablutions, ritualistic observances, religious ceremonies will not any or all earn for us Christ's smile of grace or God's favor of love. "These for sin could not atone, Thou must save, and Thou alone." Yes, there's nothing that we can do by way of our personal works or obedience that will achieve for us a good and gracious state. The Bible says, " the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight..." (Romans 3:20). All works, despite whatever form they take, are only dead works before we meet Christ and are saved by faith in Him. Keeping the law and obeying the commandments do not, after all, prove to be the living door. They are only a dead door. A door not only admits some but keeps out others. The door of law-keeping and commandment-obeying only bars from the mercy, favor, grace, and salvation of Christ. Before Christ, the living and only door of salvation, may many of you stand, realizing your lost condition and condemnation, sighing, and saying, " o more, my God, I boast no more of all the duties I have done: I quit the hopes I held before, to trust the merits of thy

Son." The door of reformation is another door by which people attempt to be saved. Reformation means the re-forming of the life - its practices or conduct. It is possible for one to become dissatisfied with his life and reform it and not be saved. Alcoholics have seen the poverty and degradation that alcohol has brought upon them and have become so disgusted they have quit it. The drug victim, the prostitute, the thief have all reformed their lives because of the distasteful effects of such a life, but such may be done by those who are not saved and do not know Christ. Reformation may produce a better civilization but not salvation. It has been said that Elizabeth Frye, under conviction of sin, looking at herself in the mirror, said, "Elizabeth Frye, you are a contemptible small lady - all outside, no inside." What she meant was that she looked good on the outside, but on the inside she did not have God's life in Christ. Reformation is not Christ. Reformation is a garment one may wear. Christ is a life God gives. Reformation is chaff - Christ is the corn. Reformation is the smoke - Christ is the fire. Reformation is the shuck - Christ is the corn. The door of local church membership is another door by which people attempt to be saved. So many people either equate being saved with joining the church or at least think joining the church is a part of being saved. Of course, so few nowadays think in terms of being saved. They think rather in terms of being Christian. owhere in the Bible did anyone ask what he must do to become a Christian. We can find where it was asked, "...What must I do to be saved?" (Acts 16:30) Christianity is a way of life. Salvation involves being aware of being lost in sin and condemned because of sin and delivered from sin - its power and penalty - by the Lord Jesus Christ. Salvation is the experience in which we receive life. o one is ever saved until he knows for sure that he is lost. One who has never experientially taken his stand as a lost sinner is not saved (Luke 19:10). Joining the church does not save us any more than putting a parrot in a canary cage causes the parrot to sing like the canary; any more than putting a leper in a physician's office cures his leprosy; any more than placing a wheelbarrow in an automobile factory makes it an automobile. It is one thing to have the name written on a church register and quite another to have it in the Lamb's book of life. Everyone who is now saved ought to go into the fellowship of a local church, provided it is a Bible-believing, Christ exalting one."

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful