John 10:1-18 The good shepherd

John 10:1-18 We come to the third of the great "I AM" revelations of Jesus. He begins with the analogy of the sheep and the sheepfold. He says, "I am the good shepherd." This has many practical implications. But first we ought to consider the modern view of pastoral care. In many traditions, the pastor is considered to be primarily a teacher. This is derived partly from Paul's comments in Ephesians 4:11 that God gave some as pastors and teachers, as the culminating gift of God to His people. The Greek words poimen means shepherd, didaskalous means teacher, and grammar suggests that the two words are linked. But I suspect that it is a misinterpretation to take Paul's words to mean that the sole function of a pastor is to teach the Word. Paul was very strong on teaching the Word (c.f. 2 Timothy 4:2). But even in his instructions to Timothy, it is clear that this does not mean just hermeneutical exposition.

          A slightly broader view of everything Paul said includes his instructions to people in many types of authority-based relationships. Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church and gave up Himself to present her as a spotless bride without spot or wrinkle, by the washing of the word. (Ephesians 5:25-27). Fathers are to nurture their children, with discipline and instruction, but not to provoke them to wrath. (Ephesians 6:4) Bosses are to render service to their employees in the fear of God and not to threaten them. (Ephesians 6:9). Immediately after telling Timothy to preach the word at every opportunity, Paul adds, "... reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction." (2 Timothy 4:2) Even peers are instructed to encourage one another. (Philippians 2:1-3) The sum of all this is that Paul sees the shepherding/pastoral role as one of teaching life based on the scriptures, not simply teaching the word. Shepherding is pervasive to every relationship of life in which authority is exercised, because the authority is primarily based on the paradigm of nurturing.           What is the difference between a pastor and a life coach? Perhaps the simplest answer is that one is a subset of the other. A pastor should, as part of his ministry, coach people.

          Jesus gives us several aspects in which He, the good shepherd, cares for His sheep.

·        He knows His sheep and calls His them by name and leads them

·        He is the door of the sheepfold; a metaphor from the basics of literal shepherding sheep. He keeps the sheep in a safe place.

·        As the doorkeeper, He excludes robbers and thieves, and provides food for His sheep

·        He gives abundant life to His sheep

·        He lays down His life for the sake of His sheep

          The practice of pastoral care in the modern world would gain significantly by emulating these dimensions of Jesus' shepherding. Clearly, Jesus is the ultimate good shepherd, so any earthly pastor partners with Christ in providing care for his charges. But this prescription for pastoral care is not limited to those with the title "pastor", but applies to anyone in a position of authority, as Paul made clear in other passages. The above dimensions of pastoral care seem almost natural to a parent's care of his or her children. In other authority relationships, most of these items are seldom present. But they are part and parcel of seeing the primary purpose of the authority as bringing the person over whom authority is exercised to the fullness of everything he or she can be.

          It is not only because God is sovereign that He commands this. It is because of His great love for His people that He sent Jesus to rescue us, and gave His word to help us understand the best possible way to have abundant life.

John 9:18-41 Who is really blind?

John 9:18-34 John records the discussions between the Jews, most likely the leaders such as Pharisees, priests, and Levites, and the formerly blind man and his parents. The heavy use of irony suggests that this man, at least, had no particular fondness for the legalists. It appears that he starts out uncertain of Jesus' true identity, but through this dialog, convinces himself that at the very least, Jesus was God's representative and empowered by Him. The evidence, combined with the very logic that the Pharisees taught, led him to this conclusion. His parents remain very noncommittal and only speak to the facts. Their son had been born blind and was not now blind.  But they offered no opinion as to how this came to be. They were afraid of being put out, presumably of either the synagogue or the Temple. Which is what happened to their son when he basically insulted the Jews by saying that it was amazing that Jesus did this miracle and they did not know where He came from.

         It is an interesting commentary on the human heart. Perhaps some can only be persuaded by irrefutable evidence, as the man who had been blind from birth suddenly was able to see. And some are not even convinced by irrefutable concrete evidence! It is the by the grace of God that He speaks to us in so many different manners: He draws us through the Holy Spirit directly in our hearts; He offers us the compelling logic that we call apologetics; and He demonstrates to us miraculous works or signs. Yet, if our heart is not open towards Him, all is in vain. The judgment ultimately is not that we committed sin, but that He revealed Himself, and we rejected His revelation, because we do not want Him to be our Lord and King. And then we reject those who declare Him thusly.

John 9:35-41 Jesus draws His relationship to the formerly blind man to its consummation. And He gives the Pharisees the assessment that they are metaphorically blind. It seems odd that He would say that He came to give sight to the blind, but blind those who see. It seemed odd to the Pharisees, who correctly understood that the latter referred to them. The formerly blind man not only saw with his physical eyes, but He recognized Jesus for who He is. Because the Pharisees thought they understood the Law of God, because they were disciples of Moses, they were not open to the God who speaks to human hearts and acts in human lives. If they had no spiritual training, they could not be held accountable for this error, but since they had Moses' teachings, they were guilty of not taking it to heart. Although they are not part of the church, Jesus' words in Revelation 3:18 could be addressed to them. And in fact, since these words were addressed to the church in Laodicea, it appears that even people who acknowledge Christ as Lord can still be spiritually blind. Let him who thinks he sees take heed, lest he stumble. (I Cor 10:12)

John 9:8-17 The legalists (again)

John 9:8-17 First there is some dispute about the facts of the miraculous healing. Was this indeed the same man who used to be blind and beg? How was it that he was no longer blind? They got the facts sorted out, then started looking for Jesus. Evidently they didn't find Jesus so they brought the formerly blind beggar to the Pharisees. It is not clear, but the conversation suggests that the Pharisees wanted to question him about what happened. Of course, the Pharisees immediately rejected the possibility that the healing could be from God, because it happened on the Sabbath, just as in other Sabbath miracles. Matthew 12:10-12, Mark 3:-4, Luke 6:6-9 all record Jesus' healing of a man with a withered hand on the Sabbath. Luke 13:10-16 records the woman being healed of the issue of blood on the Sabbath. Luke 14:1-5 records Jesus healing a man of dropsy on the Sabbath. John 5:1-16 records Jesus healing a lame man on the Sabbath.

         Why did the Pharisees have such a strong reaction to Jesus healing people on the Sabbath? This must be a warning to us about the dangers inherent in becoming legalistic. Keeping the Sabbath was one of the Ten Commandments, just as the prohibition of adultery. (Exodus 20:8-11; 31:12-16; 35:1-3) Leviticus 23 extends the concept of the Sabbath rest to include sabbatical years in which the land would rest, and years of Jubilee in which seven sabbatical years were celebrated by an additional year of rest. But what the Pharisees missed was the underlying intention of God to grant rest to His people. When Jesus healed people, He was granting them divine rest from their suffering. But even more important, He was asserting the authority of God over the law He had given. The man who had been healed saw this authority. Even if Jesus was only a prophet, God had granted Him the authority to speak on His behalf.

         Underlying this conflict in propositional discourse with the Pharisees is a spiritual realm. In this realm, to which all humans have access, some are in contact with God and some have rejected this contact. Adam initially hid from God after eating the forbidden fruit, but he came out and fessed up when God came looking for Him and called him. The gospels suggest that the Pharisees had not, but had remained hidden from God's immanent presence in their prison of rules. We would do well to avoid a similar hiding place, even if we use a different set of rules. Which set of rules we choose does not matter if we are hiding from God.

         Why did John spend so much of His record of Jesus' life on the disputes and discussions between the Pharisees and Jesus? One possibility is that we the readers need to understand how people could take something that is pure and true and good like the Law of Moses, and use it to do evil. The Pharisees believed themselves to be disciples of Moses, but they rejected Christ when He appeared. How was this possible? The conversations that are recorded here chronicle in detail the innumerable deceptions of the heart that led them astray.

John 9:1-7 A man born blind

John 9:1-7 Jesus gives another metaphor to explain how He is the light of the world. (cf John 8:12) The story begins with the disciples asking a question that is perennial. Why did this bad thing happen? The disciples are stuck in the mindset that suffering must be the direct result of sin. So their only question is whether it was this man or his parents that committed the sin that resulted in the man's blindness. Jesus' response to this question can be taken in two ways. The most common interpretation is that this happened so that the works of God could be displayed in Him. While God is sovereign and could do as He wishes, this explanation seems to fly in the face of God's nature and character. An alternative view of this passage is that Jesus is saying that neither this man nor his parents sinned, but does not connect that to the next statement. His next statement is that this is an opportunity for the works of God to be displayed, and that He must do the work of the Father. It is the day because He is the light of the world and He is in the world, so He must work. The question of why this man suffered blindness is not important, or at least not nearly as important as Jesus' need to act to heal him. So without spending effort listening to the disciples or the Jews bloviating about the problem of pain, Jesus makes clay from His spit on the ground, and applies it to the man's eyes, and sends him to the pool of Siloam to wash. And when the man does as Jesus tells him, he is healed.

         In John 8:12, Jesus speaks of being the light of the world in being the context of enabling people to recognize the truth and their own sin. Here He uses the metaphor of giving sight to the blind.

John 8:43-59 Polemics and revelation

John 8:43-47 Jesus continues the argument about parentage, connecting lies to Satan, the father of lies. Although this seems to be polemical, He is asking His listeners a rhetorical question. Really He is warning them that there are two voices in the spiritual realm, and if they reject the voice of God, they will hear the voice of the devil, and ultimately partake of his nature. The devil will ultimately be defeated and destroyed, which is the reason that the slaves of sin will not remain slaves forever. But in the meantime, if they reject the words of God that He (Jesus) brings, they will eventually not even hear them.

John 8:48-59 The polemics continue. Jesus and the Jews bantered back and forth about demonic possession. Jesus repeated once more His relationship to the Father. His reference to Abraham was certain to further provoke the Jews, who placed great stock on their ancestry. Jesus' final statement repeated once again His self-identification with YHWH, when He said, "Before Abraham was, I am." The Jews fully understood what He meant and attempted to carry out capital punishment on the spot.

What do we make of this whole argumentative passage (John 8:12-59)? There are consistent themes, but there seems to almost be repetition with little forward progress, on a variety of issues relating to the true identity and authority of Jesus. The miracle that Jesus performed that set off this debate was to deliver a woman from the power and penalty of sin. Although the Jews could not throw the first stone, they could not accept the authority of Jesus to give grace to sinners, nor could they accept that this was based on Him being God incarnate. Jesus gave the following revelations, all of which they rejected:

•    He brings light to the world, and light brings life.

•    The Father bears witness to Him.

•    The origin and source of His life are eternal, bound up in the unconditioned existence of YHWH, pre-dating Abraham.

•    He will be crucified and then they will not see Him.

•    He obeys the Father completely, to the extent that He does nothing except what the Father tells Him to do.

•    The Truth frees people from the power of sin; He is truth incarnate, the earthly embodiment of the eternal reality, and those who receive Him are freed from sin.

•    Those who reject God's truth eventually cannot hear His voice, and become the victim of the devil and his demons.

John 8:31-42 ... will set you free

John 8:31-42 One of Jesus' more memorable statements is John 8:32, and He elaborates on it. Schools of philosophy and law schools sometimes put this statement in stone on the outside of building or monuments. And there is to some extent applicability to the natural life apart from God, because God created the universe and mankind to run in this way. Falsehood and fantasy are two orthogonal departures from the truth. Knowing the truth frees us from them to return to reality. Whether one is balancing his or her household budget or building a bridge, truth is understanding reality. In legal trials, the truth is supposed to be paramount; the verdict (word of truth in Latin) should not be influenced by politics or friendship or family relationship or bribery. The truth is arrived at by presenting and examining evidence, and using logic to determine what the evidence means. The Pharisees were well steeped in the Mosaic tradition.

          But Jesus has in mind here a different level of truth. We can dismiss as mere rhetoric that Jews' claim that they had never been slaves of anyone. Besides the fact that was not what Jesus meant, they knew full well that Israel had been slaves of Egypt, and then later of the Babylonians and Assyrians, then the Greeks and then the Romans. But Jesus was talking about slavery to sin. Jesus explained the power of sin to enslave. Whether one is talking about murder, sexual immorality, theft, or dissimulation, or more modern sins such as greed, non-prescription pharmaceutical or alcohol abuse, the essence of sin is self-centeredness. The deceit of sin is that we think it is a choice we make, when in reality, once we have chosen it, it becomes the master and we are the slave. Except ... that Jesus here pronounces that the slavery of sin is       not eternal. There will come a day when the chains of sin will be broken. Just as Jesus had freed the woman caught in the act of adultery earlier that day from the condemnation and judgment of her sin, He will do for anyone who comes to Him. That power comes only from God. There is no human power or method or mechanism that can break the power of sin. Reform, training, discipline, or willpower - individually or in combination - are not able to deliver from the power and penalty of sin. It is a level of spiritual truth that comes from direct relationship with God the Father that frees from sin. We must respond to this relationship with obedience but the relationship is the first step. The ultimate truth is God, and we partake of it when we are connected to Him. It is not the truth of accurate propositional statements or the truth of correctly interpreted evidence. It is the truth of an eternal reality that we come to know in an experiential sense.

          The conversation then degenerates into an argument about parentage. Jesus observes that they are not behaving much like Abraham's seed since they are seeking to kill Him because He told them truth. By contrast, He is doing the will of God His Father. Naturally their response is based on their completely worldly view of life. Jesus was born less than nine months after Mary and Joseph were married. They claim God as their Father. And so it boils down to this. Claiming sonship is not just a biological or genetic heritage. Relationship is demonstrated through behavior. We often say something about a person bringing honor or shame on the family name. And so it is that Jesus is invoking behavior as the ultimate proof of parentage.

John 8:12-30 Jesus is ....

John 8:12-20 We have here the next self-revelation of Jesus: 'I am the Light of the world.' Jesus connects light not to seeing but to walking, and specifically, walking with Him. The Pharisees were so focused on the rules of evidence that they could not even take Jesus' words seriously enough to try to understand what He was saying. But Jesus talks about His judgment. Following the incident with the woman who was caught in the act of adultery, it seems very likely that when He refers here to His judgment, what He means is mercy and grace. He didn't even judge the Pharisees - He just created a situation that allowed them to recognize their own hypocrisy. This was light - apparently the Pharisees were so used to sitting in judgment on others that they did not bother with self-examination. Not that Jesus was implying that we should sit around focusing on our sin and saying 'woe is me'. What He did say was that He came to bring light to the world, and that this light brings life. (See also John 1:4) He then went on to explain that the Father also bore witness to Him (see John 5:37), so that He satisfied the legal requirement of Moses for two witnesses. ( In John 5:33-47, He identified four witnesses). John then adds the parenthetical comment, very similar to John 2:4 & 7:30, that they did not arrest Him because it was not yet the appointed hour.

          The amazing thing is that the light of God, which is Jesus, brings life to the world, not judgment.

John 8:21-30 Jesus repeats His statement from John 7:33-36 that He would go away where they would not be able to come to Him. They still don't understand. He goes on to explain that His origin and the source of His life are fundamentally different from theirs. He then promises to forgive the sins of those who believe that He is the one from YHWH. At least, the use of the phrase ego eimi in both verses 24, 28, and 58 seems to be a clear self-identification with the "I AM" of the Jewish faith. There are then two consequential revelations. Firstly, He will be lifted up, and then they will know who He is, speaking of His crucifixion, as in John 3:14 and 12:23-34, and then they will recognize His deity. Secondly, He always obeys the Father, both in doing what the Father tells Him to do and things that please the Father, and not doing the things that He is not told by the Father to do. In fact, He repeats (frequently apparently) that He does nothing on His own initiative (John 5:30, 8:28, 8:42, 12:49, 14:10). His is not the passivity of waiting for something to happen so He can respond, but the aggressive seeking of His Father's will (in prayer - see Mark 1:35, Luke 5:16, 6:12, 11:1, John 17:7-8) so that He would know the Father's will and do it.

          The result of this discourse was that many people believed in Him. Perhaps they did not understand much of this yet, but they knew how to tell the true from the counterfeit, and hang on to the right stuff.