April 22, 2018
Readings:
First Reading; Acts of the Apostles 4:
8-12
Psalm: 118
Second Reading: 1 John 3: 1-2
Gospel reading according to John (10:
11-18)
+
Homily: Good Shepherd
Jesus introduces himself to his
disciples in another form of personification, allegory or an image and/or
function, depicting Jesus as a shepherd; not just an ordinary shepherd or
hired/paid shepherd, but a good shepherd and at the same time he is the owner
of the sheep he guides and leads to the green pasture. He takes good care of them. “Jesus
said, ‘I am the good shepherd. A good
shepherd lays down his life for the sheep’.” (John 10: 11). As a good shepherd and owner of the sheep, he
brings them in the field where there are lots of grasses to eat. As a good shepherd, he is ready to protect his
sheep from any danger and harm. He even
risks his life to the point of death, just to safeguard his sheep, especially
from robbers/thieves and wild wolves. Jesus,
our good shepherd, saved us from the grasped of Satan, the thief and wolf, bad
shepherd, when we were about to fall in his trap, by offering himself up to the
cross and died, and on the third day he resurrected. Jesus says, “I am the good shepherd” (v. 11). The saying of Jesus, “I am,” is like that God introducing himself to Moses and Moses
will introduce God to the Israelites and to the Pharaoh, when the time comes
God will deliver Israel from slavery to freedom from the hands of Pharaoh in
Egypt and to be brought to the Promised Land.
This saying is ultimately concerns the life, firstly of the people
Israel, and sooner or later, secondly, those of gentiles and pagans to be
included in the flock. He has just
promised life “to lay down his
life” (v. 11), 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). 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), for the sheep, (hyper
ton probaton), does not in itself necessarily speak of sacrifice, but in
John it does. So again Jesus’ death is
seen to be central to his task, as a good shepherd.
What does good shepherd mean? What is the meaning of good shepherd? What is
the origin of good shepherd? And, who is the good shepherd? Jesus refers himself as the good shepherd of
his flock. He is appropriating to
himself the task of God in saving the sheep. 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, in
Ps 80:1). Jeremiah and Ezekiel in
particular develop the shepherd motif to express how God cares for his people
and his condemnation of false and evil shepherds (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 shepherds who only look after themselves and
harm the others (Ezek. 34:11-22). In
these passages God shepherds through his designated leaders. Jesus is claiming
such a role for himself, but in a way unlike anything seen before. He has made clear claims to divinity and
messiahship, which will be repeated shortly (Jn. 10:22-39). So when he claims
to be the shepherd he is claiming that Messiah has come and in him God himself
has come to shepherd his people. Another
part of the conceptual background of the shepherd 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 other is the worthless shepherd who deserts the flock (Zech.
11:4-17). God’s messianic shepherd-king 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 which happened to Jesus and to his disciples. 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” (cf. Jn.
12:32) (https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/IVP-NT/John/Jesus-Good-Shepherd-Who-Flock).
Jesus continued by saying, “A hired man, who is not a shepherd and whose
sheep are not his own, sees a wolf coming and leaves the sheep and runs away,
and the wolf catches and scatters them.
This is because he works for pay and has no concern for the sheep”
(John 10: 12-13). 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. Because he is not the owner of the sheep, 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 except for the salary they receive. 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, (1) the lack of care on the part of the hireling and (2) 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)
(https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/IVP-NT/John/Jesus-Good-Shepherd-Who-Flock).
Jesus was telling his disciples, “I am the good shepherd, and I know mine and
mine know me just as the Father knows me and I know the Father and I will lay
down my life for the sheep” (John 10: 14-15). For the second time Jesus said “I am the good shepherd,” and “lay down my life,” the themes introduced in a general way (Jn. 10:11-13) is 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. 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.” 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 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 oneness (10:30), and a similar oneness of life is
affirmed between Jesus and his disciples (for example, 15:1-7). This theme of
intimacy has been introduced earlier, for example in Jesus’ teaching that his
followers must eat his flesh and drink his blood, and it will be unpacked in
detail in the discourse in the upper room (John 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. 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 crucified form of 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 humankind by taking away the sin of
the world and revealing the glory of God, the Father almighty (https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/IVP-NT/John/Jesus-Good-Shepherd-Who-Flock).
“I
have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. These also I must lead, and they will hear my
voice, and there will be one flock, one shepherd” (John 10: 16). Jesus mentions that he has other sheep not of
this flock who must be brought also, so “there shall be one flock and one
shepherd” (v. 16), is that
Jesus is referring to sheep from outside the fold of Judaism. There are
Gentiles and pagans 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 and pagans are to be included, and so the church later had to discern
his will whether or not Gentiles and pagans 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. 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), 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 another theme is running throughout this Gospel and
indeed the New Testament. He must (dei) do this; it is a
divine necessity that comes from the very character of God as love. But how will he bring the Gentiles and pagans
to his flock? When Gentiles do come to him it signals his hour has finally
arrived (John 12: 20, 23), but Jesus himself is not seen going to the Gentiles. He will bring the Gentiles and pagans into
the flock by the ministry of his disciples, whom he will send (20:21). The
disciples are the ones who will bring the Gentiles and pagans, 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.
Jesus explained his relation to his
Father. “This is why the Father loves me, because I lay down my life in order to
take it up again. No one takes it from
me, but I lay it down on my own. I have
power to lay it down, and power to take it up again”” (John 10: 17-18). Jesus concludes his 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 NIV), 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 mysterious 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 (John 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 in 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.” Others
point to the effects of the obedience, either in terms of its revelation of the
love between the Father and the Son or in terms of its accomplishment of the
salvation of the world (https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/IVP-NT/John/Jesus-Good-Shepherd-Who-Flock).
“This
command I have received from my Father” (John 10: 18). Each of these efforts touches on Johannine
themes, but what does it mean that the reason the Father loves the Son
is that he lays down his life? or because of his obedience to the command of
his Father who is love? 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,” 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” (John 15:10). Such obedience is the
expression of love and is the condition for intimacy. 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, we see both the character of God’s love and the effects of the Son’s love,
which is shown in obedience (https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/IVP-NT/John/Jesus-Good-Shepherd-Who-Flock).
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten