And the Sheep Hear His Voice
Eschatology of John Part 20: John 10
We made it to twenty essays on John. How are you liking the series so far? Are you getting something out of it? I know I have in writing it. I look forward to compiling all these articles, polishing them, and publishing them as a book in the future. Eventually, we will use the principles we pick up here to read John’s epistles and Revelation.
I do want to make one more housekeeping statement before we really get into this one. With school starting, the bulk of my free time is spent reading, watching lectures, and doing some preparatory research for my end of term essays. While I’ve finished my required reading, I’ve been following the advice of my friend Dallas and am trying to read extra books to supplement my education.
That being said, I’ve found that Thursday is the best day for me to write these essays, so I’ll start publishing them on Friday. Thanks for your support!
And the Sheep Hear His Voice
Does John 10 Contribute to Our Discussion on Eschatology?
If you read through John 10, and I hope you have, then you might not notice anything that specifically mentions resurrection, judgment, or the usual themes we pick out when surveying John’s eschatology. But you may have noticed a few themes we’ve already touched on in the Gospel of John: the shepherd and his sheep, abundant life, and mutual indwelling.
These themes may not stand out to some people as being eschatological, but, as we will see, they tie into everything we’ve talked about up to this point.
Due to the structure of John 10, I’m going to follow the order of the text loosely and use the themes as the way by which I’ll organize this article.
The Shepherd and His Sheep
John, Ezekiel, and Matthew 25
We covered the symbols of the shepherd and the sheep gate back in one of our introductory articles, which you can read here:
This text is eschatological because Jesus is drawing off of texts like Ezekiel 36, which we have referenced several times in our discussion of John’s eschatology.
Thus says the Lord GOD: I will also let the house of Israel ask me to do this for them: to multiply their people like sheep. Like a consecrated flock, like the flock at Jerusalem during her appointed festivals, so shall the ruined towns be filled with flocks of people. Then they shall know that I am the LORD. Ezekiel 36:37–38
Another interesting passage is Ezekiel 34. When you read it, you might recognize a theme that comes up in Matthew 25:
I myself will be the shepherd of my sheep, and I will make them lie down, says the Lord GOD. I will seek the lost, and I will bring back the strays, and I will bind up the injured, and I will strengthen the weak, but the fat and the strong I will destroy. I will feed them with justice. As for you, my flock, thus says the Lord GOD: I shall judge between sheep and sheep, between rams and goats: Ezekiel 34:15–17
You should read all of Ezekiel 34 if you really want more insights into John 10.
Now, let’s bring this back to John 10 and really think about what has happened.
In John 8, Jesus talked about how he is the true Light. In John 9, Jesus demonstrated this by healing a blind man, which sparked a debate on true sight. In John 10, after this discussion about the shepherds, John reminds us that we are still on the subject of spiritual blindness by reporting what some of the people said: “These are not the words of one who has a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?” (John 10:21).
Now follow me here:
Why were the shepherds of Israel in trouble in both John 10 and Ezekiel 34. If you read the context of Ezekiel 34, the shepherds were in trouble because the shepherds didn’t search for lost sheep and they fed themselves while the sheep went hungry. Now, isn’t this exactly how Jesus “divides” or “judges” or “renders a decision” when separating the sheep from the goats in Matthew 25:31ff? That is, those who fed the hungry, clothed the naked, etc. had spiritual sight and could “enter the kingdom of heaven,” for unless one is born from above, they cannot “see” the kingdom of heaven (John 3:3, 5).
This is what John 10 is all about: the sheep hear the voice because the sheep have spiritual sight. They are the ones who would heal on the Sabbath, turn water into wine, and offer a Samaritan woman water of life. That is, they, like their Shepherd, are those who practice justice.
The “hired hands” who are “not my sheep” are those who seek to save themselves, who prefer sacrifice to mercy, and who refuse to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, etc (cf. Luke 15).
The difference between those of the fold and those not of the fold is justice. Because to “hear the voice” of the Good Shepherd is to keep the commandments, and what are the commandments? To emulate the Shepherd in laying down one’s life for another, to love one another as Christ has loved us (John 15:12).
What happens to those who are not of the sheepfold?
Let’s see what Jesus has to say.
Those Who are not My Sheep
We’ll split this section into two parts to answer two questions: (1) did Jesus die for the people he addressed in John 10:36? and (2) what does it mean for those outside of his flock to perish?
This first question has to do with the question of limited atonement; that is, did Jesus die for everyone or for a limited group of the elect?
The Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms defines limited atonement as “A concept, found in Calvinist theology, maintaining that Christ died only for the elect, who are the only recipients of salvation.”1
If you’ve ever heard of “TULIP” before, then you might recognize this as the “L.”
Why would some use John 10 to teach limited atonement? Well, it’s actually fairly straightforward.
In John 10:11, Jesus says, “The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.” In John 10:26 he says, “But do you do not believe because you do not belong to my sheep.” So the argument goes that Jesus didn’t lay down his life for those who were not his sheep.
Is that what Jesus is saying here? Is he suggesting that this particular group would never have a chance at salvation because they were not part of the specific elect group for which he laid down his life? We’ll start with the idea that the sheep are the predestined elect whose number would neither increase (through the salvation of reprobates) nor decrease (through the loss of the elect).
Gerald L. Borchert warns against such a hasty, and devastating, interpretation:
In the same manner v. 26 must not be used by Christian theologians as part of formulating the devastating theory of reprobation (the theology of predestination to damnation, frequently referred to by the nontechnical designation of double predestination). Great care must be observed to avoid such proof-texting theology because at 10:38 Jesus here still continues to issue an invitation to the Jews2
Another commentator, Cornelius a Lapide (AD 1637), wrote,
S. Augustine by "sheep" understands the elect. But this is not the proper nor the adequate cause of their rejecting Christ. For reprobation is not the cause, but rather the result of unbelief and sin. It was not that God had cast off the Jews that they sinned by unbelief. But it was because they chose to disbelieve and sin, that God cast them off. And it was not an adequate cause, because many of them who disbelieved in Him, believed in Him afterwards through the preaching of the apostles. And again some then believed in Christ who were not predestinated, but afterwards fell away into sin, as Judas and others.3
I’d like to add one more witness to this idea that those who were not Jesus’s sheep were only not considered sheep because of unbelief, and that witness is Paul, who said, “And even those of Israel, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again” (Romans 11:23). Though they were “enemies for the sake of the gospel,” this state was tied to unbelief, not a predetermined choice of God (Romans 11:28).
Now that we’re past the initial shock factor of this text and have taken into account the larger context and some secondary sources, we’ll see one more major reason why this passage cannot be used to teach limited atonement. In 1 John, John tells us who Jesus laid down his life for:
and he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. 1 John 2:2
You might word it like this… “and not for this flock only but also for the sins of every sheep, regardless of who their shepherd is at this moment.”
This brings us to another point: what does it mean for those outside of the flock to perish?
In saying that members of his flock would not perish, Jesus seems to imply that those outside of his flock would.
I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one will snatch them out of my hand. John 10:28; cf. John 3:16
Read that last part again. “No one will snatch them out of my hand.” Who is trying to break into snatch sheep out of Jesus’s hand? Well, if you read John 10 carefully, it certainly wasn’t God!
I think sometimes we get the idea that God is causing “unbelievers” to perish, but John 10 paints a different picture:
The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly. John 10:10
It’s the thief that comes to steal and kill and destroy. So when Jesus talks about how he is a Shepherd and his followers are his flock, he is inviting the crowds to join a community of safety and security. If they don’t believe in Jesus, or if they don’t believe in the miracles he does (a concession Jesus is willing to make), then they are in danger of being overcome by the thief.
It is the thief that causes these to perish. It is the thief who killed Adam and Eve with a lie, thinking back to John 8. And it is the thief that Jesus said he came to judge! In John 12:31, John 14:30, and John 16:11, Jesus teaches that the ruler of the world would be driven out, that the thief has no power compared to the Son, and the ruler of the world stands condemned.
Any interpretation of this text that suggests that these outside the flock are totally under the control of the thief and have no hope for redemption are saying that the thief would never be driven out, that he does have power over the Son, and that he will forever persist in his activity despite standing condemned.
But, if as John said, Jesus came to “destroy the works of the devil,” doesn’t this include his ability to steal, kill, and destroy? (1 John 3:8). Instead of stealing, Jesus reconciles. Instead of killing, Jesus gives life. And instead of destroying, Jesus restores all things.
We must remember in studying John that life and death most often refer to spiritual or covenental life and death. Is one living for God or not? Is one under the delusion of separation through the Original Lie? As we’ll see in the next section, if abundant life is the opposite of whatever it means to perish, then the term primarily applies to our condition in this life, not necessarily the next.
Abundant Life
The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly. John 10:10
Keep in mind that one of John’s goals is to “explain God” through the life and teaching of Jesus (John 1:18, NASB95). So this statement by Jesus is a radical revelation of who God is: God doesn’t come to steal and kill and destroy; instead, God comes to give abundant life.
Now, is this the character of God you picked up on in sermons, books, and articles you’ve read?
But this is who God is as revealed by Jesus. God is not the thief.
In the context of John, abundant life is identical with eternal life, but the modifier “abundant” may be more helpful to us. When we think of eternal life, our minds might first replace “eternal” with “after.” But when Jesus says “abundant life,” hopefully we pause to think about what this means.
The idea here is that Jesus gives us an extraordinary life that “is not normally encountered.”4 It’s a life that is larger than life, unexpected, and overflowing with goodness. It’s a life that starts here and now. It is the gift of salvation from the thief.
When the lie (of John 8/ Genesis 3) is exposed and we realize how God really views us, we see everything in a new way. “All things are yours,” as the apostle says. Life, death, and the powers that be cannot take this kind of life away from us. Even in the face of extreme turmoil, we can be sure that we won’t be snatched out of the Father’s hand, and there was very real turmoil looming in Jesus’s audience future.
In the first century, those who held to Jesus’s teaching of non-violence and radical love fled Jerusalem when the Roman armies began to surround the holy city. Those who were under the delusion of the thief, though, tried to reach out and seize for themselves a kingdom. As Jesus lamented in Luke 19:41-44, they did not know the way of peace, and their end was violence, death, destruction, and captivity.
This most unfortunate event caused both Jesus and the apostles to weep. Even Paul wished that he could be cast off from Christ if it would be possible to save his kinsmen (Romans 9:3). Jesus was offering a salvation to the people that had spiritual consequences. Undoubtedly, this is the primary meaning behind all of these texts, but this salvation also had physical implications as well, for Jesus said “But not a hair of your head will perish” (Luke 21:18).
Mutual Indwelling
The kind of radical confidence I discussed earlier is only possible because Jesus has shown us who the Father is. As he said in John 10:30, “The Father and I are one.”
After Jesus said that the Father and he are one, the people wanted to kill him. After some creative interpretation of the Scriptures, Jesus says
But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.” John 10:38
And now we arrive once more to the theme introduced in the first article in this series: one of the several themes that ties John and Paul’s eschatology together is mutual indwelling.
Why does Jesus want the people to believe in him? It’s always so that they can know the Father as the Father actually is.
Jesus will later invite the people to participate in this mutual indwelling. Just as Jesus both dwells in the Father and is the temple of the Father, Jesus and the Father both dwell in us and us in them.
This is the goal of eschatology. This is the point of the entire “scheme of redemption.” This was God’s plan from before the very beginning: for us to walk in the Spirit with the Father and Son (Genesis 3:8; check out the word “breeze”).5
God invites us to come out from behind the bushes, shake off the fig leaves of our insecurity, and trust in the pronouncement that we were created to be “very good” and to know that this is how God views us as his children.
Had Adam and Eve known to ask for forgiveness, they wouldn’t have left the garden. God forgives freely and fully. But they didn’t know because the Original Lie had hidden God from their view, but Jesus has annulled the covenant made with death and hades. He has shown us who God is. And as the Eternal Truth, Jesus has laid down his life for all so that all might be drawn to him; he became an outpouring of God’s love towards us, but not for us insiders only.
And if this isn’t true, then God is a thief, not a Good Shepherd. But God isn’t a thief, Jesus isn’t wrong about who God is, and we are invited to step into this Light of Life, never to be plucked out of the hand of Divine Love.
McKim, Donald K. The Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms. Second Edition, Revised and Expanded. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2014. Print.
Borchert, Gerald L. John 1–11. Vol. 25A. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996. Print. The New American Commentary.
https://catenabible.com/com/5838d8f6205c248f42e52253
Arndt, William, Frederick W. Danker, Walter Bauer, and F. Wilbur Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
I first realized the connection between the cool breeze in Genesis 3 and the Holy Spirit thanks to Baxter Krueger.