“Very truly, I tell you, anyone who does not enter the sheepfold by the gate but climbs in by another way is a thief and a bandit.
The one who enters by the gate is the shepherd of the sheep.
The gatekeeper opens the gate for him, and the sheep hear his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.
When he has brought out all his own, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him because they know his voice.
They will not follow a stranger, but they will run from him because they do not know the voice of strangers.”
Jesus used this figure of speech with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them.
So again Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep.
All who came before me are thieves and bandits; but the sheep did not listen to them.
I am the gate. Whoever enters by me will be saved and will come in and go out and find pasture.
The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly.
I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.
The hired hand, who is not the shepherd and does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and runs away—and the wolf snatches them and scatters them.
The hired hand runs away because a hired hand does not care for the sheep.
I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me,
just as the Father knows me and I know the Father. And I lay down my life for the sheep.
I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd.
For this reason 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 of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it up again. I have received this command from my Father.”
Again the Jews were divided because of these words.
Many of them were saying, “He has a demon and is out of his mind. Why listen to him?”
Others were saying, “These are not the words of one who has a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?”
At that time the festival of the Dedication took place in Jerusalem. It was winter,
and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the portico of Solomon.
So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.”
Jesus answered, “I have told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name testify to me;
but you do not believe, because you do not belong to my sheep.
My sheep hear my voice. I know them, and they follow me.
I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one will snatch them out of my hand.
What my Father has given me is greater than all else, and no one can snatch it out of the Father’s hand.
The Father and I are one.”
Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him.
Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these are you going to stone me?”
The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you, but for blasphemy. You, a human being, are making yourself God.”
Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, you are gods’?
If it calls them gods to whom the word of God came—and scripture cannot be annulled—
can you say that the one whom the Father has consecrated and sent into the world is blaspheming because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?
If I am not doing the works of my Father, do not believe me.
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.”
Again they tried to arrest him, but he escaped from their hands.
He went away again across the Jordan to the place where John had been baptizing earlier, and he remained there.
Many came to him and said, “John performed no sign, but everything John said about this man was true.”
Ver. 25. "I told you often," He saith, "and ye believe not: the works that I do in My Father's Name, they are they that bear witness of Me."
2. A remark which the more tolerable among them continually made to one another; "A man that is a sinner cannot do such miracles." And again, "A devil cannot open the eyes of the blind": and, "No man can do such miracles except God be with him." (c. iii. 2) And beholding the miracles that He did, they said, "Is not this the Christ?" Others said, "When Christ cometh, will He do greater miracles than those which this Man hath done?" (c. vii. 31.) And these very persons as many as then desired to believe on Him, saying, "What sign showest thou us, that we may see, and believe thee?" (c. vi. 30) When then they who had not been persuaded by such great works, pretended that they should be persuaded by a bare word, He rebuketh their wickedness, saying, "If ye believe not My works, how will ye believe My words? so that your questioning is superfluous."
Ver. 26. "But," He saith, "I told you, and ye believe not, because ye are not of My sheep."
"For I on My part have fulfilled all that it behooved a Shepherd to do, and if ye follow Me not, it is not because I am not a Shepherd, but because ye are not My sheep."
Ver. 27--30.
"For My sheep hear My voice, and follow Me; and I give
unto them eternal life; neither can any man pluck them out of My hand. The Father, which gave them Me, is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of My Father's hand. I and the Father are One." Observe how in renouncing He exciteth them to follow Him. "Ye hear Me not," He saith, "for neither are ye sheep, but they who follow, these are of the flock." This He said, that they might strive to become sheep. Then by mentioning what they should obtain, He maketh these men jealous, so as to rouse them, and cause them to desire such things.
"What then? Is it through the power of the Father that no man plucketh them away, and hast thou no strength, but art too weak to guard them?" By no means. And in order that thou mayest learn that the expression, "The Father which gave them to Me," is used on their account, that they might not again call Him an enemy of God, therefore, after asserting that,
"No man plucketh them out of My
hand," He proceedeth to show, that His hand and the Father's is One.
Since had not this been so, it would have been natural for Him to say, "The Father which gave them to Me is greater than all, and no man can pluck them out of My hand." But He said not so, but, "out of My Father's hand." Then that thou mayest not suppose that He indeed is weak, but that the sheep are in safety through the power of the Father, He addeth, "I and the Father are One." As though He had said "I did not assert that on account of the Father no man plucketh them away, as though I were too weak to keep the sheep. For I and the Father are One." Speaking here with reference to Power, for concerning this was all His discourse; and if the power be the same, it is clear that the Essence is also. And when the Jews used ten thousand means, plotting and casting men out of their synagogues, He telleth them that all their contrivances are useless and vain; "For the sheep are in My Father's hand"; as the Prophet saith, "Upon My hand I have pictured thy walls." (Isa. xlix. 16.) Then to show that the hand is One, He sometimes saith that it is His own, sometimes the Father's. But when thou hearest the word "hand," do not understand anything material, but the power, the authority. Again, if it was on this account that no one could pluck away the sheep, because the Father gave Him power, it would have been superfluous to say what follows,
"I and the Father are One." Since were He inferior to Him, this would have been a very daring saying, for it declares nothing else than an equality of power; of which the Jews were conscious, and took up stones to cast at Him. (Ver. 31) Yet not even so did He remove this opinion and suspicion; though if their suspicion were erroneous, He ought to have set them right, and to have said,
"Wherefore do ye these things? I spake not thus to testify that my power and the Father's are equal"; but now He doth quite the contrary, and confirmeth their suspicion, and clencheth it, and that too when they were exasperated. For He maketh no excuse for what had been said, as though it had been said ill, but rebuketh them for not entertaining a right opinion concerning Him. For when they said, Ver. 33--36. "For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy; and because that thou being a man makest thyself God"; hear His answer; "If the Scripture called them gods unto whom the word of God came, how say ye that I blaspheme, because I said, I am the Son of God?"
What He saith is of this kind: "If those who have received this honor by grace, are not found fault with for calling themselves gods, how can He who hath this by nature deserve to be rebuked?" Yet He spake not so, but proved it at a later time, having first relaxed and yielded somewhat in His discourse, and said, "Whom the Father hath sanctified and sent." And when He had softened their anger, He bringeth forward the plain assertion. For a while, that His speech might be received, He spoke in a humbler strain, but afterwards He raised it higher, saying, Ver. 37, 38. "If I do not the works of My Father, believe Me not; but if I do, though ye believe not Me, believe the works."
Seest thou how He proveth what I said, that He is in nothing inferior to the Father, but in every way equal to Him? For since it was impossible to see His Essence, from the equality and sameness of the works He affordeth a proof of unvaryingness as to Power. And what, tell me, shall we believe?
3. "That I am in the Father, and the Father in Me."
"For I am nothing other than what the Father is, yet still Son; He nothing other than what I am, yet still Father. And if any man know Me, he knoweth the Father, and if he knoweth the Father, he hath learnt also the Son." Now were the power inferior, then also what relateth to the knowledge would be false, for it is not possible to become acquainted with one substance or power by means of another. (Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on the Gospel of John)
A. The NT Context: Is Jesus the Son of God? The present scriptural quote, following on the heels of the Good Shepherd Discourse (10:1-18, 25-30), occurs in the context of a trial scene that focuses, seriatim, on the dual question of whether Jesus is the Christ (10:24) and the Son of God (10:33).
In both cases the Jews mount an initial charge (10:24, 33) that is rebutted by Jesus (10:25-30, 34-38) but is rejected by the Jews, who unsuccessfully attempt to stone or arrest him (10:31, 39). With its dual focus on the question of whether Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, the present scene anticipates Martha's confession in the following chapter (11:27) and the Johannine purpose statement in 20:30-31 (Daly-Denton 2004: 123).
A similar line of investigation is found in the Synoptic portraits of Jesus' Jewish trial before the Sanhedrin (Mark 14:62; Luke 22:67, 70). However, in contrast to the Synoptic Gospels, which locate Jesus' trial at the end of his ministry, John's Gospel has Jesus on trial throughout his entire ministry (see commentary on the temple clearing at 2:17 above). What is more, John's "trial motif" turns the notion of trial on its head by focusing not on Jesus' guilt, but on the Jews' culpability in rejecting their Messiah despite ample evidence to the contrary (esp. 12:37-41, on which, see below; see Lincoln 2000; Daly-Denton 2004: 124; Köstenberger 2005b).
After a heated dispute about the true spiritual origins of Jesus and the Jewish leaders, respectively, in chapter 8, and Jesus' indictment of the Pharisees subsequent to his healing of the blind man in chapters 9-10 (see esp. 9:39-10:21) and Jesus' claim to be one with God the Father (10:30), the Jews are once again ready to stone him (10:31). In response, Jesus asks for which good work they intend to stone him, exploiting a division within their own ranks (cf. 10:19-21). The Jews answer that it is not for any good work that they want to stone Jesus, but rather for blasphemy, "because you, being a man, make yourself God" (10:33).
It is in response to this charge of blasphemy that Jesus cites OT
Scripture: "Is it not written in your law, 'I have said, "You are gods"? If it [i.e., the law; see Köstenberger 2004: 314] called those gods' to whom the word of God came.." (10:34). The quotation is from Ps. 82:6, which in its entirety reads, "I said, 'You are gods, and all of you are sons of the Most High," the only reference to Ps. 82 in the NT. In context, Jesus' purpose in adducing this particular OT passage in response to the Jews' charge of blasphemy "is an appeal to Scripture to justify His claim to be one with the Father, and to be His Son (cf. vv. 25, 29-30)" (Johnson 1980: 28). In essence, Jesus is saying that there is OT precedent for referring to humans as "gods."
In what follows Jesus adduces his works as evidence for his claim of divine sonship (10:37-39). It is his hope that when people see the kinds of works that he does—works that stand in continuity with those done by God the Father—they will recognize that Jesus does in fact stand in perfect communion with the Father and that he therefore rightfully claims to be God's Son. The present passage builds on previous similar encounters between Jesus and his Jewish opponents, most importantly the aftermath of Jesus' healing of the lame man in chapter 5. There Jesus, when accused of breaking the Sabbath, claimed to do his work in continuity with the Father, and he was promptly charged with blasphemy (see 5:18-21).
B. The OT Context of Ps. 82:6. The subject addressed in Ps. 82 is the judgment of unjust judges or rulers (Leupold 1959: 592, cited in Johnson
1980: 29). This psalm, attributed to Asaph, consists of an indictment (82:1-
5), a verdict (82:6-7), and a plea (82:8) (Leupold 1959: 594-96, cited in Johnson 1980: 29). The statement "I said, 'You are gods" is part of the section containing the verdict. God has put judges (or Israel) in an exalted position (82:6), but they will die an ordinary death because they failed to administer justice (82:7; cf. 82:2-5; cf. the references to Samson in Judg.
16:7, 17). The words uttered in Ps. 82:6 may be either those of the psalmist, who "had been under the impression that the pagan deities were of some importance, but now realizes that they are nothing, because they are quite incapable of defending the poor and rescuing the downtrodden"' (Dahood
1968: 270), or those of God, who may recall a previous decree (Tate 1990:
330, 337-38).
C. Psalm 82:6 in Judaism. A reference to Ps. 82:1-2 is found in 11Q13 Il, 10-11 in the context of Melchizedek freeing the sons of God from the hands of Belial. Hence the term elohîm is taken in this document as a reference to (evil) angels rather than human judges or OT Israel (cf.
Johnson 1980: 31; see further §E below). Rabbinic tradition regards the psalm as being addressed to Israel or part of Israel (ef. the citation of Ps.
82:1 in m. Abot 3:6; see Johnson 1980: 31-32).
D. Textual Matters. The quotation here is identical with the LXX, which is an exact equivalent of the Hebrew text.
E. The Use of Ps. 82:6 in John 10:34. The preceding Good Shepherd Discourse (10:1-18, 25-30), with its allusions to Yahweh's end-time Davidic shepherd envisaged by the prophet Ezekiel (e.g., 10:16 alluding to Ezek. 34:23; 37:24; see further below), provides the context for John's account of Jesus' reference to Ps. 82 in the present scene. The royal Solomonic-Davidic motif is underscored also by the external surroundings of the portico named after David's son Solomon (10:23) and Jesus' quotation of a psalm (albeit not attributed to David). Both the book of Psalms and the OT prophets can speak of Israel's king in highly exalted terms (cf., e.g., Ps. 45:7; Isa. 9:6; Zech. 12:8; see Daly-Denton 2004: 125).
Jesus' argument, in typical rabbinic fashion, is from the lesser to the greater (cf., e.g., 5:47; see Brown 1966-1970: 410; Morris 1995: 469;
Schnackenburg 1990: 2:310; Moloney 1998: 316; contra Ridderbos 1997:
374). His practice of posing a question that proves too difficult for his opponents to answer 1s attested repeatedly in the Synoptics (e.g., Matt.
22:41-46 pars.; see Borchert 1996-2002: 1:343). Jesus' point is that if Israel can in some sense be called "god" in the Scriptures, how much more appropriate this designation is for him, "whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world" (10:36) and who truly is the Son of God (on the charge of blasphemy against Jesus, see Hurtado 1999: 35-58, esp. 36-37).
Jesus' commentary on the scriptural passage that he adduces commences,
"If he called them 'gods' to whom the word of God came" (10:35). In the OT the phrase "to whom the word of God came" often is used with reference to those who speak or act in God's name. The expression "the word of the Lord that came" is found at the opening of the prophetic books of Jeremiah, Hosea, Joel, Micah, and Zephaniah (see also Luke 3:2). The phrase is used also with reference to David (1 Chron. 22:8) and Solomon (1 Kings 6:11) (see Daly-Denton 2004: 125). Fittingly, the backdrop for the present use of Scripture is the Feast of Dedication and a portico named for David's son Solomon (10:22-23).
In the original context the designation "gods" may have referred to, in order of likelihood, the following (see the survey in Schuchard 1992: 62-
63): (1) Israel's corrupt judges who were called "gods" because the administration of justice was a divine prerogative delegated to a few select individuals Exod. 21:6 [NIV]; 22:8-9, 28; Deut. 1:17; 1 Chron. 29:23; 2 Chron. 19:6-7; cf. Ps. 82:1-4; see Jungkuntz 1964; Johnson 1980: 29;
Schnackenburg 1990: 2:311; Morris 1995: 467; Beasley-Murray 1999: 77); (2) Israel at the time of the giving of the law (cf. b. Abod. Zar. Sa; see Hanson 1964-1965; 1967; Ackerman 1966: 186-88; Ridderbos 1997: 373;
Carson 1991: 398; Barrett 1978: 384; Schnackenburg 1990: 2:311); (3) angelic powers who abused the authority that God had given to them over the nations (Emerton 1960; 1966; this is unlikely in light of the scarcity of references to angels in John; ef. Tg. Ps. 82:6, cited in Johnson 1980: 30-31, with reference to Freed 1965: 63).
We may highlight several aspects of Jesus' argument from Ps. 82:6 in the present passage. First, there is a polemic point made (note the reference to
"your" law in 10:34; cf. 15:25). Jesus' Jewish opponents, though willing to admit that corrupt human judges may be called "gods," were unwilling to accept, and in fact could not endure, that Jesus, sanctified and sent into the world by the Father, called himself "Son of God" (Johnson 1980: 33, citing Warfield 1948: 32). Thus Jesus' use of the OT in the present instance is aimed at pointing to an inherent inconsistency in the Jews' stance toward OT representatives of God and Jesus.
Second, Jesus' a fortiori argument follows the lines of a syllogism that may be expressed as follows (Johnson 1980: 33, citing Lenski 1942: 765): major premise: Scripture cannot be broken; minor premise: Scripture calls human beings to whom God's word came "gods"; conclusion: there is nothing inherently blasphemous in Jesus referring to himself as "Son of God."
Third, and most important, Jesus' argument at one and the same time breaks down the strict dichotomy erected between God and humans upheld by his contemporaries and on this basis claims divine sonship in a sense that represents a major escalation over the sense in which humans in OT times were referred to as "gods." OT history witnesses to a series of individuals who served as God's representatives, including judges, prophets, priests, and kings. God filled these individuals with his Spirit in order to enable them to accomplish a particular task or gave them his word, which they were to proclaim to his people. In these individuals, therefore, we find a paradigm of a union between the divine and the human, no matter how qualified or limited it may have been.
On the basis of this contention the possibility of a union between the human and the divine Jesus proceeds to assert that this type of union is realized in himself, and this in a sense is infinitely greater than had been done previously (Johnson 1980: 33, citing Bernard 1928: 2:368). Hence Jesus used the reference to certain Israelites in Ps. 82:6 as the substructure for his theology (to appropriate C. H. Dodd's terminology) of divine sonship, which is presented within the framework of John's "sending" Christology. As S. L. Johnson rightly points out, the incarnation is thus shown not to be alien to the spirit of the OT Scriptures and not standing in necessary conflict with the notion of monotheism, rightly understood. To the contrary, it is found in the OT in "typical anticipations" (Johnson 1980: 34).
F. Theological Use. Jesus' argument here may seem peculiar to our ears, but it is best understood as limited to the following point. For argument's sake, Jesus says that his claim of divine sonship does not necessarily involve blasphemy, since in the Hebrew Scriptures there are places where humans are called elõhîm ("gods"). Psalm 82:6 is a case in point. Hence it is wrong for his opponents to consider him guilty and stone him for blasphemy merely because he claimed equality with the Father (10:30)
Once again, Jesus proceeds to offer his works as evidence for the truthfulness of his claim of divine sonship (10:37-38; ef. 10:32).
This does not mean that Jesus' claim to a unique relationship with God fails to involve a claim to deity, for it does, as the Johannine prologue makes abundantly clear. It does mean, however, that Jesus' opponents must carefully investigate the nature of his claims rather than react to what they perceive to be a claim that conflicts with their notion of monotheism. Jesus' argument is of the rabbinic kind that rests theological weight on a particular word or phrasing of an OT passage (cf. Gal. 3:16). In the present instance the scriptural passage cited by Jesus provides common ground for further argumentation with his rabbinic counterparts.
For this reason it is best to understand Jesus' use of Scripture here in terms of analogy rather than typical fulfillment (contra Johnson 1980: 34).
The analogy here extends to one point, and one point only: just as certain individuals in the OT Scriptures could legitimately be called "gods," so also can Jesus, without necessarily involving them or him in blasphemy and violation of monotheism. Of course, any analogy stretched beyond its limit breaks down. In the present case the limit constitutes the sense in which the term "god" could be applied to the referents of elohim in Ps. 82:6 and to Jesus.
Jesus' statement in 10:35 that the Scripture cannot be broken is evidence for his belief in the inviolability of God's written word (in this case, the Hebrew Scriptures). Elsewhere, Jesus contended that "until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the law until everything is accomplished" (Matt.
5:18). In this belief, Jesus knew himself to be united with his Jewish contemporaries (Matt. 5:20; cf. 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:20-21). In the present instance Jesus affirms, over against his opponents' claim that they alone upheld the authority of God's word, that he too has a high view of Scripture. By his statement, Jesus emphatically pits his Jewish opponents against the word of God and the inviolability of Scripture (Ridderbos 1997:
374).
Jesus' assertion that he was set apart and sent into the world by the Father harks back to passages in the OT and Second Temple literature where the term "set apart" referred to those appointed to fulfill an important task or office, be it Moses the lawgiver (Sir. 45:4), Jeremiah the prophet (Jer. 1:5), or the Aaronic priests (see Exod. 28:41; 40:13; Lev. 8:30; 2 Chron. 5:11;
26:18). Not only did Jesus replace previous sanctuaries (1:14; 2:21), the Sabbath (chaps. 5; 9), the manna (chap. 6), and the light and water at the Feast of Tabernacles (chaps. 7-9), but also the present reference to Jesus' setting apart may recall the event behind the celebration of the Feast of Dedication: the consecration of the altar that replaced "the abomination of desolation" erected by Antiochus Epiphanes IV (see Carson 1991: 399). (D.A. Carson & G.K. Beale, Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament)
