186 Verses 1-18.―The Scriptures for reference are, in particular, Ps. 23., Isa. 40., Zech. 11. To be understood rightly, the close connection of this passage with chapters 8 and 9 must be seen, which the division of chapters tends to obscure.
187 Verses 1-3.― “The fold.” “... leadeth them out.” One of the “realistic scenes” given at the Palestine Exhibitions brings out those characteristics of an Eastern sheepfold stated in Carr’s note, ad loc.―the high wall; entrance closed at night and guarded by “porter”; the mixture of flocks; and their separation each morning through the different voice of each shepherd. Cf. Isa. 43:1 and Acts 2:39. By “the porter” it will be seen the expositor understands the Holy Spirit (so Stier, Alford, and McRory); Godet, the Baptist.
For the New Testament add, in particular, Luke 15:11-32. As to the relation of allegory to metaphor, see Carson on “Figurative Language of Scripture,” or “Encyclopædia Britannica,” vol. i., under “Allegory.”
188 Verses 4-7.― “He goeth before them.” The Lord severed His connection with the Temple before the disciples separated from it; their break with it was very gradual.
With verse 6 cf. 16:25, ff. and Mark 4:13; and with 5:7, Heb. 10:20 (Norris).
189 Verse 8.― “Before me.” These words seem to have been omitted in some leading manuscripts from the difficulty that attaches to the verse when they are read. The Manichees used them in support of their theories. If the words προ ἐμοῦ are retained, one way of taking πρὁ is in the sense of “instead,” “in place of,” but then it will be necessary to take the statement prophetically, as none such presented themselves until after the Lord’s first coming. Isaiah has used the past tense in this way (10:28-31). Other explanations are recorded in Alford’s note, ad loc. Zahn combines the idea of both past and immediate future by supposing that the Asmonaaan rulers and Herodian princes are meant.
190 Verse 9.― “Shall go in and shall go out.” This is a Hebraism. See Num. 28:17. Cf. Maclaren’s remarks on Communion and Service in his Exposition, vol. ii., pp. 28 ff.
An Eastern shepherd acts as a door.
191 Verse 10.― “Abundantly.” Cf. 2 Pet. 1:11.
192 Verse 11.―The view of Pfleiderer (ii. 480), that Paul’s doctrine of salvation resting on the death and resurrection of Christ was supplanted by John’s emphasizing the whole redemptive activity of His earthly life, is reproduced by Scott. As to this theory, see the Exposition at p. 367.
“The good Shepherd” cf. (Heb. 13:20), “the great Shepherd,” and (in 1 Pet. 5:4) “the chief Shepherd.” Pss. 22., 23., 24. seem to answer respectively to these designations.
“Layeth down His life,” or soul (cf. Isa. 53:10). The word for “life” here is altogether different from that in verse 10 (life in contrast with death). The following “for,” as Meyer says, indicates substitution, not only benefit, as in 1 John 3:16, with which Rom. 16:4 (decisive). It comes out strikingly in this Gospel (18:8), where see note.
Govett, on the present passage, well remarks: “He showed He had power to enforce that exchange.” How can Scott get over the five-times repeated mention by Christ of His death in this short discourse? It carries as much emphasis as, e.g., in Acts 20:28 or Heb. 13:20, 1 Pet. 1:19.
193 Verse 12.―See Ezek. 34:11-23, etc. For the “wolf,” cf. Matt. 10:16 and Acts 20:29. The “hireling” is exemplified in the conduct of the blind man’s parents in chapter 9 here.
193a See the “Lycidas” of Milton.
194 Verses 14-16 ―Here we have a link with the first Gospel: our Lord “in the days of His flesh” was “Minister of the circumcision” (cf. 12:23-32. and note 8 above). Again, there is connection with the third Gospel. It would be nearer the truth to say that John was influenced by Isaiah (chapter 49) than by Paul.
With verse 14 cf. 17:20-22. The passage should correct the strangely serious notion that to doubt one’s acceptance is the best proof of being a child of God!
As one has said, “To insist on the one flock (5:16) and yet form a sacramental fold which is exclusive, instead of inclusive, is suicidal: always has been and ever will be.”
195 Verse 17 f. ―On the relation of these words of Christ to those of Paul in Gal. 3:13, see Gerdtell on “Substitution,” p. 44 f. Criticism has been bestowed on J. N. Darby’s writing that the Lord gave up His first human life, “to which sin attached,” to take up in resurrection another life, in which the sin of mankind, reckoned to Him on the cross (2 Cor. 5:21), has no voice. But it is of the ζωὴ that the writer of “Synopsis of the Books of the Bible” speaks—from no neglect of the Greek word used here―with reference to such passages as 1 Pet. 4:1. Reference to Mr. Darby’s treatment of Scriptures outside this Gospel, like those just referred to, should remove any misapprehension of his meaning. The words of these verses entirely meet the unholy view of the Atonement, according to which the Father is regarded as exposing Himself to the imputation of injustice. He and the Son combine.
195a Contrast the present passage with Ps. 89:48. “No one taketh it away from Me.” This, of course, at the same time as human, excludes Satanic power; it is equivalent to “No one can,” etc. And so for Heb. 5:7 as bearing on the agony in Gethsemane (Luke 22:43 f.).
In 9:14 of that Epistle, “an eternal spirit” speaks of Christ’s own (Westcott). His own Deity was engaged in the work.
195b Cf. Horton, “Teaching of Jesus,” pp. 200 f.
196 Verses 19-21.―Cf. Ps. 146:7 f. From these verses of the Gospel we may learn that truth separates as a preliminary to uniting.
Observe how the Lord’s works were seen to reinforce His words, which stand or fall together. Jülicher admits that they are inseparable.
With v. 20, cf. Schofield, “Christian Sanity,” p. 15.
197 Verse 22.―The “Feast of Dedication,” also called the “Feast of Lights.” was instituted by the Maccabean Jews to commemorate the rededication of the Temple after the victories of Judas over Antiochus Epiphanes, who had desecrated it. See “Jewish Prayer Book,” p. 274. The Chanuka generally falls in the month of Chisleu, or December, and so the mention of “winter.” Observe that the Evangelist does not speak of it as a “feast” ―i.e., as if it had Divine sanction.
198 Verse 24 f.― “Dost thou hold our soul in suspense?” These words serve to show that the progress of the Messianic claim is not really represented differently in the fourth from what it is in the earlier Gospels (cf. Horton, pp. 190 f.).
John takes us more “behind the scenes,” emphasizing more their responsibility; nevertheless, the Jews can still talk thus at this advanced stage of the ministry. Having regard to 9:22, their sincerity may well be questioned. It is much the same with the antecedent rejection of “the miraculous” in our day. “Openness of mind” alone will do in religious as in all other search after truth. Cf. Matt. 11:4 f.; Luke 11:3 ff.
198a Verse 26 f.―See verse 3 f.
199 Verses 28-30.—See note 110 on Mark, and cf. Deut. 32:39, Isa. 43:13. Hengstenberg “Jesus assumes to Himself the possession of the power which belongs to Jehovah.” See Hooker’s notable sermon on the “Perpetuity of Faith in the Elect,” which might suffice for “Anglicans.”
“We are One,” ἔν, neuter. It is not one in will or purpose only, for this in the case of Jesus might still be frustrated, but that will and power coalesce in the person of the Speaker. In these verses the distinction of Persons and unity of Nature alike come out. See, further, 12:45, 14:9 f., 17:21; and cf. Heb. 1:3. The Sabellian and Patripassian (Swedenborgian) theory breaks down when faced with the words: the Father and JESUS are not one “Person”; whilst the one nature contradicts Arians (Socinians). The contemporary Jews understood the Lord’s statement, whilst their descendants and “Unitarians” miss its meaning.
200 Verse 31.―Cf. Lev. 24:10, and see note on 19:7 below.
201 Verse 32.―Cf. Ps. 78:11 f.
201a Verse 33.―This may be regarded as the locus classicus on the way in which the Lord’s claims were understood at the time.
202 Verse 35.― “The word of God came.” Cf. Ezek. 1:3; Luke 3:2.
203 Verse 36.―See note 30 on Mark (p. 248).
204 Verse 40 ff.― “Again.” As to the Peræan ministry, see 1:28. As to John’s performing no miracles, see Gerdtell, p. 70.