Charles Ellicott Commentary John 10

At the Feast of Tabernacles there was a practice, one of those that testified to a sentiment broader than that of just those who participated in it, of offering seventy oxen for the seventy nations of the world, this number being taken partly from the list in Genesis and partly from a vague idea of its sanctity. The number seventy was thus brought before the people with the recognition of the heathen world as within the hope of salvation, and people's minds were prepared for the mission of the Seventy, which followed not long after.

John 10:16 finds the beginning of its fulfillment in this mission of this chapter. The appointment of a new body of disciples, whose very number is symbolic of a wider work, was the first step in the bringing in of the “other sheep.” The Twelve corresponded to the number of the tribes of Israel, but the Seventy represent the nations of the world. The directions for this work to each body are nearly identical, but the restrictions laid upon the Twelve are not laid upon the Seventy.

The reference in Luke 10:3 to the wolves among whom they would be as lambs, sheds light on John 10:12. He who would lay down His life for them would expose them to the wolves because He, as the Good Shepherd, would save them from the wolf.

The phrase And it was at Jerusalem is better rendered as And the Feast of the Dedication was being held at Jerusalem. Although St. John gives no hint that our Lord had left the vicinity of Jerusalem, this specific mention of the city implies a return from a distance, because the words would be out of place if He had remained there during the interval since John 10:21. They cannot be restricted to the feast, which was not confined to Jerusalem but was universally observed by the Jews.

The reference in the margin warns us against the error of understanding “the Feast of the Dedication” as a feast in honour of the dedication of Solomon’s or Zerubbabel’s temple. We know of no annual festival connected with these dedications, and the statement that this feast was “in the winter” makes it almost certain that it was the feast instituted in 164 B.C. by Judas Maccabeus, in commemoration of the cleansing of the Temple after its profanation by Antiochus Epiphanes .

It extended over eight days, beginning on the 25th of the month Kisleu, which corresponds to parts of our November and December. It is still called “Chanuca,” the Dedication, while St. John’s Greek name for it, which was adopted by the Vulgate (Encœnia), is familiar to English ears in connection with another commemoration.

In this, as in other rejoicings, illumination was a prominent feature, and it was sometimes called the “Feast of Lights.” The Temple and private houses were illuminated. It was customary in the houses of the more wealthy and pious Jews to have a light for each member of the family, increasing by an additional light for each evening of the feast.

This practice of illumination has sometimes been traced to the discovery in the temple by the Maccabees of a vial of oil, sealed with the high priest’s ring. This oil, it is said, was sufficient for the lamps for only one evening but was miraculously multiplied to suffice for eight evenings. This is why the eight evenings were therefore devoted to annual illuminations in remembrance of this gift of God (Talmud, Shabbath 216).

The phrase And it was winter is better rendered as It was winter. These words should then be connected with the following verse, as the current division breaks the sense.

And when he putteth forth his own sheep.—The majority of the better manuscripts add the word “all.” The tense is past. We should read, therefore, when he has put forth all his own sheep. The addition is important as marking the care of the shepherd to count his flock and see that none is missing.

The phrase “put forth” is stronger than “lead out” from the previous verse and represents the details of the action as it took place in the sheepfold. The shepherd would call each sheep by name, and when it answered to its name, he would drag it outside the fold. Though it knew its shepherd, it would be unwilling to separate itself from the whole flock. One by one, then, he calls his sheep and places them outside the fold.

He goeth before them, and the sheep follow him.—This is one of the incidents in the management of an Eastern flock, which strikes all who see it for the first time and is abundantly illustrated in books of Eastern travel. The details are given here with minute accuracy. When the last sheep has been brought out, the shepherd places himself at their head, and the flock follows him together.

For they know his voice.—The word is stronger than the one in John 10:3, and the sheep hear his voice. It expresses the familiar knowledge that the little flock has of the voice of their own shepherd who leads them day by day.

And a stranger will they not follow.—The “stranger” is anyone other than their own shepherd, and the term is not to be limited to the “thief” and “robber” of John 10:1. The thought is of the flock following the shepherd to the pasture. On the road they would meet other persons whom they would not follow. Some would, as thieves and robbers, seek to lead them away, calling them by their names and imitating their shepherd’s cry; but they have, by long usage, learned to recognize his voice, and will not follow a stranger.

But will flee from him.—A strange word is a source of alarm to them. With the known tone of the shepherd’s voice they have learned to associate protection, guidance, food. His voice recalls these associations. A stranger’s voice is something unknown and therefore feared. It is like the voice of a plundering raider who has called the flock before, or like the cry of a wild beast that has broken into the fold at night. The associations with unfamiliar words are only of things that are evil.