Sermon and Worship Resources

Ezekiel 34:1-31 · Shepherds and Sheep

1 The word of the LORD came to me: 2 "Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel; prophesy and say to them: 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Woe to the shepherds of Israel who only take care of themselves! Should not shepherds take care of the flock? 3 You eat the curds, clothe yourselves with the wool and slaughter the choice animals, but you do not take care of the flock. 4 You have not strengthened the weak or healed the sick or bound up the injured. You have not brought back the strays or searched for the lost. You have ruled them harshly and brutally. 5 So they were scattered because there was no shepherd, and when they were scattered they became food for all the wild animals. 6 My sheep wandered over all the mountains and on every high hill. They were scattered over the whole earth, and no one searched or looked for them.

7 " 'Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the LORD: 8 As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD , because my flock lacks a shepherd and so has been plundered and has become food for all the wild animals, and because my shepherds did not search for my flock but cared for themselves rather than for my flock, 9 therefore, O shepherds, hear the word of the LORD: 10 This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am against the shepherds and will hold them accountable for my flock. I will remove them from tending the flock so that the shepherds can no longer feed themselves. I will rescue my flock from their mouths, and it will no longer be food for them.

11 " 'For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I myself will search for my sheep and look after them. 12 As a shepherd looks after his scattered flock when he is with them, so will I look after my sheep. I will rescue them from all the places where they were scattered on a day of clouds and darkness. 13 I will bring them out from the nations and gather them from the countries, and I will bring them into their own land. I will pasture them on the mountains of Israel, in the ravines and in all the settlements in the land. 14 I will tend them in a good pasture, and the mountain heights of Israel will be their grazing land. There they will lie down in good grazing land, and there they will feed in a rich pasture on the mountains of Israel. 15 I myself will tend my sheep and have them lie down, declares the Sovereign LORD. 16 I will search for the lost and bring back the strays. I will bind up the injured and strengthen the weak, but the sleek and the strong I will destroy. I will shepherd the flock with justice.

17 " 'As for you, my flock, this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I will judge between one sheep and another, and between rams and goats. 18 Is it not enough for you to feed on the good pasture? Must you also trample the rest of your pasture with your feet? Is it not enough for you to drink clear water? Must you also muddy the rest with your feet? 19 Must my flock feed on what you have trampled and drink what you have muddied with your feet?

20 " 'Therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says to them: See, I myself will judge between the fat sheep and the lean sheep. 21 Because you shove with flank and shoulder, butting all the weak sheep with your horns until you have driven them away, 22 I will save my flock, and they will no longer be plundered. I will judge between one sheep and another. 23 I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them; he will tend them and be their shepherd. 24 I the LORD will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the LORD have spoken.

25 " 'I will make a covenant of peace with them and rid the land of wild beasts so that they may live in the desert and sleep in the forests in safety. 26 I will bless them and the places surrounding my hill. I will send down showers in season; there will be showers of blessing. 27 The trees of the field will yield their fruit and the ground will yield its crops; the people will be secure in their land. They will know that I am the LORD , when I break the bars of their yoke and rescue them from the hands of those who enslaved them. 28 They will no longer be plundered by the nations, nor will wild animals devour them. They will live in safety, and no one will make them afraid. 29 I will provide for them a land renowned for its crops, and they will no longer be victims of famine in the land or bear the scorn of the nations. 30 Then they will know that I, the LORD their God, am with them and that they, the house of Israel, are my people, declares the Sovereign LORD. 31 You my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, are people, and I am your God, declares the Sovereign LORD.' "

When Did We See You?

Ezekiel 34:1-31

Sermon
by King Duncan

(Thanksgiving) The juxtaposition is startling--the Thanksgiving feast we have just enjoyed and our text for the day:

" . . . I was hungry and you fed me; I was thirsty and you gave me water; I was a stranger and you invited me into your homes; naked and you clothed me, sick and in prison and you visited me." (Mt. 25: 35-36 The Living Bible).

And yet what better day is there than this one--between the celebration of Thanksgiving, the one day when gluttony is transformed from a sin to a sacrament and Advent and Christmas, the season of our most conspicuous national consumption? What better day is there to remind ourselves of those persons in this world not as fortunate as we?

And we do need to remind ourselves.

We are much like Charlie Brown in the PEANUTS cartoon series. Lucy is seated comfortably in her ben bag chair watching television. She asks Charlie Brown:

"How about getting me a dish of ice cream? . . . Mint! Make sure it's mint!"

Charlie Brown returns with a dish of green ice cream. Lucy smiles and says, "Thank you."

Then her face is perplexed and she sticks out her tongue. "This doesn't taste like mint."

Charlie Brown replies, "All we had was vanilla . . . But you can do amazing things with a green felt tip." (1)

We are living in a time when many persons want to color reality with a green felt tip pen. It is almost heresy for an American to speak pessimistically about the problems of our society. Accentuate the positive. Ignore the gloomier aspects of the Gospel. Preach the empty tomb but not the crucified Christ. Concentrate on what is good about America. At all costs avoid becoming one of the nattering nabobs of negativism, as former Vice-President Spiro Agnew once termed them.

Now I am not a negative preacher, as you know. But there are hungry persons in this world. There are thirsty persons in this world. There are sick, naked, imprisoned persons in this world. And we need to be reminded. For the teaching of the Scripture is clear. If we ignore the least and the lowly, we ignore Christ.

Our text today is not on hunger, per se, but on sensitivity. Are we aware that all about us persons who are in need? "When did we see you hungry, or thirsty or naked or sick or in prison or lonely or afraid?" When did we see you depressed or on drugs or at your wit's end? When did we see you close yourself off from your friends or in grief from death or divorce? When did we see you fatherless and without a friend?

Jesus had no problem with the physically blind. It was the spiritually blind, the socially blind, the materially blind that he could not heal.

Lazarus sat at the rich man's gate, but the rich man never saw him. The Pharisees were within a stone's throw of the Kingdom, but because of their blindness, they could not find the door. Zaccheus climbed a sycamore tree in order that he might see. But it was while breaking bread in his own home with the Master that the scales were removed from his eyes.

And the question confronts us--do we see him? Really see him?

In 1953 there was a Baptist pastor in London riding on a subway. His name was Peter West. Like all clergymen in England he wore a clergy collar. He noticed that there was a man on the subway who looked at him with a very angry look.

Just before the man got off the subway, he said to Peter West, "You clergy really aren't much good. You don't do much to help anyone, and you are never there when we need you!"

Peter West was totally discouraged by the conversation. He went home and began looking around. Suddenly he saw the telephone on his desk in a new way. He began to envision something more that he could do.

He called his church leaders together. His idea was to use the telephone as a point of contact with hurting people in the community. While he was working long hours and doing all he could, he could train volunteers who would serve as listeners on the telephone line. It sounded like a great idea. They launched the very first telephone crisis-listening line in the world. They called it STS--Spiritual Telephone Service.

Soon the London newspapers picked up the story, and it was published across the land. It was a beautiful story about a Baptist pastor who wanted to serve the needs of his community.

A German television station caught the story, then a German newspaper, then a Swedish magazine published the story. Soon other telephone lines were opened; thousands of people were making calls and were being helped because the scales were lifted off of one pastor's eyes and he saw a need and filled it. He saw a hurt and healed it. But he was not alone. (2)

William Larimer Mellon, Jr., retired at the age of thirty-seven with everything one could want: family, money, prestige and a life of leisure and pleasure ahead of him.

One night he read a magazine article that was to change his life. It was about Dr. Albert Schweitzer who, years before, at the age of thirty, had put aside successful careers in music, writing and teaching to go to Africa as a medical missionary.

An idea began to grow in Mellon's mind. He read all he could find about Dr. Schweitzer, eventually corresponding with him. Then the day came when Mellon made his decision. He recalls: "I found Gwen (his wife) on a ladder doing homework. I went to her and blurted out, 'I think I'll go to medical school, then settle down somewhere that can use a good country doctor.'"

The rest is simply told. He went to Tulane University. On graduation, he decided to move into the disease-ridden tropics of Haiti. He became the chief doctor of the first hospital in that area, a hospital that was built with his money . . .

Thousands of other people read the same magazine article and put it aside, thanking God for such a man as Dr. Schweitzer and perhaps even praying that God would raise up other such people to serve Him. But for Mellon, this article was an awakening, a soul opening, a lifting of the veil, a skinning of the eyes of faith. (3)

When did we see you?

Jesus says to us, "Open your eyes . . . " It is not enough that we save ourselves.

There is no lasting satisfaction in simply seeking our own security. We are inextricably related to one another. We were not meant to go it alone. The poet was right: "No man is an island."

Years ago Charles L. Allen told a story from the life of Dr. Gunsaulus, a famous Chicago pastor, that we need to hear.

One Sunday morning while Dr. Gunsaulus was in his study writing a sermon, his nephew came in. The boy was a fine athlete about twenty-five years old, but he had never been quite able to find himself.

He noticed his uncle's sermon text, "For this cause came I into the world" (John 18:37). That is a statement of Jesus to Pilate.

The boy said, "Uncle, I wish I knew why I was born." That gave the preacher a chance to say a few words to him about life, and soon the boy went on his way.

While he was walking down the street he heard the fire engines. He noticed that the old Iroquois Theater was burning. In that fire more than five hundred people lost their lives. The boy rushed over, and when he arrived he saw a number of people gathered around a balcony window. Quickly he found a heavy plank, climbed on the building next to the theater and laid the plank across to that window. Then he stood in the window and helped many people across to safety. However, while he was working, a heavy timber fell on him and knocked him to the pavement below. Just before he died his uncle got to him and said, "Now you know why you were born. You were born to save those people."

The curtain drops on the story there. But several years later Dr. Gunsaulus was traveling in Europe.

One night he met a man in a hotel lobby, and in the ensuing conversation the preacher mentioned he was from Chicago, when the other man suddenly became hysterical and began to mutter something over and over. Another man came over and led him away.

Later Dr. Gunsaulus asked the third man what had caused the distressing scene. The man said it was a very sad case. He told Dr. Gunsaulus that his new acquaintance was in Chicago one Saturday and went to the old Iroquois Theatre. The theater caught fire but this man got out. However, to get out, he had to climb over many screaming and fear-crazed people.

Though he himself was not harmed he became insane thinking about the experience. As a result, he fell into the habit of saying over and over, "I saved nobody but myself. I saved nobody but myself." (4) There is that question again, "When did we see you?" My purpose this morning is not to lay a guilt trip on any of us. It is just that the Scripture beckons me as your pastor to remind you and to remind myself as well, who we are and what we are about. We are those who have been fed by the tender hand of the Shepherd. That is how Ezekiel puts it:

For the Lord God says: I will search and find my sheep . . . I will be the Shepherd of my sheep, and cause them to lie down in peace . . . I will seek my lost ones, those who strayed away, and bring them safely home again. I will put splints and bandages upon their broken limbs and heal the sick. (Ezekiel 34: 11,15,16, THE LIVING BIBLE)

We are those who have experienced the Shepherd's tender love. And we cannot be happy until we share that love with someone else.

There is a wonderful fable that tells of a young girl who was walking through a meadow when she saw a butterfly impaled upon a thorn. Very carefully she released it and the butterfly started to fly away. Then it came back and changed into a beautiful good fairy.

"For your kindness," she said to the little girl, "I will grant you your fondest wish."

The little girl thought for a moment and replied, "I want to be happy." The fairy leaned toward her and whispered in her ear and then suddenly vanished.

As the girl grew, no one in the land was more happy than she. Whenever anyone asked her for the secret of happiness, she would only smile and say, "I listened to a good fairy."

As she grew quite old, the neighbors were afraid of the fabulous secret might die with her. "Tell us, please," they begged, "tell us what the fairy said."

The now lovely old lady simply smiled and said, "She told me that everyone, no matter how secure they seemed, had need of me!" (5)

That is the secret of life! Everyone you meet has need of the love that you have within you.

"When did we see you?" we ask. And he answers: everywhere. In the searching eyes of a hurting child, in the mocking sneer of an alienated youth, in the anger and emptiness of the middle- aged bore, in the clinging loneliness of the nursing home parlor.

When did we see you? Wherever there is hunger or thirst or nakedness or loneliness or fear or hurt, he is there.

Edward Everette Hale once put it like this:

Is there some desert or pathless sea
Where Thou, good God of angels, wilt send me?
Some oak for me to rend; some sod,
Some rock for me to break;
Some handful of His corn to take
And scatter far afield,
Till it, in turn, shall yield
Its hundredfold
Of grains of gold
To feed the waiting children of my God?
Show me the desert, Father, or the sea;
Is it Thine enterprise? Great God, send me.

When did we see you? Open your eyes, my friends. The opportunity to see Christ lies all about each of us.

1. Thanks to Dr. John Bardsley for this illustration.

2. From a sermon by Dr. Joe Harding.

3. Robert A. Raines, New Life in the Church (San Francisco: Harper & Row Pub., 1961).

4. Charles L. Allen, In Quest of God's Power (Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1952).

5. Leo Buscaglia, Loving Each Other.

Dynamic Preaching, Collected Sermons, by King Duncan

Overview and Insights · From Judgment to Hope: God the Shepherd Will Cleanse Them and Give Them a New Heart (33:1–36:38)

Chapters 33–48 covers God’s restored presence and the new temple. Ezekiel 33 transitions from judgment on Jerusalem to the hope centered on the coming shepherd. In Ezekiel 24:26–27 God tells the prophet to expect a messenger to arrive with the news of Jerusalem’s fall. Next comes a parenthesis in the story, as Ezekiel 25–32 announces judgment on the surrounding nations. Ezekiel 33 now continues the story, and in 33:21 the messenger pre…

The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Ezekiel 34:1-31 · Shepherds and Sheep

Commentary · Shepherds and Sheep

By the phrase “shepherds of Israel” (34:2) Ezekiel designates the leaders of the land. In the ancient Near East “shepherd” was a stock term for “king,” and even gods could be so styled. Indeed, there are many parallels between this particular chapter in Ezekiel and Jeremiah 23:1–8, suggesting that Jeremiah 23 may have served as the stimulation for Ezekiel 34. The point made by the prophets, then, is that a society can be no better or rise no higher than its leaders.

What are the characteristics of these pseudoshepherds? First, they are concerned only about themselves and not about their flocks. Second, they allow the weak and sickly members of their flocks to fend for themselves. Third, they brutalize their sheep. As a result of such irresponsible lapses of duty, the flock has scattered and become prey for wild animals. The Lord’s response to this is twofold. He will relieve the bad shepherds of their duties (34:7–9), and he himself will become the shepherd of the sheep (34:10–16). Note the “I wills” in these seven verses.

Not all the problems lie with the shepherds, however. Blame is to be attached elsewhere. For that reason, in verses 17–24 Ezekiel speaks to the sheep. Among the flock are those sheep who are thoughtless, pushy, greedy, and belligerent. In such cases the Lord will render justice. This is followed by the staggering announcement that God will raise up a future shepherd, and his name will be David (34:23–24). There are only two other references in the Old Testament to a post-David David (Jer. 30:9; Hos. 3:5). It may be that we should understand “my servant David will tend them/be their shepherd/be prince among them” to mean “one from the house of David” will expedite these ministries, rather than as reflecting a belief that David will return from the dead (cf. 1 Samuel 28; Matthew 17). Christians, of course, read the passage messianically, and properly so.

Verses 25–31 shift from the metaphor of sheep and shepherds to the imagery of prosperity and peace, which the restored people of Israel will enjoy once they are resettled in their own land. The “I wills” of this section may be profitably compared with the “I wills” of verses 10–16. The blessings with which God will visit his people read much like the rewards promised for obedience in the old covenant (see Lev. 26:1–13; Deut. 28:1–14). They are physical, immediate, and this-worldly. A David figure will shepherd God’s flock (34:23–24), but Yahweh himself will also care for his flock in the manner of a shepherd (34:25–31).

The emphasis in this chapter on good and bad shepherding surely provides a background for the New Testament’s focus on the good shepherd (Luke 15:1–7; esp. John 10:1–21). Ezekiel would not have any need to fulminate against the good shepherd who lays down his life for the sheep, who knows his sheep, who calls his sheep by name, a shepherd who allows his sheep to feed off him instead of feeding off his sheep.

The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Ezekiel’s Message of Hope and Restoration: Ezekiel 34–48, the second major part of this book, is concerned with a message of hope for the exiles and with the promise of Israel’s future restoration. That message has broken through in a muted sense in chapters 1–33 (11:14–21; 16:53–63; 20:33–44; 28:25–26), but it now becomes the central theme. These fifteen chapters fall into three sections. The first, chapters 34–37, is a series of seven oracles dealing with the restoration of Israel. The second section describes the rise and fall of Gog of Magog, Israel’s last great enemy (chs. 38–39). Finally, chapters 40–48 express a message of hope for Israel’s present and future, grounded in the presence of the Lord. These chapters present Ezekiel’s third great vision of the Glory of the Lord (see chs. 1–3 and 8–11) entering the perfect temple of the prophet’s vision just as it had departed the corrupted temple in Jerusalem.

The first two of the seven oracles in chapters 34–37 both concern shepherds and sheep. Ezekiel 34:1–10 is an allegory of Judah’s fall and exile, based on the ancient image of the king as a shepherd, which places the blame for the scattering and plundering of the flock on its wicked shepherds. In contrast, 34:11–31 affirms the Lord as Israel’s true shepherd and describes a future, more modest role for the descendants of David (34:23–24). The next two oracles both address mountains. The first (35:1–15) is an oracle of judgment against Mount Seir (that is, Edom; see 25:8, 12–14), reflecting the role Edom had played in the sack of Jerusalem. By contrast, the oracle directed to the mountains of Israel (36:1–15) is a stirring promise of restoration. Ezekiel 36:16–38 continues this theme, underlining that the restoration is in no sense due to any righteousness on Israel’s part: “It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am going to do these things, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you have gone” (36:22). The sixth oracle in this section is perhaps the most famous and influential passage in the book: Ezekiel’s vision of the valley of dry bones (37:1–14). This section ends with a sign-act representing the reunification of all the tribes, north and south (37:15–28), and promising the restoration of king and temple (37:24–28). Three of the passages from Ezekiel used in the Common Lectionary (34:11–16, 20–24; 36:24–28; 37:1–14) are taken from these words of hope and promise.

34:1–10 On the basis of the thematic distinction between the judgment on human shepherds and God’s role as true shepherd, we will treat verses 1–10 and verses 11–34 as two intimately related, but distinct, oracles (see Additional Notes). The divine word formula (v. 1) introduces the allegory of the false shepherds in verses 1–10, which is in two parts: God’s accusation of the shepherds of Israel (vv. 1–7), and the announcement of judgment upon them (vv. 9–10), introduced by “O shepherds, hear the word of the LORD” (v. 9) and the messenger formula (v. 10). The image of the king as the shepherd of his people, the basis of this allegory, was widespread in the ancient Near East and is very old, going back to the ancient Sumerian king lists (Block, Ezekiel 25–48, p. 80). Hammurabi, founder of the first great Babylonian empire in the eighteenth century B.C., had written, “I am Hammurabi, the shepherd, selected by the god Enlil, he who heaps high abundance and plenty” (trans. M. Roth, cited by Odell, Ezekiel, p. 426). The expression was still in use in Ezekiel’s day at the rise of the Neo-Babylonian Empire—both Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar were called “shepherds” (Odell, Ezekiel, p. 432). The point of the image is that the king cares for his people, as a shepherd tends the flock.

But Israel’s shepherds have not lived up to that responsibility: “Woe to the shepherds of Israel who only take care of themselves! Should not shepherds take care of the flock?” (v. 2). It is important not to sentimentalize this picture: the sheep are not pets, after all. Ezekiel does not question the right of the shepherds to take milk and wool, or even to slaughter their charges for the meat (v. 3); neither does he question the right of rulers to command their subjects, and to benefit from their rule over their people. What Ezekiel does do is accuse the shepherds of cruelty, and hence of poor stewardship: “You have not strengthened the weak or healed the sick or bound up the injured. You have not brought back the strays or searched for the lost. You have ruled them harshly and brutally” (v. 4; consider the hirelings in John 10:12–13, as contrasted with the Good Shepherd). As a result, the sheep have strayed and become lost: They were scattered over the whole earth, and no one searched or looked for them (v. 6). Verse 8 succinctly summarizes God’s accusation. Predators have plundered and ravaged the flock. The sheep are lost, and no one looks for them, because the shepherds cared for themselves rather than for my flock. In brief: my flock lacks a shepherd (v. 8; see also Matt. 9:36//Mark 6:34). This description of exiled, defeated, leaderless Israel draws upon the oracle of Micaiah ben Imlah concerning the fate of Ahab and the armies of Israel: “I saw all Israel scattered on the hills like sheep without a shepherd, and the LORD said, ‘These people have no master. Let each one go home in peace’” (1 Kgs. 22:17//2 Chr. 18:16; compare esp. Ezek. 34:5–6, where the same key words appear). For Ezekiel, the second half of that prophecy takes on a new resonance. Only after the shepherds are slain and the flock is scattered can God, as true shepherd, act to bring God’s people home in peace (vv. 12–13, 25).

Because of their cruelty and neglect, the Lord pronounces judgment upon the shepherds (vv. 9–10). God is against the shepherds (v. 10)—a strikingly ominous phrase. They will not escape accountability for their crimes, indeed God will remove them from their positions of authority. This, of course, takes the story up to where Ezekiel and his fellows find themselves: in exile in Babylon, their temple destroyed, their city in ruins, their kingly line cut off.

34:11–16 The allegory, which never describes the shepherds as the owners of the flock that they neglect, has already set the scene for this next step. Instead, the Lord declares, these are My sheep (vv. 6, 8). The theme of verses 11–31 is the Lord as Israel’s true shepherd. The messenger formula (v. 11) introduces this second unit, and a modified recognition formula (“Then they will know that I, the LORD their God, am with them and that they, the house of Israel, are my people, declares the Sovereign LORD,” v. 30) and the oracular formula (v. 31) conclude it. The oracle is in three parts: verses 11–16 describe God as the true shepherd; verses 17–24 concern God’s judgment between the fat sheep and the lean sheep (v. 20); and verses 25–31 describe God’s covenant of peace (v. 25) with Israel, leading to the affirmation that Israel is “the sheep of my pasture . . . and I am your God” (v. 31). This unit is used in the Common Lectionary; 34: 11–16, 20–24 are to be read on the feast of Christ the King in Year A.

Unlike the false shepherds, the Lord says, “I myself will search for my sheep and look after them” (v. 11). Some have seen the phrase a day of clouds and darkness (v. 12) as an explanation of how the flock came to be scattered: they are unable to find one another in the dark. However, this is typical language for the Day of the Lord (see the discussion at 30:3). The “day of clouds and darkness” is the Lord’s Day of vengeance and deliverance, when God will seek out and save God’s scattered flock. Jesus uses this image of God searching for the lost sheep in a powerful way in the parables (Matt. 18:12–14; Luke 15:1–7).

Verses 13–15, which describe the return of the flock into their own land (v. 13), is reminiscent of Psalm 23. The Lord will cause Israel to lie down in good pasture, beside streams of water (NIV ravines, v. 13). The mention of the settlements in the land (v. 13), however, breaks up this pastoral imagery to remind the reader of the point of this allegory: God will bring the exiles home and repopulate desolated Judah.

The last verse of this section begins as a summary of verses 11–16, reiterating God’s determination to seek out and care for the scattered sheep. But then, abruptly, the image shifts: “I will bind up the injured and strengthen the weak, but the sleek and the strong I will destroy” (v. 16). This statement, like the mention of “settlements” in verse 13, explodes the metaphor: it makes no sense for any shepherd to destroy the strong and healthy sheep. The next phrase, however, makes the meaning clear: “I will shepherd the flock with justice” (v. 16). We saw God’s justice in verses 1–10, with the punishment of the false shepherds. But just because the shepherds were guilty does not mean that the sheep are therefore innocent. Throughout this book, Ezekiel has rejected the exilic community’s claims of innocence (most recently, see 33:31). In the next section God will visit justice on the sheep, just as God visited justice on the shepherds.

34:17–24 As in verses 1–10, God’s judgment upon the flock falls into two parts: the accusation (vv. 17–19); and the pronouncement of judgment (vv. 20–24), introduced by the messenger formula (v. 20) and concluding with “I the LORD have spoken” (v. 24). The accusation opens “I will judge between one sheep and another, and between rams and goats” (v. 17). These words will remind Christian readers of the judgment scene in Matthew 25 (compare 25:32). There, as here, the basis of the judgment is regard for the least (Matt. 25:40, 45). So, God takes the strong sheep to task for selfishly and greedily trampling the pasture and muddying the water so that others cannot eat or drink (vv. 18–19; compare 32:2, 13). Verse 21 expands the point: God condemns the strong for thrusting the weak aside. In our own day, the gap between rich and poor is wider than it has ever been, as a small minority of the world’s people claim the lion’s share of its resources. The trampling of our earth and fouling of our water, through irresponsible use of this world’s resources, threaten the entire planet even as these practices rob opportunity from the vulnerable. Ezekiel plainly states God’s place in this: on the side of the poor, and on the side of the abused land. God declares, “I will save my flock, and they will no longer be plundered” (v. 22). God will accomplish Israel’s deliverance by re-establishing kingship (vv. 23–24).

This is a remarkable statement. Throughout this book, Ezekiel has condemned Jerusalem’s kings for their faithlessness (17:1–21) and cruelty (in addition to 34:1–10, see 19:1–9); it is little wonder many have argued that the abrupt, awkward statement in verses 23–24 is a later expansion to the book (Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, p. 218; Allen, Ezekiel 20–48, p. 159). But then, Ezekiel is not entirely disinterested in the future of kingship. By dating his oracles by the years of Jehoiachin, Ezekiel suggests a preference among the pretenders to the throne (see 17:22–24). Further, the language here referring to the re-established king is modest, and typical of Ezekiel. Consistent with the prophet’s practice throughout the book, he calls this future ruler a prince, not a “king” (v. 24, Heb. nasiʾ; see the discussion of this term at 12:10). The future Davidide will rule expressly as one under divine authority: “I the LORD will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them” (v. 24; see Levenson, Program of Restoration, p. 80).

34:25–31 Many have also seen this glowing description of restoration after the exile as a later expansion to the text. The language is awkward (note, e.g., the repeated recognition formulae, vv. 27, 30), suggesting that Ezekiel or an editor has revised and expanded this passage (and all of vv. 11–31).

The terms and imagery in this passage are priestly, as we would expect from either the prophet or his priestly editors. Verse 25 describes God’s covenant with Israel as a covenant of peace (see also 37:26, and Isa. 54:10, likely influenced by the use of this expression in Ezekiel)—the expression that also refers to the covenant of eternal priesthood the Lord made with Phineas at Baal-Peor (Num. 25:12). God’s new covenant with Israel will be eternal and unbreakable, unlike the first (see the discussion of 16:59–63). The imagery of the restoration in verses 25–31 is likewise priestly, drawn from the promises in the Holiness Code regarding the life God intends for Israel in the land (Lev. 26:3–13; Odell, Ezekiel, p. 429). So, God will banish wild beasts from the land, so that one may lie down anywhere, even in the desert or in the forests, and be safe (vv. 25, 28; compare Lev. 26:6, and see the Additional Note on 14:15). They will be safe from foreign nations (vv. 27–29; compare Lev. 26:6–8). God will send showers in season; there will be showers of blessing (v. 26; compare Lev. 26:4), yielding abundant crops (vv. 27, 29; compare Lev. 26:4–5). Most of all, however, the Lord says, “they will know that I, the LORD their God, am with them and that they, the house of Israel, are my people, declares the Sovereign LORD” (v. 30; see also v. 26, and compare Lev. 26:11–12). This promise of divine presence, bringing life and fruitfulness, will be an important feature of the third vision of the Lord’s Glory, the climax of these oracles of hope (see 43:7a; 47:1–12). Whether Ezekiel or his editors penned verses 25–31, the message is consistent with the vision of the entire book.

35:1–15 Like the oracles against the nations in chapters 25–28, the oracle against Mount Seir (another name for Edom; see the discussion of 25:8) takes the form of a prophetic proof-saying (Hals, Ezekiel, pp. 255–56). Following the introductory divine word formula typical of Ezekiel (v. 1), the oracle begins “Son of man, set your face against Mount Seir” (v. 2; compare 25:2; 28:21). The messenger formula (v. 3) leads into three distinct judgments on Edom, each concluding with the recognition formula (for the function of this formula in the oracles against the nations, see the discussion of 25:5, 7). The first, verses 3–4, simply announces the Lord’s judgment, without giving a reason. However, the judgments in verses 5–9 and 10–15 each begin with “because” and state the reason for the judgment (vv. 5, 10; compare 25:3, 6, 8, 12, 15; 26:2 [though without the messenger formula]; 28:2, 6), followed by the statement of the penalty.

The first summary statement of the judgment on Edom is scathing: “I will stretch out my hand against you and make you a desolate waste. I will turn your towns into ruins and you will be desolate” (vv. 3–4). The expression “desolate waste” appears in the oracle against the mountains of Israel (see 6:14), and in the judgment upon the survivors in the land (33:28–29). The mountains of Seir will suffer the same fate that God meted out to the mountains of Israel.

In the second judgment, God gives a reason for Edom’s condemnation: “Because you harbored an ancient hostility and delivered the Israelites over to the sword at the time of their calamity” (v. 5). The second half of this statement is fairly straightforward: frequently, texts from the period of the exile target Edom for its participation in the sack of Jerusalem (see the discussion of 25:12–14, above). For example, Psalm 137:7 reads:

Remember, O LORD, what the Edomites did

on the day Jerusalem fell.

“Tear it down,” they cried,

“tear it down to its foundations!”

But what is the “ancient hostility” Edom harbors against Israel? Ezekiel 25:12 condemns Edom for taking revenge on the house of Judah—this is also a puzzle, which this oracle may help us to understand. The oracle attributes Edom’s actions against Jerusalem not to current squabbles, but to age-old hatreds. The expression “ancient hostility” (Heb. ʾebat ʿolam) also occurs in 25:15, referring to the hatred of the Philistines—evidently to ancient conflicts from the time that these Sea Peoples first encountered the Israelites. The “ancient hostility” between Edom and Israel may refer to the story in Genesis of the conflict between the twin brothers Jacob, later renamed “Israel,” and Esau, also called “Edom.” This conflict began in the womb and escalated to attempted murder (Gen. 25:19–44; 27:1–45; see also Block, Ezekiel 25–48, p. 316, and Blenkinsopp, Ezekiel, pp. 162–63). Isaac’s deathbed “blessing” on Esau, after Jacob had stolen the better part, describes Edom’s condemnation to a warlike life and the conflict bound to arise between Edom and Israel: “You will live by the sword and you will serve your brother. But when you grow restless, you will throw his yoke from off your neck” (Gen. 27:40). Because Edom has wielded the sword in ancient, bitter enmity against Israel, the Lord decrees, “bloodshed . . . will pursue you” (v. 6). God’s judgment is annihilation for Edom: “I will make you desolate forever; your towns will not be inhabited (v. 9; compare 25:13).

God pronounces the third judgment “Because you have said, ‘These two nations and countries will be ours and we will take possession of them,’ even though I the LORD was there” (v. 10). In context, of course, the “two nations” are Israel and Judah, destined for restoration and reunification in Ezekiel’s prophecy (37:15–28). However, this is also an allusion to the oracle the Lord pronounced over Rebekah and her fractious unborn sons: “Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you will be separated” (Gen. 25:23). Again, the conflict between Edom and Israel is set in the context of an ancient feud. This statement of God’s presence (“I the LORD was there”) is a bit of a surprise: didn’t Ezekiel see the Lord depart from Jerusalem (11:22–23)? However, while God has indeed withdrawn the Glory—God’s particular, special presence—from the city, God has by no means rescinded God’s claim to this place. Therefore, Edom’s land seizure robs God.

The Lord bases the judgment in verses 10–15 not only on Edom’s land seizure after Jerusalem’s fall, but also on “all the contemptible things you have said against the mountains of Israel” (v. 12; compare 25:3; 26:2). Edom had boasted, “They have been laid waste and have been given over to us to devour” (v. 12). In a sense, this statement is no different than what the Lord, through Ezekiel, has said about Judah—particularly in the oracle against the mountains of Israel in chapter 6. The land has been laid waste (6:6), and given over to plunder by enemies (6:3, 11–12). However, the Lord, as Israel’s creator and judge, has the authority and the right to pronounce this judgment; Edom does not.

Further, Edom has no right to possess the land. The Holiness Code states, “The land must not be sold permanently, because the land is mine and you are but aliens and my tenants” (Lev. 25:23). One can rent the use of the land until the year of jubilee, but every fifty years all debts are cancelled and the land reverts to the clan to whom God assigned it (Lev. 25:8–24). Whether the Israelites actually ever put this idealistic legislation into practice or not, the principle unquestionably held true. The land belongs to the Lord—not to the insurgents fighting on against the Babylonians in Judah, not to the exiles, and certainly not to the Edomites. God entrusts the use of the land to whomever God chooses, but the land itself remains the Lord’s possession.

Edom’s punishment fits its crime. Because Edom had rejoiced when Jerusalem fell (v. 15), “While the whole earth rejoices, I will make you desolate” (v. 14). On the day of the Lord’s judgment, Mount Seir will be forsaken, abandoned, and ruined.

36:1–15 The oracle to the mountains of Israel is explicitly related to the preceding oracle against Mount Seir (see v. 5), as well as to the earlier oracle against the mountains of Israel in 6:1–14. Indeed, in many ways the structure of verses 1–15 is like that of one of Ezekiel’s judgment oracles. The command “Son of man, prophesy” (v. 1) elsewhere opens a message of judgment (13:2; 21:9, 14, 28; 30:2; 34:2; 39:1). Similarly, the pattern of the messenger formula followed by “because” (v. 3) generally leads into the reasons for the judgment God is about to give (see, most recently, 35:5, 10). However, unlike those earlier oracles of judgment and condemnation, this unit describes the restoration of Israel. Also unlike the earlier oracle against the mountains of Israel, in which the territory stood for its inhabitants, God addresses this oracle to the uninhabited land itself, to the mountains and hills, to the ravines and valleys, to the desolate ruins and the deserted towns that have been plundered and ridiculed by the rest of the nations around you (v. 4, see also v. 6). The Lord promises the desolate land that it will once more be inhabited.

The oracle is in two parts. The first, in verses 1–12, is a proof saying which reaches its climax in the recognition formula (v. 11). That saying itself divides into a judgment against the surrounding nations, particularly Edom (vv. 1–7), and the promise that the mountains of Israel will once more be inhabited (vv. 8–12). The second part, in verses 13–15, cites and refutes a saying regarding the mountains of Israel (compare 12:22, 27; 16:44; 18:2).

As in the preceding oracle against Mount Seir, the oracle to the mountains of Israel aims to correct a misunderstanding on the part of the nations. They had thought that, since the mountains of Israel had been depopulated, the land was up for grabs: The enemy said of you, “Aha! The ancient heights have become our possession” (v. 2). However, as the land’s true owner, the Lord, makes clear, the judgment that has befallen the people of Israel in no way means that God has surrendered claim to the land. God’s response to the nations’ possession of the land, and to their malicious talk and slander (v. 3) is brief and pointed: “I swear with uplifted hand that the nations around you will also suffer scorn” (v. 7).

In contrast, God promises the land of Israel exaltation and blessing. The land will not remain desolate; instead, the mountains of Israel “will produce branches and fruit for my people Israel, for they will soon come home” (v. 8). Once more, the land will be plowed and sown (v. 9), and the abandoned towns will be rebuilt and inhabited once more (v. 10). The population, consisting of the whole house of Israel (v. 10; evidently, the exiles of both Judah and Israel [see 37:15–28]), will increase, as will their flocks and herds. “I will settle people on you as in the past and will make you prosper more than before” (v. 11). By this, the formerly desolate mountains of Israel “will know that I am the LORD” (v. 11). For Ezekiel, a wild place is a desolate and forsaken place. God’s blessing on the land means its habitation.

In language reminiscent of statements to Abraham and Joshua (Gen. 13:17; Josh. 1:3; 24:3), the Lord promises that the people Israel will walk upon the mountains and so claim and possess them once more (v. 12). In contrast to the fraudulent claim of the nations, which the Lord scornfully rejects, the people Israel will find here their true inheritance. While in former days, the wild, desolate land consumed its inhabitants (see 33:27), in the days to come “you will never again deprive them of their children” (v. 12).

This verse provides a neat segue into the final section of this oracle, where the nations are making precisely this claim about the mountains of Israel: “You devour men and deprive your nation of its children” (v. 13). Implicitly acknowledging the truth of this claim in the past, the Lord declares that it will no longer be so in the future (v. 14). God will claim control of the land’s future destiny, so that the shame and loss of former days will never come again.

36:16–21 The fifth oracle (36:16–38) in chapters 34–37 is also a promise of restoration, which the divine word formula introduces (v. 16), and the recognition formula concludes (v. 38). In its final form, the text falls into four parts. First, verses 16–21 set forth the circumstances that resulted in Israel’s exile. Then three passages, each of which begins with the messenger formula (vv. 22, 33, 37), describe God’s restoration of the exiles in the land: verses 22–32, 33–36, and 37–38.

There is considerable evidence that the original unit ended with the recognition formula in verse 23 and that, from the latter part of that verse to the end of the chapter, we are dealing with a later expansion (see the Additional Notes). Yet this oracle forms an important part of the MT of Ezekiel and contains one of the most important theological statements in the book (vv. 24–28; note that this passage is listed in the Common Lectionary together with 37:1–14, to be read as part of the vigil leading up to Easter). Though more a witness to the receptin of Ezekiel’s message than to the message itself, verses 23b–38 are certainly consistent with the spirit of this book.

Before speaking of restoration, the prophet turns first to the reasons for the exile: “Son of man, when the people of Israel were living in their own land, they defiled it by their conduct and their actions” (v. 17). They stood condemned not merely by particular evil acts (the word translated “actions” in the NIV), but by their entire way of life (“their conduct”—lit., in Heb., “their way”). As a result, the land itself became unclean (reflecting Ezekiel’s priestly concerns). The prophet expresses the defilement of the land in God’s sight with an image from priestly law that is strange to us: “Their conduct was like a woman’s monthly uncleanness in my sight” (v. 17). In the priestly worldview, the ultimate source of uncleanness was death; by extension, contact with blood was ritually defiling, because “the life of a creature is in the blood” (Lev. 17:11, 14; see also Gen. 9:4–5). A woman’s menstrual period, then, was a time of impurity (Lev. 15:19–24). But the Holiness Code takes this further. Leviticus 18:19 groups sex with a woman during her menstrual period together with other “detestable things” (Heb. toʿebot) that had prompted the land to vomit out its former inhabitants, and would lead to Israel’s expulsion as well (Lev. 18:24–30; see the discussion of Ezek. 18:6, 19, above). Extending a metaphor we have encountered before in this book (most forcefully, in chs. 16 and 23), Ezekiel imagines Israel as a menstruating woman, who passes her uncleanness to whatever she touches, and with whom her husband (that is, the Lord) can have no intimate relationship. However, as the medieval Jewish commentator Kimchi observed, this simile also expresses hope for Israel’s future: Israel “is compared in her sinful state to a menstruant whose husband puts her away all the days of her impurity, but draws her near once she becomes pure” (translated by Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, p. 728).

For Ezekiel, it was this defilement of the land, caused by oppression and idolatry, which prompted God to act: “because they had shed blood in the land and because they had defiled it with their idols,” the Lord says, “I dispersed them among the nations, and they were scattered through the countries” (vv. 18–19). The exile was necessary, to spare the land from pollution and to give it the opportunity to heal. However, the exile posed another problem: “wherever they went among the nations they profaned my holy name” (v. 20). This profanation is not the result of anything that the exiles do. It derives, rather, from the fact of their exile itself. Among the nations, people are saying, “These are the LORD’s people, and yet they had to leave his land” (v. 20)—implying that the Lord had been unable to save them. They have called the Lord’s honor into question (“I had concern for my holy name,” v. 21).

36:22–32 It is for this reason—to vindicate the Lord’s honor—that the Lord will act among the exiles: “It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am going to do these things, but for the sake of my holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you have gone” (v. 22). As Greenberg observes, “Ezekiel remains true to his ruthless focus on the majesty of God, the safeguarding of which is, in his view, the prime motive of Israel’s history” (Ezekiel 21–37, p. 738). God’s action depends not on the worthiness, righteousness, or repentance of Israel, but on God’s own identity and character: “You will know that I am the LORD, when I deal with you for my name’s sake and not according to your evil ways” (20:44; see also 16:59–63). God’s actions on Israel’s behalf will show the holiness of (better, with the NRSV, “sanctify”) my great name (v. 23). Leviticus 22:32 commands that God’s name not be profaned (compare Deut. 32:51), but it is Israel, not the Name, that God sanctifies (as is usual in the Holiness Code; see Lev. 20:8; 21:8; 22:32; so also Ezek. 37:28). This is the only place in Scripture where the Lord acts to sanctify the Lord’s own name. In this way, the LORD says, “the nations will know that I am the LORD” (v. 23). In the original text the unit ended here and the restoration and reunification of God’s people in vision and sign in Ezekiel 37 immediately followed. However, there is no explicit connection between the sanctification of the Lord’s name and the restoration chapter 37 describes.

Verses 23b–32 specifically link the vindication of God’s name to Israel’s restoration. The Lord will display the Lord’s holiness through you before their eyes (v. 23b), because God “will take you out of the nations; I will gather you from all the countries and bring you back into your own land” (v. 24; compare 37:21). God will remove Israel’s defilement and idolatry (v. 25). The statement “I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean” (v. 25) reflects priestly ideas of washing with water as a means of removing ritual uncleanness (Lev. 11:32; 14:8–9; 15:13; 17:15; Num. 8:7; 19:19; see also the story of Naaman’s cleansing from leprosy in 2 Kgs. 5:1–19).

God acts to bring the people of Israel home and to cleanse them from impurity on God’s own initiative, out of God’s own character, and for the sake of God’s own honor. There is no mention, here or elsewhere in Ezekiel, of God’s love or mercy (the sole exception, the reference to God’s compassion in 39:25, likely belongs to an editor rather than to the prophet). As Gowan frankly observes, “Ezekiel does not speak of the love of God, as other prophets do, and as the nt does, and his theology seems deficient for that reason” (Ezekiel, p. 118). Indeed Greenberg claims, “The restoration would not be a gracious divine response to human yearning for reconciliation. . . . It would be an imposition on wayward Israel of a constraint necessary for saving God’s reputation” (Ezekiel 21–37, p. 737). A powerful image from earlier in this book expresses this “constraint” as Ezekiel declares that restored Israel will receive from the Lord a new heart and a new spirit (v. 26; see the discussion of this expression in 11:19 and 18:31). But this text clarifies the character and purpose of this transformation: “I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws” (v. 27). The new spirit is God’s spirit (compare 37:14; Lust, “Ezekiel 36–40,” p. 526). Together with the new heart (that is, a transformed will), this infusion of God’s spirit means that Israel will obey God’s commands in future (compare Ps. 51:10 and Jer. 31:31–34).

For Greenberg, this also means that Israel will no longer be free: “so that God’s name never again suffer disgrace, Israel’s restoration must be irreversible. Such it can be only if Israel be denied the ability ever again to disobey God’s laws. God’s uninterrupted glorification entails the curtailment of human freedom” (Ezekiel 21–37, p. 735). Indeed, Israel’s restoration and purification (vv. 28–29), and even the fruitfulness of the land (vv. 29–30), are intended to vindicate God’s honor, not to liberate God’s people (“I want you to know that I am not doing this for your sake, declares the Sovereign LORD,” v. 32). Restoration will lead not to Israel’s exaltation, but to its shame: “Then you will remember your evil ways and wicked deeds, and you will loathe yourselves for your sins and detestable practices. . . . Be ashamed and disgraced for your conduct, O house of Israel!” (vv. 31–32).

How are we to understand this bleak, cold, loveless view of Israel’s future and of Israel’s God? It is no help to say that these verses are likely from an editor: first, because they are nonetheless a part of the traditional Hebrew text of our Old Testament; second, because these same ideas occur and recur throughout this book (see the discussion of 16:59–63 and 20:43–44, above). One way forward is to consider what the logic of Ezekiel’s argument avoids. By basing Israel’s future entirely upon God’s activity and identity, the prophet avoids the uncertainty—indeed, ultimately, the despair—of a future dependent upon human accomplishment.

A historical perspective may prove helpful. In nineteenth-century Europe, when optimism about human nature and ability was at its height, scholars such as Ernest Renan produced biographies of Jesus as a champion of moral progress. The kingdom of God about which Jesus had preached was thought to be just around the corner, the inevitable result of human advancement. But in 1863, the same year that Renan’s Vie de Jésus (Life of Jesus) was published in France, fifty thousand men died at the battle of Gettysburg. The American Civil War, still the bloodiest conflict in the history of the United States, demonstrated that human ingenuity and technological progress could lead to heightened savagery rather than to peace and enlightenment. Then, at the dawn of the twentieth century, World War I shattered the last vestiges of that naive optimism. Today, looking back over the century now past, we see it as a century of genocide: Auschwitz, Hiroshima, Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia-Hercegovina, Darfur—the roll call of mass death and destruction goes on and on, a brutal and final rebuke to shallow, optimistic trust in human progress. But does that mean that the kingdom of God Jesus proclaimed is a hollow dream? Surely the problem lies rather in our forgetting that it is God’s kingdom, not ours.

We cannot, by our own willing and doing, accomplish God’s dream of justice and peace. But the point, for Jesus or for Ezekiel, is not surrender to quietism. One is able to act in the world because of the confidence that, ultimately, the victory belongs to the Lord. So Ezekiel can at the same time call upon his community to repent and affirm that God’s deliverance is not dependent upon their repentance. He can refer to the new heart and new spirit as both gift (11:19; 36:26) and goal (18:31). This inescapable, irreducible paradox is a common feature of the life of faith.

Nor is it necessary to conclude that the future Ezekiel envisions reduces Israel to an inhuman race of puppets. The new heart God promises is, after all, a heart of flesh in the place of a heart of stone (v. 26; so also 11:19). God does not remove, but rather restores, our humanity. As Gowan observes, “What is wrong is that our hearts of flesh, which had the potential for deciding to obey God, have become so calloused by continual disobedience that they have become virtually petrified, and we are trapped in our commitment to rebellion until God intervenes” (Ezekiel, p. 120). It is in our stony-hearted state that we are bound, unable to will or choose the good for others or for ourselves (as Paul well understood; see Rom. 7:14–25). The “heart transplant” which makes us truly human also makes us truly free.

36:33–36 This account of the restoration harks back to the oracle promising restoration to the mountains of Israel at the beginning of this chapter (vv. 1–15). The desolate land will be populated, and will flourish once more. Indeed, the nations will say, “This land that was laid waste has become like the garden of Eden; the cities that were lying in ruins, desolate and destroyed, are now fortified and inhabited” (v. 35). This marks the fifth reference to Eden in Ezekiel (see also 28:13; 31:9, 16, 18), which mentions the garden of paradise nearly as often as Genesis (2:8, 10, 15; 3:23–24, 4:16). Indeed, apart from Ezekiel and Genesis, only Isaiah 51:3 and Joel 2:3 mention Eden. The prominence of Eden in Ezekiel may derive from the identification of the garden with the temple on Zion (see the discussion of and Additional Notes on 28:11–19). At any rate, the paradisial state of the land will bring the knowledge of God to the nations. They “will know that I the LORD have rebuilt what was destroyed and have replanted what was desolate” (v. 36).

36:37–38 This brief account of the restoration is based on the image (from 34:11–31) of Israel as a flock of sheep restored to their proper pastures. However, these verses add several new features to this image. While in that earlier oracle God had sought after lost Israel (34:11–12), now God invites Israel to seek after God, who will be responsive to them (compare Isa. 55:6–7). In contrast to 36:22–32, where God acts despite Israel, these verses depict God as responsive to Israel’s prayers. In this account, the image of the flock becomes an image of abundance: “I will make their people as numerous as sheep” (v. 37). Further, there is a link between that abundance and the temple: the people in their formerly ruined towns and villages will be as numerous as the flocks for offerings at Jerusalem during her appointed feasts (v. 38). This is an ironic image, given what happens to sheep at the temple (as Andrew Mein has observed [“Profitable and Unprofitable Shepherds: Economic and Theological Perspectives on Ezekiel 34,” presented at the SBL Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA, 2005])! This unit concludes by stating the purpose of God’s restoration and deliverance of Israel: “Then they will know that I am the LORD” (v. 38).

37:1–10 The sixth oracle in this section of Ezekiel, the vision of the dry bones, is arguably the most famous and influential passage in this book. As one of the passages from Ezekiel used in the Common Lectionary, it is read during Lent in Year A, and every year in the Paschal Vigil. The use of this passage in the great vigil leading up to Easter underlines the influence of verses 1–14 on Jewish and Christian theology. For while in its context this passage is a symbolic representation of the restoration and reunification of Israel, later readings of Ezekiel’s vision find here the primary image for life after death in Judaism and Christianity: that is, the resurrection of the body.

Like the wheels in Ezekiel’s vision of God’s chariot throne in chapters 1–3, the odd and powerful imagery of this passage captured the imagination of African slaves in America. A familiar African-American spiritual describes the macabre scene from verse 7 in joyous sing-song (“the foot bone connected to the ankle bone, the ankle bone connected to the leg bone . . .”), punctuated by “Now hear the word of the Lord!” The song reaches its climax, as does Ezekiel’s vision, with an image of life brought from death, and joy from sorrow: “Them bones, them bones gonna walk around.” For the victims of the slave trade in America, as for Ezekiel’s audience of exiles, this text spoke of hope for the hopeless, freedom for the captives, and life for those who had thought themselves as good as dead. For this same reason, verses 1–14 are read in synagogue at Passover, that great festival of liberation from bondage.

Verses 1–14 comprise the third of four vision reports in Ezekiel (see also chs. 1–3; 8–11, and 40–48). It is the only report which has no date (compare 1:1; 8:1; 40:1), and which does not concern the Glory of the Lord. However, this report does begin with Ezekiel’s typical expression for entry into the vision state, The hand of the Lord was upon me (v. 1; see the discussion of 1:3, and compare 3:14, 22; 8:1; 40:1). The report is in two parts: first, verses 1–10 describe the vision, and then verses 11–14 interpret it. In the interpretation, the messenger formula (v. 12) introduces God’s promise of new life, and a dual expression of the recognition formula (vv. 13–14) pronounces its purpose.

As the vision opens, Ezekiel finds that the hand of the Lord has transported him to a valley filled with dry, dead, disjointed bones (vv. 1–2). Attempts to locate this valley, or to identify the particular battle that left these grisly remnants behind, are simply wrong-headed: this is a vision. On the other hand, Ezekiel’s education and experiences certainly provide background for understanding this imagery. Assyrian kings threatened in treaty curses to leave the corpses of rebels scattered on the ground as food for carrion birds, and boasted in their battle accounts of leaving their slain enemies covering the plain like grass (Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, p. 748). On the long march to Babylon, the prophet may have seen unburied corpses left for the scavengers on bloody battlefields, and this vision may well reflect the memory of such horrors. For a priest, the valley of dry bones through which Ezekiel walks in his vision would have been a dangerously unclean place, defiled by the unburied dead (Num. 19:11–20; Deut. 21:22–23). But in his vision Ezekiel walks about among the bones without protest (contrast 4:14).

Now the Lord addresses the prophet: “Son of man, can these bones live?” (v. 3). The reasonable answer, obviously, is no—there is no life, and no possibility of life, in this place. The bodies strewn across the valley are not only dead, they are long dead—their disjointed bones are very dry (v. 2). Ezekiel speaks, however, out of his long experience. Since his call, he has seen (and done!) very odd things in the Lord’s service. His answer reflects both confidence in the depth of the Lord’s perception and submission to whatever the Lord may choose to say or do: I said, “O Sovereign LORD, you alone know” (v. 3).

Through the remainder of the vision, Ezekiel becomes a channel of divine power (see the discussion of 32:3). First, God commands the prophet, “Prophesy to these bones and say to them, ‘Dry bones, hear the word of the LORD!’” (v. 4). As Ezekiel delivers God’s promise of life to the dead bones, he hears a noise, a rattling sound, and the bones came together, bone to bone (v. 7). He watches as, in accordance with the word he had proclaimed (v. 5), the bones are joined by tendons and covered over with flesh. Now, instead of a valley full of dry bones, the prophet is standing in a valley filled with corpses: there was no breath in them (v. 8).

As the footnote in the NIV observes, the Hebrew word ruakh (“breath” in the NIV of v. 8) carries multiple meanings. It can mean simply “breath.” So to say that there was no ruakh in the bodies could simply mean that they were not breathing. Related to this meaning is the use of ruakh for “wind” (as in 1:4 and 37:9). In keeping with the invisible force of the wind and the life-giving power of the breath is a third meaning. Ruakh can also mean “spirit”—that is, the empowering, enlivening agency of persons (see 1:12, 20), and particularly of God (as in 36:26–27). A similar ambiguity in the Greek stands behind John 3:8, where Jesus uses the power of the wind (pneuma in Gk.), which “blows wherever it pleases,” to describe the mysterious force active in those “born of the Spirit” (also pneuma).

A pun on ruakh runs through the Lord’s second command to the prophet: Then he said to me, “Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to it, ‘This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe into these slain, that they may live’” (v. 9). So, as Ezekiel prophesied to the wind (ruakh), breath (ruakh) entered the bodies, and they came to life and stood up on their feet—a vast army (v. 10). The third meaning of ruakh will come to the fore in the Lord’s message interpreting this vision.

37:11–14 Now God explains to Ezekiel the meaning of his vision: “Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel” (v. 11). Just as, in the prophet’s vision, the bones were dry and scattered, so the exiles say of themselves, “Our bones are dried up and our hope is gone; we are cut off” (v. 11). God does not deny this self-assessment; the exiles are in fact quite right. Israel, as a nation, is no more. However, God remains God and, therefore, hope for the future remains possible and meaningful. Twice (vv. 12 and 13) the Lord declares to the exiles (called my people) that God will open their graves, and bring God’s people up out of them. These statements flank the promise of restoration: “I will bring you back to the land of Israel” (v. 12). Dead Israel will live again, in its homeland. Further, God declares, “I will put my Spirit [again, ruakh] in you and you will live, and I will settle you in your own land” (v. 14). The restoration will involve more than resettlement. God will restore Israel spiritually as well—renewing, enlivening, and enabling them (see 11:19; 18:31; 36:26–27).

As powerfully effective as the language and imagery of this passage still are today, it is difficult for us to recapture the explosive impact it must have had upon its original audience. No one had ever said anything like this before. To be sure, Hosea had raised the idea of national resurrection (6:1–3), as had Isaiah (26:19), but what was for them a metaphor has become, for Ezekiel, an experience. In a vision, the prophet smells the dust of the dry bones, hears the rattling as the power of the divine word reunites the bones, feels the wind of God’s enlivening spirit, sees dead Israel raised to new life—and, through his words, we share in that vivid experience. There are, of course, elements from Israel’s tradition which here receive new dress: the notion of the breath of God transforming the dust into living beings (see Gen. 2:7, 19), and the stories of Ezekiel’s prophetic forebears Elijah and Elisha raising the dead (1 Kgs. 17:17–24; 2 Kgs. 4:18–37; 13:20–21). However, no one before Ezekiel had put these ideas together into a single, powerful image.

Verses 1–14 portray a symbolic vision of exile and restoration as the national death and resurrection of Israel. However, the image proved too powerful to be restricted to that single, historical interpretation. Indeed, the resurrection of the dead becomes the dominant mode for understanding life beyond this life in Judaism and Christianity. Already Daniel 12:2, arguably the earliest interpretation of Ezekiel 37 extant, plainly presents this idea: “Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.” Similarly, the Syriac translation of 37:11 in the Peshitta has “these are the bones of the whole house of Israel,” rather than “these bones are the whole house of Israel”—reading the metaphor as reality. Early Christian interpreters (with the exception of Origen, who treats this passage metaphorically) uniformly read verses 1–14 as a depiction of the resurrection at the end of time.

But not all ancient readers of verses 1–14 found a general resurrection here. Talmud records a fascinating discussion of whether this passage relates to the resurrection of the dead or not (b. Sanhedrin 92b). Rabbi Judah says, ʾemet mashal hayah (“It is true, it is a parable,” or perhaps, “Truly, it is a parable”). Elsewhere Talmud also identifies Job as a mashal, meaning “Job never was and never existed” (b. Bava Batra 15a). Rabbi Judah’s point is that Ezekiel’s vision was indeed a vision; he did not actually raise the dead. But Rabbi Nehemiah responds, “If it is true, how is it a parable, and if it is a parable, how is it true?” Debate about the meaning of Rabbi Judah’s statement continued among the medieval commentators. Rashi too said that Ezekiel had offered to the exiles a metaphor for their circumstance, but in his commentary on Ezekiel he nonetheless held that verses 12–13 referred to a literal resurrection to come. Kimchi allowed for that possibility but still proposed that verses 1–14 were a metaphor for exile and restoration (cited in Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, p. 750).

The bulk of the discussion in b. Sanhedrin 92b assumes that an actual resurrection took place. The rabbis debate when the resurrection that verses 1–14 describe occurred (at the same time that Nebuchadnezzar cast Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego into the furnace; Dan. 3:19–30), exactly who was raised, and how long they lived after their resurrection (Rabbi Eliezar held that they rose up, sang a hymn, and died again, while Rabbi Jose the Galilean said that they had lived to return to Palestine and father children; Rabbi Judah ben Bathyra claimed to be one of their descendants!). Still, since those Ezekiel had raised did die again, the rabbis did not hold that this text was relevant for the discussion of the resurrection at the end of the age.

While verses 1–14 address exile and restoration, then, that reading did not exhaust its significance for ancient interpreters, who found here a basis for hope in the face of death itself (see also Additional Notes, below). For the Christian, this hope is inseparable from the Easter confession: God who raised Jesus Christ from the dead will raise us up as well (see 1 Cor. 15; 1 Thess. 4:13–18).

37:15–17 The typical divine word formula (v. 15) introduces the seventh oracle in this section, the sign-act of the two sticks. It closes with a variation of the recognition formula (“Then the nations will know that I the LORD make Israel holy, when my sanctuary is among them forever,” v. 28). There are two parts: the sign (vv. 15–17), and its interpretation (vv. 18–28). As is common with the sign-acts in Ezekiel, nothing is said of Ezekiel actually performing the sign (compare chs. 4–5, and contrast 12:1–16)—the description of the act suffices.

God tells Ezekiel to take two sticks. On one he is to write, “Belonging to Judah and the Israelites associated with him,” on the other, “Ephraim’s stick, belonging to Joseph and all the house of Israel associated with him” (v. 16). We might ask how Ezekiel was to write on the sticks, or how an audience could tell what he had written (though if this is a literary sign-act rather than one he actually performed, that objection fades). But the next part of the sign is difficult even to imagine: “Join them together into one stick so that they will become one in your hand” (v. 17). Perhaps Ezekiel places the sticks end to end, hiding the join in his hand, so that they appear as one—though that would be hard to do if the sticks were of any length at all. He may have prepared two interlocking halves of a single broken stick, which he now rejoins—but if so, why didn’t he just say so?

The Hebrew term ʿets, translated “stick of wood” in the NIV means, simply, “wood.” It can refer, depending on the context, to a stick, a board, a branch, or even a tree. The LXX of verses 16–17 renders ʿets as hrabdos, which often means “staff.” In Hebrew, the words for “staff” (shebet and matteh) can also mean “tribe” or “clan,” since the head of a tribe or clan bears a staff as a symbol of authority (see Num. 17:1–11). Often, then, interpreters have found in verses 16–17 a reference to two staves, symbolizing rulership over the two kingdoms of Judah and Israel. As Odell observes, the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser shows Jehu of Israel bowing to the Assyrian ruler and records in an inscription that he presented to Shalmaneser his ruler’s staff, representing his kingdom (Odell, Ezekiel, pp. 456–57). She proposes that when Ezekiel takes the two staves, he is playing the role of God, who has now assumed rule over all the tribes: “The two ‘sticks’ thus signify Yahweh’s sovereign prerogative to rule and protect these people” (Odell, Ezekiel, p. 456). This is a tempting interpretation, though it leaves unexplained how Ezekiel combines the two staves into one; still, as Zimmerli wryly observes, “the argument of clearness of presentation is much less forceful in Ezekiel than with one of the other prophets” (Ezekiel 2, p. 274).

But there is another interpretation that grants greater clarity to every aspect of this sign-act, from the writing on the two “sticks of wood” to their combination into one. In Targum Jonathan, ʿets is translated as “tablet,” suggesting that Ezekiel’s “sticks of wood” may in fact have been writing boards. As Block observes, writing boards coated with colored beeswax and written upon with a pointed stylus are widely attested in the ancient world (Block, Ezekiel 25–48, pp. 400–401). If verses 16–17 refer to a writing board, there would be no problem either with the prophet writing on the board, or with the legibility of his message. Finally, writing tablets were often hinged or tied together, so that two could, literally, be brought together as one (Block, Ezekiel 25–48, p. 405).

37:18–28 The meaning of the sign-act is certainly obvious. Still, the Lord says that when Ezekiel’s audience asks what all this means, he is to tell them, “This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I will take the Israelites out of the nations where they have gone. I will gather them from all around and bring them back into their own land. I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel” (vv. 21–22). The reunification of the tribes into “one nation” will be manifest through one ruler: the line of David will be established once more (vv. 22–25; compare 34:23–24). Almost certainly, the lines in verses 22 and 24 which identify the future Davidic ruler as king (Heb. melek; by contrast v. 25, like 34:24, uses nasiʾ) represent the later editing of this book (Eichrodt, Ezekiel, pp. 511–12; Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, pp. 271–72; Hals, Ezekiel, pp. 273–74). It is doubtful that Ezekiel, who has been so consistent in his avoidance of the term “king,” would change his characteristic usage now.

Once more (see the discussion of 34:25), God says “I will make a covenant of peace with them” (v. 26), though this time God expressly identifies that covenant as an everlasting covenant (v. 26; see the discussion of 16:60). One temple will demonstrate the unity and permanency of Israel, and the place of God in their midst: “I will put my sanctuary among them forever. My dwelling place will be with them; I will be their God, and they will be my people” (vv. 26–27). This promise has a dual significance. First, consistent with the concern expressed in 36:16–23, God’s commitment to dwell permanently in Israel’s midst vindicates the divine honor in the sight of the nations: “Then the nations will know that I the LORD make Israel holy, when my sanctuary is among them forever” (v. 28). But secondly, this promise opens up a guarantee of divine presence that brings the book full circle. In chapters 1–3, Ezekiel experienced the Glory in exile, prompting the question: What has become of Jerusalem? In chapters 8–11, the prophet watched in horror as the Glory departed from Jerusalem, abandoning city and temple to their fate. Now Ezekiel promises that, in the future, God will once more establish a dwelling among God’s people. But how can we understand that in a way that avoids the tragic failures of the past? Further, where is God’s Glory now, in the meantime? These questions will be the concern of Ezekiel’s final vision complex, in chapters 40–48.

Additional Notes

34:1–10 Commentaries generally treat this entire chapter as a unified oracle (e.g., Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, pp. 705–9; Block, Ezekiel 25–48, pp. 273–76; Odell, Ezekiel, p. 423). Block argues that, as a unit, this chapter draws upon Jer. 23:1–6: “The linkages in theme and in structure, style, and diction are too numerous and too specific to be accidental, and their distribution throughout Ezek. 34 may support the unitary interpretation of the latter” (Block, Ezekiel 25–48, p. 275). Given the close relationship evident between these two prophetic books, dependence on Jer. is certainly possible. On the other hand, the many resemblances between these two chs. could represent dependency either way. Perhaps the later editors of Jer. shaped Jer. 23:1–6 to mirror Ezek. 34.

Certainly, vv. 11–31 presuppose vv. 1–10 and are closely related to them. However, a shift of perspective is also evident, from human shepherds to the divine shepherd, and from judgment on the shepherds to judgment on the sheep. Although the placement of vv. 1–10 assumes a setting after the fall of Jerusalem the text provides no date, and one might ask why Ezekiel is penning an oracle against kingship when there are no longer any kings to condemn. Perhaps this allegory was written before the fall and has been recalled here to serve as a base for the oracle of reconstruction and renewal in vv. 11–34. On the other hand, the oracle condemns the shepherds in broad, general terms, making it more applicable to the entire history of kingship in Israel than to the particular abuses of specific monarchs. This is a complicated chapter, with many problems (particularly in vv. 11–31), and the interrelationships among its parts are not always easy to unravel.

34:16 The sleek and the strong I will destroy. The NIV, like the NRSV and the NJPS, follows the MT, which reads ʾashmid (“I will destroy”). The LXX, Syr., and Vulg. all read instead “watch over,” assuming an original Heb. ʾeshmor. The two words are nearly identical in Heb. (d and r look a great deal alike), so it is easy to understand a scribe mistaking one for the other. The reading the LXX follows certainly seems a better fit with the context of vv. 11–16, which stresses God’s care for the flock, in striking contrast to the shepherds’ cruelty (Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, p. 208; Block, Ezekiel 25–48, p. 287; Allen, Ezekiel 20–48, p. 157). On the other hand, the following section, vv. 17–24, will deal with God judging the sheep and siding with the weak and injured over against the fat and strong. The shocking introduction of this idea in v. 16 is in keeping with Ezekiel’s style elsewhere. The NIV is right to stay with the Heb. here.

34:31 “You my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, are people, and I am your God.” The awkward Eng. of the NIV translation is a faithful representation of the awkward Heb. in the MT. The initial “you” is feminine, not the masculine form that Ezekiel has used throughout this chapter, and is missing in the LXX; likely it is an addition, meant to correct the grammar (tsoʾn, the word for “sheep,” is feminine). The word “people” (Heb. ʾadam) also does not appear in the Gk. or Old Latin texts of this verse, and three Heb. manuscripts also lack it (Block, Ezekiel 25–48, p. 295), suggesting that it is a gloss, meant to indicate that the sheep are not literal sheep but Israelites. There is no conjunction before the pronoun “I” in the Heb., but the LXX has this. Perhaps the best reconstruction would be “My sheep, the sheep of my pasture, you are; and I am your God.”

35:6 “I will give you over to bloodshed and it will pursue you. Since you did not hate bloodshed, bloodshed will pursue you.” This is a difficult verse. The word the NIV renders “bloodshed” is simply the Heb. word for “blood” (dam), repeated four times in this verse. The first clause, “I will give you over to bloodshed, and it will consume you,” is better translated “I will make you blood (or, perhaps, “bloody”), and blood will pursue you.” The NIV represents one attempt to make sense of this odd phrase. Another is the NRSV “I will prepare you for blood.” Though Tg. assumes the presence of this strange clause, it does not appear in the LXX. Further, the expected ending to the oath at the verse’s beginning (“therefore as surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD”) is found in the second clause; the first clause interrupts that sequence. It is perhaps best, then, to delete this clause as a dittography (an error caused by a scribe mistakenly copying a word or phrase twice; here, “blood will pursue you”). Among commentators who delete this clause are Block, Ezekiel 25–48, p. 312; Darr, “Ezekiel,” p. 1476; Allen, Ezekiel 20–48, p. 167.

The second clause, which the NIV renders “Since you did not hate bloodshed,” is more accurately translated “Since you hated (or, were an enemy of) blood,” which appears to make no sense in context. The NIV and the NRSV simply read as though the text said the opposite—and indeed, the Heb. ʾim-loʾ dam saneʾta, if read literally, would be “if you did not hate blood.” However, in an oath formula, the Heb. ʾim-loʾ (“if not”) “expresses not the negative, but an emphatic affirmative” (Darr, “Ezekiel,” p. 1477; see, e.g., 36:7, in which this formula also appears). The LXX reads, “since you are guilty of blood,” perhaps assuming an original Heb. ʾashamta, though how the MT could have been derived from this is unclear. Others propose emending the text to nasata (reversing the n and s), which yields “you bear (presumably, the guilt of) blood” (S. R. Driver, cited by Darr, “Ezekiel,” p. 1477) or to sinʾah, hence “blood of hatred” (Block, Ezekiel 25–48, p. 312).

The MT, while difficult, is meaningful. Greenberg notes that all three words in this phrase, “hate,” “blood,” and “pursue,” occur in the context of laws involving the “avenger of blood” (a kinsman charged with avenging the death of family members, see Deut. 19:6; Num. 35:20–21). Edom is “an enemy of blood,” opposed to Israel’s very existence (Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, p. 713). Its actions against Israel, motivated by ancient hatred, are not warfare but murder, which must be avenged: “The blood shed by such a murderer will hound him, and be satisfied only by his death” (Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, p. 713).

36:11 “I will settle people on you.” Ezekiel does not value the land for its own sake. It is not the unsettled wilderness but the settled places, farms and villages, which reflect the presence and blessing of God. This instrumental view of the land having value in its usefulness for humanity was common in the ancient world (J. Galambush, “God’s Land and Mine: Creation as Property in the Book of Ezekiel,” in Cook and Patton, eds., Ezekiel’s Hierarchical World, pp. 102–3). Also common was the corresponding notion that the wilderness is dangerous and threatening, if not outright evil. After all, it is in the wilderness that Jesus encounters the devil (Matt. 4:1–11//Mark 1:12–13//Luke 4:1–13; see also Matt. 12:43–45//Luke 11:24–26). There are, to be sure, other biblical witnesses which affirm the inherent goodness of the world, apart from its utility (see Gen. 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25), as well as the caring presence of God in wild places (e.g., Job 38–39; Ps. 104:10–30).

36:15 No longer will you . . . cause your nation to fall. This is an entirely unexpected and unprecedented statement, at odds with the entire message of this book: nowhere does Ezekiel ever suggest that the land has somehow caused Israel to fall. The verb translated “cause to fall” (takshili) is nearly identical to the verb in v. 14 translated “make childless” (teshakkeli); the only difference in the consonants is the order of the letters sh and k. Indeed, the written text of v. 14 also has takshili, but ancient scribal tradition dictates that that is an error; the word is to be read as teshakkeli. The LXX confirms that the Heb. text the Gk. translators had before them read “make childless” in v. 14, and all the modern translations read accordingly. Perhaps (as Block suggests, see Ezekiel 25–48, p. 333) we should read “make your nation childless” here in v. 15 as well. However, the LXX lacks the final phrase in v. 15, suggesting that its presence in the MT is an error. It is likely that a scribe has mistakenly copied this phrase from the also mistaken text of the preceding verse (Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, p. 231; Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, p. 722). It is best, then, to delete it.

36:23b–38 These verses were probably composed to make the connection between sanctifying the Lord’s name and ch. 37 explicit (J. Lust, “Ezekiel 36–40 in the Oldest Greek Manuscript,” CBQ 43 [1981], pp. 525–27). Lust, however, holds that the original text placed chs. 38–39 prior to ch. 37, as in Papyrus 967, and that the movement of the Gog material to its present location necessitated this bridge in the MT (see the discussion and notes on chs. 38–39 below).

While these verses were certainly incorporated into the text of Ezek. by the first century A.D., as the Ezek. fragment from Masada demonstrates (see S. Talmon, with C. Newsom and Y. Yadin, “Hebrew Fragments from Masada,” in Masada VI: The Yigael Yadin Excavations 1963–1965 Final Report [ed. J. Aviram, G. Foerster, E. Netzer; Jerusalem: Hebrew University, 1999], pp. 59–75), it seems most probable that the original text of the book lacked these verses. This material is missing from Papyrus 967, generally regarded as an excellent witness to the best old Gk. translation of Ezek. (esp. Lust, “Ezekiel 36–40,” p. 517; see also Lust, “Shorter and Longer Texts,” pp. 12–13). A Coptic-Sahidic lectionary listing several passages from Ezek. also has 36:16–23a as a unit, ending the passage at the same point as Pap. 967 (M. N. van der Meer, “A New Spirit in an Old Corpus? Text-Critical, Literary-Critical and Linguistic Observations regarding Ezekiel 36:16–38,” in The New Things: Eschatology in Old Testament Prophecy (Festschrift for Henk Leene) [ed. F. Postma, K. Spronk, and E. Talstra; Amsterdamse Cahiers voor Exegese van de Bijbel en zijn Tradities; Maastricht, 2002], p. 148, though van der Meer argues that since the manuscript “is not a complete Bible text, but a lectionary . . . it is not possible to draw conclusions from this text”). In Codex Wiceburgensis, one of the oldest and best witnesses to the old Latin translation of the text, this entire ch. is missing (Zimmerli, Ezekiel 2, p. 242); however, from reconstruction of the folios that remain it appears most likely that here as well, the latter half of the chapter was never part of the complete codex (P.-M. Bogaert, “Témoignage de la Vetus Latina dans l’étude de la tradition des Septante Ézéchiel et Daniel dans le Papyrus 967,” Bib 59 [1978], pp. 390–91). Further, in the LXX as we have it, the translators responsible for the rest of Ezek. did not write the latter part of ch. 36: “The Greek style and vocabulary of Ez 36, 23c–38 differs considerably from its context” (Lust, “Shorter and Longer Texts,” p. 13). Apparently, this section has been filled in from another, later Gk. translation, similar in style to Theodotian, a translator of the Jewish Scriptures into Gk. who worked in the late second or early third century A.D. (Lust, “Shorter and Longer Texts,” p. 13, citing the work of H. St. J. Thackeray). Finally, in the Heb. of 36:23b–38 we find an odd combination of quotes and allusions from elsewhere in the book and the use of vocabulary not found anywhere else in Ezek. (see the discussion of these vv. above, and Lust, “Ezekiel 36–40,” pp. 521–25). Further, the MT seems disjointed and uneven: note that van der Meer, who argues for the unity of 36:16–32, accepts that 36:33–36 and 37–38 “may be even later appendices to that section” (“New Spirit,” p. 157, see also p. 147 and Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, pp. 733–34).

Of course, it is possible that the absence of these verses from Pap. 967 is due to scribal error (Wevers, Ezekiel, p. 273, though it is a stretch to think that a scribe could unknowingly skip this much material) or to a scribe missing a page from the text he was copying (van der Meer, “New Spirit,” p. 151; Block, Ezekiel 25–48, p. 340). However, that would not explain the absence of the same section from Codex Wirceburgensis, the different character of the LXX translation through this same section, or the curious coincidence of an Egyptian lectionary regarding 36:16–23a as a complete unit. Scholars who have noted its close connection with its context have defended the authenticity of 36:23b–38. In particular, scholars often observe that, without these verses, God’s defense of God’s name is left undefined (esp. Block, Ezekiel 25–48, pp. 339–43; Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, pp. 738–40; and van der Meer, “New Spirit,” pp. 153–57). However, such a good fit could also demonstrate an able and accomplished editor. This editor (or editors) could have written 36:23b–38 in order to describe the vindication of God’s name more fully (as Block acknowledges, though he says “Ezekiel should not be prematurely eliminated as a candidate for that redactor,” Ezekiel 25–48, p. 343). Most likely, these verses belong to the editing of our book.

36:25 I will sprinkle clean water on you. The Heb. verb zaraq (“pour, sprinkle”) refers to purification by water only here and in Num. 19:13, 20 (a text which deals with uncleanness through contact with a corpse; see Lust, “Ezekiel 36–40,” p. 523), and the expression translated “clean water” is found only here in Scripture.

36:38 Flocks of people. This unique expression persuasively demonstrates that these verses represent a later expansion to the context. The Heb. tsoʾn ʾadam is based on a scribal error in 34:31 (Lust, “Ezekiel 36–40,” p. 524; see the Additional Note on 34:31).

37:7 A rattling sound. The word translated “a rattling sound” in the NIV (Heb. raʿash) generally indicates a loud rumbling roar, like an earthquake (1 Kgs. 19:11–12; Isa. 29:6; Amos 1:1; Zech. 14:5; see also the LXX of v. 7, which has seismos), a battle (Isa. 9:5; Jer. 10:22), or the hoof-beats and rolling wheels of chariotry (Jer. 47:3; Nah. 3:2). In Ezek., the term describes the roar of the wind, wings, and wheels in the prophet’s first vision of the Lord’s Glory (1:12–13), and the manifestation of God’s wrath against Gog (38:19; the NIV reads, “there shall be a great earthquake in the land of Israel”), which could suggest that v. 7 also describes a loud noise, like an earthquake. Evidently, the painter of the Dura Europas synagogue fresco depicting vv. 1–14 (from around the third century A.D.) understood the term in this way, as the wall painting shows a mountain split in two as the dead are raised (see Odell, Ezekiel, pp. 453–54). The writer of Matthew also understood that an earthquake accompanied the resurrection of the dead (see Matt. 28:2, and particularly 27:51–53, which many propose is based on Ezek. 37).

However, nothing else in vv. 1–14 suggests an earthquake—no description of rocks splitting, or the ground opening up, appears in this vision. In Ezek. 12:18, where raʿash also occurs, the prophet quietly acts out the terror of the siege: “Son of man, tremble as you eat your food, and shudder in fear as you drink your water” (compare Job 39:24; 41:29, which also refer to shaking or rattling, rather than the roar of an earthquake). The NIV, like the NRSV and NJPS, has made the right choice: raʿash in v. 7 most likely describes the rattling sound of the bones joining together.

37:10–14 St. Cyril of Jerusalem (fourth century A.D.) quotes v. 12 in his catechetical lectures as a scriptural proof for the resurrection of the dead, and St. Ambrose (340–397 A.D.) writes of vv. 9–14, “We notice here how the operations of the Spirit of life are again resumed; we know after what manner the dead are raised from the opening tombs” (The Two Books of St. Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, on the Decease of His Brother Satyrus, 2.75–76, trans. H. DeRomestin).

In contrast to the rabbis, Second (or Pseudo-) Ezekiel, a work based on Ezekiel found at Qumran (4Q386–390; the specific fragment dealing with Ezek.37 is 4Q385) does apply Ezekiel’s vision to the future resurrection of the dead. This mid-first century A.D. Jewish text describes resurrection as the reward for the khesed (“steadfast love” or “covenant loyalty;” Geza Vermes translates it here as “piety”) of “many from Israel who have loved your name” (G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English [4th ed.; London: Penguin, 1981], p. 327; note that this reading is a reconstruction from a fragmentary text).

37:11 We are cut off. The verb here, gazar, is a surprise. In priestly law generally (e.g., Lev. 7:20–21; 17:10–11), and in the Holiness Code particularly (e.g., see Lev. 18:29; 19:8; 20:5–6), the term that refers to expulsion from the community is karat, which also means “cut off.” The word gazar is not common; it appears only fourteen times in the HB, and never in priestly legislation. The oldest meaning of the word seems to be “cut in two” (Gen. 15:17; 1 Kgs. 3:25–26; still reflected in Ps. 136:13 [where gazar appears twice]) or “cut down” (2 Kgs. 6:4). In late texts, oddly, gazar can refer to issuing a decree (Esth. 2:1; Job 22:28). However, texts from around the time of the exile use gazar for separation in a more abstract sense. The preexilic Hab. 3:17 expresses faith in God “though there are no sheep in the pen” (lit., “though the sheep are cut off from the pen”), and postexilic 2 Chr. 26:21 records that the leprous King Uzziah was “excluded [that is, “cut off”] from the temple of the LORD.” Lam. 3:54 and Isa. 53:8, also from the exilic period, use gazar as v. 11 does here, for the separation of death (see also Ps. 88:5).

37:23 For I will save them from all their sinful backsliding. NIV here follows the LXX and Symmachus; the MT reads “I will save them from the settlements in which they have sinned.” The Heb. word moshebotehem (“their settlements”) is almost identical to meshubotehem (“their turnings-back”), which was evidently the text in front of the Gk. translators. Apparently, a scribe reversed the letters sh and w in the MT (Block, Ezekiel 25–48, p. 407; Greenberg, Ezekiel 21–37, p. 756).

Understanding the Bible Commentary Series by Steven Tuell, Baker Publishing Group, 2016

Dictionary

Direct Matches

Clouds

The OT depicts God as riding on a cloud (Judg. 5:4; Isa. 19:1; Pss. 18:11 12; 68:4; 104:3), and as the creator and sender of clouds: “Ask rain from the Lord in the season of the spring rain; from the Lord who makes the storm clouds, and he will give them showers of rain, to everyone the vegetation in the field” (Zech. 10:1 ESV [see also 1 Kings 18:44; Pss. 135:7; 147:8; Prov. 8:28; Isa. 5:6; Jer. 10:13]). Divine judgment is pictured as a dark storm (Isa. 30:30; Lam. 2:1; Nah. 1:3; Zech. 1:15).

At several crucial points God manifested his presence among the Israelites in the form of a cloud: in the wilderness (the “pillar of cloud” of Exod. 13:21 and elsewhere), on Mount Sinai (Exod. 19:9; 24:15), in the tabernacle (Exod. 40:34), in the temple at Jerusalem (1 Kings 8:10), and frequently in the visions of Ezekiel (e.g., Ezek. 1:4; 10:3).

The NT continues the imagery of the cloud as a manifestation of divine presence in the story of the transfiguration (Matt. 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:36), and also in depictions of Jesus as a cloud-rider in Matt. 26:64; Rev. 14:14 (see Dan. 7:13). Jesus was hidden by a cloud when he ascended (Acts 1:9), and believers will be caught up by clouds at his return (1 Thess. 4:17; Rev. 11:12).

Covenant

A pact/compact or an agreement (Heb. berit). The NT counterpart word is diathēkē, defined as a “legal disposition of personal goods.”

The covenant is something that binds parties together or obligates one party to the other. Although there are legal implications associated with covenant, the relational aspect of covenant should not be overlooked. A covenant is best understood as a relationship with related legalities. Marriage, for example, is a covenant that establishes and defines a relationship. This perhaps explains why God chose from the realm of relationships among humans the covenant metaphor to establish and communicate his intent in divine-human relationships.

Some covenants are between persons of equal status (parity treaties); others are between a master and a servant (suzerainty treaties), between nations, between clans, and between a husband and a wife (Mal. 2:14). To “cut a covenant” at any level of society implies a solemn commitment to a relationship.

The most significant covenant relationship in the biblical material is the one between God and humankind. The uniqueness of Israel’s covenant relationship with Yahweh in contrast to all surrounding nations is established on the basis of Deut. 32:8 9. Although Yahweh gave the nations their inheritance, he selected Israel for his own personal care; he established a relationship with the nation independent of and prior to the nation’s association with his land.

Covenant is a dominant theme that gives cohesiveness to the structure of the OT and distinguishes the history of Israel. The phrase “covenant history” can be used to describe the biblical literature that recounts the events and episodes of Israelite life. It is a macrogenre that characterizes the historical narratives of the OT. Although this large literary corpus of historical narrative shares a covenant perspective, the individual books within the narrative corpus are noted for the attention they give to various aspects of the covenant relationship. For example, Gen. 12–50 develops the covenant promises of seed and blessing through a number of subgenres such as genealogies and family stories. Joshua, on the other hand, engages several military subgenres to recount the tension between the promise of land occupation and the responsibility of Israel to occupy the land. Covenant history is a realistic presentation of the tensions associated with the covenant relationship between Yahweh and the nation of Israel.

Finally, the psalms have a direct covenant connection emphasizing covenant worship. Psalm 119 (esp. vv. 57–64) is filled with covenant terms that relate to God’s word (testimonies, laws, oath, judgments). Marching to the place of worship designated by the covenant is reflected in the Psalms of Ascent.

Although the covenant theme is less pervasive in the NT, its christological significance is profound. The NT highlights the significant messianic role of Christ in relation to the covenants. Paul references the new covenant in both books of Corinthians (1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor. 3:6). Each celebration of the Lord’s Supper reminds us that the shed blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant. The new covenant is cut in connection with or on the basis of his death, burial, and resurrection (1 Cor. 11:25). The writer of the book of Hebrews gives detailed attention to how the new covenant functions in contrast to the old Mosaic covenant. The writer explains that Jesus is the guarantor of a better covenant (7:22; 8:6–7). Finally, Paul indicates that we are now considered ministers of the new covenant ministry (2 Cor. 3:6).

David

The second king of Israel (r. 1010 970 BC), founder of a dynasty that continued with his son Solomon (r. 970–931 BC), who ruled all of Israel; subsequently the remaining “sons of David” ruled the southern kingdom, Judah, until 586 BC.

Human kingship is a late development in Israel, but a number of ancient texts anticipate the establishment of the institution (Gen. 17:6; Deut. 17:14–20) and specifically the rise of a king from Judah (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:17). Thus, it is surprising that the first king of Israel is not from Judah, but from Benjamin. When the people ask Samuel for a king, he anoints Saul (1 Sam. 8–12), who proves to be a tremendous disappointment. He forfeits the establishment of his dynasty when he shows a lack of confidence in God by rashly offering prebattle sacrifices (13:13–14). God then rejects Saul as king because he does not execute God’s full judgment against the Amalekites as he knows he should (15:23).

Eventually Saul’s moment of judgment comes. Saul’s final battle is against the Philistines, the major foreign force still inside the borders of the promised land. Both Saul and Jonathan meet their end on Mount Gilboa, and David sings songs that express his sadness over their deaths (1 Sam. 31–2 Sam. 1).

Even with Saul out of the way, David’s rise to kingship is not easy. He is immediately crowned king of Judah (2 Sam. 2:1–7), but the northern tribes choose to follow Ish-Bosheth, the son of Saul. War erupts between the two kingdoms. Eventually, though, the powerful general Abner abandons his support of Saul’s son, sealing the end of that dynasty. Ish-Bosheth is killed by his own men, and soon David becomes king over all Israel (5:1–5).

David’s kingship leads to significant victories that, in essence, complete the conquest of Canaan by finally subduing all the internal enemies. His men take the city of Jerusalem from the Jebusites, and he makes it his capital (2 Sam. 5:6–16). He also defeats the Philistines, who have been a thorn in the side of Israel for years (2 Sam. 5:17–25; for other victories, see 8:1–14). In celebration, David brings the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem (2 Sam. 6).

The David narrative reaches its apex when God enters into a covenant with him that establishes his dynasty (2 Sam. 7; 1 Chron. 17). After David dies, his son will succeed him, and indeed his dynasty lasts for many hundreds of years (see below).

David is a good king, but not a perfect king. A turning point in his reign comes in 2 Sam. 11. Up to this point, David has been content with what God has given him. He does not grasp for anything that does not belong to him. However, when he sees the beautiful Bathsheba bathing, he sends messengers to bring her to his house, where the two have sexual intercourse and she becomes pregnant. In an attempt to conceal this sin of adultery, he orders the death of her husband, Uriah the Hittite. Thus, he adds the crime of murder to that of adultery.

David thinks that the sin is secret, but nothing is hidden from God, who sends his prophet Nathan to confront David (2 Sam. 12; cf. Ps. 51). The difference between Saul and David is not that the latter is perfect but rather that David, as opposed to Saul, repents when he sins. Thus, God allows his reign to continue. Even so, David feels the consequences of his sin. First, the son that Bathsheba bears from her illicit union with David is struck with illness and dies. And ever afterward, David’s family life is troubled, with great impact on the political life of Israel. Son is pitted against son (Amnon and Absalom [2 Sam. 13]), as well as son against father (Absalom and David [2 Sam. 15–18]). Absalom temporarily deposes his father from the throne, but David eventually regains the kingship, though at the cost of the heartbreaking loss of his son.

Even at the very end, there is conflict within David’s house. When David has grown old, another son, Adonijah, attempts to take the throne, with support from powerful people such as Joab and Abiathar. At the instigation of Bathsheba and Nathan, however, David places the son of his choosing, Solomon, on the throne (1 Kings 1). David then dies after a reign of forty-one years, seven in Hebron and the rest over all Israel (1 Kings 2:10–12).

David’s greatest legacy is the dynasty that bears his name. Beginning with Solomon, however, his successors do not continue his spiritual legacy. Although a number of kings do some good, only Hezekiah (r. 727–698 BC) and Josiah (r. 639–609 BC) are given unqualified approval. Eventually, the Davidic rule comes to an end in Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians (586 BC). But God is not done with his redemptive purposes, and his promise to David is that he will have a ruler on the throne “forever” (2 Sam. 7:16). The NT recognizes that Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of this promise. He is the greater son of David, the one who is the Christ or Messiah, the anointed king. Jesus is the one who reigns forever in heaven. The life and the rule of David foreshadow the messianic rule of Jesus Christ.

Desert

A broad designation for certain regions in Israel, typically rocky, although also plains, with little rainfall. These areas generally are uninhabited, and most often “wilderness” refers to specific regions surrounding inhabited Israel. A fair amount of Scripture’s focus with respect to the wilderness concerns Israel’s forty-year period of wandering in the wilderness after the exodus (see also Wilderness Wandering).

More specifically, the geographical locations designated “wilderness” fall into four basic categories: the Negev (south), Transjordan (east), Judean (eastern slope of Judean mountains), and Sinai (southwest).

The Negev makes up a fair amount of Israel’s southern kingdom, Judah. It is very rocky and also includes plateaus and wadis, which are dry riverbeds that can bloom after rains. Its most important city is Beersheba (see Gen. 21:14, 22 34), which often designates Israel’s southernmost border, as in the expression “from Dan to Beersheba” (e.g., 2 Sam. 17:11).

Transjordan pertains to the area east of the Jordan River, the area through which the Israelites had to pass before crossing the Jordan on their way from Mount Sinai to Canaan. (Israel was denied direct passage to Canaan by the Edomites and Amorites [see Num. 20:14–21; 21:21–26].) Even though this region lay outside the promised land of Canaan, it was settled by the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh after they had fulfilled God’s command to fight alongside the other tribes in conquering Canaan (Num. 32:1–42; Josh. 13:8; 22:1–34).

The Judean Desert is located on the eastern slopes of the Judean mountains, toward the Dead Sea. David fled there for refuge from Saul (1 Sam. 21–23). It was also in this area that Jesus was tempted (Luke 4:1–13).

The Sinai Desert is a large peninsula, with the modern-day Gulf of Suez to the west and the Gulf of Aqaba to the east. In the ancient Near Eastern world, both bodies of water often were referred to as the “Red Sea,” which is the larger sea to the south. In addition to the region traditionally believed to contain the location of Mount Sinai (its exact location is unknown), the Sinai Desert is further subdivided into other areas known to readers of the OT: Desert of Zin (northeast, contains Kadesh Barnea), Desert of Shur (northwest, near Egypt), Desert of Paran (central).

Wilderness is commonly mentioned in the Bible, and although it certainly can have neutral connotations (i.e., simply describing a location), the uninhabited places often entail both positive (e.g., as a place of solitude) and negative (e.g., as a place of wrath) connotations, both in their actual geological properties and as metaphors. The very rugged and uninhabited nature of the wilderness easily lent itself to being a place of death (e.g., Deut. 8:15; Ps. 107:4–5; Jer. 2:6). It was also a place associated with Israel’s rebellions and struggles with other nations. Upon leaving Egypt, Israel spent forty years wandering the wilderness before entering Canaan, encountering numerous military conflicts along the way. This forty-year period was occasioned by a mass rebellion (Num. 14), hence casting a necessarily dark cloud over that entire period, and no doubt firming up subsequent negative connotations of “wilderness.” Similarly, “wilderness” connotes notions of exile from Israel, as seen in the ritual of the scapegoat (lit., “goat of removal” [see Lev. 16]). On the Day of Atonement, one goat was sacrificed to atone for the people’s sin, and another was sent off, likewise to atone for sin. The scapegoat was released into the desert, where it would encounter certain death, either by succumbing to the climate or through wild animals.

On the other hand, it is precisely in this uninhabited land that God also showed his faithfulness to his people, despite their prolonged punishment. He miraculously supplied bread (manna) and meat (quail) (Exod. 16; Num. 11), as well as water (Exod. 15:22–27; 17:1–7; Num. 20:1–13; 21:16–20). God’s care for Israel is amply summarized in Deut. 1:30–31: “The Lord your God, who is going before you, will fight for you, as he did for you in Egypt, before your very eyes, and in the wilderness. There you saw how the Lord your God carried you, as a father carries his son, all the way you went until you reached this place.”

The harsh realities of the wilderness also made it an ideal place to seek sanctuary and protection. David fled from Saul to the wilderness, the Desert of Ziph (1 Sam. 23:14; 26:2–3; cf. Ps. 55:7). Similarly, Jeremiah sought a retreat in the desert from sinful Israel (Jer. 9:2).

Related somewhat to this last point is Jesus’ own attitude toward the wilderness. It was there that he retreated when he could no longer move about publicly (John 11:54). John the Baptist came from the wilderness announcing Jesus’ ministry (Matt. 3:1–3; Mark 1:2–4; Luke 3:2–6; John 1:23; cf. Isa. 40:3–5). It was also in the desert that Jesus went to be tempted but also overcame that temptation.

Earth

Israel shared the cosmology of its ancient Near Eastern neighbors. This worldview understood the earth as a “disk” upon the primeval waters (Job 38:13; Isa. 40:22), with the earth having four rims or “corners” (Ps. 135:7; Isa. 11:12). These rims were sealed at the horizon to prevent the influx of cosmic waters. God speaks to Job about the dawn grasping the edges of the earth and shaking the evil people out of it (Job 38:12 13).

Israel’s promised land was built on the sanctuary prototype of Eden (Gen. 13:10; Deut. 6:3; 31:20); both were defined by divine blessing, fertility, legal instruction, secure boundaries, and were orienting points for the world. Canaan was Israel’s new paradise, “flowing with milk and honey” (Exod. 3:8; Num. 13:27). Conversely, the lack of fertile land was tantamount to insecurity and judgment. As Eden illustrated for Israel, any rupture of relationship with God brought alienation between humans, God, and the land; this could ultimately bring exile, as an ethically nauseated land “vomits” people out (Lev. 18:25, 28; 20:22; see also Deut. 4; 30).

For Israel, land involved both God’s covenant promise (Gen. 15:18–21; 35:9–12) and the nation’s faithful obedience (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 19:5; 1 Kings 2:1–4). Yahweh was the earth’s Lord (Ps. 97:5), Judge (Gen. 18:25), and King (Ps. 47:2, 7). Both owner and giver, he was the supreme landlord, who gifted the land to Israel (Exod. 19:5; Lev. 25:23; Josh. 22:19; Ps. 24:1). The land was God’s “inheritance” to give (1 Sam. 26:19; 2 Sam. 14:16; Ps. 79:1; Jer. 2:7). The Levites, however, did not receive an allotment of land as did the other tribes, since God was their “portion” (Num. 18:20; Ps. 73:26). Israel’s obedience was necessary both to enter and to occupy the land (Deut. 8:1–3; 11:8–9; 21:1; 27:1–3). Ironically, the earth swallowed rebellious Israelites when they accused Moses of bringing them “up out of a land flowing with milk and honey” (Num. 16:13). As the conquest shows, however, no tribe was completely obedient, taking its full “inheritance” (Josh. 13:1).

Fruit

Literally, fruit is the seed-bearing part of a plant. It constitutes an important part of the diet in the ancient Near East. Common fruits are olives, grapes, and figs, though many other varieties of fruit are also available, including apples, apricots, peaches, pomegranates, dates, and melons. Fruit trees play a prominent role as a food source in God’s creation and preparation of the garden of Eden (Gen. 1 3). The law prohibits the Israelites from cutting down their enemy’s fruit trees (Deut. 20:19). The abundance of fruit trees characterizes the land that God has prepared for Israel (Deut. 8:8; Neh. 9:25) as well as the final restoration (Ezek. 47:12; Joel 2:22; Rev. 22:2).

One aspect of fruit is that it grows from a plant. This use of the term is often extended to represent what emerges from something else. Thus, fruit may represent offspring, whether human or animal (Deut. 7:13; 28:4), one’s actions (Matt. 7:16–20), the result of one’s actions or choices (Prov. 1:31; 10:16; Jer. 17:10), or words coming from one’s mouth (Prov. 12:14; Heb. 13:15). In the NT especially, producing much fruit symbolizes performing deeds that are pleasing to God (Matt. 3:8; 13:23; Mark 4:20; John 15:16; Rom. 7:4; Col. 1:10). Those who live by the Spirit produce the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23). The apostle Paul speaks of the first converts in a particular region as being firstfruits, probably referring to their conversion as the result of the gospel being preached in the area (Rom. 16:5; 2 Thess. 2:13).

Judgment

Of several Hebrew words for “judgment,” two are important here.

The word shepet is used of God, who brings the judgments upon the Egyptians in the plagues (Exod. 6:6; 7:4; 12:12). Ezekiel prophesies God’s judgment on Israel and other nations (e.g., Ezek. 5:10; 16:41; 25:11). The word is also applied to human beings, as the Syrians execute judgment on Israel (2 Chron. 24:24).

The most frequent noun is mishpat. Abraham is noted for mishpat, “judgment/justice” (Gen. 18:19). God by attribute is just (Gen. 18:25); he shows justice toward the orphan and the widow (Deut. 10:18) and brings judgment on behalf of the oppressed (Ps. 25:9). At the waters of Marah, God makes a judgment, an ordinance for the people (Exod. 15:25). Similarly, the mishpatim, “judgments/ordinances,” become law for life in Israel (Exod. 21:1). In making judicial judgments, the Israelites are to be impartial (Lev. 19:15), and they are to use good judgment and justice in trade (Lev. 19:35; Prov. 16:11). Israel will be judged for rejecting God’s judgments (Ezek. 5:7 8) and worshiping false gods (Jer. 1:16). Those accused of crime will come to judgment/trial (Num. 35:12). The children of Israel come to their judges for judgment (Judg. 4:5). God will bring each person to a time of judgment regarding how his or her life is spent (Eccles. 11:9).

One key word in the NT is krisis. It has a range of meaning similar to mishpat. In the NT, judgment is rendered for thoughts and words as well as deeds (Matt. 5:21–22; 12:36). Future, eschatological judgment is a key theme for Jesus (Matt. 10:15; 11:22, 24; 12:42), Paul (2 Thess. 1:5), and other NT writers (Heb. 9:27; 10:27; 2 Pet. 2:9; 3:7; 1 John 4:17; Jude 15; Rev. 14:7). Jesus himself will be the judge (John 5:22). The only way to avoid condemnation is by having eternal life in the Messiah (John 5:24).

Another key word in the NT is krima. It may refer to condemnation (Matt. 7:2; Rom. 3:8) or to judgment, again including the eschatological judgment (Acts 24:25). Krima is the word most frequently used by Paul. He also often presents judgment as already realized (e.g., Rom. 2:2–3; 5:16). In the later epistles judgment may be realized as well (2 Pet. 2:3; Jude 4). James points out that not many should presume to be teachers, because they will be judged more strictly (James 3:1).

Justice

The concept of justice pervades the Bible, especially, though not exclusively, the OT. The biblical concept of justice is an embodiment of two contemporary concepts: righteousness and justice. The former designates compliance with the divine norm, while the latter emphasizes conformity to a societal standard of what is right and equitable. Focusing exclusively on the latter hinders the correct understanding of justice in the biblical sense.

The source of justice is God himself. It flows from his essential character as one who is both just and righteous, whose actions are flawless, perfect, upright, and just (Deut. 32:4; 1 Sam. 12:7; 2 Sam. 22:31; Job 37:23; Ps. 89:14). God is the righteous lawgiver, hence the one who establishes the norm for right conduct (Deut. 4:4 8; Ps. 19:7–9). He requires justice of all his creatures (cf. Gen. 9:5–6; Exod. 21:12, 28–29). God also judges righteously (Gen. 18:25; 1 Kings 8:32; Ps. 9:4, 9; Jer. 9:24) and defends and vindicates the weak and oppressed (Deut. 10:18; Ps. 103:6). The responsibility of maintaining justice in the human community, however, he delegates to its leaders, such as civil magistrates or political officials, and requires them to execute this responsibility with integrity, equity, and impartiality (Deut. 1:16–17; 16:18–20; Ps. 82:2–4; Prov. 31:8–9; John 7:24; 1 Pet. 2:13–14). God’s requirement of justice in the human community is not limited to its leaders only; it is incumbent upon everyone therein (Ps. 15:1–5; Mic. 6:8; Zech. 7:9; 8:17; Matt. 23:23).

Rivers

Eden’s rivers. Genesis 2:10 14 describes the garden in Eden as the source of an unnamed river that subsequently divided into four “headwaters”: the Pishon, the Gihon, the Tigris, and the Euphrates. This description defies any attempt to locate the purported site of Eden in terms of historical geography. The Tigris and the Euphrates do not diverge from a common source, but instead converge before emptying into the Persian Gulf. Moreover, the Gihon, if it is to be identified with the sacred spring of the same name in Jerusalem (1 Kings 1:45), is several hundred miles away from the Tigris and the Euphrates. The Pishon is otherwise unknown. If, as various commentators since antiquity have suggested, the Gihon and the Pishon are to be identified with other great rivers in the same class of importance as the Tigris and the Euphrates (the Nile, the Ganges, etc.), then this would further confound any attempt to understand Gen. 2:10–14 in terms of historical geography.

The Nile River. The Nile (Heb. ye’or) is fed by two major tributaries: the White Nile, which begins at Lake Victoria, and the Blue Nile, which begins in Ethiopia. At over four thousand miles, the Nile is the longest river in the world. The ancient civilization of Egypt depended entirely on the flow of the Nile and upon its annual flood (the “gift of the Nile”) for irrigation of crops. Even today, arable land along the Nile is confined in some places to an area no more than a few miles from its banks.

Two of the plagues sent by God upon the Egyptians took place at the Nile, an appropriate setting for a confrontation between the God of Israel and the Egyptian pharaoh, himself a living representation of the Egyptian pantheon. God told Moses to confront Pharaoh at the Nile (Exod. 7:15), and the first plague with which God afflicted the Egyptians consisted of turning the Nile into blood, causing its fish to die and rendering its water unsuitable for drinking. The Egyptians were forced to dig wells along its banks (7:20–21). The second plague involved the multiplication of frogs in the Nile, to the point of great inconvenience (8:3).

Isaiah continues the theme of God punishing the Egyptians by attacking the Nile: “The waters of the river will dry up, and the riverbed will be parched and dry. The canals will stink; the streams of Egypt will dwindle and dry up. The reeds and rushes will wither, also the plants along the Nile” (Isa. 19:5–7).

The Euphrates River. The Euphrates is the westernmost of the two great rivers of Mesopotamia (along with the Tigris [see below]), the land “between the rivers.” As mentioned above, the Euphrates was one of the four rivers flowing from the garden of Eden, according to Gen. 2:14. Along the Euphrates were located the ancient cities of Carchemish, Emar (Tell Meskeneh), Mari, Babylon, and Ur. The Euphrates runs over seventeen hundred miles from northwest to southeast, beginning in the mountains of eastern Turkey before joining with the Tigris and entering the Persian Gulf.

In the Bible, the Euphrates represents the northern boundary of the territory granted to Abraham (Gen. 15:18; see also Exod. 23:31). David extended his territory as far as the Euphrates when he fought the Aramean king Hadadezer (2 Sam. 8:3), and so the dimensions of Israel at its apex under Solomon are described as controlling all the kingdoms “from the Euphrates River to the land of the Philistines, as far as the border of Egypt [i.e., the southern limit of his realm]” (1 Kings 4:21).

The Tigris River. Along with the Euphrates, the Tigris (Heb. khiddeqel) was one of the two rivers of ancient Mesopotamia. The Tigris lies east of the Euphrates and runs over a course of approximately 1,150 miles from northwest to southeast, finally joining with the Euphrates and emptying into the Persian Gulf. In antiquity, the cities of Calah, Nineveh, and Asshur lay along the Tigris. The Tigris is mentioned twice in the Bible: first, as one of the four headwaters emanating from the garden of Eden (Gen. 2:14) and, second, as the location of Daniel’s visionary experience (Dan. 10:4).

The Jordan River. The Jordan (Heb. yarden) runs southward from the Hula Valley into the Sea of Galilee (also known as the Sea of Tiberias; modern Lake Kinneret) and from there through a river valley (the “plain of the Jordan” [see Gen. 13:10]) to the Dead Sea.

In the OT, several memorable stories are set near the Jordan. In addition to Joshua’s dramatic crossing of the Jordan (Josh. 3:1–17), the “fords of the Jordan” were strategic locations, and it was there that the Gileadites slaughtered forty-two thousand Ephraimites as they attempted to return to their territory on the western side of the Jordan (Judg. 12:5). Elisha instructed Naaman, the leprous Aramean general, to bathe seven times in the Jordan for the healing of his condition (2 Kings 5:10). When Elisha’s companions wished to build shelters for themselves, they went to the Jordan, where they knew they would find abundant vegetation and poles (2 Kings 6:2; cf. Zech. 11:3). When one of them dropped an iron ax head into the water, Elisha caused it to float to the surface (2 Kings 6:6–7).

In the NT, the Jordan was the site of much of John the Baptist’s ministry (Matt. 3:5–6; Mark 1:5; Luke 3:3). John 1:28 specifies that John was on the eastern bank (also John 3:26; 10:40). It was in the waters of the Jordan that he baptized those who came to him, including Jesus (Matt. 3:13; Mark 1:9; Luke 3:21).

The wadi of Egypt. In a number of texts the “wadi of Egypt” (or “brook of Egypt”) represents the far southern limit of Israelite territory. Some ancient interpreters understood this as referring to the Pelusian branch of the Nile River delta, while most modern scholars favor the Besor River, farther east, in present-day Israel. Several biblical passages refer to the Shihor River as marking a boundary between Egypt and Israelite territory (Josh. 13:3; 19:26; 1 Chron. 13:5; Isa. 23:3; Jer. 2:18).

The Orontes River. Although it is not mentioned in the Bible, the Orontes marked an important international boundary in the biblical world. The Orontes begins in the Bekaa Valley in present-day Lebanon, then flows northward between the Lebanon and the Anti-Lebanon mountain ranges before turning sharply westward to empty into the Mediterranean Sea. Along the Orontes lay the kingdom of Hamath (see, e.g., 2 Sam. 8:9; 2 Chron. 8:3; Jer. 39:5).

Save

“Salvation” is the broadest term used to refer to God’s actions to solve the plight brought about by humankind’s sinful rebellion and its consequences. It is one of the central themes of the entire Bible, running from Genesis through Revelation.

In many places in the OT, salvation refers to being rescued from physical rather than spiritual trouble. Fearing the possibility of retribution from his brother Esau, Jacob prays, “Save me, I pray, from the hand of my brother Esau” (Gen. 32:11). The actions of Joseph in Egypt saved many from famine (45:5 7; 47:25; 50:20). Frequently in the psalms, individuals pray for salvation from enemies that threaten one’s safety or life (Pss. 17:14; 18:3; 70:1–3; 71:1–4; 91:1–3).

Related to this usage are places where the nation of Israel and/or its king were saved from enemies. The defining example of this is the exodus, whereby God delivered his people from their enslavement to the Egyptians, culminating in the destruction of Pharaoh and his army (Exod. 14:1–23). From that point forward in the history of Israel, God repeatedly saved Israel from its enemies, whether through a judge (e.g., Judg. 2:16; 3:9), a king (2 Kings 14:27), or even a shepherd boy (1 Sam. 17:1–58).

But these examples of national deliverance had a profound spiritual component as well. God did not save his people from physical danger as an end in itself; it was the necessary means for his plan to save them from their sins. The OT recognizes the need for salvation from sin (Pss. 39:8; 51:14; 120:2) but, as the NT makes evident, does not provide a final solution (Heb. 9:1–10:18). One of the clearest places that physical and spiritual salvation come together is Isa. 40–55, where Judah’s exile from the land and prophesied return are seen as the physical manifestation of the much more fundamental spiritual exile that resulted from sin. To address that far greater reality, God announces the day when the Suffering Servant would once and for all take away the sins of his people (Isa. 52:13–53:12).

As in the OT, the NT has places where salvation refers to being rescued from physical difficulty. Paul, for example, speaks of being saved from various physical dangers, including execution (2 Cor. 1:8–10; Phil. 1:19; 2 Tim. 4:17). In the midst of a fierce storm, Jesus’ disciples cry out, “Lord, save us! We’re going to drown!” (Matt. 8:25). But far more prominent are the places in the Gospels and Acts where physical healings are described with the verb sōzō, used to speak of salvation from sin. The healing of the woman with the hemorrhage (Mark 5:25–34), the blind man along the road (Luke 18:35–43), and even the man possessed by a demon (Luke 8:26–39), just to name a few, are described with the verb sōzō. The same verb, however, is also used to refer to Jesus forgiving someone’s sins (Luke 7:36–50) and to his mission to save the lost from their sins (Luke 19:10). Such overlap is a foretaste of the holistic salvation (physical and spiritual) that will be completed in the new heaven and earth (Rev. 21–22). The NT Epistles give extensive descriptions of how the work of Jesus Christ saves his people from their sins.

Servant

There are numerous relationships in the OT that could be characterized as following a servant-master model. These included service to the monarchy (2 Sam. 9:2), within households (Gen. 16:8), in the temple (1 Sam. 2:15), or to God himself (Judg. 2:8). We also see extensive slavery laws in passages such as Exod. 21:1 11; Lev. 25:39–55; Deut. 15:12–18. The slavery laws were concerned with the proper treatment of Hebrew slaves and included guidelines for their eventual release and freedom. For example, Hebrew slaves who had sold themselves to others were to serve for a period of six years. On the seventh year, known also as the Sabbath Year, they were to be released. Once released, they were not to be sent away empty-handed, but rather were to be supported from the owner’s “threshing floor” and “winepress.” Slaves also had certain rights that gave them special privileges and protection from their masters. Captured slaves, for example, were allowed rest on the Sabbath (Exod. 20:10) and during special holidays (Deut. 16:11, 14). They could also be freed if their master permanently hurt or crippled them (Exod. 21:26–27). Also, severe punishment was imposed on a person who beat a slave to death (Exod. 21:20–21).

Slavery was very common in the first century AD, and there were many different kinds of slaves. For example, slaves might live in an extended household (oikos) in which they were born, or they might choose to sell themselves into this situation (1 Pet. 2:18–25). Although slavery was a significant part of society in the first century AD, we never see Jesus or the apostles encourage slavery. Instead, both Paul and Peter encouraged godly character and obedience for slaves within this system (Eph. 6:5–8; Col. 3:22–25; 1 Tim. 6:1–2; Philemon; 1 Pet. 2:18–21). Likewise, masters were encouraged to be kind and fair to their slaves (Eph. 6:9; Col. 4:1). Later in the NT, slave trading was condemned by the apostle Paul as contrary to “sound doctrine” and “the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God” (1 Tim. 1:10–11).

Jesus embodied the idea of a servant in word and deed. He fulfilled the role of the “Servant of the Lord,” the Suffering Servant predicted by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 42:1–4; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12). He also took on the role of a servant in the Gospels, identifying himself as the Son of Man who came to serve (Mark 10:45) and washing the disciples’ feet (John 13:4–5). Paul says that in the incarnation Jesus took on “the very nature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7).

The special relationship between Jesus and his followers is captured in the servant-master language of the NT Epistles, especially in Paul’s letters (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:1). This language focuses not so much on the societal status of these servants as on the allegiance and honor owed to Christ Jesus.

Shepherd

Shepherds were pastoralists who herded sheep and goats for meat, milk, clothing, and sacrifices. Shepherding was an integral part of life and a potent symbol in Israelite culture, reflected in biblical portrayals of Abel (Gen. 4:2), Moses (Exod. 3:1), David (1 Sam. 16:11), and Jesus (Luke 2:8 20; John 10:11, 14).

A shepherd could herd his or her own flock (Gen. 30:37–43). Sons (Gen. 37:2), daughters (Gen. 29:6, 9), or hirelings (Gen. 13:7; 1 Sam. 25:7; Luke 17:7) could assume the task. As agriculture developed and crops were cultivated, shepherds became marginalized (note that it was the youngest son of Jesse, David, who tended the sheep [1 Sam. 16:11–13]) and even despised (Gen. 46:34). Shepherds could live in villages, daily herding their flock to and from nearby arable land (Gen. 29:7–14). Once all the grazing land had been consumed, shepherds led the flock to pastureland far enough from town to prohibit daily returns. They would then live a seminomadic existence, wandering when new grazing land and water were needed (Gen. 37:12; cf. Isa. 13:20). Shepherds constructed makeshift enclosures out of available materials (stones, brush) or used a cave and remained with the flock throughout the night (Gen. 31:40; Song 1:8; Luke 2:8)

The vital role of shepherding in ancient Near Eastern culture naturally led to the metaphorical use of the term to refer to both civil authorities (Num. 27:17; 1 Kings 22:17; Isa. 44:28; Ezek. 34:1–19) and deity (Gen. 48:15; 49:24; Pss. 23:1; 78:52), both in Israel and among its neighbors. Both the exodus (Exod. 15:13, 17; Ps. 78:52–55, 71–72) and the return from Babylonian exile (Ps. 44:11–23; Jer. 23:1–8; 31:8–14) are portrayed in pastoral terms as Yahweh shepherding his people to safe pasture. In the NT, Jesus called himself the “good shepherd” (John 10:1–16), and the metaphor is extended to church leaders who are to imitate the good shepherd in their provision and protection of God’s people (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet. 5:1–3).

Son of Man

In the OT, the phrase “son of man” usually refers to humanity in general or to a specific individual. In Ezekiel, for instance, God addresses the prophet himself as “son of man,” possibly indicating his human status compared with God or, alternatively, highlighting his unique status as God’s prophet in contrast with the rest of humanity.

One of the most crucial OT “son of man” texts is Dan. 7 because of its influence on the “Son of Man” in the Gospel tradition. The first half of the chapter records Daniel’s vision (7:1 14), while the second half contains its interpretation (7:15–27). In the vision Daniel sees “one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven” (7:13). This exalted figure contrasts with the first three beasts, which are “like a lion” (7:4), “like a bear” (7:5), and “like a leopard” (7:6). The fourth beast is so gruesome that it defies comparison with any species of the animal kingdom (7:7). Many agree that the beasts likely refer to ancient world empires; however, the referent of “one like a son of man” has given rise to much debate. The figure may refer to earthly Israel, since at this figure’s vindication he is endowed with authority and glory. This is precisely what “the holy people of the Most High” receive in verse 27. In this way, the “one like a son of man” is a symbol for the persecuted, earthly saints. Alternatively, the exalted figure could be a heavenly being such as the archangel Gabriel (9:21) or Michael (10:13; 12:1). Here “one like a son of man” is the heavenly counterpart and leader of suffering Israel and fights a cosmic battle on its behalf.

In the NT the term “Son of Man” occurs mostly in the Gospels and, with the exception of John 12:34 (where the crowd quotes Jesus), is uttered exclusively by Jesus himself. Unlike in Daniel, the epithet occurs in the Gospels with the definite article, likely indicating that the Son of Man was a known figure. In first-century Judaism many Jews believed that the Son of Man would return at the end as savior and judge. The OT provides the most helpful background for understanding the Son of Man in the Gospels.

The Son of Man sayings in the Gospels fall within three categories: earthly, suffering-resurrection, and future-vindication sayings. Starting with the earthly sayings, in Mark 2:10, for example, the Son of Man has “authority on earth to forgive sins,” and in 2:28 he exercises dominion over the Sabbath. Although in Daniel the Son of Man does not receive such authority until his appearance in Yahweh’s presence at his vindication, the Son of Man in the Gospels exercises such authority during his earthly ministry. Jesus also predicts that the Son of Man will suffer, die, and be raised again. In Mark, these suffering-resurrection predictions occur three times (8:31; 9:31; 10:33–34). Echoing Dan. 7, this plight of Jesus recalls the suffering of the holy ones caused by the little horn (v. 21). If the “one like a son of man” represents the holy ones in their vindication, then it is reasonable that he does so in their suffering as well; however, the text of Daniel is silent on this point. Finally, the clearest reference to Dan. 7 occurs in the future-vindication sayings. In Mark 13:26; 14:62 the Son of Man comes with/on the clouds, which points to his vindication over the Sanhedrin, the dominant adversaries of Jesus in Mark. Matthew appears to develop even more than Mark the judicial responsibilities of the Son of Man (Matt. 13:41–43; 25:31–33). Meanwhile, in Luke the church must stay alert and be prepared for the return of the Son of Man (12:39–40; 17:22–37; 21:34–36).

Finally, the Son of Man in Revelation is in the heavenly temple functioning as both judge and caretaker of the seven churches (Rev. 1:12–20) and reaps the saints while “seated on the cloud” (14:14–16).

Suffer

While in the OT suffering is regularly an indication of divine displeasure (Lev. 26:16 36; Deut. 28:20–68; Ps. 44:10–12; Isa. 1:25; cf. Heb. 10:26–31), in the NT it becomes the means by which blessing comes to humanity.

The Bible often shows that sinfulness results in suffering (Gen. 2:17; 6:5–7; Exod. 32:33; 2 Sam. 12:13–18; Rom. 1:18; 1 Cor. 11:27–30). Job’s friends mistakenly assume that he has suffered because of disobedience (Job 4:7–9; 8:3–4, 20; 11:6). Job passionately defends himself (12:4; 23:10), and in the final chapter of the book God commends Job and condemns his friends for their accusations (42:7–8; cf. 1:1, 22; 2:10). The writer makes clear that suffering is not necessarily evidence of sinfulness. Like Job’s friends, Jesus’ disciples assume that blindness is an indication of sinfulness (John 9:1–2). Jesus rejects this simplistic notion of retributive suffering (John 9:3, 6–7; cf. Luke 13:1–5).

The NT writers reveal that Jesus’ suffering was prophesied in the OT (Mark 9:12; 14:21; Luke 18:31–32; 24:46; Acts 3:18; 17:3; 26:22–23; 1 Pet. 1:11; referring to OT texts such as Ps. 22; Isa. 52:13–53:12; Zech. 13:7). The Lord Jesus is presented as the answer to human suffering: (1) Through the incarnation, God’s Son personally experienced human suffering (Phil. 2:6–8; Heb. 2:9; 5:8). (2) Through his suffering, Christ paid the price for sin (Rom. 4:25; 3:25–26), so that believers are set free from sin (Rom. 6:6, 18, 22) and helped in temptation (Heb. 2:18). (3) Christ Jesus intercedes for his suffering followers (Rom. 8:34–35). (4) Christ is the example in suffering (1 Pet. 2:21; 4:1; cf. Phil. 3:10; 2 Cor. 1:5; 4:10; 1 Pet. 4:13), and though he died once for sins (Heb. 10:12), he continues to suffer as his church suffers (Acts 9:4–5). (5) Christ provides hope of resurrection (Rom. 6:5; 1 Cor. 15:20–26; Phil. 3:10–11) and a future life without suffering or death (Rev. 21:4).

The NT writers repeatedly mention the benefits of suffering, for it has become part of God’s work of redemption. The suffering of believers accompanies the proclamation and advancement of the gospel (Acts 5:41–42; 9:15–16; 2 Cor. 4:10–11; 6:2–10; Phil. 1:12, 27–29; 1 Thess. 2:14–16; 2 Tim. 1:8; 4:5) and results in salvation (Matt. 10:22; 2 Cor. 1:6; 1 Thess. 2:16; 2 Tim. 2:10; Heb. 10:39), faith (Heb. 10:32–34, 38–39; 1 Pet. 1:7), the kingdom of God (Acts 14:22), resurrection from the dead (Phil. 3:10–11), and the crown of life (Rev. 2:10). It is an essential part of the development toward Christian maturity (Rom. 5:3–4; 2 Cor. 4:11; Heb. 12:4; James 1:3–4; 1 Pet. 1:7; 4:1).

Suffering is associated with knowing Christ (Phil. 3:10); daily inward renewal (2 Cor. 4:16); purity, understanding, patience, kindness, sincere love, truthful speech, the power of God (2 Cor. 4:4–10); comfort and endurance (2 Cor. 1:6); obedience (Heb. 5:8); blessing (1 Pet. 3:14; 4:14); glory (Rom. 8:17; 2 Cor. 4:17); and joy (Matt. 5:12; Acts 5:41; 2 Cor. 6:10; 12:10; James 1:2; 1 Pet. 1:6; 4:13). Other positive results of Christian suffering include perseverance (Rom. 5:3; James 1:3), character and hope (Rom. 5:4), strength (2 Cor. 12:10), and maturity and completeness (James 1:4). Present suffering is light and momentary when compared to future glory (Matt. 5:10–12; Acts 14:22; Rom. 8:18; 2 Cor. 4:17; Heb. 10:34–36; 1 Pet. 1:5–7; 4:12–13).

Throughout the Bible, believers are instructed to help those who suffer. The OT law provides principles for assisting the poor, the disadvantaged, and the oppressed (Exod. 20:10; 21:2; 23:11; Lev. 19:13, 34; 25:10, 35; Deut. 14:28–29; 15:1–2; 24:19–21). Jesus regularly taught his followers to help the poor (Matt. 5:42; 6:3; 19:21; 25:34–36; Luke 4:18; 12:33; 14:13, 21). It is believers’ responsibility to show mercy (Matt. 5:7; 9:13), be generous (Rom. 12:8; 2 Cor. 8:7; 1 Tim. 6:18), mourn with mourners (Rom. 12:15), carry other’s burdens (Gal. 6:1–2), and visit prisoners (Matt. 25:36, 43). See also Servant of the Lord.

Watch

A chronological division of the night. The term is derived from soldiers or others guarding, or “watching,” something during specified portions of the night. In the OT, there apparently were three watches or divisions in the night. Gideon and his men struck the Midianites at the beginning of the “middle watch” (Judg. 7:19). The Roman system had four divisions or watches in the night, and the Gospels report Jesus walking on the lake during the “fourth watch” (Matt. 14:25; Mark 6:48 ESV, NASB, NKJV). The term can also be used to refer to the guard placed on duty to guard something (Neh. 4:9).

Water

Water is mentioned extensively in the Bible due to its prevalence in creation and its association with life and purity. The cosmic waters of Gen. 1 are held back by the sky (Gen. 1:6 7; cf. Pss. 104:6, 13; 148:4). God is enthroned on these waters in his cosmic temple (Pss. 29:10; 104:3, 13; cf. Gen. 1:2; Ps. 78:69; Isa. 66:1). These same waters were released in the time of Noah (Gen. 7:10–12; Ps. 104:7–9).

Water is also an agent of life and fertility and is therefore associated with the presence of God. Both God himself and his temple are described as the source of life-giving water (Jer. 2:13; 17:13; Joel 3:18; cf. Isa. 12:2–3). Ezekiel envisions this water flowing from beneath the temple and streaming down into the Dead Sea, where it brings life and fecundity (Ezek. 47:1–12; cf. Zech. 14:8). The book of Revelation, employing the same image, describes “the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb” (22:1). This imagery is also illustrated in archaeological remains associated with temples. Cisterns are attested beneath the Dome of the Rock (presumably the location of the Jerusalem temple) and beneath the Judahite temple at Arad. Other temples, such as the Israelite high place at Tel Dan, are located close to freshwater springs. The Gihon spring in the City of David may also be associated with the Jerusalem temple (Ps. 46:4; cf. Gen. 2:13).

This OT imagery forms the background for Jesus’ teaching regarding eternal life in the writings of the apostle John. Jesus claims to be the source of living water, and he offers it freely to everyone who thirsts (John 4:10–15; 7:37; Rev. 21:6; 22:17; cf. Rev. 7:17). This water, which produces “a spring of water welling up to eternal life” (John 4:14), is the work of the Holy Spirit in the believer (John 7:38–39).

Water is also described in the Bible as an agent of cleansing. It is extensively employed in purification rituals in the OT. In the NT, the ritual of water baptism signifies the purity and new life of the believer (Matt. 3:11, 16; Mark 1:8–10; Luke 3:16; John 1:26, 31–33; 3:23; Acts 1:5; 8:36–39; 10:47; 11:16; 1 Pet. 3:20–21; cf. Eph. 5:26; Heb. 10:22).

Finally, the NT also reveals Jesus as the Lord of water. He walks on water (Matt. 14:28–29; John 6:19), turns water into wine (John 2:7–9; 4:46), and controls water creatures (Matt. 17:27; John 21:6). Most important, Jesus commands “the winds and the water, and they obey him” (Luke 8:25; cf. Ps. 29:3).

Word

“Word” is used in the Bible to refer to the speech of God in oral, written, or incarnate form. In each of these uses, God desires to make himself known to his people. The communication of God is always personal and relational, whether he speaks to call things into existence (Gen. 1) or to address an individual directly (Gen. 2:16 17; Exod. 3:14). The prophets and the apostles received the word of God (Deut. 18:14–22; John 16:13), some of which was proclaimed but not recorded. The greatest revelation in this regard is the person of Jesus Christ, who is called the “Word” of God (John 1:1, 14).

The psalmist declared God’s word to be an eternal object of hope and trust that gives light and direction (Ps. 119), and Jesus declared the word to be truth (John 17:17). The word is particularized and intimately connected with God himself by means of the key phrases “your word,” “the word of God,” “the word of the Lord,” “word about Christ,” and “the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17; Col. 3:16). Our understanding of the word is informed by a variety of terms and contexts in the canon of Scripture, a collection of which is found in Ps. 119.

The theme of the word in Ps. 119 is continued and clarified in the NT, accentuating the intimate connection between the word of God and God himself. The “Word” of God is the eternal Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1; 1 John 1:1–4), who took on flesh and blood so that we might see the glory of the eternal God. The sovereign glory of Christ as the Word of God is depicted in the vision of John in Rev. 19:13. As the Word of God, Jesus Christ ultimately gives us our lives (John 1:4; 6:33; 10:10), sustains our lives (John 5:24; 6:51, 54; 8:51), and ultimately renders a just judgment regarding our lives (John 5:30; 8:16, 26; 9:39; cf. Matt. 25:31–33; Heb. 4:12).

Yoke

A wooden crosspiece fastened to the neck and shoulders of one or, more often, two animals (e.g., 1 Sam. 6:7) to facilitate labor. Yokes were also used by individuals to balance a load suspended from the shoulders (Num. 4:10, 12; 13:23). As such, the yoke also functioned as a symbol of subjection (Gen. 27:40; Lev. 26:13; Deut. 28:48; Jer. 27:2 7; Gal. 5:1; 1 Tim. 6:1), sometimes of joint labor (2 Cor. 6:14; Phil. 4:3), and is closely associated with pairs of animals (Luke 14:19; 1 Sam. 11:7). See also Weights and Measures.

Direct Matches

Pasture

An open area where herders tended sheep, goats, or cattle (Joel 1:18) or where wild donkeys (Job 39:8) or deer (Lam. 1:6) grazed. The best pasture was open, quiet, and peaceful (1 Chron. 4:40), but it might be the result of God’s destruction (Isa. 32:14). Conversely, good pasture represented God’s restoration (Ezek. 34:14) or God himself (Jer. 50:7).

Shepherd

A shepherd’s tools included a clublike rod used to guard the flock and fend off predators and thieves (Gen. 31:39; Isa. 31:4; Mic. 7:14) and as a tool for dividing the flock (Lev. 27:32; Jer. 33:13); a crook or staff to retrieve strays and injured (Ezek. 34:16; Zech. 11:7); a sling and some sort of pouch (1 Sam. 17:40); and even dogs (Job 30:1). A shepherd was held accountable for any losses in the flock and was required to pay restitution (Gen. 31:39; Exod. 22:10–13).

Secondary Matches

The following suggestions occured because Ezekiel 34:1-31 is mentioned in the definition.

Binding and Loosing

Binding can mean physically restraining a person or people (Judg. 15:13; 2 Kings 25:7; Job 16:8; Pss. 119:61; 149:8), mending, as with a wound (Isa. 61:1; Ezek. 34:16; Hos. 6:1), or taking a legally constraining oath (1 Sam. 14:27–30; Neh. 10:29; Jer. 50:5). The opposite of binding is loosing or setting free, which can describe literally being freed from bonds (e.g., Acts 16:26) or the release from something that is binding.

The law, a binding covenant between Israel and God, is to be literally bound on one’s forehead as a reminder (Deut. 6:8; 11:18). Non-Israelites who wish to identify with the God of Israel can bind themselves to his laws (Isa. 56:6). In Num. 30:6, 9, 13, an oath taken by a young woman still in her father’s house will be binding only if the father is not against it. If he is against it, it is not binding and she is loosed from it (30:5). This is the same in the case of a married woman, whose approval has to come from the husband. However, for widows or divorced women, all pledges they make are binding since there are no men in their lives to void the pledges (30:9).

While contracts were binding, some had time limits. For example, the seventh year and the fiftieth year (Jubilee) allowed for cancellation of such binding contracts as slavery or land ownership (Lev. 25:10–54; 27:24).

The binding of Isaac (Gen. 22), traditionally known as the Akedah, has theological significance for both Christians and Jews. It is interpreted as a form of resurrection, a coming from the dead for Isaac after Yahweh had instructed his father, Abraham, to sacrifice him (Heb. 11:17–19). God inquires of Job whether he can “bind the chains of the Pleiades” or “loosen Orion’s belt” (Job 38:31).

The book of Proverbs encourages the wise to metaphorically bind love and faithfulness around their necks (3:3) and their parents’ commands and teachings to the heart (6:21) and the finger (7:3); it also talks of folly being bound up in the heart of a child (22:15), perhaps alluded to by Paul in Rom. 11:32 when he says that God has bound all people to disobedience that he may have mercy on them.

Introducing his ministry in Luke 4:18, Jesus quotes Isa. 61:1, which talks of binding up the brokenhearted, a reference to his healing ministry. Further, binding and loosing are found in Jesus’ commissioning of his disciples (Matt. 16:19; 18:18; cf. John 20:23), where it may be referring to the binding of demons and loosing of demoniacs bound or oppressed by demons (cf. Mark 3:14–16; 6:7; Luke 13:6). Since Jesus has the power to bind and loose (John 8:36), he chooses to empower his followers to do the same. Binding Satan is the subject of the ultimate eschatological battle in Jewish lore (T. Levi 18:11–12) and becomes central in Christianity. Jesus encounters satanic forces embodied in humans and looses such people from the chains of Satan (Mark 5:3; Luke 13:12, 16). Ultimately, Satan is to be bound for a millennium and loosed only for eternal damnation (Rev. 20:1–3).

Paul invokes Jewish law about marriage by claiming that one is bound in marriage only as long as one’s partner is alive (Rom. 7:2). In this way, Paul explains how Christians are dead to the law, because Jesus has died on their behalf, thus setting them free from the law (Rom. 7:4–6; cf. Heb. 9:15). To the Corinthians also he talks of the binding nature of marriage but with a caveat: if the marriage is between a believer and a nonbeliever, and if the nonbeliever leaves, then the believer is not bound (1 Cor. 7). But for Paul, being set free from sin (Rom. 8:2) means being bound to God (6:22).

Book of Ezekiel

The book of Ezekiel is widely recognized as one of the most idiosyncratic of the OT prophetic books. Some rabbis prohibited anyone under the age of thirty from reading portions of the book (i.e., the visions of God’s glory in chapters 1 and 10 might lead to dangerous speculations about the mystery of God).

Authorship and Date

Up until the beginning of the twentieth century, most scholars viewed the unparalleled extensive dating in the book (1:1–2; 8:1; 20:1; 24:1; 26:1; 29:1, 17; 30:20; 31:1; 32:1, 17; 33:21; 40:1), along with the symmetry achieved by deliberate thematic repetition (i.e., the “watchman” passages in 3:16–21; 33:1–9; Ezekiel’s message of judgment/hope addressed to the mountains of Israel respectively in chaps. 6; 36) as indisputable proof that the book was the product of a single author. Even during the first one hundred years or so of historical-critical dominance in OT research, historical-critical investigations tended to confirm the traditional views of the unity, authenticity, and date of the book of Ezekiel, although the opinions of the majority of scholars began to shift early in the twentieth century.

For much of the first half of the twentieth century, issues of authorship, dating, and provenance of the prophet’s ministry dominated critical research on the book of Ezekiel. The book’s peculiarities lent themselves to various suggestions regarding the place of Ezekiel’s ministry. If, as 1:1–3 records, Ezekiel was called to prophetic ministry among the exilic community in Babylon, how does one explain Ezekiel’s apparent knowledge of particular events in Jerusalem, such as the death of Pelatiah (11:13) and the various forms of idolatry taking place in and around the temple complex in chapters 8–11? Furthermore, what is one to make of Ezekiel’s words to those who remained behind in Jerusalem (5:8–17; 11:5–12; 33:23–29)?

Many of those who sought to defend a straightforward understanding of the book’s own claims looked to mysticism or psychology to explain Ezekiel’s visionary involvement in events occurring some seven hundred miles away. Explanations for the apparent idiosyncrasies of his ministry—including extremely violent and graphic language, his extended period of “muteness,” various striking sign-acts, and the extended length and emotional intensity of his visionary experiences—tended to bleed into the discussion of how to understand his visionary experience of being transported to remote locations. Earlier solutions ranged from noting the similarities between Ezekiel’s experiences and those of the mystics to characterizing Ezekiel as having a “complex personality” and as one whose life was more attuned to the realities of the supernatural world.

Geographical solutions to account for Ezekiel’s apparent knowledge of events in Jerusalem include two suggestions. The first is that Ezekiel ministered only in Jerusalem. His preaching forms the core of chapters 1–39, and a later exilic redactor updated these chapters to address the concerns of an exilic audience and also added chapters 40–48. The second suggestion is that Ezekiel ministered in Jerusalem from 593 BC until the fall of Jerusalem, at which time he was taken into captivity in Babylon, where he continued his ministry among the exiles. The appeal of a dual-ministry approach is that it accounts for the double geographical focus of Ezekiel without resorting to ecstatic or supernatural flight from one city to the other or positing extensive secondhand editing of the book.

On the other hand, there is evidence from other biblical materials that ecstatic or visionary experiences of this sort were part of the prophetic tradition. Many of Ezekiel’s apparent idiosyncrasies actually resemble characteristics of the preclassical prophets. Viewing Ezekiel’s ministry as part of an accepted cultural tradition provides a more persuasive explanation for the text as it stands. For example, the evidence of continued contacts between the Jerusalem and exilic communities (Jer. 29; Ezek. 33:21) suffices to explain whatever knowledge Ezekiel possessed of events in Jerusalem. The manner of their presentation in his visions is dictated by the cultural standards and expectations of a prophet operating under the influence of the “hand of Yahweh” and by the rhetorical goals of his preaching.

It is entirely plausible to suggest that the author of Ezekiel was an Israelite who was a rough contemporary of the tragic events surrounding the dismantling of the Judahite monarchy by the Neo-Babylonian Empire.

Historical Background

The book of Ezekiel itself yields pertinent information about Ezekiel’s world, which, when supplemented with other biblical texts (2 Kings, Jeremiah, Daniel, and Habakkuk), enables us to reconstruct a working picture of the social, historical, and theological milieu in which Ezekiel lived and ministered.

In 701 BC the kingdom of Judah escaped annihilation by the Assyrians, as had befallen the northern kingdom in 722 BC, due in large part to the ministry of Isaiah and the faith of King Hezekiah (2 Kings 18:1–20:21; Isa. 36–37), albeit at a crippling financial expense in the form of heavy tribute to Assyria. After Hezekiah’s death in 698 BC, his son Manasseh reversed his father’s religious reforms, which meant disaster spiritually (2 Kings 21:1–18; 2 Chron. 33:1–11) and survival politically. Judah continued to exist for most of the seventh century BC as a vassal kingdom under Assyrian domination. The spiritual decline of Judah was briefly challenged during the reign of Josiah, who ruled in the years 640–609 BC. However, Jeremiah’s strong invectives against empty religious formalism and social irresponsibility during much of Josiah’s reign suggest that Josiah’s attempts at religious reforms were only nominally successful and did not penetrate to the populace at large.

While Josiah was seeking to institute his reforms, power in the international scene was shifting. After the death of Ashurbanipal, the last great Assyrian ruler, the Assyrian Empire began to wane. The Neo-Babylonian Empire, founded by Nabopolassar (626 BC), dealt Assyria its final blow with the conquest of Nineveh (612 BC), followed by the destruction of Harran a few years later. This, coupled with the untimely death of Josiah in battle against the Egyptians at Megiddo (609 BC), spelled disaster for Judah (2 Kings 23:29–30; 2 Chron. 35:20–24). Nebuchadnezzar assumed leadership of Babylon after the death of his father (605 BC). Later that same year, Nebuchadnezzar defeated Egyptian forces at Carchemish and also ordered the deportation of some of the educated young Jewish men to Babylon (Dan. 1:1–4). This was followed by a second deportation in 597 BC, which included King Jehoiachin, Ezekiel, and about ten thousand Jews (2 Kings 24:14). Zedekiah was placed on the Judean throne as a puppet king. His rebellion against Babylon (588 BC) led to Nebuchadnezzar’s one-and-a-half-year siege of Jerusalem before its final demise in 586 BC.

The political crisis of 597–586 BC led to a crisis of faith. The promises of an eternal Davidic kingdom (2 Sam. 7:7–16; Ps. 89:3–4, 35–37) and Yahweh’s vow to set up his abode forever in the temple at Jerusalem (Pss. 68:16; 132:13–14) seemed to be failing. At the beginning of Ezekiel’s ministry, the Davidic promise was already under a cloud: Jehoiachin, the rightful heir of the line of David, had been taken in captivity to Babylon, and in his place sat the puppet king Zedekiah. In addition, the land of Canaan had played a significant role in shaping the Israelites’ understanding of themselves as Yahweh’s chosen people (Gen. 12:1–3; Deut. 4:37–38; 7:1–11). Because true worship of God was so closely aligned with the Israelites’ inheritance of the land (Deut. 12), to be outside the land immediately raised grave concern about their status before God (1 Sam. 26:19). To be outside the promised land would lead in a few short years to a questioning of whether true worship was even possible any longer (Ps. 137:4). Throughout this period, Ezekiel (and Jeremiah) consistently portrayed Nebuchadnezzar as an unwitting pagan king commissioned by Yahweh to execute the covenant curses on the recalcitrant southern kingdom.

Far from recognizing these events as such, many Israelites in the rebellion party, supported by rebellion prophets, asserted their claim to divine favor and denied the validity of prophetic indictments. They supported their claims with appeals to the miraculous deliverance from the formidable Assyrian army (701 BC), selective use of Scripture’s focus on the inviolability of Jerusalem and the temple, the unconditional promises of an eternal Davidic kingdom (see above), and predictions by rebellion prophets of a quick return for the exiles (Jer. 28; 29:15–32; Ezek. 13).

From Ezekiel’s perspective, the people of Judah were making a liar out of Yahweh. Yahweh had always demanded their exclusive worship. In light of their recent history of idolatry, the only appropriate response was to execute judgment on them (Ezek. 20:4–44). By denying this, the only explanation left to the rebellion party for the destruction of Jerusalem and exile was that a mighty and wicked kingdom that they intensely hated (Ps. 137:4) had bested Yahweh.

From this historical survey one may distill the overall situation faced by Ezekiel into a set of opinions probably shared by the majority of Ezekiel’s fellow exiles. First, there was a widespread belief that it was proper to worship other deities in addition to Yahweh. Also, it was generally believed that the people of Judah were in good standing with Yahweh and were objects of his favor, and that he would shortly bring them deliverance. These beliefs combined to eliminate serious consideration of the possibility that destruction of the kingdom and exile were Yahweh’s intention. Consequently, once the kingdom was destroyed and exile had become a reality, Yahweh’s power and/or character became suspect in the minds of many. Furthermore, the perceived link between the land and the presence and blessing of Yahweh cast the exilic experience in an extremely negative light. For those gripped by these convictions, exile raised the specter of hopelessness. The sense of hopelessness was intensified by its conjunction with the belief that destruction of the kingdom and exile were undeserved. There was no way to integrate the outcome of the Babylonian crisis with their previously held beliefs about Yahweh and his purposes for Israel.

Literary Considerations

Structure and outline. There are several frameworks that can help the reader understand the “inner logic” of the book.

Tripartite structure. In chapters 1–24 the theme of God’s impending judgment on the nation of Israel for violation of the covenant laws is emphatically repeated in both word and sign-act. Chapters 25–32 serve a Janus (double) function, connecting with chapters 1–24 by continuing the theme of God’s judgment, now directed toward the foreign nations. The pronouncements of coming judgment in these chapters anticipate the last part of the book, with the message of hope for Israel that dominates chapters 33–48. The emphasis on divine judgment in the first half of the book is not a de facto statement that God is finished with Israel; rather, it is recognition that only by means of judgment (both of Israel and their neighbors) is future restoration and reconciliation possible. Many recognize a further subdivision in the third section, with chapters 33–39 focusing on the renewal of the nation and chapters 40–48 dealing with Ezekiel’s temple vision.

This yields the following outline:

I. God’s Judgment on Israel (1–24)

II. God’s Judgment on the Foreign Nations (25–32)

III. Hope for Israel (33–48)

A. Renewal of the nation (33–39)

B. Ezekiel’s temple vision (40–48)

Visions. Visions open and close the book (chaps. 1–3; 40–48), with two additional visions in between: temple idolatry and the incremental departure of God’s glory as judgment is executed (chaps. 8–11), and the valley of dry bones (37:1–14).

The movement of God’s glory. Ezekiel’s sustained concern for the temple as the place where God’s glory dwells provides a unifying structure to the book as Ezekiel chronicles God’s glory coming to Babylon in his ominous inaugural vision (chaps. 1–3), the incremental departure of God’s glory from the temple and the city (chaps. 8–11), and the return of God’s glory in the vision of the new temple (chaps. 40–48).

Genre. The book of Ezekiel is considered by many to be a literary masterpiece composed of various genres, including extended visionary narrative (1–3; 8–11; 37:1–14; 40–48), allegory (16; 23), poetry (19; 26–28), parable (17; 24:3), and popular sayings (8:12; 9:9; 11:3, 15; 12:22, 27; 18:2; 33:10, 17, 20, 24, 30; 37:11). Other prophets quoted popular sayings (Isa. 40:27; Jer. 31:29; Amos 5:14; Hag. 1:2; Mal. 1:2, 6–7, 12–13), but the quotations are far more frequent in Ezekiel and are couched in uniquely theocentric language. In each case it is God who informs Ezekiel what the people are saying. Ezekiel uses popular sayings of the people to establish their hostility toward God and to vindicate God by demonstrating his covenant faithfulness. The unparalleled frequency of Ezekiel’s use of popular sayings in his oracles against the Israelites and the patently theocentric garb in which his counterreplies are clothed serve to anchor both the judgment and the hope of restoration in God alone. Ezekiel’s quotations serve as a foil for a frontal attack on the entire religious enterprise of his contemporaries in Jerusalem and Babylon. By citing these popular sayings and refuting them, Ezekiel skillfully reveals both the necessity and purpose of the exilic crisis. He turns the sayings of the people against them, exposing the depths of their opposition to God and thus furthering the purpose of vindicating God.

Theological Message

The sovereignty of God. The book emphasizes God’s sovereignty over all as Ezekiel challenged the false theology of his fellow Jewish exiles, which held that Yahweh, bound by covenantal oath, could not destroy Jerusalem. The formulaic expression (with variations) “After X occurs, then you/they will know that I am the Lord/I have spoken” occurs over sixty-five times in the book to emphasize God’s intervention in human events, including the exile and restoration (e.g., 7:27; 13:23; 29:16), to uphold the covenant and establish his kingdom.

The holiness of God. Israel’s sins had obscured God’s holiness in the sight of their neighbors (20:9). God’s holiness required both punishment of Israel’s sins and the continuation of his covenantal relationship with his people. God’s purging judgment and restoration would be a fulfillment of his covenantal obligations and would display his holiness (20:40–44; 28:25; 36:16–32).

Hope in the midst of judgment. God’s covenantal faithfulness would include restoration after judgment (chaps. 33–39). The final temple vision (chaps. 40–48) gives a picture of the restoration using typological images and cultural idioms with which the people were familiar.

New Testament Connections

There are approximately sixty-five quotations and allusions to the book of Ezekiel in the NT. Echoes of Ezekiel are prevalent in John’s Gospel (John 10:1–30 [Ezek. 34]; John 15:1–8 [Ezek. 15]) and the book of Revelation (Rev. 4:6–9 [Ezek. 1]; Rev. 20–22 [Ezek. 40–48]).

Famine and Drought

Famine was the most devastating catastrophe to an agrarian society. Caused by drought, crop failure, or siege (Ruth 1:1–2; 2 Kings 25), it often was accompanied by disease or war, which in turn brought adversity to many levels of society (Jer. 14:12; Matt. 24:7), including that of the animals (Job 38:41; Joel 1:20).

Dependence on rainfall caused some people to stockpile in anticipation of possible famine. In Egypt, Joseph implemented a grain ration that saved the people, supplied seed, and filled Pharaoh’s royal storehouses (Gen. 41:33–36; 47:23–24). Israel’s own temple contained storerooms (1 Chron. 26:15; Neh. 10:38–39). God used famine to encourage obedience from the Israelites (Deut. 11:17; 28:33) and as divine judgment upon them (Lev. 26:14–20; Jer. 29:17–18).

Famines had far-reaching results: price inflation, robbery, social exploitation, agricultural collapse, migration, and even cannibalism (Gen. 12:10; 26:1; Ruth 1; 2 Kings 6:24–29; Neh. 5:1–3; Lam. 2:20–21; 4:8–10). Therefore, faithfulness to God was a particularly vivid reality (Pss. 33:18–19; 37:19), and God’s blessings on the nation included its being free from famine (Ezek. 34:29; 36:29–30).

Joseph understood that God sent him ahead to Egypt to save his family from an international famine (Gen. 45:5–7). For forty years God tested the Israelites with hunger to rid them of self-reliance (Exod. 16:2–8; Deut. 8:2, 16). Moreover, God sent afflictions on Israel such as famine, drought, mildew, blight, and insects in order to arouse national repentance (Amos 4:6–12). This meant that sin and human suffering were tied to the land in interdependence (Lam. 4:3–4). Elijah’s contest with the Canaanite prophets of Baal vividly shows the theological implications of faith and food: Yahweh would prove that he was in control of nature’s forces (1 Kings 18:23–39; cf. Gen. 8:22). Even Elijah, however, required special divine care through this famine (1 Kings 17:1–6). For Amos, literal hunger funded his description of desperate spiritual hunger, “a famine . . . of hearing the words of the Lord” (Amos 8:11).

Jesus relived Israel’s experience in his own wilderness testing and rejected the bread that he could make for himself (Matt. 4:3–4; Deut. 8:3). His success showed that scarcity and hunger are intended to develop humility and trust in God, the divine provider (Matt. 4:2), something that Israel did not learn very well. Jesus fed a second manna to five thousand people to draw them to the bread of life (John 6:35), but the crowds followed Jesus more for the food than for him (6:26–27). Famines are mentioned in the NT (Luke 4:25; Acts 7:11 [historical]; 11:27–30 [contemporary]).

Jesus taught that famines would be a sign of his coming. Yet, without ignoring physical food, Jesus highlighted the spiritual hunger and thirst of people (Matt. 5:6; John 4:14, 34; 7:37–38). Because eating is a powerful part of fellowship, heaven will merely remove the desperation of hunger, not the use of food (Gen. 43:34; Luke 22:15–16; Rev. 19:9; cf. 1 Cor. 4:11; Rev. 7:16; 21:4).

Impotent

To God belongs all power (Ps. 62:11), and in comparison all others are impotent (i.e., without power), including idols and gods made by human hands (Isa. 44:17; Jer. 10:5) and people who appear to be strong (Deut. 9:2–3; Ezek. 34:16). At the cross, Jesus destroyed Satan’s power over death (Heb. 2:14) and “disarmed the powers and authorities” (Col. 2:15). Jesus died for us while we were powerless or “weak” (Gk. asthenēs [Rom. 5:6]), and believers are now empowered by his Spirit for life and ministry (2 Pet. 1:3).

Olivet Discourse

The Olivet Discourse is Jesus’ sermon predicting the Jewish War, the destruction of the temple, the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70, and the coming of the Son of Man to judge and to save. It is found in the Synoptic Gospels (Matt. 24:1–25:46; Mark 13:1–37; Luke 21:5–36). The name derives from the Mount of Olives, overlooking Jerusalem and the temple, the place where Jesus taught his disciples this material.

All three Synoptics place the discourse following scenes of confrontation with the Jewish leadership. Matthew’s account is the most dramatic. Jesus rebukes the scribes and Pharisees in Matt. 23, culminating with the accusation that they are responsible for “all the righteous blood that has been shed on the earth” (v. 35). He pauses to lament for Jerusalem, then declares the temple, which he calls “your” house, desolate. As he leaves, the disciples remark on the stones of the temple compound. Jesus then predicts the total destruction of the temple. This will indicate the Son of Man coming with power and great glory (Matt. 24:30) in judgment of apostate Israel.

Jesus uses apocalyptic language to describe coming events: earthquakes, famines, betrayal, signs in the sun, moon, and stars. These are all the birth pains. Christians will face persecution. They will be brought before the authorities, but they will be given what to say by the Holy Spirit. They will be put to death and hated by all nations. False prophets and false messiahs will emerge and attempt to lead the elect astray. Jesus’ repeated command is for the disciples to be alert, as no one knows the time, not even the Son. It will be possible, though, to know when the time is approaching, just as the approach of summer can be predicted by observing the fig tree.

Matthew appends three parables to the end of the discourse concerning preparedness and reward: the ten virgins, the talents, and the sheep and the goats. The virgins were unprepared when the bridegroom arrived and were shut out of the banquet. The talents were entrusted to servants by a man going on a journey. When he returned, he rewarded those who had invested wisely. The last parable is an adaptation of Ezek. 34:11–31, a messianic passage where God will gather his scattered sheep. Jesus declares himself to be the one who judges between the sheep. In Ezekiel the sheep are judged for their sins: muddying the water, trampling the food, butting the weak sheep. In keeping with his extended ethical teaching in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus will judge even omissions of proper care of each other: not feeding strangers, not visiting those in prison. The message is clear: disciples must be prepared for the return of Jesus at any time, using their gifts wisely and treating the least among us with care.

Some say that Jesus is answering two questions from the disciples: “When will this (the destruction of the temple) happen?” and, a completely separate question, “What will be the sign of your (second) coming?” But Jesus is only recorded as speaking about the temple here, and following the rebuke of the Pharisees, it is clear that he speaks of judgment in connection with the Jewish leaders. Luke makes this clearer in his frank substitution: where Matthew (24:15) and Mark (13:14) record “when you see . . . the abomination of desolation,” Luke (21:20) writes, “when you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies,” a clear reference to AD 70. Matthew (24:28) hints at the same idea: “Wherever the carcass is, there the eagles [perhaps from the Roman emblem] will be gathered together” (NKJV). None of the three accounts seem to contemplate answers to two separate questions.

Oracles

Divine pronouncements given to humankind that are either unsolicited (Isa. 7:3–9; Hag. 1:2–11; Zech. 12:1) or a response to an inquiry (2 Kings 8:8). It was common practice throughout the ancient Near East to seek pronouncements from deities and to identify holy sites where sacred individuals could query the deities (e.g., the shrine of Apollo at Delphi). How much time elapsed between the transmission of an oracle and its inscription is uncertain. Inscriptions from the surrounding Near Eastern milieu attest that messages received from a deity often were transcribed immediately upon reception, with the prophet’s name attached.

Reception and Delivery of Oracles

The Hebrew word massa’ (derived from nasa’, “to lift, take, carry”), variously translated “oracle” (Isa. 17:1; 19:1; 21:1; 30:6), “burden” (Isa. 17:1 JPS, KJV), or “prophecy” (Prov. 30:1; 31:1 KJV), is used in this figurative sense primarily in prophetic speech (Prov. 30:1; 31:1 are the exceptions) to refer to threatening pronouncements against Israel (Hab. 1:1; Zech. 12:1; Mal. 1:1), its neighbors (Isa. 13:1; 14:28; 15:1; Nah. 1:1), or an individual (2 Kings 9:25; 2 Chron. 24:27). Although the word itself is used infrequently, the prophetic activity of delivering divine pronouncements was prevalent throughout Israel’s history, rising in prominence during the monarchy and ceasing at the beginning of the intertestamental period.

Priests, judges (Deut. 17:9), and prophets (1 Sam. 9:9) could be the recipients and deliverers of divine oracles, although as the duties of these offices became more differentiated over time, delivery of oracles became more the province of the prophet (2 Kings 22:11–14; Jer. 21:2). A few oracles found in the OT are attributed to non-Israelites (Balaam [Num. 22–24]; Agur [Prov. 30:1]; King Lemuel [Prov. 31:1]). The Israelites were commanded to seek Yahweh (Isa. 55:6; Hos. 10:12), and they (Isa. 9:13) and their leaders (Jer. 10:21) were condemned both for failure to do so and for their dismissive response to a prophetic oracle once it had been delivered, whether solicited (Ezek. 33:30–32) or not (Zech. 7:12).

Prophets were often sought to inquire about obtaining an oracle (1 Sam. 9:9; 2 Kings 3:11; 22:13) during times of crisis or need. Such oracles were for the benefit of either an individual (Exod. 18:15; 2 Kings 8:8) or the nation (1 Kings 22:5; 2 Kings 3:11; 2 Chron. 18:6) and were sought by commoners (Gen. 25:22; Exod. 18:15; Ezek. 33:30), elders (Ezek. 14:1–3; 20:1; see also 8:1), royalty (1 Kings 14:5; 22:5–8; 2 Kings 22:18; 2 Chron. 26:5), army officials (Jer. 42:1–3), and foreigners (2 Kings 8:7; Isa. 14:32). Prophetic response to oracular inquiry was not automatic. Deliverance of an oracle after an inquiry could be immediate (Jer. 37:17), delayed for an extended period of time (Jer. 42:7 [ten days]), or the prophet could refuse to deliver an oracle (Jer. 23:33; Ezek. 14:1). A previous oracle could be superseded (Isa. 38 [compare v. 1 with vv. 4–6]). Various commodities could be used for payment, including silver (1 Sam. 9:7–8), food (1 Kings 14:3), and foreign goods (2 Kings 8:7–9).

Oracles could be pronounced publicly in various places, including the palace (2 Kings 20:4–5), the temple (Jer. 7:2; 26:2), the city gates (1 Kings 22:10; 2 Chron. 18:9), the roadside (1 Kings 20:38–43), or privately to individuals, including royalty (Jer. 37:17), officials (Isa. 22:15), and foreigners (Jer. 39:15–17). There are several mentions in Scripture of oracles that are not part of the canonical record (e.g., 2 Chron. 24:27).

Oracular pronouncements could be brief (1 Kings 17:1) or lengthy (the books of Nahum and Malachi), and they consisted of a variety of genres, including satire (Isa. 44:9–20), parable (2 Sam. 12:1–14), and lament (Jer. 9:20; Ezek. 19; Amos 5:1), to produce the desired rhetorical effect. The prophetic introductory or concluding oracular formulas “thus says the Lord” and “declares the Lord” echo the messenger terminology of the broader culture, in which a similar introductory “thus says X” was used by messengers delivering public proclamations on behalf of the one who commissioned them (2 Chron. 36:23). In this way, the prophet presented an oracle as God’s message to the people, not his own.

Nominal Israel was condemned for seeking pronouncements from false gods (2 Kings 1:3–4, 6, 16; 2 Chron. 25:15; Hos. 4:12), necromancy (Isa. 8:19), and failure to inquire of the true God of Israel (Zeph. 1:6). False prophets could also claim to have received communication from God (Deut. 13:1–11; 18:20; Ezek. 13), but they were indicted for delivering their own message without divine sanction (Jer. 23:34–39; 28; Lam. 2:14; Ezek. 13), turning the people away from the true God to worship false gods (Deut. 13:1–11) and delivering oracular pronouncements in order to enjoy personal pleasure (Mic. 2:11) and gain (Jer. 6:13–15; 8:10–12).

Often Scripture simply notes that a prophet received a “word of the Lord” (Jer. 1:2; Hos. 1:1; Joel 1:1; cf. Isa. 14:28; Hab. 1:1) without explicitly stating the means by which the divine pronouncement was received. The prophetic witness mentions both seeing (Isa. 1:1; 13:1; Amos 8:1; Hab. 1:1) and hearing (Ezek. 1:24–25, 28) divine communication, but what actually happened to the prophet is not easily determined. The references to the Spirit coming upon an individual (Num. 11:25; 24:2; 1 Sam. 10:6, 10; Ezek. 8:1; 11:5; 37:1) point to some sort of divine intervention that seized the prophet’s consciousness in such a way as to prepare the prophet for a revelation from God.

Prophets were known to have ecstatic or visionary experiences that marked them as operating under divine influence. In addition, several of the prophets (Isa. 20; Jer. 13:1–11; Ezek. 5:1–4) acted out demonstrations (sign-acts) as part of their oracular ministry. These ecstatic experiences and peculiar actions offended many of their contemporaries (2 Kings 9:11; Jer. 29:26; Hos. 9:7). These phenomena were concentrated around the two great crises faced by Israel: the demise of the northern kingdom in 722 BC and of the southern kingdom in 586 BC. Having been given warning that national judgment was imminent, these prophets were led to augment their preaching with dramatizations in order to convey more persuasively to the audience the urgency of heeding their message (Ezek. 12:8–11).

Types of Oracles

Form critics have identified three main types of prophetic oracles: oracles of salvation, judgment, and repentance. The first is further divided into subcategories: individual salvation oracles (1 Kings 17:8–16) and community salvation oracles (1 Sam. 7:3–15). The prophets, however, were not tightly bound to the traditional forms, and they demonstrated great creativity in modifying the forms to fit their personal style and the situation before them.

These various types of oracles were not arbitrary pronouncements; they were founded on Israel’s covenantal relationship with Yahweh (Jer. 34:18). The prophets served as covenant prosecutors, and their oracles were part of the prosecution’s case on behalf of Yahweh against the people. Behavior, whether an individual’s or the nation’s, was evaluated in light of the demands of the covenant. So too, Yahweh’s response—judgment or salvation—was cast in terms of his faithfulness to the covenant(s) that he made with Israel.

Salvation oracles announced Yahweh’s glorious deliverance and restoration, mostly in response to the catastrophe of 586 BC (Ezek. 11:16–21; 36:24–38; 37:15–28; Amos 9:11–15; Zeph. 3:14–20), and they could include in the salvific pronouncement the destruction of the enemy (Zeph. 3:19). They often open with the formulaic “in that day” (Amos 9:11; Mic. 4:6), focusing Israel’s attention on a future time when all its enemies would be subdued and covenantal blessings would be established and enjoyed by the redeemed community.

Judgment oracles typically were introduced with an interjection, often translated into English as “woe,” followed by a formal address and accusation accompanied by an announcement of the punishment to be inflicted (Isa. 1:4; 5:8, 11, 18, 20, 21, 22; Jer. 22:13; Ezek. 34:2). These oracles could take the form of a lawsuit. In Isa. 1:2 “heaven and earth” are summoned as witnesses, harking back to Deut. 30:19; 31:28; 32:1, where these elements of nature were invoked by Moses to be witnesses of God’s covenant with Israel. Some oracles state explicitly that a case has been brought against the people (Isa. 3:13; Jer. 2:9; Hos. 4:1; 12:2; Mic. 6:1–2).

Repentance oracles specifically summon the addressee to repentance and a recommitment to the covenant in order to avoid destruction (Isa. 31:6; Jer. 4:1; Hos. 12:6).

Means of Oracles

Various objects were sanctioned for use in discerning God’s will. Scripture is silent on many of the details regarding the manipulation of these objects, but the validity of their use for discerning the divine will is not questioned. The mysterious Urim and Thummim, two stonelike objects kept in the high priest’s breastpiece, appear to have operated to give a “yes or no” response (Exod. 28:30; Lev. 8:8; Deut. 33:8; 1 Sam. 14:41), though sometimes there is no response at all (1 Sam. 28:6). The ephod, some sort of two-piece linen apron or loin cloth worn by priests under the breastpiece (Exod. 28:4, 6; 1 Sam. 23:9–12; 1 Sam. 30:7–8; but note that Samuel was wearing one as he assisted the high priest Eli [1 Sam. 2:18], and David, as he led the procession returning the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem [2 Sam. 6:14]), was also pressed into service for discerning God’s will. Another method, the casting of lots, is shrouded in mystery. This method was used to determine the scapegoat on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:8–10), the guilty party in the loss at Ai (Josh. 7:14), land allotment in Canaan (Josh. 14–19; 21), priestly assignments in the temple (1 Chron. 24:5; 25:8; 26:13), residency in Jerusalem in the postexilic community (Neh. 11:1), the day to massacre the Jews in Persia as plotted by Haman (Esther 3:7; 9:24), and dividing the Messiah’s clothing (Ps. 22:18; cf. John 19:24).

Oracles against the Foreign Nations

A special group of oracles are those addressed to Israel’s historic enemies, commonly referred to as “oracles against the [foreign] nations.” Blocks of these oracles are found in Amos 1–2; Isa. 13–23; Jer. 46–51; Ezek. 25–32 and the entire books of Nahum and Obadiah. These oracles were addressed to a specific foreign nation (the putative audience) but were heard by Israel. During a time when most people’s conception of deity was tied to a specific land, these oracles maintained that Yahweh was sovereign over the whole earth, and that his purposes included all humankind. All the nations do his bidding. These oracles were to be understood against the backdrop of Israel’s infidelity to Yahweh and its futile reliance on the support of foreign nations. The oracles demonstrated that Yahweh would bring down all that was haughty and would order events so that he alone would be high and exalted in the day of his coming. Those nations that cursed Israel would themselves be cursed (Gen. 12:1–3; 27:29).

New Testament Usage

In the NT, “oracle” (Gk. logion) occurs four times, always in the plural (logia [NIV: “words”]). It refers to the Mosaic law (Acts 7:38) and unspecified portions of revelation (Rom. 3:2; Heb. 5:12; 1 Pet. 4:11).

Showing 1 to 50 of207 results

1. The Good Shepherd - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

It is small wonder that the image of the shepherd was frequently upon the lips of the savior. It was a part of his heritage and culture. Abraham, the father of the nation, was the keeper of great flocks. Moses was tending the flocks of his father-in-law, Jethro, when God called him into a special service. David was a shepherd boy called in from the fields to be the King of Israel.

The imagery of the shepherd was also imprinted upon the literature of the day. The 23rd Psalm is frequently referred to as the shepherd psalm. "The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want. He maketh me to lie down in green pastures. He leadeth me beside still waters."

When Isaiah spoke of the coming of the Messiah he worded it by saying: "He will feed his flock like a shepherd! He will gather his lambs into his arms." Yes, the tradition of the shepherd was very much a part of the heritage of Christ.

This picture comes more clearly into focus in the New Testament. Jesus once told a story about a shepherd who had 100 sheep, but one of them went astray. In our way of thinking a 99% return on our investment would be most desirable, but not this shepherd. He left the 99 to go in search of that one lost sheep. Later, when Jesus was speaking to a great throng of people, Mark tells us that he had compassion upon them because they were "as sheep without a shepherd."

Throughout the Judeo-Christian faith, then, the image of the shepherd has been stamped upon our thinking. In our scripture text for this morning Jesus again taps into this imagery when he refers to himself as the good shepherd. For a few moments this morning, I would like for us to examine together what he had in mind when he described himself as the Good Shepherd.

1. First, we have a shepherd that is a genuine shepherd.
2. Second, I think that the Good Shepherd knows his sheep.
3. Third, the Good Shepherd also includes other sheep.
4. Fourth, the shepherd lays down his life for his sheep.

2. I'm Not the Shepherd

Illustration

Keenan Kelsey

A pastor was taking a group of parishioners on a tour of the Holy Land. He had just read them the parable of the good shepherd and was explaining to them that, as they continued their tour, they would see shepherds on the hillsides just as in Jesus' day. He wanted to impress the group, so he told them what every good pastor tells his people about shepherds. He described how, in the Holy Land, shepherds always lead their sheep, always walking in front to face dangers, always protecting the sheep by going ahead of them. He barely got the last word out when, sure enough, they rounded a corner and saw a man and his sheep on the hillside. There was only one problem: the man wasn't leading the sheep as the good pastor had said. No, he was behind the sheep and seemed to be chasing them. The pastor turned red. Flabbergasted, he ran over to the fence and said, "I always thought shepherds in this region led their sheep out in front. And I told my people that a good shepherd never chases his sheep." The man replied, "That's absolutely true... you're absolutely right... but I'm not the shepherd, I'm the butcher!"

I am afraid that in this day and age we are all too familiar with the butcher, and not very familiar with the Good Shepherd.

3. Called by Many Voices

Illustration

John H. Pavelko

Now if I had to nominate one animal to represent the word mediocre, a sheep would easily be in the top five. Sheep are not independent. They cannot defend themselves like cattle. They are not strong, creative, brave nor will they initiate. They cannot even work up a good stampede. Normally, they just sort of meander. Also, sheep will not be driven, like cattle. They will scatter in a thousand different directions. This type of behavior did not earn the animal any respect on the open range so the ranchers assumed that the animal was dumb. However, a sheep is actually smarter than a cow.

So why does Jesus choose to use a sheep to represent his disciples? Even in ancient society, sheep and shepherds did not garner the respect and admiration of the rich and famous. They did not have a contest to see which shepherd would be the next "Israeli Idol." For us who do not live in an agrarian society, it is even harder to understand. I have never identified myself with a sheep. Popular artists write songs about soaring on the wings of eagles, not grazing with the lambs.

Sheep have one particularly admirable quality. They will follow their shepherd wherever he leads them. They have learned to know him and trust him. They are not easily distracted by another shepherd. Move three flocks into a field, place three shepherds at three strategic points and have each of them issue a call. The sheep will sort themselves. You will not need brands to recognize which sheep belongs to which shepherd. Every animal will only follow his/her shepherd.

The people of God have been placed in a very large field that is often called the world. Many voices are calling us to come and join them. The voice of materialism wants us to deny our faith in the supernatural and believe only in the physical world. The voice of consumerism calls us to fulfill our envy by overspending on vacations, cars, clothing and a home. The voice of entertainment wants to fill our lives with media driven flashes that grab our attention, isolate us from our family and friends and then leave us with nothing but an oversized bill.

4. Other Voices

Illustration

John M. Braaten

The call of our Lord is "hidden" in a whole chorus of worldly voices which beckon us. Other would-be shepherds seek to tempt us away from the Good Shepherd, the joy of his forgiveness and the security of his love. And when we are weak and confused we may fall victim to the enticements of other gods.

An American tourist traveling in the Mid East came upon several shepherds whose flocks had intermingled while drinking water from a brook. After an exchange of greetings, one of the shepherds turned toward the sheep and called out, "Manah. Manah. Manah." (Manah means "follow me" in Arabic.) Immediately his sheep separated themselves from the rest and followed him.

Then one of the two remaining shepherds called out, "Manah. Manah." and his sheep left the common flock to follow him. The traveler then said to the third shepherd, "I would like to try that. Let me put on your cloak and turban and see if I can get the rest of the sheep to follow me."

The shepherd smiled knowingly as the traveler wrapped himself in the cloak, put the turban on his head and called out, "Manah. Manah." The sheep did not respond to the stranger's voice. Not one of them moved toward him. "Will the sheep ever follow someone other than you?" The traveler asked.

"Oh yes," the shepherd replied, "sometimes a sheep gets sick, and then it will follow anyone."

We have seen it, haven't we? People, young and old, who are "sick." Battered by the storms of life and distracted by voices urging them to go this way and that, they have lost their bearings and they don't know where they are or where they are going. That can be more than a little frightening; it leads to despair, to hopelessness. And when someone is "sick" they will follow anyone who will promise a moment of happiness, a brief feeling of peace or forgetfulness, a sense that they are someone.

But the call of Jesus the Good Shepherd is, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life." There is no better way, no greater truth, no happier life. Our Lord reaches out to us in love that we might follow him.

5. Break A Leg

Illustration

Michael P. Green

Please see the note below this illustration.

A woman visiting in Switzerland came to a sheepfold on one of her daily walks. Venturing in, she saw the shepherd seated on the ground with his flock around him. Nearby, on a pile of straw lay a single sheep, which seemed to be suffering. Looking closely, the woman saw that its leg was broken.

Her sympathy went out to the suffering sheep, and she looked up inquiringly to the shepherd as she asked how it happened. “I broke it myself,” said the shepherd sadly and then explained. “Of all the sheep in my flock, this was the most wayward. It would not obey my voice and would not follow when I was leading the flock. On more than one occasion, it wandered to the edge of a perilous cliff. And not only was it disobedient itself, but it was leading other sheep astray.

“Based on my experience with this kind of sheep, I knew I had no choice, so I broke its leg. The next day I took food and it tried to bite me. After letting it lie alone for a couple of days, I went back and it not only eagerly took the food, but licked my hand and showed every sign of submission and affection.

“And now, let me say this. When this sheep is well, it will be the model sheep of my entire flock. No sheep will hear my voice so quickly nor follow so closely. Instead of leading the others away, it will be an example of devotion and obedience. In short, a complete change will come into the life of this wayward sheep. It will have learned obedience through its sufferings.”

Many times it is the same in human experience. Through our suffering, God may be seeking to teach us obedience and reliance on his care.

Note: There is no evidence that this was a practice among shepherds. See the following page for more information.

6. So Who Needs a Shepherd?

Illustration

Donald B. Stobe

One Sunday morning, following the church service, a layman accosted the pastor and said, "Tom, this church has been insulting me for years, and I did not know it until this week." The stunned pastor replied, "What on earth do you mean?" "Well," said the layman, every Sunday morning the call to worship in this church ends with the words, ‘We are the people of His pasture and the sheep of His hand.' And I have heard ministers over the years call the congregation, God's flock.' Then this past week I visited the Chicago stockyards. There I discovered that sheep are just about the dumbest animals God ever created. Why, they are so stupid that they even follow one another docilely into the slaughterhouse. Even pigs are smarter than sheep, and I would certainly be angry if my church called me a pig' every Sunday morning. So I'm not at all sure I want to come to church and be called a sheep' any longer...even God's sheep'."

The man had a point. But whether we like it or not, that is the language of the Bible: both the Hebrew Bible and the Christian New Testament. We are called "God's sheep." The favorite psalm of many people is the 23rd, and it begins by saying, "The Lord is my shepherd..." And if "the Lord is my shepherd," then I am one of the Lord's sheep.

7. Knowing but Not Really Understanding

Illustration

A shepherd was tending his flock in a remote pasture when suddenly a brand-new Jeep Cherokee appeared out of a dust cloud, advanced toward him and stopped. The driver, a 20 something fellow wearing a Brioni suit, Gucci shoes, Ray Ban sunglasses and a YSL tie, leaned out of the window and asked the shepherd, "If I can tell you exactly how many sheep you have in your flock, will you give me one?"

The shepherd looked at the young guy, then at his peacefully grazing flock, and calmly answered, "Sure."

The young man parked his car, whipped out his notebook computer, connected it to a cell phone, surfed to a NASA page on the Internet where he called up a GPS satellite navigation system, scanned the area, then opened up a database and some Excel spreadsheets with complex formulas.

He finally printed out a 150-page report on his hi-tech miniaturized printer, turned around to our shepherd and said, "You have here exactly 1,586 sheep!"

"Amazing! That's correct! Like I agreed, you can take one of my sheep," said the shepherd.

The shepherd watched the man make a selection and bundle it into his Cherokee. When he was finished the sheepherder said, "If I can tell you exactly what your political persuasion is, where you're from and who you work for, will you give me my sheep back?"

"Okay, why not," answered the young man.

"You're a Republican/Democrat from (name your city here) and you're working for (name here a local politician or your mayor)," said the shepherd.

"Wow! That's correct," said the young man. "How did you ever guess that?

"Easy," answered the shepherd. "Nobody called you, but you showed up here anyway. You want to be paid for providing a solution to a question I already knew the answer to. And you clearly don't know squat about what you're doing. Now ... can I have my dog back?"

8. The Lost Sheep

Illustration

'Twas a sheep, not a lamb, that strayed away
in the parable Jesus told.
A grown-up sheep that had gone astray
from the ninety and nine in the fold.

Out on the hillside, out in the cold,
'twas a sheep the Good Shepherd sought;
And back to the flock, safe into the fold,
'twas a sheep the Good Shepherd brought.

And why for the sheep should we earnestly long
and as earnestly hope and pray?
Because there is danger, if they go wrong,
they will lead the lambs astray.

For the lambs will follow the sheep, you know,
wherever the sheep may stray;
When the sheep go wrong, it will not be long
till the lambs are as wrong as they.

And so with the sheep we earnestly plead,
for the sake of the lambs today;
If the sheep are lost, what terrible cost
some of the lambs will have to pay!

9. Do You Know My Business?

Illustration

Keith Wagner

A shepherd was herding his flocks in a remote pasture when suddenly a brand new Jeep Cherokee advanced towards him out of a dust cloud. The driver, a young man in a Brioni suit, Gucci shoes, Ray Ban sunglasses and a YSL tie, leans out of the window and asks: "If I can tell you exactly how many sheep you have in your flock, will you give me one?"

The shepherd looks at the yuppie, then at his peacefully grazing flock and answers, "Sure!" The yuppie parks the car, whips out his notebook, connects it to a cell phone, surfs to a NASA page where he calls up a GPS navigation system, scans the area and opens a database and some 60 spreadsheets with complex formulas. Finally, he prints a 150-page report on a miniature printer, turns to our shepherd and says: "You have exactly 1586 sheep!" "That's correct. As agreed, you can take one of the sheep," says the shepherd. He watches the young man make a selection and bundle it into his Cherokee.

As the car starts to pull away, he calls out: "If I can tell you exactly what your business is, will you give me my sheep back?" "Okay, why not?" answers the young man, stopping the car. "You are a consultant" says the shepherd. "That's correct," says the yuppie. "How did you guess?"

"Easy," answers the shepherd. "You turn up here without being asked. You want to be paid for information I already have. And you don't know anything about my business because you just took my dog."

10. The Doorkeeper

Illustration

Staff

A sheepfold was a walled enclosure made of stones. Several flocks of sheep were kept in the sheepfold, and when a legitimate shepherd came to get his flock, the doorkeeper or watchman of the fold would let the shepherd pass into the fold. The shepherd would call the sheep, and the sheep, who knew his voice, would come to him, and he would lead his flock out to pasture. When they were away from the sheepfold, the shepherd would stay out all night with his flock, finding some kind of shelter in the pasture area, and he himself would act as the door, so that no wild animal could get by him.

11. I Am The Door

Illustration

George Adam Smith

George Adam Smith, the 19th century biblical scholar tells of traveling one day in the holy land and coming across a shepherd and his sheep. He fell into conversation with him and the man showed him the fold into which the sheep were led at night. It consisted of four walls, with a way in. Smith asked him, "This is where they go at night?"

"Yes," said the shepherd, "and when they are in there, they are perfectly safe."

"But there is no door," said Smith.

"I am the door," said the shepherd.

He was not a Christian man and wasn't speaking in the language of the New Testament. He was speaking from an Arab shepherd's viewpoint. Smith looked and him and asked, "What do you mean you are the door?" "When the light has gone," said the shepherd, "and all the sheep are inside, I lie in that open space, and no sheep ever goes out but across my body, and no wolf comes in unless he crosses my body; I am the door."

12. Sheep Know Their Shepherd

Illustration

In her book The Preaching Life, Barbara Brown Taylor tells of a conversation she had with a friend who grew up on a sheep farm in the Midwest. According to him, sheep are not dumb at all. "It is the cattle ranchers who are responsible for spreading that ugly rumor, and all because sheep do not behave like cows. Cows are herded from the rear by hooting cowboys with cracking whips, but that will not work with sheep at all. Stand behind them making loud noises and all they will do is run around behind you, because they prefer to be led. You push cows, her friend said, but you lead sheep, and they will not go anywhere that someone else does not go first. Their shepherd-who goes ahead of them to show them that everything is all right."

Sheep know their shepherd and their shepherd knows them.

He went on to say that "it never ceased to amaze him, growing up, that he could walk right through a sleeping flock without disturbing a single one of them, while a stranger could not step foot in the fold without causing pandemonium."

Sheep & shepherds develop a language of their own.

13. A Familiar Voice

Illustration

Michael P. Green

During World War I, it is said that some Turkish soldiers tried to steal a flock of sheep from a hillside near Jerusalem. The shepherd, who had been sleeping, suddenly awakened to see his sheep being driven off on the other side of the ravine. He could not hope to recapture his flock by force single-handedly, but suddenly he had a thought. Standing up on his side of the ravine, he put his hands to his mouth and gave his own peculiar call, which he used each day to gather his sheep to him. The sheep heard the familiar sound. For a moment they listened and then, hearing it again, they turned and rushed down one side of the ravine and up the other toward their shepherd. It was quite impossible for the soldiers to stop the animals. The shepherd was away with them to a place of safety before the soldiers could make up their minds to pursue them—and all because his sheep knew their master’s voice.

14. Calling the Sheep

Illustration

David J. Risendal

Today's Middle-east shepherds lives are not radically different from that of their first century counter-parts. They wander endlessly in search of fields where their sheep might graze. Every night, the sheep are led into a protected area - a "sheepfold." Sometimes, there are three or four or five flocks gathered by a number of shepherds into the same area. The shepherds take shifts staying up throughout the night, making sure that wolves or other wild animals aren't able to make their way into the protected area. In the morning, one might wonder if there is any hope of separating one flock from another. But it's a simple matter. Each shepherd calls the sheep and the sheep hear their shepherds' voice, and they immediately begin to move towards their shepherd. After a few minutes, all the sheep are separated into their own flocks, and the shepherds lead them away. Even in a crowd sheep know the voice of their own shepherd, and they follow it.

15. That’s All I Want

Illustration

B. Wiley Stephens

A little girl reciting the 23rd Psalm began, "The Lord is my shepherd; that's all I want." Maybe she missed the wording, but she sure got the theology right. To have Jesus as our shepherd is indeed a blessing. As he moves towards the cross, Jesus holds up this model of the good shepherd, reminding his listeners that a good shepherd would lay down his life for the sheep. He would give his life to protect the sheep from thieves, wild animals, or whatever danger might confront the flock. We can give him our allegiance because of his commitment to us.

16. Only Obedience

Illustration

J. Scott Miller

High in the mountains of North Wales in a place called Llanymawddwy, lives a shepherd named John Jones with his wife Mari and his black and white dog Mack. I stood one misty summer morning in the window of their farmhouse watching John on horseback herding the sheep with Mack. A few cows were quietly chewing their cud in a nearby corner while perhaps a hundred sheep moved across the dewy meadow toward the pens where they were to be dipped. Mack, a champion Scottish collie, was in his glory. He came from a long line of working dogs, and he had sheep in his blood. This was what he was made for, this was what he had been trained to do. And it was a marvelous thing to see him circling to the right, circling to the left, barking, crouching, racing along, herding a stray sheep here, nipping at a stubborn one there, his eyes always glued to the sheep, his ears listening for the tiny metal whistle from his master, which I couldn't hear.

Mari took me to the pens to watch what John had to do there. When all the animals had been shut inside the gates, Mack tore around the outside of the pens and took up his position at the dipping trough, frantic with expectation, waiting for the chance to leap into action again. One by one John seized the rams by their curled horns and flung them into the antiseptic. They would struggle to climb out the side, and Mack would snarl and snap at their faces to force them back in. Just as they were about to climb up the ramp at the far end, John caught them by the horns with a wooden implement, spun them around, and held them ears, eyes, and nose submerged for a few seconds . . . .

When the rams had been dipped, John rode out again on his horse to herd the ewes which were in a different pasture. Again I watched with Mari as John and Mack went to work, the one in charge, the other obedient. Sometimes, tearing at top speed around the flock, Mack would jam on four-wheeled brakes, his eyes blazing but still on the sheep, his body tense and quivering, but obedient to the command to stop. What the shepherd saw the dog could not see the weak ewe that lagged behind, the one caught in a bush, the danger that lay ahead for the flock.

"Do the sheep have any idea what's happening?" I asked Mari.

"Not a clue!" she said.

"And how about Mack?" I'll never forget Mari's answer.

"The dog doesn't understand the pattern only obedience."

17. The Christmas Candy Cane

Illustration

Staff

Tradition holds that a candy maker wanted to make a candy that would be a witness, so he made the Christmas Candy Cane. He incorporated several symbols for the birth, ministry, and death of Jesus Christ. He began with a stick of pure white hard candy: white to symbolize the Virgin Birth and the sinless nature of Jesus, and hard to symbolize the solid rock, the Foundation of the Church and firmness of the promises of God.

The candy maker made the candy in the form of a "J" to represent the name of Jesus, who came to earth as our Savior. It could also represent the staff of the Good Shepherd with which He reaches down into the ditches of the world to lift out the fallen lambs who, like all sheep, have gone astray. Thinking that the candy was somewhat plain, the candy maker stained it with red stripes. He used three small stripes for the blood shed by Christ on the cross, so that we could have the promise of eternal life.

Another description is as follows:

The Candy Cane, used during the holidays, stands as an important Christmas symbol. A candy maker wanted to come up with an idea to express the meaning of Christmas through the imagination of candy. That is when he came up with the idea of the Candy Cane. There are several different symbols incorporated through the Candy Cane. First, he used a plain white peppermint stick. The color white symbolizes the purity and sinless nature of Jesus. Next, he decided to add three small stripes to symbolize pain inflicted upon Jesus before his death on the cross and a bold stripe to represent the blood he shed for mankind. Two other symbols are distinctive on the Candy Cane. When looked at, it looks like a shepherd's staff because Jesus is the shepherd of man. Then if you turn it upside down, you will notice the shape of the letter J symbolizing the first letter in Jesus' name. These five symbols were incorporated into this piece of peppermint stick so that we would remember what we really celebrate the Christmas season.

Wikipedia covers the German origins:

In 1670, in Cologne, Germany, the choirmaster at Cologne Cathedral, wishing to remedy the noise caused by children in his church during the Living Crèche tradition of Christmas Eve, asked a local candy maker for some "sugar sticks" for them. In order to justify the practice of giving candy to children during worship services, he asked the candy maker to add a crook to the top of each stick, which would help children remember the shepherds who visited the infant Jesus. In addition, he used the white color of the converted sticks to teach children about the Christian belief in the sinless life of Jesus. From Germany, candy canes spread to other parts of Europe, where they were handed out during plays reenacting the Nativity. The candy cane became associated with Christmastide.

18. Pastor or Priest?

Illustration

John R.W. Stott

Moreover, in seeking to reestablish this truth, it would be helpful simultaneously to recover for these over seers the New Testament designation "pastor." "Minister" is a misleading term, because it is generic rather than specific, and always therefore requires a qualifying adjective to indicate what kind of ministry is in mind. "Priest" is unfortunately ambiguous. Those with knowledge of the etymology of English words are aware that "priest" is simply a contraction of "presbyter" meaning "elder." But it is also used to translate the Greek word hiereus, a sacrificing priest, which is never used of Christian ministers in the New Testament. Calling clergy "priests" (common as the practice is in Roman Catholic, Lutheran and Angelican circles) gives the false impression that their ministry is primarily directed toward God, whereas the New Testament portrays it as primarily directed towards the church. So "pastor" remains the most accurate term. The objection that it means "shepherd" and that sheep and shepherds are irrelevant in the bustling cities of the Twentieth Century can be best be met by recalling that the Lord Jesus called himself "the Good Shepherd," that even city dwelling Christians will always think of him as such, and that his pastoral ministry (with its characteristics of intimate knowledge, sacrifice, leadership, protection and care) remains the permanent model for all pastors.

19. A Thankless Job

Illustration

King Duncan

Any job where there is not much recognition or you are taken for granted can seem like a thankless job. Author Ruth Harms Calkin stated it well:

You know, Lord, how I serve You
With great emotional fervor
In the limelight.
You know how eagerly I speak for You
At a women's club;
You know how I effervesce when I promote
A fellowship group.
You know my genuine enthusiasm
At a Bible study.

But how would I react, I wonder
If You pointed to a basin of water
And asked me to wash the callused feet
Of a bent and wrinkled old woman
Day after day
Month after month,
In a room where nobody saw
And nobody knew?

We know what she's talking about, don't we? Thankless jobs. Jobs without much of a payoff in money or recognition. Repetitive jobs, boring jobs, repulsive jobs.

Being a shepherd is a thankless job. It really is. Imagine dealing with dumb, smelly sheep all day. In Palestine, flocks of sheep are plentiful. They dot the countryside, clutter up highways, crowd the streets of towns and villages. The shepherd with his long staff walks in front of his flock and his sheep follow him. In fact, they crowd around so closely they hamper the shepherd's movement. Dumb, helpless sheep.

20. SHEPHERD

Illustration

Stephen Stewart

Genesis 47:3 - "Pharaoh said to his brothers, ‘What is your occupation?’ And they said to Pharaoh, ‘Your servants are shepherds, as our fathers were.’ "

Luke 2:8 - "And in that region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night."

This is one of the oldest and most important occupations among the ancient Hebrews. There were two types of shepherds: nomads who followed their flocks from one grazing area to another, and those who lived in villages. The shepherd protected his flock from the cold, robbers, and predatory animals. His only weapons were the staff and sling, although, later dogs were also used.

The shepherd wore a whole animal skin with the wool retained. He may also have worn an undertunic or outer cloak. A folded girdle was also worn in which was carried money or pebbles (for the sling and to draw the flocks’ attention). A veil that consisted of a yard-square piece of material folded into a triangle and held by a black ring of goat’s hair was also worn. He also usually had long hair and a beard.

Several days’ food supply was carried in a bag. The food consisted of bread, cheese, olives, and dried raisins. While the flock grazed, he could nap or play his reed pipe. The shepherd was very devoted to his flock and willing to give his life to save them.

During the summer, the shepherd slept outdoors. During bad weather, he slept in a tent or a special tower. Some shepherds gathered their flocks in caves or stone sheepfolds. To lead them, the shepherd walked ahead of the flock, not behind it. The flock was counted every morning and evening, and the shepherd cared for the sick animals, helped in lambing, and often carried weak lambs.

The Hebrew patriarchs were nomad-type shepherds, and, later, Moses and David were both shepherds. In the Talmud, the rabbis viewed shepherds as dishonest and uncouth because many grazed their flocks on the property of others. But we have before us the Good Shepherd, who cares for us as the shepherd cared for his sheep.

We spoke before of the herdsman, and we said that he lives today very much as before in the Near East, and the same comment that we made then about those who today raise sheep and goats would hold true here also.

21. Huddled Like Sheep

Illustration

King Duncan

Pastor Mike Milton of Savannah, GA tells about two photos that appeared together on the front page of a local newspaper, the Camden, Maine Herald. One photo was of the board of aldermen and the town manager huddled together at a meeting. The other photo was a flock of sheep. Unintentionally, the captions were reversed. Under the picture of the sheep, the caption identified them as the aldermen and town manager. Under the photo of the distinguished fathers of the community, the caption read like this: "The Sheep, naive and vulnerable, huddle for security against the uncertainties of the outside world."

Let's face it, friends, you and I are oftentimes like sheep. We nibble ourselves into situations that are too big for us to handle. We follow the other sheep, sometimes unwisely. There we are "The Sheep, naive and vulnerable, huddled for security against the uncertainties of the outside world." Does our Shepherd care? Yes, says Luke's gospel. He leaves the ninety and nine. Where? Out in the wilderness, to search for that one who has gone astray. What great good news.

22. God Is Like a Shepherd

Illustration

Frederick Buechner

'God's in His Heaven, all's right with the world,' Robert Browning wrote, and the psalm is not saying that any more than you or I can say it either. Whoever wrote it had walked through the valley of the shadow the way one way or another you and I have walked there too. He says so himself. He believed that God was in his Heaven despite the fact that he knew as well as we do that all was far from right with the world. And he believed that God was like a shepherd.

When I think of shepherds, I think of one man in particular I know who used to keep sheep here in Rupert a few years back. Some of them he gave names to, and some of them he didn't, but he knew then equally well either way. If one of them got lost, he didn't have a moment's peace till he found it again. If one of them got sick or hurt, he would move Heaven and earth to get it well again. He would feed them out of a bottle when they were new-born lambs if for some reason the mother wasn't around or wouldn't 'own' them, as he put it. He always called them in at the end of the day so the wild dogs wouldn't get them.

I've seen him wade through snow up to his knees with a bale of hay in each hand to feed them on bitter cold winter evenings, shaking it out and putting it in the manger. I've stood with him in their shed with a forty watt bulb hanging down from the low ceiling to light up their timid, greedy, foolish, half holy faces as they pushed and butted each other to get at it because if God is like a shepherd, there are more than just a few ways, needless to say, that people like you and me are like sheep. Being timid, greedy, foolish, and half holy is only part of it. Like sheep we get hungry, and hungry for more than just food. We get thirsty for more than just drink. Our souls get hungry and thirsty; in fact it is often that sense of inner emptiness that makes us know we have souls in the first place.

There is nothing that the world has to give us, there is nothing that we have to give to each other even, that ever quite fills them. But once in a while that inner emptiness is filled even so. That is part of what the psalm means by saying that God is like a shepherd, I think. It means that, like a shepherd, he feeds us. He feeds that part of us which is hungriest and most in need of feeding.

23. Don’t Count the Sheep

Illustration

Leonard Sweet

Economist and seer E.F. Schumacher had a lovely story about an old shepherd. "Don't count the sheep," he said, "or else they won't thrive." By this he meant that counting the sheep turned each live, unique animal into an abstraction, a symbol of a sheep, each one like the next one. In this way one would begin to lose sight of them as individual sheep. One would fail to notice whether they looked healthy, acted normal, and in general were becoming their best sheep selves. The late John Holt, school reformer/ educator/amateur cellist who tells this story, concludes with the observation that "What we easily forget, in our passionate twentieth-century love affair with abstract thinking, is that to make an abstraction out of some part of reality we must take some meaning out of it." (See Holt's Learning All the Time [Reading, Mass.: Addison Wesley Publishing Co., 1989], 104.) Remember: the shepherds with whom Jesus was familiar knew each of their sheep by name, and called the flock to their side each morning.

24. More than Numbers to God

Illustration

Lee Griess

Numbers. Our lives are filled with numbers. Each year we file our income taxes. Now that's an exercise in numbers to end all numbers games. Pages upon pages of numbers. And when it is finally prepared, we send it off to the Internal Revenue Service with our Social Security number on it. And the IRS takes all those numbers and puts them into a computer, along with the numbers of thousands and thousands of other people. And to them, we become a number.

The government knows us by our tax number. The state knows us by our driver's license number. The bank knows us by our account number. And when we retire, we'll be known by our Social Security number. And it goes on and on. In fact, sometimes I wonder if anybody knows us at all without a number!

And that's why this morning's Gospel reading is so significant, because it tells us that God knows us. He knows us intimately, in fact, better than we know ourselves. And that's important to remember. In spite of the fact that the image of sheep and shepherd is foreign to our experience, the words of the Gospel this morning hearken for us a truth that our human hearts long to hear. The Old Testament writer put it even more clearly when he wrote, "The Lord is my Shepherd, I shall not want." Jesus says it this morning, "My sheep hear my voice and I know them and they follow me, and I give them eternal life."

25. Someone with Skin On

Illustration

Staff

A little boy who cried out in the night. "Daddy, I'm scared!" Half awake Daddy said, "Don't be afraid, Daddy's right across the hall." There was a brief pause and the little boy called out, "I'm still scared." So Daddy pulled out the big guns, "You don't have to be afraid God is with you. God loves you." The pause was longer but the little boy called out again, "I don't care about God, Daddy; I want someone with skin on!"

God knew we needed that assurance of someone with skin on. So God wrapped all the glory of heaven into the flesh and blood of Jesus and stepped into this world as the Good Shepherd just to show us how much we are loved. The Good Shepherd isn't satisfied until all of the sheep are safely gathered into the flock. Not even a one percent margin of loss was acceptable. Jesus came to find the lost.

26. Jesus, The Light of the World

Illustration

John H. Townsend

Jesus is nothing less then the light of the world. This was plainly seen by thousands of people during the American influenza epidemic of 1918. During the height of that plague, churches and all public gathering places were ordered closed. Yet more than ever, it was then that people needed hope and consolation. Burdened by his inability to reach out to people in their time of need, one resourceful pastor thought of the magnificent stained glass windows that graced his church. Those windows faced a major thoroughfare and were large and commanding in design. He had numerous floodlights placed inside the church; illumination through the glass to the outside world gave passers-by the full effect of the window's story.

There for all to see were the matchless portrayals of Jesus: Jesus the good shepherd bearing a lamb on his bosom; Jesus the searching Savior rescuing the lone lost sheep while the ninety-nine rested safely on the fold; Jesus praying in Gethsemane; Jesus on the cross; Jesus triumphant in Resurrection glory. The silent sermons of light and stained glass spoke an eloquent message.

The Gospel of John puts it this way: The true light that gives light of every man was coming into the world. People who passed by the church would stop reverently, silently. They found themselves filled with new resolve and encouragement. They saw ever more clearly in that age of sickness the light of Christ glory which was coming into the world.

27. Jesus' Flight to Egypt

Illustration

It was Christmas and the Pastor had planned a visit to a Pre-School Sunday School class. The teacher, wanting to impress the pastor had the each child draw a picture of some part of the Christmas story. The teacher put the art work on the wall; the preacher came and he was impressed as he identified each drawing's meaning. There was one with a barn and a man and a woman. It was obvious that this was Joseph, Mary, and Jesus at the manger. Another had sheep, men, and angels in the sky. The Shepherd scene he concluded. Another had a caravan with camels and a star in the sky. This was wise men seeking the Christ child.

But one puzzled him. It was an airplane with three figures going up the steps boarding the plane and one other figure in the cockpit. He thought and thought until he had to ask what it meant. The artist spoke up, "It's Jesus' flight to Egypt."Ok said the pastor but who is that up front? "Oh, That's Pontius the pilot."

28. Jesus, Out of Doors

Illustration

J. Ellsworth Kalas

Jesus lived with nature, and he taught from it. If I want an object lesson, I have to carry it into the pulpit or trust that you and I can blend our imaginations to envision a scene. Jesus had his illustrations at first hand; the people could often reach out and touch them. "Consider the lilies of the field," Jesus said, and the people looked at a hillside just to their right. "A certain man went out to sow seed," Jesus said, and every person in the crowd knew what he was talking about, because they had either sown seed or had seen another do it. "There was a shepherd who lost a sheep": there wasn't a person there but whose acquaintance included someone who had gone searching for such a poor, lost beast.

But the marvel with Jesus is that he took such common elements and touched them with eternity. The people who heard him teach knew all about lilies, farming, and sheep, but now they saw those things as messengers of God's work in the world. G.K. Chesterton said it well:

There was a man who dwelt in the east centuries ago.
And now I cannot look at a sheep or sparrow,
A lily or a cornfield, a raven or a sunset,
A vineyard or a mountain, without thinking of Him.

When Chesterton wrote those words, he wasn't thinking of a tour in the Holy Land, but simply of what the teachings of Jesus had done to his entire outlook on life. Jesus gives a sacredness to the common elements of life.

29. Nibbled Lost

Illustration

David Beckett

The story is told of a farmer who had just rescued a lost sheep. When asked how the sheep got lost, the farmer replied, "They just nibble themselves lost. They go from one tuft of grass to another, until at last they've lost their way." That's what happens in life, isn't it? We nibble away at life with little purpose or direction, until it's gone and we have no idea where it went.

In a world that's increasingly more scattered and scared, our task as Christ's Church is to translate and transmit the voice of the Good Shepherd to all those who are lost, hurting, and alone. It's also about following Jesus' example and welcoming everyone into the fold. Even we sheep should be able to understand that.

30. A Shepherd to Lead Us - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

What I want to deal with is leadership. People are saying in Boston, Mass, Palm Beach, Florida, and towns throughout our country that there must be something wrong with the church. Why has the religious leadership failed?

Now let us travel 3000 miles to Israel. In towns very familiar to us because they are biblical towns there is a war going on in the streets. The two sides are deeply religious and yet they are at each other's throats. Even the children there are abused and used as human bombs.

People are saying in Palestine, Jerusalem, Kabul, and in towns all over the east that something is wrong. Why has the religious leadership failed?

Leadership. We all want good leadership. Good shepherds to lead us in and out of green pasture. We vote hoping to elect it, we apply for jobs hoping to work for it, and we go to school hoping to be educated by it. But we do not always find it. The trust we place in our leaders can be broken. So what are we to do? John 10 holds the answer.

Let us ask three questions and see how Jesus answers them.

1. What are the needs of the sheep?
2. What are the traits of a bad shepherd?
3. What are the traits of a good shepherd?

31. What have you heard and Seen this Christmas?

Illustration

Brett Blair

Oh, you say, had I been there at Bethlehem that night I would have seen. I would have understood. I would have known it was the Christ child. Would you? There is one way of knowing:

Ask yourself what you have seen and heard this Christmas Season.

When you watched the 6:00 news did you see chaos and strife, or did you see sheep without a shepherd.
When you went out to do your shopping did you see only hordes of people in the stores, or did you notice the worried expressions on some of their faces worried because they are facing this Christmas without employment or enough money and they don't know how they are going to make ends meet.

What did you hear this Christmas?

Did you hear only the blast of music and carols, or did you hear the silent sighs of the lonely and the bereaved who may be dreading Christmas because it accentuates their loneliness.
And in the midst of the sounds of honking horns and people arguing over parking places, did you hear [name here the sounds coming from some meaningful mission or event of your local church].

You see, so often what you see and what you hear is not dependent upon the event but upon you. If you did in fact hear the cry from the lonely, the laughter of poor children, if you saw the sheep without a shepherd, then, and only then, might you have noticed the events that took place in Bethlehem that night. If you lacked that spiritual seeing and hearing then you probably would have been with the 99% who were present but who saw or heard nothing out of the ordinary. In the end perhaps one of our carols words it best:

No ear may hear his coming, but in this world of sin.
Where meek souls shall receive him still, the dear Christ enters in.

Amen.

32. The Gifts Are Unrelated

Illustration

Paul Lintern

Lydia loved to give things away crafts, baked goods, items she picked up at auctions or sales. It seemed her mind was always thinking about who might enjoy a pick-me-up, an act of encouragement, an expression of love.

When she baked, she baked enough to fill several paper plates to take to neighbors, people at work, her daughter's teacher, some shut-ins at church.

When she learned a new craft, everyone knew it, because Lydia would share with them.

Once, at a garage sale, she spent a dollar for a whole box of old animal figurines ü muddy, greasy, ready-for-the-trash figurines. She cleaned each one with an old toothbrush, glued it to a three-by-five card, and wrote a scripture verse on the card.

On the card with a little bird, she wrote, "Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your Heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?"

Placing a sheep on a card, she wrote, "The Lord is my Shepherd."

One figure was an armadillo; on that card, she wrote, "Put on the whole armor of God."

And the figure of the pink and purple mouse, dressed in red bow tie and rainbow colored top hat, she wrote, "Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your minds."

She greatly enjoyed this project, because she pictured in advance each person to whom she would give that figurine. The zebra was for the nurse who cared for her aunt, the lion for the old man who lives alone in the house behind her, the turtle for the little boy at church who broke his leg. As she delivered them she enjoyed the responses of others and her own joy within.

One day, soon after she had delivered the figurines, Lydia was surprised to see at her door old Mr. Lyons (the one to whom she had given the lion). He handed her a little box which contained a beautifully carved teakwood dove ü smooth, intricately detailed, right down to the feathers and the compassionate eyes.

Lydia's eyes widened. "Oh Mr. Lyons, this is beautiful. Where did you find this?"

His eyes sparked as he said, "Inside a piece of wood; of course I had to whittle away some of the wood to find it."

"I am so overwhelmed. This is so beautiful, such a special part of you. I don't know what to say. I gave you so little. You gave me so much. How can I ever thank you?"

"You already have. This is my gift to you. Your gratitude is your gift to me. They are not dependent on each other; they are both gifts. Like God's gift of grace, and our gifts of gratitude."

He smiled and excused himself to return home. Lydia smiled with a tear in her eye and a rush of joy in her heart. As she walked back to the kitchen, she saw that Mr. Lyons had placed a card in the box. It read, "For we are what God has made us, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand to be our way of life."

33. The Sheep and the Goats - Sermon Starter

Illustration

Brett Blair

Like it or not, judgment is a fact of life. That is true whether we are talking about the histories of nations or the events of our own personal life. If we break the law, then society will judge us. If we live immorally drink too much, engage in sexual promiscuity, live a lifestyle of constant stress then our bodies will judge us. We simply cannot escape judgment in life.

Jesus rarely spoke about the final judgment, but on one occasion he did paint a picture for us in one of his stories. The parable that I just read gives a strong jolt to those who are heavy on doctrine but short on ethics.

A shepherd divides the sheep from the goats, said Jesus, so too shall there be a great division on the final day. Those on the right hand will be allowed entrance into the kingdom, while those on the left will be denied it. And the great surprise is that those who thought they were religious turn out to be not as good as they thought, and those who thought they failed were told they did a better job then they supposed.

I would like to suggest three points that this parable is attempting to make this morning…

We Are to View Each Individual as if They Are Christ.
The End Criteria Will Be Simple Acts of Kindness.
We Are Judged by the Good We Do Not Do.

34. Just When You Think You Know the Answer

Illustration

David Busic

The story is told about a pastor who enjoyed telling stories to the children. He'd bring all the children to the front of the sanctuary, they would sit on the floor, and he would tell them a story. One day he said: "Boys and girls, I want to tell you a story about someone who likes to live in the woods, but sometimes we can see him in our yards. He has a big bushy tail, and likes to eat nuts. Anybody have any idea what I'm talking about?"

No takers.

He said: "I'm talking about a creature that lives in the woods, sometimes in our yards, big bushy tail, eats nuts, likes to climb trees, jumps from tree to tree now, does anybody know what I'm talking about?"

One kid raised his hand to take him out of his misery. The pastor said: "Do you know what I'm thinking about?"

The kid said: "Yeah. I know the answer should be Jesus, but it sounds like a squirrel to me."

That's a little of how it is with the Gospel of John. Just when you think you know what the answer should be, a different meaning presents itself. As you read through John, you find that it is full of double meanings and multi-layered levels. It's very different than the other three gospels. I heard one pastor say: "If Matthew, Mark, and Luke are Rembrandts . . . John is a Picasso!" That is because they have a different purpose.

John's purpose was to prove Jesus was the Messiah sent from God. But he used symbolism and metaphors to communicate that message. The symbol John employs here is that of a shepherd with his flock.

35. Jesus Takes Command

Illustration

Phillip Yancy

Only one miracle made it into all four gospels. It transpired on the grassy hills by the shores of the Sea of Galilee at a time when Jesus' popularity and also his vulnerability was cresting. Wherever he went, a throng that included many deranged and afflicted trailed behind.

The day before the big miracle, Jesus crossed the lake to elude the masses. Herod had just executed John the Baptist, Jesus' relative, his forerunner and friend, and Jesus needed time alone to grieve. Doubtless, John's death provoked somber thoughts of the fate awaiting him.

Alas, there would be no secluded retreat. A huge swarm of yesterday's multitude made the ten-mile journey around the lake and soon hundreds, even thousands of people clamored around Jesus. "He had compassion on them," says Mark, "because they were like sheep without a shepherd." Instead of spending the day renewing his spirit, Jesus spent it healing the sick, always an energy drain, and speaking to a crowd large enough to fill a modern basketball arena.

The issue of food came up. What to do? There are at least five thousand men, not to mention the women and children! Send them away, suggested one disciple. Buy them dinner, said Jesus. What? Is he kidding? We're talking eight months' wages!

Then Jesus took command in a way none of them had seen before. Have the people sit down in groups of fifty, he said. It was like a political rally--festive, orderly, hierarchical--exactly what one might expect from a Messiah figure.

Unavoidably, we moderns read Jesus' life backwards, knowing how it turns out. That day, no one but Jesus had a clue. Murmurs rustled through the group on the packed hillside. Is he the one? Could it be? In the wilderness, Satan had dangled before Jesus the prospects of a crowd-pleasing miracle. Now, not to please a crowd but merely to settle their stomachs, Jesus took two salted fish and five small loaves of bread and performed the miracle everyone was waiting for.

Three of the Gospels leave it at that. "They all ate and were satisfied, and the disciples picked up twelve basketfuls of broken pieces of bread and fish," reports Mark with masterful understatement. Only John tells what happened next. Jesus got his time alone, at last. As the disciples rowed back across the lake, fighting a storm all the way, Jesus spent the night on a mount, alone in prayer. Later that night he rejoined them by walking across the water.

36. Fishing Takes Practice

Illustration

Samuel G. Candler

Ernest Hemingway loved fishing as much as he loved writing. He would never have been a great writer had he not fished, and he would never have been a great fisherman had he not written. Maybe his great work "The Old Man and the Sea" is so powerful because it is at one time so dramatically simple and also so dramatically deep. But "The Old Man and The Sea" is only one of Hemingway's great stories about fishing. His favorite saying apparently was this--something he learned while fishing and writing: il faut (d'abord) durer. "It is necessary, above all else, to endure. It is necessary to endure," he said.

Yes, fishing remains one of the great models of Jesus for the kingdom of God. Maybe our age and culture are in danger of losing the image because we no longer go fishing - just like we no longer herd sheep and know what a shepherd is. We no longer plant seed in the ground and know what growth is. We no longer draw water from wells and know what living water is.

Fishing also teaches us about discipline. "Follow me, and I will make you fishers," said Jesus. Fishing takes practice, preparation, discipline. One must learn how to best throw the net, how to make the mouth of the net come open too. I can throw the actual cast net a long way, but I can't always make the net come open so that it will actually form a circle around the fish. One must learn how to cast the line on a rod. Again, some folks can cast a long way, but their accuracy is awful. There may be fish on the right, but they know only how to cast the line to the left. There may be fish on the left, but they keep casting to the right. Casting, like discipleship, is an acquired habit. It rewards practice.

37. Which Color Would You Be?

Illustration

Richard J. Fairchild

Ralph Milton tells of the teacher who, for reasons of her own, asked the kids one day, "If all the bad children were painted red and all the good children were painted green, which color would you be?"

Think about it. What color would you be? Red or Green? It is a tough question isn't it when you pose only two options.

One very wise child answered the teacher: "Striped"

It seems to me that in the frame of the story - everyone but Jesus is striped. It is the same in the world today. We are a curious combination of the lost and the found. We are striped. We are, in some sense, not completely complete. It is hard language, this language of lost and found, especially for folks in the middle, as most of us are most of the time. It seems too absolute.

Rarely are we completely lost. And rarely are we completely found. There is always a part of us that needs to be dragged and cajoled into the light, and there is always a part of us that is already there in the light. For some it is more and for some it is less, but always some part.

The wonderful thing is - that God wants us to enter fully into the light. The wonderful thing is that God wants to bless us all richly to keep us safe, to make us strong, to help us be like a Shepherd who really cares for his sheep, or like a poor widow who really values all her coins.

38. It's a Big Ocean to be Lost In

Illustration

Brett Blair

H.H. Staton in his book, "A Guide To the Parables of Jesus" tells the story of having been on an ocean liner headed to the Middle East.

Nine hundred miles out to sea a sail was sighted on the horizon. As the liner drew closer, the passengers saw that the boat - a small sloop flying a Turkish flag - had run up a distress signal and other flags asking for its position at sea. Through a faulty chronometer or immature navigation the small vessel had become lost. For nearly an hour the liner circled the little boat, giving its crew correct latitude and longitude. Naturally there was a great deal of interest in all the proceeding among the passengers of the liner. A 12 year-old-boy remarked aloud to himself - "It's a big ocean to be lost in."

It is a big universe to be lost in too. And we do get lost - we get mixed up and turned around. We despair, we make mistakes, we do evil to each other. We deserve the wrath of God and that is what the Pharisees who criticized Jesus maintained. But Jesus understood God more. He knew God as a Shepherd in search of the one lost sheep. He knew God as a woman searching in the dark, in the crevasses, for that valuable coin. In the end it was Jesus' view of God which prevailed and not his critics.

39. She Knew The Good Shepherd

Illustration

Lee Griess

Missionary Herb Schaefer tells about a thirteen-year-old Chinese girl who continued with her family to worship God secretly in their home during the Cultural Revolution in China, that time when religion was forbidden and worship was banned by the Chinese rulers. One evening the Red Guards burst into their small home and threatened them for worshiping Jesus. A small altar with a crude cross stood in one corner of the room. Determined to put a stop to their worship and command complete allegiance to the Communist state, the Red Guard lieutenant demanded they spit on the cross. They refused. The lieutenant became indignant and shouted at them that unless they spat on the cross they would be killed.

Finally the elder in the group came forward, spat on the cross and left. One by one they followed, doing the same disgusting thing until only the thirteen-year-old remained. She refused to do what the others had done. "I cannot and I will not," she replied. Then she told the lieutenant the depth of her faith and said that she was willing to die for it. Remarkably the Lieutenant seemed pleased. "This is the kind of devotion we want for the new China: people who will commit themselves so totally that they are willing to die for what they believe." But he wanted that devotion directed toward Chairman Mao. "We will change you," he promised and left. She was spared, but she never saw the rest of her family again.

The story doesn't end there, however. For shortly thereafter, that little girl fled to Hong Kong and was taken in. Later she entered the Lutheran seminary there and today she is a pastor of the Hong Kong Lutheran Church, serving the needs of countless souls. She prays for the day when she will be allowed to return to her village and minister to her people there and perhaps even to that Red Guard lieutenant who spared her but murdered her family.

She was able to endure, to overcome that tragedy in her life, because she knew the Good Shepherd.

40. 8 Signs You're Not Reading Your Bible

Illustration

King Duncan

A group of boys and girls was asked to sum up what they had learned from the New Testament. Here is a summation of what they had learned: "Jesus is the star of the New Testament. He was born in Bethlehem in a barn. During His life, Jesus had many arguments with sinners like the Pharisees and the Republicans. Jesus also had twelve opossums. The worst one was Judas Asparagus. Judas was so evil that they named a terrible vegetable after him.

"Jesus was a great man. He healed many leopards and even preached to some Germans on the Mount. But the Republicans and all those guys put Jesus on trial before Pontius the Pilot. Pilot didn't stick up for Jesus. He just washed his hands instead. Anyways, Jesus died for our sins, then came back to life again. He went up to Heaven but will be back at the end of the Aluminum. His return is foretold in the book of Revolution."

You laugh, but many adults wouldn't fare much better in describing the New Testament. Here are eight signs you are not reading your Bible enough:

The pastor announces the sermon is from Galatians . . . and you check the table of contents.
You think Abraham, Isaac and Jacob may have had a few hit songs during the 60s.
You open to the Gospel of Luke and a WWII Savings Bond falls out.
Your favorite Old Testament patriarch is Hercules.
You become frustrated because Charlton Heston isn't listed in either the concordance or the table of contents.
Catching the kids reading the Song of Solomon, you demand: "Who gave you this stuff?"
You keep falling for it every time when pastor tells you to turn to First Condominiums.
And the No. 1 sign you may not be reading your Bible enough: The kids keep asking too many questions about your usual bedtime story: "Jonah the Shepherd Boy and His Ark of Many Colors."

41. SHEEPSHEARER

Illustration

Stephen Stewart

Genesis 38:12 - "in course of time the wife of Judah, Shuah’s daughter, died; and when Judah was comforted, he went up to Timnah, to his sheepshearers, he and his friend Hirah the Adullamite."

2 Samuel 13:23 - "After two full years Absalom had sheepshearers at Baalhazor, which was near Ephraim, and Absalom invited all the king’s sons."

Shearing was done after the spring lambing season at the shearing houses. However, not all the sheep were shorn - the firstlings of the flock were sacred to God and were not shorn. The wool which was gathered from these sheep was made into clothing for the family, and, for those who had additional wool, it made a substantial income when sold.

The shearing time was a time of great rejoicing, and gave rise to a gala feast. The flock’s owner, joined by his shearers, provided a feast for friends and relatives. Part of the joy stemmed from the revenue realized, but there may very well be some connection between these festivals and the Passover Feast.

The large sheep owners of today still use sheep-shearers to remove the wool from the sheep and prepare it for shipment to the manufacturers of materials and clothing. Without them, many of the articles of clothing that we take so much for granted would be unavailable.

42. Don’t Forget the Best

Illustration

Adrian Dieleman

There is an ancient Scottish legend that tells the story of a shepherd boy tending a few straggling sheep on the side of a mountain. One day as he cared for his sheep he saw at his feet a beautiful flower. One that was more beautiful than any he had ever seen in his life. He knelt down upon his knees and scooped the flower in his hands and held it close to his eyes, drinking in its beauty. As he held the flower close, suddenly he heard a noise and looked up. Before him was a great stone mountain opening up right before his eyes. And as the sun began to shine on the inside of the mountain, he saw the sprinkling of the beautiful gems and precious metals that it contained.

With the flower in his hands, he walked inside. Laying the flower down, he began to gather all the gold and silver and precious gems in his arms. Finally with all that his arms could carry, he turned and began to walk out of that great cavern, and suddenly a voice said to him, "Don't forget the best."

Thinking that perhaps he had overlooked some choice piece of treasure, he went back and picked up additional priceless treasures. Now with his arms literally overflowing with wealth, he turned to walk back out of the great mountainous vault. Again the voice said, "Don't forget the best."

But by this time his arms were filled and he walked out. Suddenly, the precious metals and stones turned to dust, and he looked around just in time to see the great stone mountain closing its doors. Just then the voice spoke one last time, "You forgot the best. For the beautiful flower is the key to the vault of the mountain."

In our Scripture passage we have someone who also forgot the best. Her name was Martha.

43. The Judas Goat

Illustration

Michael P. Green

The major reason for teenage suicide, drug addiction, and alcoholism is that most young people are conformists. They, like their parents, do what “everybody else” does, feeling instinctively that if most people are doing it, then “it” must be good to do. In effect, we act like sheep.

In a packing house where sheep are slaughtered, the sheep walk from their large pen up a narrow ramp and turn right. In order to get the sheep to move up the ramp, a “Judas goat” is trained to lead the sheep up the ramp to their death. The goat is placed among the sheep and then walks confidently to the ramp as the others follow. Once the Judas goat gets to the top of the ramp the he turns left, as a gate is opened only for him and then closed. The others keep going, turn right, and walk to their death.

Note: Judas Goat is an actual term and are used in slaughter houses for this purpose. Read more hear.

44. The Perfect Prayer

Illustration

Staff

It was Sunday morning in the mountain country of central Europe, and the church bells were ringing. A man walking a mountain path came upon a shepherd lad with his father's flock of sheep. The boy was kneeling, and, looking up, was reciting the alphabet.

The man asked, "What are you doing?" and the boy answered, "I am praying." Somewhat sternly, the man said, "Praying? What kind of praying is this? Just saying letters, no words at all?" The lad replied: "I've never learned any prayers, sir. But it's Sunday morning and the bells are ringing in the valley, and I thought I wanted to pray, and I thought maybe - well, maybe - if I just said all of the letters, God might hear them and put them together for me, and spell out what I ought to say."

This, my dear friend, is true worship - worship in its essence, worship at its purest and best: simply to place ourselves before God and turn it all over to him. This is the ultimate devotion, the first act of worship and the final one -here it begins and here it ends. Whatever else we may do - all our praying, all our preaching, all our singing - nothing ever surpasses this: simply to turn it all over to him and say, "Here it is, Lord; take it, and make it come together as it should; take it, and spell it out for me, if you please."

When we have done this, we will have prayed something pretty close to the perfect prayer.

45. A Mother's Prayer for Her Children

Illustration

Staff

Prayer by a Bishop Anselm for the Members of His Church, adapted as a Prayer of a Mother for Her Children.

Jesus, good Shepherd, they are not mine but Yours,
for I am not mine but Yours.
I am Yours, Lord, and they are Yours,
because by Your wisdom You have created
both them and me,
and by Your death You have redeemed us.

So we are Yours, good Lord, we are Yours,
whom You have made with such wisdom
and bought so dearly.
Then if You commend them to me, Lord,
You do not therefore desert me or them.
You commend them to me:
I commend myself and them to You.
Yours is the flock, Lord, and Yours is the shepherd.
Be Shepherd of both Your flock and shepherd.

You have made an ignorant mother,
a blind leader, an erring ruler:
teach the mother You have established,
guide the leader You have appointed,
govern the ruler You have approved.

I beg You,
teach me what I am to teach,
lead me in the way that I am to lead,
rule me so that I may rule others.
Or rather, teach them, and me through them,
lead them, and me with them,
rule them, and me among them.

Adapted from Anselm (1033 – 1099), Archbishop of Canterbury, translated by Sister Benedicta Ward, S.L.G. Adapted for mothers by Ruth Bell Graham.

46. We Know Your Voice

Illustration

David Beckett

From 1928 through 1942, children in schools in America learned to know the voice of Walter Damrosch, the host of ‘Music Appreciation Hour' a radio broadcast from NBC. He taught thousands of boys and girls to know and love music. Classes stopped at a certain hour, the school radio was switched on, and then his familiar voice was heard: "Good morning, my dear children." They then enjoyed a half-hour of beautiful music, and he would tell them the meaning and the message within the music.

One day Mr. Damrosch was asked by the headmaster of a school to come and talk to the boys and girls. He sat on the platform and the children fidgeted, for he was an old man, and they knew that old men very often make long speeches. The headmaster let him introduce himself. Mr. Damrosch stood up and smiled, but no one knew him. Then he said, "Good morning, my dear children," and immediately the whole room was in an uproar. The children clapped and cheered. Mr. Damrosch said, "And why do you cheer? You do not know me." "Yes we do, we know your voice."

If we are sheep, do we know our Shepherd's voice? Do we know with whom we belong?

47. A Point of Reference

Illustration

James Merritt

During World War II, the English government knew that Hitler was planning to invade the British Islands. They encouraged their people to prepare for the invasion and they did several things: they boasted their defenses, they put guards on constant watch, and they developed early warning systems and evacuation routes.

They did one more thing - the government passed a law requiring every community to take down all the road signs and any sign that named any town or village. They knew the Germans had maps of England, but if they couldn't locate themselves on those maps, they would be slowed in their progress as they approached London. Without any sign or any point of reference, the troops would just wander aimlessly around.

The world does that to us. It takes our roads signs away. And we live our lives lost; not knowing where we are and don't know how to get to where we need to go, so husbands and wives will wander away from their marriages. Children will wander away from their parents. People will walk off cliffs of drugs, alcohol, or materialism. Sheep need guidance. We need direction and leadership.

That is the job of the shepherd. What is the second verse in the twenty-third Psalm? "He makes me lie down in green pastures; He leads me beside quiet waters."

48. Tuning to a Distant Signal

Illustration

Staff

A sheep rancher in the remote mountains of Idaho found that his violin was out of tune, and, try as he would, he was unable to make the instrument sound the way it should. A frequent listener to a radio station in California, he wrote the station concerning his problem, asking these good people at a certain hour and minute on a certain day to strike the right note for him. This they did: stopping everything else, silencing all other sounds for a moment, they struck that note. In his shepherd's hut in the distant mountains, the shepherd heard that sound, and from that single note he put his instrument into tune again.

This is the hour of worship, a special time of being in touch with God. Here we listen for the signal-tone he strikes for our lives, for the pitch he gives by which our hearts may be put in tune.

49. I Am Sayings

Illustration

Brett Blair

There are seven "I Am" sayings in the gospel of John. I Am the true vine is the last of these sayings.

I am the bread of life - 6:35
I am the light of the world - 8:12 & 9:5
I am the gate for the sheep - 10:7,9
I am the good shepherd - 10:11,14
I am the resurrection and the life - 11:25
I am the way and the truth and the life - 14:6
I am the true vine - 15:1,5

50. When We Fail to Listen

Illustration

Brett Blair

A certain public school superintendent passed down a verbal set of instructions to his assistant concerning the appearance of Halley's Comet a few years back. The superintendent said:

Next Thursday at 10:30 a.m., Halley's Comet will appear over this area. This is an event that occurs only once every 75 years. Call the school principals and have them assemble their teachers and classes on their athletic fields, and explain the phenomena to them. If it rains, then cancel the day's observation and have the classes meet in the auditorium to see a film about the Comet.

The assistant superintendent telephoned the school principals with this message: By order of the superintendent of schools, next Thursday Halley's Comet will appear over your athletic field at 10:30 a.m. If it rains, then cancel the day's classes and report to the auditorium with your teachers and students, where you will be shown films, a phenomenal event which occurs only once every 75 years.

The principals told their teachers the following: By order of the phenomenal superintendent of schools, at 10:30 a.m. next Thursday, Halley's Comet will appear in the auditorium. In case of rain over the athletic field, the superintendent will give another order—something which occurs only once in every 75 years.

The teachers then told their students: Next Thursday at 10:30 a.m., the superintendent of schools will appear in our school auditorium with Halley's Comet—something which occurs every 75 years. If it rains, the superintendent will cancel the Comet and will order us out on our phenomenal athletic field.

By the time the message was taken home to parents by the students and it sounded like this: When it rains next Thursday at 10:30 a.m. over the school's athletic field, the phenomenal 75 year-old superintendent of schools will cancel all classes, and appear before the student body in the auditorium, accompanied by Bill Haley and the Comets.

When we fail to listen, we misinterpret or modify what we have heard. It is then that chaos and confusion come in. We practice selective listening and hear only what we want to hear! Good Shepherds listen carefully, attentively, and intentionally to the voice of the Master Shepherd. In listening to Jesus, we hear the instruction, guidance, and sensitivity we need in relating to members of our flock.

Showing 1 to 50 of 207 results