Of Sheep and Shepherds

Introduction

Background Bible study is fascinating and is perhaps one of the most important parts of biblical research. Obtaining a “behind-the-scenes” look into the biblical documents will “contribute to a more precise comprehension of the Word of God.”[1] This observation can be said about the shepherd motif found in Scripture. Since it is dangerous to paint half a picture of anyone or anything – especially biblical topics; we stress, then, that this is but a footnote to the beautiful motif of the pastoral profession (i.e. the shepherd) often employed by the biblical authors.

Shepherds in Israel
Shepherding was a great profession in the culture of the Ancient Near East, and so far as it relates to Israel’s history, pastoral work was a constant aspect of nomadic life (cf. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc.). Even when they conquered and settled into Palestine, the end of the nomadic life did not stop pastoral work (e.g. David 1 Sam. 16.19; Amos 1.1, 7.14).[2] The widespread awareness of this profession “made motifs of sheep and shepherding apt descriptions of human and divine roles and relationships.”[3]

Notice one Old Testament example. God through Jeremiah pronounces a “woe” upon the leadership of Judah using the pastoral motif:

“Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture!” declares the LORD. Therefore thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, concerning the shepherds who care for my people: ‘You have scattered my flock and have driven them away, and you have not attended to them. Behold, I will attend to you for your evil deeds, declares the LORD.’” (Jer. 23.1-2 ESV)

The “shepherds” failed to maintain the pastoral relationship with God’s flock; consequently, the sheep were scattered. Jeremiah, looking to post-exilic times, promises that God will restore the proper care to his flock with faithful shepherds (Jer. 23.3-4).

Shepherds in the New Testament

There are several related New Testament words used to the work of shepherding. The noun form is poimein, and refers to a shepherd, herdsmen, or pastor,[4] and hence it is a metaphor describing a guardian-leader. The third translation option probably receives the most attention from among the three, and this is due to its connection with the eldership of the New Testament (Eph. 4.11, here teaching-pastors), and its erroneous – but popular - usage in denominational circles.[5]

However, the New Testament uses the term significantly in its normal sense. Jesus refers to himself as “the good shepherd” in John 10.1-18 to distinguish himself from the leaders who had oppressed or neglected the house of Israel. Luke narrates the story of the shepherds, in the field with their flock, who were told of the arrival of the Messiah (2.1-20). Jesus warned his disciples that when he is handed over to the Jews, that they would be scattered like sheep when their shepherd is harmed (Matt. 9.36 = Mark 6.34).

But perhaps the most vivid pastoral scenes are of those moments that relate to our relationship with Jesus. The Lord is described as “the Shepherd and Overseer” of our souls (1 Pet. 2.25 cf. Heb. 13.20), who receives straying sheep as any good shepherd does. Another vivid scene using the shepherd motif is the Day of Judgment, when Jesus “will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats” (Matt. 25.32). This is taken from a understanding that sheep and goats were “pastured together” in Palestine, but at certain appropriate times they “require separation.”[5] The figure is given Christian meaning as a metaphor of the judgment upon faithful and non-faithful Christians.

Learning from the Sheep and the Shepherds

There are so many relationship lessons that God has taken from pastoral care, we would do well to reflect upon it more. For example: at the birthing of a new lamb, the shepherd “guards the mother during her helpless moments and picks up the lamb and carries it to the field. For the few days, until it is able to walk, he may carry it in his arms or in the loose folds of his coat.”[6] Could we not make an application from this? The shepherd and the lamb have a wonderfully tender relationship, and we would strengthen our fellowship in taking a lesson from this behavioral motif.

Truly, we can see that a pastoral care for Christians will encourage us to help in the development and care of new converts. It will stimulate us to help heal wounded sheep, and protect them as they are nourished to good health. And more personally, perhaps we would be more receptive to the prodding and care by our shepherds in the church. The “pastoral” mentality is not only for the elders, we would all do well to lead on, or be led, ever so gently (Gen. 33.14).

Conclusion[8]

In the Christian age, it is quite common for New Testament students to think of shepherd-pastors as only in terms of the office of a bishop/elder as mentioned in 1 Timothy 3. However, the imagery of a shepherd has a wide application to both describe religious leaders and the effects of their ministries upon teir religious constituents, and it also describes how the Lord Jesus and the Father are both presented as providers and keepers of our souls.

May we  take from these lessons, practical ways, to reflect a pastoral concern for ourselves, our fellow believers, family, and our friends.

Sources

1. Jackson, Wayne. Background Bible Study. Rev. ed. Stockton, CA: Courier, 1999; p. 1.
2. Miller, Madeleine S., J. Lane Miller, Boyce M. Bennett, and David H. Scott. Harper’s Encyclopedia of Bible Life. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1978; p. 142.
3. Johnson, D. in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Eds. Joel B. Green, Scot McKnight, and I. Howard Marshall. Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1992; p. 751.
4. Vine, W.E., Merrill F. Unger, and William White. Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Nashville: Nelson, 1986; 2:462, 2:569.
5. Despite popular usage among denominations as a term for “minister,” a usage which J.P. Louw and Eugene Nida’s lexicon continues to perpetuate (cf. L-N 53.72), typical passages used to support this idea are missapplied. Specifically, Ephesians 4.11 where there are four groups of leadership types (not five) set forth as recipients of the temporary “gifts” which enable the Christians to obtain maturity (Eph. 4.12; cf. 1 Cor. 13.10). see J. Jeremias in TDNT 6.485-502.
6. Lewis, Jack P. Matthew. Abilene, TX: Abilene Christian UP, 1984; 2:137.
7. Patch, J. in International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Gen. ed. James Orr. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1943; 4:2764.
8. I wanted to end this study with the following oft quoted illustration: “One day at a great party a great actor was asked to recite the 23rd Psalms. The actor said that he would if a pastor who was present would also recite the psalm. The pastor said that he would. The actor was a great speaker. His voice was beautiful. The people listened carefully. They were thrilled with the way he recited the psalm. When the actor had finished, the people all applauded him loudly. They thought the actor was a wonderful speaker. When the actor’s voice had died away, the pastor, who was an old man, rose to his feet. He began to recite the psalm. His voice trembled. At times he paused as if to think of the wonders of the psalm. The Lord seemed to speak through him to the people. When he finished, no one clapped. Most of the audience were crying. Many sat with bowed heads. The Good Shepherd had become very real to them as the old pastor had spoken. The actor rose to his feet again and laying a hand on the shoulder of the old pastor, he said, “My friends, I spoke to your eyes and your ears, but this man spoke to your hearts. The difference between us is this: I know the 23rd Psalm, but this man knows the Shepherd.” (click here to find source for this story).

Obtainable Spiritual Goals – Controlling the Tongue

Introduction

I’ll be honest. I have not always used my tongue in the most positive, and constructive of ways. I could append my guilty plea with the excuse, saying, “it wasn’t me, the devil made me do it”, but such trifle excuses remove personal responsibility from the case. So what am I to do? Repent, seek the counsel of the Scriptures, and then implement that wisdom on a consistent basis.

As in all spiritual quests, the journey is quite personal. Spiritual progress is a tailor-made phenomenon, for no two people are exactly the same and all have individualized challenges. It is the struggle of overcoming, and harnessing the impulses of our body, and conforming them to the teaching of God as revealed in the Bible that unites all men searching for spiritual solutions to their plight with sin.

Perhaps, the most pervasive struggle is the use and misuse of our tongue. This little piece is focused on providing an encouragement and to provide ammunition in the battle over the tongue.

A Warning by James

When the brother of the Lord addressed the church spread across the Roman Empire, James provided one of the most lengthy sections committed to illustrating the danger and misuse of the tongue in the New Testament (3.1-18).

The passage connects two main themes articulated to resolve a number of problems facing the Jewish-Gentile church. On the one hand, a section affirming that faith and action must go hand in hand in order to be genuine faith (2.14-26); and on the other hand, James makes the connection that a wise and understanding person is not only demonstrated by a ”good conduct”,[1] but that because of a behavior saturated in heavenly wisdom, such a person can contribute to the diffusion of quarrelings (3.13-4.12).

James argues, therefore, that all members should act in a spirit of humility grounded in recognition of God (4.4-10; cf. Jas. 1.27); otherwise, they will continue to be guilty of sins exasperating the church climate of James’ audience (4.17). So James addresses the use of the tongue and the need to minimize the “heat” amplifying the problems, and to maximize ”light” in order to diffuse the internal strife.

James haults the multiplication of teachers by affirming that a teacher should be a mature Christian, and that a mature Christian teacher is to be able to control the tongue (3.1-2). The reason? Because, despite its apparent insignificant size, it actually wields a large span of control over a person’s influence and ability (3.3-5a).

Furthermore, its destructive power (unrighteous use) can destroy lives presently and eternally (3.5b-6), but its most consistent problem is found in its duplicity (3.7-12): “with it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God.”

Therefore, James warns against “wanna be teachers” who are too immature to enter the fray of “church problems.” Such matters are to be left to those who have demonstrated a pattern of life guided by wisdom and understanding (3.13). Such individuals will ideally refrain from acting “earthly, unspiritual, [and] demonic”, and instead will act on “the wisdom that comes from above” (3.14-17).

The results?

A harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace. (3.18)

Despite the great dangers of the tongue, James says that it can form the foundation needed to resolve conflict – physically, socially, and spiritually. Imagine just how much better people and churches we would be if we constantly sowed the seeds of peace within the congregation, and among  our congregational neighbors.

In James’ approach to church conflict, he highlights an important trait of the Christian involved: it must be a mature Christian who can win the battle of control over the tongue. It may not always be a perfect use of the tongue, but the tongue will not be allowed to run wild. This is a decision all Christians can make; and so, what we are saying is this: the control of the tongue is an absolutely obtainable spiritual goal.

“Excuses, Excuses”

Usually, we find ourselves under the delusion of our own excuses: “I was raised to cuss like a sailor”, “I was angry and I lost it”, “I need to work on that, but I always forget”. We could plumb the depths of the excuse abyss ad infinitum and find a defense for every one of our misconducts. But we do ourselves a true dis-service by accepting defeat, instead of trusting in Him who raised Jesus from the dead (Rom. 6.6-14, 8.32).

The apostle Paul says that we are more than conqueror through God’s power (Rom. 8.37), and to raise the white flag is accept defeat unneccessarily. Such determinism is Calvinistic to the core, and utterly rejects the free-volitional-will that God endowed upon His Imago Dei (Gen. 1.26). A person can choose to serve God or not – it is within the hands of the person (Josh. 24.15, cf. Eccl. 9.10). Furthermore, it dismisses the seriousness of the sins of the mouth, which God has already spoken of as behaviors under His wrath (Prov. 6.16-19; Rev. 21.8).

Returning to the situation confronting the church James addresses, it is essential to notice that one of his main objectives is to denounce and expose the erroneous excuse that God has placed us in a difficult situation only to fail, and that we have no recourse but to sin (cf. Jas. 1.12-18). To overthrow this deception, James sets forth the themes of his letter:[2]

Knowing this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear [1.21-2.26], slow to speak [3.1-18], slow to anger [4.1-5.6]; for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness that God requires. (Jas. 1.19-20)

Such a letter demands personal responsibility in the employment of true religion. Furthermore, true religious expressed through the Christian lifestyle is dependant upon the ability to control the tongue (Jas. 1.27-28). This is clearly stated in James 3.2:

For we all stumble in many ways. And if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body.

Chalinagogeo, the word used for “bridle” in James 3.2 is the same word used in James 1.26. It means to literally “lead with a bridle”; and among all the New Testament documents it appears in James alone. Moreover, it carries the metaphorical force of restraint and the ability to keep things in check (cf. NIV).[3]

Amazingly, James reaffirms his statement about the tongue in 1.26-28 , and applies it to the need to control the whole body (i.e. behavior and character) in 3.2. In light of this data, could anything be more clearer than the spiritual need to overcome his or her tongue?

In what way could the excuses above carry weight against the inspired words of James? An uncontrolled use of the tongue can not be explained away with frivolous excuses, nor will they stand when they are brought before the Divine Tribunal in the judgement (Eccl. 12.14; Matt. 12.36).

With such clear biblical data, excuses must be tossed to the side, responsibility must be taken for the misuse of the tongue, and a course of action must be taken to consistently (daily) manage the tongue knowing full well that it is “a restless evil, full of deadly poison” (Jas. 3.8).

Some Suggestions

A study like this would be incomplete without attention brought to possible strategies to minimize the misuse of the tongue, and to maximize the potentials in reaching true religion with a proper use of the tongue. Some of the points come from Scripture, others come from common sense. There is no doubt that these are but a sample of all that could be said.

From the Heart. Jesus once made the statement that the heart was the source of all of our actions. Notice how Matthew records this affirmation:

[W]hat comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a person. (15.18-20; cf. Mark 7.14-23)

Indeed, we see the wisdon of Proverbs 4.23, saying, “Keep your heart with all vigilance, for from it flow the springs of life.” Many feel that the best way to succeed in life is to expose oneself to everything that can be known, and then let the chips fall where they may; thinking that exposure is the same thing as protection. Actually, the opposite is true.

The apostle Paul penned the following inspired words: “I want you to be wise as to what is good and innocent as to what is evil” (Rom. 16.19). Two things are said here: we must be thoroughly informed in what is good, and we must be unadulterated with evil.

Layering these passages together, it is clear that the heart must be guarded against evil influences by filling it with “what is good”. This will enable a person to control what proceeds “from the heart.” Certainly, then, with a tongue controlled at its source the course of our lives will be better.

Upgrade to Filter. Have you ever heard of BTM? BTM stands for “brain to mouth” and is commonly used to describe a popular “syndrome” of sharing whatever comes to mind – i.e., you think it, you say it. Surely this cannot be a prudent method of communication.

It is enlightening to observe some passages from Proverbs and how they describe BTM-ish uses of the mouth. Note a couple of passages:

• The heart of the righteous ponders how to answer, but the mouth of the wicked pours out evil things. (15.28)
• If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame. (18.13)

There is evidence to conclude then that Christians should upgrade their tongue with a filter that makes them to ponder of what they are going to say. Moreover, a person can say what is on their heart without forsaking forethought when talking with other people.

Word choice – and it is a choice – is an important part of the communication process. It will enable us to speak morally, honestly, correctly, empathically, and positively. So the next time you are on the verge of a brain-to-mouth moment, pause, “hear” and “ponder” over the matter at  hand before you speak. This filtration system just might be the best thing you do to change the direction of your life for the better (Jas. 3.2-6)!

A Time for Silence. In chapter 3 of Ecclesiastes, the “Preacher” (Eccl. 1.1),[4] presents his famous “there is a time” monologue (3.1-8). In verse 7 of this passage, he pens, that there is ”a time to keep silence, and a time to speak.” What was Solomon addressing?

The overrulling theme of this section of the book focuses upon two main things: (a) in this transcient life humanity has many ways (i.e. the “a time to” statements, 3.2-8) to stay busy (3.1, 10); and (b) despite the ability for the mundacity of life to bring despair (3.9), everything is beautiful “in its time” in light of the eternal consequences of living the life designed by God (3.11-14).[5]

Now that we have established the context, the actual verse needs some clarification. The whole verse reads (3.7):

(A) a time to tear,

and (B) a time to sew;

(A’) a time to keep silence,

and (B’) a time to speak

As seen above, from the first verse to the eighth each verse is broken down into four parts of what can be best expressed as “opposite extremes”.

For example, in 3.2 birth and death are “opposite extremes” of each other, and then in a similar vein the vegitation imagery is used of planting a productive plant seed, and then plucking the plant to ends it productivity. The two lines are very similar in their emphasis, there is a time to begin life and a time that life and all its productivity will come to an end.

Ecclesiastes 3.7 follows a similar pattern, only that here the passage seems to refer to the customs of mourning and grief shown during the event of a death. Customarily, in the cultural milieu of biblical times a garment was “torn” to show grief,[6] but when it was time to overcome grief reconnecting the torn pieces (i.e. “a time to sew”) would symbolize “picking up the pieces” (for lack of a better phrase).

Likewise, carrying this pattern of posing “opposite extremes” against each other, the Preacher says that there are appropriate times that justify silence – like a death – and that there are times when we must resume to our daily conversations.

Solomon stresses that life often confronts us with these opposite extremities of life. One moment, we are careful without a concern in the world; and then, in the next moment, it would seem as if the whole world were on our shoulders and every detail must be right. However, in the grand scheme of things, knowing that eternity looms in the future, and we have a purpose in the world, we face each challenge with spiritual and moral strategies in place. We fear God and keep his commandments (Eccl. 12.13).

Amazingly, one of those spiritual and moral strategies is to be silent or converstant depending upon how the situation demands us to act. Often, spiritual concerned individuals feel that they must consistently insert their lips into every problem or situation, thinking perhaps that it is the conscientious thing to do. Solomon reminds us – there is a time for it, and then there is a time when it is highly inappropriate to speak.

Conclusion

What can we say, our tongue is a battle ground. So much depends upon our ability to control this little muscle-organ. As we have observed, the use of our tongue stems from our own maturity and spiritual depth. We must be vigilent then to guard our hearts, be more patient and think before we speak; and finally, we must recognize that just because we feel we have something to say, the occassion may not call for it.

May this study be enriching and encouraging to you in your quest to live a life of biblical faith.

Sources

1. All quotations of the Holy Bible are taken from the English Standard Version (Wheaton: Crossway, 2001) unless otherwise stated.
2. Although many have suggested outlines for the book of James, we agree with John Niemela’s assessment of the organization of the letter based upon the thematic structure of the letter (“Faith Without Works: A Definition.” Chafer Theological Seminary Journal 6.2 (2000): 2-18; pp. 3-6). In brief: (1) Prologue (1.1-18); (2) Theme (1.19-20); (3) Themes Subdivided (1.21-5.6); (4) Epilogue (5.7-20).
3. Earle, Ralph. Word Meanings in the New Testament. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1998; p. 434.
4. The word used for Ecclesiates’ author, “Preacher”, translates a difficult word, according to R.K. Harrison (Introduction to the Old Testament 1969 [Peabody: Hendrickson, 2004]; pp. 1072-73). Perhaps a helpful way of thinking about the term itself is in the following way, “Ecclesiastes is a Greek translation of Heb. qohelet ‘one who convenes a congregation,’ presumably to preach to it. ‘Preacher,’ then, is not an inaccurate translation of either the Greek or Hebrew. However, Qoheleth (sometimes spelled Koheleth) would hardly parallel the Christian meaning, since his texts were taken more from his own observations of life than from the Law or the Prophets” (W.S. LaSor, D.A. Hubbard, and F.W. Bush. Old Testament Survey. 2nd ed. [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996]; pp. 497-98). For a brief but good response to question of Solomon’s authorship in light of linguistic criticisms certain scholars use to reject Solomonic authorship see Gleason L. Archer’s entry in his work, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982), pp. 255-58.
5. Kidner, Derek. The Wisdom of Proverbs, Job, and Eccelsiastes (Downer’s Grove: InterVarsity, 1985); pp 97-99.
6. Several passages in the Old Testament alone demonstrate this cultural practice: Gen. 37.29, 34, 44.13; Num. 14.6; Josh. 7.6; Judg. 11.35; 2 Sam. 1.11-12; 2 Sam. 13.19, 31; Ezra 9.3; Esth. 4.1; Job 1.20, 2.12; Isa. 37.1, etc. This is not all the passages that could be listed, but these are sufficient to demonstrate the pattern of behavior.

Suggested Reading

1. Hiebert, D. Edmond. “The Unifying Theme of the Epistle of James.” Bibliotheca Sacra 135 (1978): 221-31. (Link)
2. Jackson, Wayne. “James 3.1 – A Warning to Teachers.” Christian Courier Online. 17 May 2002 (Link).
3. Jackson, Wayne. “The Tongue – One of Man’s Most Dangerous Weapons.” Christian Courier Online. 21 March 2005 (Link).