LIBERTY UNIVERSITY

THE I AM THE GOOD SHEPHERD STATEMENT AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR THE
DEITY AND ROYALTY OF JESUS CHRIST

A PAPER PRESENTED TO
PROFESSOR HARRY HARRISS
BIBL 323-S06 DLP

BY
ADAM BOWERS
LYNCHBURG, VIRGINIA
APRIL 23

Bowers 2

The allegory of Jesus as the Good Shepherd may seem quite simple and easy to
understand. It is, however, one of the most complex parallels drawn by the Savior in His known
dialogues. A shepherd protects and cares for the sheep, and the sheep follow the shepherd. Jesus
is the good shepherd, and the believers are the sheep. Yet, the original listeners of this
comparison are divided and confused upon its delivery. The initial audience does not understand
an analogy that seems simple to modern readers, because the parallel carried additional meaning
lost in modern culture.
In the parallel of the Good Shepherd, Jesus likens Himself to the great kings of the world
as a royal protector, provider and healer, thereby proclaiming his royal deity.
In John 9, Jesus sees a man blind from birth and is questioned as to what fault resulted in
such tragedy. In verse one, Jesus disciples call him Rabbi, meaning teacher. Though a
respectful term, this does not adequately express the identity of Jesus or His authority. Jesus is
much more than a teacher, He is Lord. This subtle reference illustrates the lack of perception
among the followers of Jesus. They do not fully understand the identity of Jesus or the
implications of His authority.
In John 9:1, Jesus explained that no sin caused the mans blindness; rather, it existed to
show the work of God. Jesus proceeded to heal the man, setting off a chain of confusion and
accusation from others. The Pharisees were enraged at Jesus healing, not simply because He
performed a miraculous work, but because He challenged their authority. The Pharisees had
established their own laws and rules, making themselves lords of the Sabbath, instead of
worshiping the true Lord of the Sabbath. Of the Pharisees, Bob Deffinbaugh writes, to enter
the kingdom of God was considered to be a kind of private club, of which they were the

Bowers 3
membership committee.i By healing a man on the Sabbath, Jesus demonstrated His authority
over the Sabbath and superiority to the Pharisees. Moreover, by healing a man born blind, Jesus
illustrated His authority over a malady said to come from God at birth.
To a Middle Eastern person, these actions meant much more than their literal
interpretation. For centuries in the Middle East, the combination of authority and healing were
considered elements of the great kings. From Sumerian rulers to Egyptian Pharaohs, the highest
claim a king could make is that of healer. Healing was viewed as a function of the gods.
The primary functions of a great king were protecting, providing and healing. Ancient
kings who considered themselves great rulers often used the term shepherd to describe their
interaction with the people as a protector, provider and healer. Dr. Don Fowler writes, So
ancient is the image that the Egyptian hieroglyph for the verb to rule is that of a shepherds
crook.ii The image of the ruler as a shepherd was the highest ranking label used by ancient
Middle Eastern kings. In John 9, Jesus establishes proof that He is capable of healing, one of the
primary functions of the Shepherd-King. The Pharisees likely realize why this is such a problem
for them. The blind man says in John 9:32, Nobody has ever heard of opening the eyes of a
man born blind. This is no small feat, rather, a declarative sign of Jesus authority and deity,
and a threat to the Pharisees.
In John 10, Jesus begins his discourse on shepherding. Deffinbaugh notes appropriately
that this is the first time in the Gospel of John that the topic of shepherding has been addressed
as such, though it is not the last (see John 21:15-17).iii This is point at which Jesus makes his
case for his authority as a protecting, providing, and healing Shepherd-King.
It is important to notice how closely chapters 9 and 10 of John are related. Deffinbaugh
explains this quite well:

Bowers 4
First, there is no indication of a change of time or setting in the first verse of chapter 10.
Second, the expression, Verily, verily is never used to introduce a new section in the
Gospel of John: The opening Verily, verily never begins a discourse. It always
follows up some previous teaching. It indicates that the following statement is important,
but also that it has a connection with the preceding. This passage then must be understood
in the closest of connections with the story of the blind man. Third, in verse 21 of our
text, reference is made to the healing of the man born blind: Others said, These are not
the words of someone possessed by a demon. A demon cannot cause the blind to see, can
it? The healing of the man born blind is very fresh in the minds of those who are
divided as to who Jesus is. I therefore conclude that the events of John 10:1-21 follow
immediately upon the healing of the man born blind and his interrogation by the
Pharisees.iv
In chapter 9, Jesus sets the stage with a demonstration of His legitimacy as the ShepherdKing. In chapter 10 He provides a dialogue on the topic using the imagery of animal husbandry
to relate the role of Jesus with the royal usage.
Next, Jesus explained the role of a shepherd in terms of animal husbandry. John writes
that Jesus was using a figure of speech that the people did not understand. When Jesus continued
to explain His role in the analogy, He made a remarkable statement: I am the good shepherd.
He then explained that the hired hand, when seeing the wolf coming, would abandon the sheep.
If the analogy was confusing to the people before, it was certainly perplexing to its audience at
this point. No hired hand would run from a Middle Eastern wolf! They were tiny creatures, and
no match for a human man! John relates that the people were again very divided and confused
by these words. Jesus used the analogy of the good shepherd not simply to relate animal

Bowers 5
husbandry to the Christological relationship with believers. Rather, Jesus used this analogy to
explain His deity and royalty through terminology used in animal husbandry but laced with
undertones of authority and kingship.
The hired helper is brought out as the antithesis of the good shepherd. The hired helper
represents evil shepherds who are not looking out for the best interest of the sheep. Ezekiel 34
demonstrates another instance of this analogy between shepherds in authority and people referred
to as sheep. The Lord speaks against the shepherds of Israel and says that he will rescue the
sheep. He says that He will shepherd the flock with justice, and that he will judge. The Lord
says that He will place one shepherd over His flock, the position of King David. The Lord
promises three main things to Israel: protection, provision and healing.
Ezekiels prophesy clearly outlines God as a shepherd king who protects, provides and
heals. In the book of John, Jesus makes the same claims and proves His ability to fulfill them.
Jesus is protection in that He is the gate for the sheep. Jesus is provision in that He lays down
His life for the sheep. Jesus brings healing in that He calls them out from their sinful integration
with the world to follow after Him.
By establishing himself as protector, provider and healer, Jesus proved his right to be
called the Good Shepherd in the royal and deific sense of the term. These evidences and the
shepherd-king symbolism used by Jesus in John 10 demonstrate the deity and royalty of Jesus
Christ.

Bowers 6
WORKS CITED

The Good Shepherd (John 10:1-18). Bob Deffinbaugh , Th.M., That You Might Believe: A Study of

the Gospel of John, http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=2370, Accessed April 20th, 2007

ii

The Background to the Good Shepherd Discourse in John 10. Dr. Don Fowler, Accessed April 21st,

2007
iii

The Good Shepherd (John 10:1-18). Bob Deffinbaugh , Th.M., That You Might Believe: A Study of

the Gospel of John, http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=2370, Accessed April 20th, 2007

iv

Ibid.