Figurative Speech with a Twist!

Below is a rough translation and some initial comments regarding John 10:1-10, the revised lectionary reading for the fourth Sunday of Easter. I think this reading is an interesting, even curious, study in figurative speech, with a real twist!

I must admit that I have been unsettled for years regarding the mixed metaphors and meaning of this text. I am no smarter today, but I am very grateful for this essay entitled "The Politics of Jesus the Gate" from Raj Bharat Patta on this text. I think you will find it meaningful as well, as it considers this text from a post-colonial perspective. Thanks to the Political Theology Network for their tremendous resources. 

In 2026, I am toying with a different approach to this parable, partly inspired by Raj Bharat Patta's essay, but certainly not his fault. I have long thought that when Jesus says, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" in John 14:6, the point is not that doctrines about Jesus are the way, but relationship. Jesus himself, not propositions about Jesus, is the way. Truth is incarnate in Jesus, putting all the emphasis on relational truth, experiential truth, I-thou truth. Now I'm wondering if that is the point behind the curious turn from which shepherd has the legitimate right to enter the sheepfold through the gate, to the gate itself being relational. Just as Patta describes the neighborliness and kinship of the small village as serving the purpose that walls and gates serve in colonial hands, Jesus - as truth embodied and relatable - serves the purpose that gates serve. 

I obviously have work to do on this one. 

¹ Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὁ μὴ εἰσερχόμενος διὰ τῆς θύρας εἰς τὴν αὐλὴν τῶν προβάτων ἀλλὰ ἀναβαίνων ἀλλαχόθεν ἐκεῖνος κλέπτης ἐστὶν καὶ λῃστής:

Amen amen I say to you, the one who does not enter through the gate into the pen of the sheep but goes up another way that one is a thief and a bandit.

λέγω: PAI 1s, λέγω, to speak, to say

εἰσερχόμενος: PMPart nsm, εἰσέρχομαι, 1) to go out or come in: to enter 

ἀναβαίνων: PAPart nsm, ἀναβαίνω, 1) ascend  1a) to go up  1b) to rise, mount, be borne up, spring up 

ἐστὶν: PAI 3s, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen, to be present 

1. The terms “thief” and “bandit” are interesting.

A. κλέπτης is the root of the transliterated “klepto-maniac.” It will appear 2 more times in this pericope and is used by John to describe Judas (12:6).

B. λῃστής is the term used in Matthew and Mark to identify the two persons crucified with Jesus. It is also the term used in the Synoptics when Jesus is arrested and asks why they came out for him as if for a thief. It is also how the Synoptics describe Jesus’ overturning of the temple because it had become a “den of thieves.” In John, it is how Barabbas is described (18:40).

² ὁ δὲ εἰσερχόμενος διὰ τῆς θύρας ποιμήν ἐστιν τῶν προβάτων.

But the one who enters through the gate is a shepherd of the sheep.

εἰσερχόμενος: PMPart nsm, εἰσέρχομαι, 1) to go out or come in: to enter 

ἐστιν: PAI 3s, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen, to be present 

1. Chapter 10 is the only place where the word “shepherd” appears in John’s gospel (vv.2, 11, 12, 14, 16). It is an image that the early church had of Jesus, but it does not seem to be a primary image and none of the images – as far as I can tell – are a reference to the 23^rd psalm. (Sorry.)

2. The word “Shepherd” does not have a definite article, so “a shepherd,” not “the shepherd.” (Not sorry for this one.)

³ τούτῳ ὁ θυρωρὸς ἀνοίγει, καὶ τὰ πρόβατα τῆς φωνῆς αὐτοῦ ἀκούει, καὶ τὰ ἴδια πρόβατα φωνεῖ κατ' ὄνομα καὶ ἐξάγει αὐτά.

To this one the gatekeeper opens, and the sheep hear in his voice, and his own sheep he calls by name and goes out to them.

ἀνοίγει: PAI 3s, ἀνοίγω, 1) to open

ἀκούει: PAI 3s, ἀκούω, 1) to be endowed with the faculty of hearing, not deaf  2) to hear 

φωνεῖ: PAI 3s, φωνέω, 1) to sound, emit a sound, to speak

ἐξάγει: PAI 3s, ἐξάγω, 1) to lead out 

1. I am translating ὁ θυρωρὸς as ‘the gatekeeper’ to keep it consistent with translating τῆς θύρας as ‘gate.’ This role is the porter or doorkeeper, such as the young girl who was keeping the door at the chief priest’s hall in c.18 (vv.16f) after Jesus’ arrest. I’m under the impression this is a walled-in sheep pen, not one with a split rail fence or low-lying stones. The sheep that are there are all of the sheep in that particular cooperative, not just this particular shepherd’s sheep. They build the wall and hire the porter to mind the gate and keep an eye out for predators, etc. Then the shepherd comes, calls his sheep and they hear his voice and he goes to them. The difference between entering the gate via the gatekeeper and scaling the wall is a difference of legitimate access for good or for evil.

2. τὰ ἴδια is means “one’s own” and by itself often means “one’s people.” We retain that meaning to some extent when we speak of idiom or idiomatic speech as a speech pattern peculiar to a specific people. I don’t know if the word “idiot” is directly related, but I do wonder if the ‘idiot’ is the one whose own manner of thinking and communicating is so particular that nobody else can make sense of it. If that is the root of the word “idiot,” then it does not mean that the person makes not sense, but that his/her communication only makes sense to him/her. Etymology.com has a host of delineations that suggest a slow evolution from a term that originally meant "private person" as opposed to someone involved in public affairs, leading in a later time to someone who doesn't know things about church affairs, to a later definition of someone who doesn't know things in general.  

3. The use of τὰ ἴδια in this verse shows the relation between the shepherd and the sheep, as opposed to the one scaling the wall where the sheep are. This is a peculiar (might I say ‘idiomatic’) way of speaking about the whole occupation of shepherding. It is not just a consumer-trade, where the sheep are natural resources to be exploited. There is a relational component to the trade. Maybe that is why the image of the shepherd seems so endearing.  

⁴ ὅταν τὰ ἴδια πάντα ἐκβάλῃ, ἔμπροσθεν αὐτῶν πορεύεται, καὶ τὰ πρόβατα αὐτῷ ἀκολουθεῖ, ὅτι οἴδασιν τὴν φωνὴν αὐτοῦ:

When he may drive his own out, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, because they know his voice;

ἐκβάλῃ: AASubj 3s, ἐκβάλλω, 1) to cast out, drive out, to send out  1a) with notion of violence  1a1) to drive out

πορεύεται: PMI 3s, πορεύομαι, 1) to lead over, carry over, transfer 

ἀκολουθεῖ: PAI 3s, ἀκολουθέω, 1) to follow one who precedes

οἴδασιν: PerfAI 3s,

1. This is a peculiar connection of words. ἐκβάλλω means ‘to drive out’ (literally ‘to throw out’) and often has a sense of violence or at least coercion – like Jn. 2:15 when Jesus ‘drives out’ the sheep and the oxen and the persons selling in the temple. Here, the shepherd ‘drives out’ the sheep, but by going before them and calling them and they hear his voice and follow. So far, signs of legitimate shepherding is to enter by the gate under the view of the porter; to be in relation to the sheep so that they know the shepherd's voice; and to lead as they willingly follow.

2. John uses φωνέω in v. 3 instead of λέγω – both of which could be translated ‘to speak’ or ‘to say.’ I suppose that is because of the connection between φωνέω and φωνὴν (voice), in vv. 3, 4 and

5. It may also signify some kind of unique sound that the shepherd makes, as opposed to simply saying, “C’mere, sheep!” (It reminds me of how some train engineers develop unique ways of sounding the train's horn, by feathering it or giving it a certain rhythm that signifies who they are. It is something of an art that many of us don't know to appreciate.) 

⁵ ἀλλοτρίῳ δὲ οὐ μὴ ἀκολουθήσουσιν ἀλλὰ φεύξονται ἀπ' αὐτοῦ, ὅτι οὐκ οἴδασιν τῶν ἀλλοτρίων τὴν φωνήν.

yet to a stranger they will not follow but will flee from him, because they have not known the voice of strangers.”

ἀκολουθήσουσιν: FAI 3p, ἀκολουθέω, 1) to follow one who precedes

φεύξονται: FMI 3p, φεύγω, 1) to flee away, seek safety by flight

οἴδασιν: PerfAI 3s, εἴδω, ἴδω, an obsol. form of the present tense, the place of which is supplied by ὁράω; to perceive.

1. I’m seeing ἀλλοτρίῳ (a stranger) as opposition to the shepherd and τὰ ἴδια (his own) sheep; the relatedness v. the strangeness.

2. John’s use of the perfect tense in this verse – ‘they have not known’ instead of ‘they don’t know’ – is a little jarring. It speaks to a long relationship between the sheep and the shepherd, cultivating familiarity with the sound of his voice. εἴδω is a favorite use of John’s for knowing or seeing and is often in the perfect tense.   

⁶ Ταύτην τὴν παροιμίαν εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς: ἐκεῖνοι δὲ οὐκ ἔγνωσαν τίνα ἦν ἃ ἐλάλει αὐτοῖς.

This figure of speech Jesus said to them: But they did not understand what the things were which he was speaking to them.

εἶπεν: AAI 3s, λέγω, to speak, to say

ἔγνωσαν: AAI 3p, γινώσκω, 1) to learn to know, come to know, get a knowledge of perceive, feel

ἦν: IAI 3s, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen, to be present

ἐλάλει: IAI 3s, λαλέω, 1) to utter a voice or emit a sound  2) to speak 

1. The word παροιμίαν (which I follow others in translating as “figure of speech”) here, is sometimes misleadingly translated ‘parable’ (misleading because it is not the customary word for ‘parable’). It has this definition from thebible.org: something by or on the way, a wayside discourse, or a wayside illustration, lessons drawn from actions of ordinary life, and from objects and processes in nature; also, an out-of-the-way discourse; hence, an enigmatic speech, a dark saying (in opposite to παρρησίᾳ λαλεῖν, to speak openly or plainly).  It is used 4x in John (here, in 16:25 [2x], and 16:29), then only one more time in the NT (II Peter 2:22, with reference to a proverb).

2. The latter part of this verse sounds very awkward because I am trying to honor all of the verbs in it. The ἦν is particularly curious to those of us who are grounded in English grammar because it is odd to say “the did not understand ‘what the things were’ that Jesus was speaking….” But, since Jesus is using a ‘figure of speech,’ comprehension of what he is saying requires connecting the spoken words to the things that they signify. Those who were listening were not making that hermeneutical connection.

3. By the way, who are ‘those who were listening.’ Who is the ‘them’ of this verse? The NIV inserts “the Pharisees” because at the end of c.9 Jesus was addressing them. However, by the end of this chapter is it more generally “the Judeans” (v.19) who are processing what Jesus is saying.

4. The main thing about this verse, however, seems to be that it could be an instantiation of Jesus' teaching about sheep knowing their shepherd's unique voice. Whoever the "they" are, who do not understand Jesus' figures of speech, may well belong to a different flock. 

⁷ Εἶπεν οὖν πάλιν ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ θύρα τῶν προβάτων.

Therefore Jesus said again, “Amen amen I say to you that I am the gate of the sheep.

Εἶπεν: AAI 3s, λέγω, to speak, to say

λέγω: PAI 1s, λέγω, to speak, to say

εἰμι: PAI 1s, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen, to be present 

1. Here is one way of reading this verse: Surprise! It turns out that I “did not understand what the things were which he was speaking to them” either! I would have assumed that Jesus was the shepherd that enters the gate legitimately, or perhaps even the porter who grants access through the gate. As it turns out, he is the gate itself. Didn’t see that coming. And, frankly, I’m not sure that I can make sense of it still.

2. Here is another way of reading this verse: Jesus is the gatekeeper who will let legitimate shepherds into the fold to gather their sheep, and will ward out thieves and bandits. 

⁸ πάντες ὅσοι ἦλθον [πρὸ ἐμοῦ] κλέπται εἰσὶν καὶ λῃσταί: ἀλλ' οὐκ ἤκουσαν αὐτῶν τὰ πρόβατα.

All of those who entered [before me] are thieves and bandits; but the sheep did not hear of them.

ἦλθον: AAI 3p, ἔρχομαι, 1) to come 

εἰσὶν: PAI 3p, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen, to be present 

ἤκουσαν: AAI 3p, ἀκούω, 1) to be endowed with the faculty of hearing, not deaf  2) to hear 

1. An early scribe has edited this text to include the words “before me.” I’m wondering if that scribe also “did not understand what they were which he was speaking to them.” To say ‘before me’ is to make the figure of speech temporal, when it seems like it ought to be spatial. The thieves and bandits do not come off-time, but off-site – they scale the wall instead of entering the gate. Perhaps “through me” would have been a better insertion. 

2. But, is this insertion necessary at all? It seems that the scribe doing the inserting was trying to pick up on how "I am" and "I say" in v.7 are present tense and "I am" in v.9 is present tense and yet "entered" and "did not hear" of v.8 are past tense. Whether we accept the insertion or not, the point is worth noting. Jesus does seem to be distinguishing himself from those who came before, who were able to enter the gate although they were thieves and bandits. But, in v.9 he will quickly aver that he is the gate, not the shepherd who enters legitimately himself. 

3. I think ἤκουσαν αὐτῶν means ‘hear of them’ more than ‘hear/listen to them’ (which would be the dative case, wouldn’t it?).  “Listen to” seems to make more sense, though.

4. Thieves and bandits, again (see v.1).

⁹ ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ θύρα: δι' ἐμοῦ ἐάν τις εἰσέλθῃ σωθήσεται καὶ εἰσελεύσεται καὶ ἐξελεύσεται καὶ νομὴν εὑρήσει.

I am the gate; through me anyone who may enter will be saved and will come in and will go out and find pasture.

εἰμι: PAI 1s, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen, to be present 

εἰσέλθῃ: AASubj 3s, εἰσέρχομαι, 1) to go out or come in: to enter 

σωθήσεται: FPI 3s, σῴζω, 1) to save, keep safe and sound, to rescue from danger or destruction

εἰσελεύσεται: FMI 3s, εἰσέρχομαι, 1) to go out or come in: to enter 

ἐξελεύσεται: FMI 3s, ἐξέρχομαι, 1) to go or come forth of  1a) with mention of the place out of which one goes, or the  point from which he departs

εὑρήσει: FAI 3s, εὑρίσκω, 1) to come upon, hit upon, to meet with 

1. Okay, I’m genuinely getting tangled up in the thicket of metaphors here, but here is where my mind is:

- Lest we think we misheard Jesus the first time, he is indeed the gate, not the porter or the shepherd that enters via the gate (at least not yet).

- The gate swings in 2 directions: in for safekeeping from thieves and bandits; out for gaining access to pastures for nourishment.

- The word for ‘pasture’ can also be translated ‘eating.’ It is a nourishment term.

- While the phrase ‘will be saved’ evokes notions of eternal salvation from the fires of hell, here the threats are strangers or false shepherds who are thieves and bandits.

- It is not clear to me who Jesus has in mind as the thieves and bandits, nor is it clear who the narrator has in mind, especially if this gospel is written quite late in the first century. Using the connection of the words "thieves and bandits," could this point to Barabbas-type messianic figures, who try to gather followers but who are not genuinely sent as shepherds? 

2. I know we want to make this an “all about Jesus as the only shepherd” kind of text, but if the metaphor is that Jesus is the gate, it is more complex. v.9 makes is sound as if the gate itself determines how sheep enter for security at night and exit for nourishment by day. The other verses suggest that in addition to the gate there is a gate-keeper and there are shepherds and the question is whether the shepherds are legitimate or illegitimate. 

¹⁰ ὁ κλέπτης οὐκ ἔρχεται εἰ μὴ ἵνα κλέψῃ καὶ θύσῃ καὶ ἀπολέσῃ: ἐγὼ ἦλθον ἵνα ζωὴν ἔχωσιν καὶ περισσὸν ἔχωσιν.

The thief does not come except in order that he may steal and kill and destroy; I came in order that you may have life and you may have abundance.  

ἔρχεται: PMI 3s, ἔρχομαι, 1) to come

κλέψῃ: AASubj 3s, κλέπτω, 1) to steal  1a) to commit a theft  1b) take away by theft i.e take away by stealth

θύσῃ: AASubj 3s, θύω, 1) to sacrifice, immolate  2) to slay, kill  2a) of the paschal lamb  3) slaughter 

ἀπολέσῃ: AASubj 3s, ἀπόλλυμι, 1) to destroy 

ἦλθον: AAI 3p, ἔρχομαι, 1) to come 

ἔχωσιν: PASubj 3p, ἔχω, 1) to have, i.e. to hold

ἔχωσιν: PASubj 3p, ἔχω, 1) to have, i.e. to hold

1. The word περισσὸν is listed as an adjective, therefore many translations make it modify ‘life’ or add a pronoun ‘it’ to read, “… that you may have life and have it abundantly.” I am treating it like a substantive adjective (abundance) because the verb is repeated. That may not be the best alternative.

If one ends the reading at v.10, and does not include vv.11ff, then Jesus is not the Good Shepherd. Someone else is the good shepherd; Jesus is the gate which is the legitimate entry for those shepherds who will do well and not for those thieves who will do violence or harm. One hermeneutical question for vv.1-10 is, who is the shepherd and who is the thief? The homiletical question is whether one uses this text - stopping at v.10 - to speak of Jesus as the Good Shepherd. The pairing of this text with the 23rd Psalm and the part of I Peter that says, "For you were going astray like sheep, but now you have returned to the shepherd and guardian of your souls," would suggest that Jesus is the Good Shepherd. But this text alone does not quite get there, does it? I wonder if we'd be better off reading vv. 11-15/16 or further instead of vv. 1-10, if we really want to focus on Jesus as the Good Shepherd himself.  

I believe the lectionary committee is correct in ending the pericope with v.10 because v.11 starts a new thought that is not easily reconciled with vv. 1-10. Being the ‘gate’ and being the ‘good shepherd’ are different things. My concern is how the lectionary pairs this text with Psalm 23 especially. That Psalm has become so beloved and such a graveside standard that I don't think anyone will hear John 10:1-10 in all of its puzzling complexity once that image of the Shepherd of Psalm 23 has been introduced. While the image of "the gate" is less endearing than that Shepherd, vv.1-10 are about Jesus as the gate. He says so, plainly and repeatedly, even with a couple of "Amen/verily" acclamations. 

Plainly, I think vv. 1-10 are complex, the metaphors seem to be in flux, and I do not find them to be the best jumping off point for a sermon on Jesus as the Good Shepherd. I am tempted to pair this text with Ezekiel 34, another text with rich and varied imagery of God's people being well-led or badly-led. Hmm...