Image by WikiImages from Pixabay
‘I Am’
Between them, the gospels often include several versions of the same parable. The Flower Seeds and the Pots is a retelling of Luke 8: 5-8, but I could have picked the version told in Matthew 13: 3-8 (and elsewhere, I’ve retold Mark 4: 3-9). They’re all obviously the same basic parable – but with different flourishes.
This happens often enough that it suggests that (as I’ve said in other posts) Jesus varied his parables to suit the needs of his audiences. Varying (or retelling) parables to suit the needs of our modern audience follows in that Jesus-tradition.
But in the sequence of parables and metaphors found in John 10:1-18, Jesus starts the second and third parts of the sequence (verses 7-10 and 11-18) with ‘I am.’ These aren’t parables about God or the Kingdom. These are parables about him.
Where Should Retelling Stop and Explaining Begin?
Jesus said: “I am the good shepherd.” What does that tell us about Jesus?
First, it tells us he’s a very Jewish Messiah, who’s placed himself in the tradition of David – the shepherd who became King. Since Jewish priests and leaders were often called ‘shepherds’, it also places him in the ‘Jewish leader’ tradition.
It’s often possible to retell a parable, change the setting completely (from a farm to an urban balcony) and still keep the point. Parables have plots; a fresh setting can keep the same plot. But when a metaphor is recast, it often ends up saying something different. The snow was white frosting, covering the hills – we see the snow as sweet. The snow was a white blanket covering the hills – we see the snow as comforting. The snow was a white shroud, covering the hills – we see the snow as death.
Suppose I decide that ‘I am the good shepherd,’ doesn’t give us a good idea of how Jesus saw himself. After all, in The Parable of the Shepherd’s Voice, I changed ‘shepherd’ to ‘teacher,’ arguing that the modern British image of a shepherd is very different from the image of Jesus’ time.
I am the Good Teacher?
If I choose to change ‘shepherd’ to ‘teacher,’ then ‘I am the good shepherd,’ becomes ‘I am the good teacher.’ There’s now a real danger that I’ve just changed what Jesus said about himself to something utterly different. First, it’s no longer a metaphor – Jesus was ‘a good teacher’. Second, it moves Jesus from an image we’re not very comfortable with (Jesus as a Jewish leader) to an image modern Westerners are very comfortable with (Jesus as a great religious teacher).
Metaphors don’t have plots. All we can change in a metaphor is the metaphor – and unless we’re lucky enough to have very close equivalents, we will change the meaning.
Lay Down My Life for the Sheep
Another example of the difficulty of changing ‘shepherd’ to ‘teacher’, when Jesus is applying a metaphor to himself, is John 10: 11. “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.”
Change the metaphor to ‘I am the good teacher…’ and we’re in a situation where we know that – yes, teachers have died trying to protect the children in their care. The new metaphor will make perfect sense.
Except it shouldn’t. A lone shepherd who died to save his flock would have left them unprotected. Shepherds don’t die for sheep – and Jesus’ original audience would have known that. Jesus was encouraging them to think about the biblical image of ‘shepherd-as-leader’ by using a metaphor that makes little sense – unless you realise he meant ‘leader’.
In hindsight, ‘The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep,’ is Jesus talking about his upcoming crucifixion. His listeners (I’d imagine) took it as a comment about good leadership.
A good leader should be prepared to die for their people.
Previous Commentary on The Teacher’s Voice
Next Parable: Counting the Cost (Luke 14: 28-33)
Leave a Reply