Throughout time, the image of the shepherd-sheep relationship was used to express the desire to feel safe and cared for, and is one of the most enduring symbols created (Golding). In the Bible, the idea of the shepherd is rampant (Deffinbaugh, The Flock of God), especially in the Old Testament, (Clifford 130) and as such the concept was very popular with the early Christian church, which commonly depicted Christ as the Good Shepherd. “It was everywhere-you can still see it in a fresco over the baptism font of the earliest known house church, the shepherd Jesus carrying a lamb upon his shoulders” (Long 51).
The problem with today’s industrial and technologically advanced world is the imagery is lost, and yet the same desires, the desire to have a shepherd remains. With this in mind, “the shepherd image can and must be pressed back into service” (Golding 19).
In this case, let us look at the Palestinian shepherds that lived during the time that the Bible was being written. The first thing any shepherd who wished to be employed had to deal with was a contract, an agreement between himself and his prospective employer, not unlike the dealings of a business venture today. The contract also illustrates what makes a good shepherd and an evil shepherd and gives light to the shepherding passage found in Ezekiel 34.
Any shepherding contract was written with the understanding that the “shepherds were responsible for the physical survival and welfare of their own or their master’s flock” (Mein 495). While the contracts varied from master to master, they were very specific as to what was expected from the shepherds. A common practice was “the shepherd was entitled to any surplus over and above the minimum, but had to make good on any shortfall from his own resources” (Mein 495). The understanding of these contracts was that the job was “an opportunity for service, not for personal gain and glory….and calls for self dedication and unremitting solicitude” (Mein 495).
In Ezekiel 34, “The contracting owner, Yahweh, confronts the hired hands for not having fulfilled their contract…Like Yahweh, any farmer would fire and push such hands and personally take over for the care of the flock from them” (Mein 497).
What is odd about Ezekiel 34 is Yahweh makes it seem as if the shepherds who He had employed had robbed Him, even though all they had done is used some of the goods. He felt robbed because milk was a tip or a benefit, only given when the Master was satisfied with the quantity and quality presented. The wool was stolen because it was rare to expect wool to be given as a wage unless explicitly mentioned in the contract, and finally the most logical mishandling was the slaughter and eating of the sheep. Slaughter would have been a gross misuse of the shepherd’s authority. (Mein)
Putting it simply, Yahweh punished these leaders, these evil shepherds, because they desired the best for themselves. They wanted what was owed to the Master. Their actions were in direct conflict with their contracts, and the flock suffered because of it. This is something that the leaders of the church need to remember today. The pastorate is not a position for self-glorification. The church is a place where the best must be set aside for the glorification of Him and praise should be given when life’s milk is given as a tip, and not expected.
Once the contract is writ and signed by both parties the good shepherd prepares properly to work in the field. On his belt he would pack everything that he might need for the care of the sheep while he was in the pasture. He would take with him,
“…olive oil, small splints, bandages, and soft old rags for binding up fractures and wounds, and a pair of tweezers with which he extracts thorns or pieces of fragments of stone that may happen to pierce the legs or get between the hoofs of the sheep and goats and thus lame them. He has a supply of needles, thread, and string, and a stout jackknife for emergencies, and a leathern bucket and rope for drawing water if the flock has to be watered at a well.” (Mamreov 35)
The gowns that he would wear would be open in the front, revealing the neck and chest making a pocket for which he could carry lambs in from the field. This left his hands free and enabled him to carry numerous newborns back. When the scriptures talk about being carried in the bosom, many times it is referring to this. (Mamreov)
As a means of protection the shepherd had numerous choices, the first being his staff, which was made either from an almond tree or similar hard woods and would have a nub made from the roots of the tree for which to strike an enemy. A second weapon choice was a dagger which was small and double edged. The blade was the width of a man’s hand and because of this it was called a “shibreyie” which literally means “hand-span”. There are a few times in the scriptures when this dagger was mentioned, first when Ehud assassinates Eglon, and the second time when David tells Saul about life in the fields. (Mamreov 29)
The final weapon of the shepherd is the one that by far demands the most practice and skill, this is the sling. With practice, skilled shepherds can hit a hawk in flight. Fortunately, for the shepherd, he has plenty of time to fine-tune his skills, and in his hand, the sling is truly a fearsome tool. (Mamroev 31)
The degree of preparation and knowledge that goes into working as a shepherd gives the scriptures an additional depth. When the Lord is mentioned of as a shepherd, one understands that everything He does is strictly planned, and He is prepared. The same should be true for the elders of a church as well. Just as a shepherd carries much and practices tirelessly, the church should be ready for anything that they may be faced with. A church that does not prepare for the unforeseen is left at a lost when a situation in the flock does arrive.
Assigned to a job and fully prepared, the shepherd prepares for a day in the field. The job would start first thing in the morning when he would come to the sheepfold for his flock. The sheepfold would usually be natural or manmade caves. Even today, this is still the case, and it is not uncommon for ancient palace ruins to be a sheepfold. “The flocks of sheep and goats of Palestine are sheltered in folds and never exposed to inclement weather at night.” (Mamreov 19)
Inside the fold would be an area which is open to the sky, and this was surrounded by brick walls or thorny bushes. It is called a “sirat”, which literally means “hidden or secret place”, and was used to keep the injured, sick or young for extra protection. It can be understood that the verses of Psalm 31:20, 27:5, Zech. 11:16, and Ezek 34:2-4, 16 all make mention of the sirat and the protection that this secret place provides for those that are kept in it. (Mamreov)
As the shepherd would prepare for the day, he would go to the pen’s gate, which would be guarded by the night watchman, who would only let in a person he recognized. In John 10, when Jesus says “I am the door” it can be understood to be a comparison to this night watchman who would routinely lay in the doorway of the pen acting as a barrier to whomever was not welcome. (Mamreov)
As the night watchman makes way for the shepherds to take out their flocks, the shepherds will call out to the sheep from the gate. The flock is usually named for the master and the sheep respond, group themselves, and come out to the sound of their shepherd’s voice. Jesus uses this simple point to drive the idea that He is the Good Shepherd. He makes the claim in John 10:27 that “The sheep that are my own hear and listen to my voice, and I know them and they follow me.” The sheep are so sensitive to the master or shepherd’s voice that no one can impersonate them, regardless of what is done. The Bible recognizes this fact and uses it as an allegory in verses such as Isa. 43:1, 7, Amos 9:12, and John 10:3, to name a few. (Mamreov)
This early morning ritual is the first thing that separates the good shepherds from the evil shepherds. The good ones go to the gate and are greeted and allowed entrance by the watchman, while the evil ones choose instead to climb over a wall or sneak in by other means. Once in the pen, a good shepherd will call his sheep, will know them intimately, and they will come to him. Once an evil shepherd is in though, he must use a means of deception to get close to the sheep to reach his final intention to kill and destroy them. (Deffinbaugh, The Good Shepherd)
The pastorate of today can draw a similar conclusion by the intentions of the church’s leaders. In the modern church, a good shepherd enters under the ordinance of the Lord, and generally cares for the flock. Through this, the congregation quickly starts to recognize him as someone worth trusting. In contrast, an evil shepherd may claim that he has the same ordinance but does not. He may seem trustworthy at first, but because his intentions are only of self-gain, the evidential outcome shows his true intentions and therefore the flock must be weary and on guard of such intruders.
Leaving the fold the shepherd leads the flock out to pasture. It should come as no surprise that water and pasture were highly valued for both the shepherd and his flock (Mamreov). To compound this, “the erratic winter rains in the south of Palestine made the grass grow in patches and the shepherds, with local knowledge and long experience, led their flocks to take advantage of this” (Golding 104). It is further emphasized that a good shepherd leads his sheep to good grasses even if it is easier to take them where the grasses are of poor quality.
In light of this, those who are young in the ministry and relatively inexperienced should look to those more mature in the faith as well as the Lord, who is the Good Shepherd, to ensure that his flock, the congregation, feeds on the green, good, quality grasses (Deffinbaugh, The Submission of Slaves to Masters).
As previously mentioned the green pastures may have been scattered, and in the wilderness of Palestine this may mean crossing through a ravine, quite possibly what the psalmist referred to when he sung of “the valley of the shadow of death” (Psalm 23:5). These ravines were full of animals that would take a lamb if it had the chance. David makes mention to having killed a lion and bear while defending his flocks, and these ravines would have been where these beasts would have called home (Mamreov).
This is why a good shepherd would not drive out his sheep; instead he would lead, acting as a scout looking for any dangers along the way. If his flock were large, he would hire additional help to either follow behind or take position in the middle of the flock in order to insure that all are tended. The same should be true of a church. The pastor and elders should be willing to go before, desiring to ensure that those that the Lord has commissioned them to tend to are safe as they are lead on (Mamreov).
Regardless of the size of the flock, the good shepherd will look back on regular intervals to check on them. He does this to ensure that none is injured or ill. If a good shepherd looks back and sees that one in the flock has stopped, he will stop the flock, and go back to that one to check on its well being. If it has a thorn or rock in its hoof, he will promptly remove and treat it. If the sheep is ill he will provide for it. However, if after a good inspection no obvious illnesses are revealed, the shepherd will try to get the sheep to keep moving. If it still refuses, the shepherd will assume that it is exhausted and will carry it on his shoulders (Mamreov). In contrast, the wicked shepherds “will not care for the lost, or seek the young, or heal the injured, or feed the healthy, but will eat the meat of the choice sheep, tearing off their hoofs” (Zech. 11:16).
Clearly, a good shepherd cares for every individual in the flock, regardless of the flock’s size. He will take time out of his busy schedule to ensure that he is giving proper care for the health of the flock. For those that are not well he insures for their care, even if it means taking on additional personal burdens. The same is true for the pastorate. The congregation is not numbers but people, who are the flock that the Lord has commissioned for a pastor to tend to their needs. The pastor has the responsibility to remember and take care of each one of his flock. The Lord judges those who he puts as leaders by the way that they treat their charge.
Once the flock has gotten to green pastures, the shepherd looks for and ensures that the sheep have a spring from which to drink. It is understood that the concept of “living water” was springs that by law were communal, and all livestock was welcome to drink from it. The rights belonged to the community and the natives of the land and were rarely, if ever, sold (Mamreov). In addition, the wording of Psalm 23 indicates more than just a satisfaction of thirst but literally means, “bringing back the vigor of life, the vitality” (Kraus 307).
This is another matter that the pastorate must remember. It is easy to become elitist and exclusive, even competitive with other churches for numbers, but this is not the mark of a good shepherd. The water is free and available to all who wish to drink from it, therefore anyone who comes to a church should feel welcome and wanted. The grace was given freely to the church, and therefore it is demanded that it be given freely to all.
Once their thirst was satisfied and grazing in the pasture, a shepherd’s job is far from over since he must continue to watch for trouble from inside and outside the flock. There are several situations within the flock that a shepherd must watch for such as tyrannical dominance among the sheep. Stronger males will force around the young and weak. In addition, to further express their dominance, they will not only eat their fill but also destroy the remainder, commonly by defecating and trampling the good grass until it is inedible or laying in a spring to spoil the water (Mamreov).
If a sheep does this, the good shepherd will intervene and attempt to correct the behavior of the sheep. If the shepherd’s attempts to correct the behavior prove unsuccessful, he will mark the sheep with scarlet dye. This designates them from the others so that they are sold to the butcher for slaughter. Isaiah 65:12 seems to refer to this by saying, “I will destine you to the sword, and you shall bow down to the slaughter; because when I called you did not answer; when I spoke you did not listen or obey; but you did what was evil in My eyes, and you chose that in which I did not delight.” While this seems like a cruel punishment for a little disruptive behavior, it is clear that if not handled properly, the entire flock suffers (Mamreov).
Another issue is the idea of the “wolf in sheep’s clothing.” This is when a hired hand would dress in sheepskins and mingle into a herd with the intention of killing or stealing a lamb for himself (Mamreov).
The church deals with the same issues where those who have been in the congregation for the longest tend to take hold and claim power over others. In some cases, they will be quick to attack someone else who may offer a new idea or suggestion that could threaten the way that the church has been run or threaten the power that they have been rewarded over time. Even worse is when a thief comes into the flock acting as one of them. They seem at best helpful, at worst benevolent, but time reveals that their intentions are neither. They desire personal gain and impede on the flock. As a shepherd of the flock, this is something that needs to be addressed, or it hurts the whole flock and disallows for growth.
Lovingly, the pastor and elders need to come alongside these individuals and show them their error and pray that the Lord convicts them to change, but if they are unwilling to change, then the means of handling the situation must be implemented so that they do not continue to hinder the church.
One of the most overlooked aspects of Psalm 23 is the fact that the Lord makes the sheep lay down in green pastures. Laying down really does not seem to be all that much of a deal, but it takes quite a bit of effort and care to get a flock to come to rest. Sheep will only lay down if they are free from fear, are not fighting with another in the flock, are free from flies and parasites, and their hunger and thirst has been satisfied (Dale). The fact that all these aspects are satisfied proves that the Lord’s provision is great. In further mention, the Lord does all this for “His name’s sake” or His glory. This idea may seem odd, but it makes sense that in a community that focused heavily on animal husbandry, there was a common knowledge of those who took care of their flocks (Herrick).
The job of the pastorate is ultimately the desire to care and love the flock and a wanting to ensure their comfort and joy. The pastor and elders have been given a contract that Yahweh expects to see fulfilled, and the church should delight in fulfilling it.
Works Citied
Clifford, Richard J. Psalms 1-72. Nashville: Abingdon P, 2002. 31-34.
Dale, Ron. “The Shepherd’s Voice.” The Expository Times (1992). Academic Search
Premier. EBSCO. Lancaster Bible College, Lancaster. 29 Mar. 2008. Keyword: Shepherding.
Deffinbaugh, Bob. “The Good Shepherd (John 10:1-18).” Bible.Org. 29 Mar. 2008
<http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=2370>.
–.”The Good Shepherd and the Flock of God.” Bible.Org. 29 Mar. 2008
<http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=468>.
– “The Submission of Slaves to Masters.” Bible.Org. 29 Mar. 2008
<http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=1728>.
Golding, Thomas A. “The Imagery of Shepherding in the Bible, Part 1.” Biblitheca Sacra
163 (2006): 18-28. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Lancaster Bible College, Lancaster. 29 Mar. 2008. Keyword: Shepherding.
—. “The Imagery of Shepherding in the Bible, Part 2.” Biblitheca Sacra
163 (2006): 158-175. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Lancaster Bible College, Lancaster. 29 Mar. 2008. Keyword: Shepherding.
Herrick, Greg. “An Exposition of Psalm 23.” Bible.Org. 29 Mar. 2008
<http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=1575>.
Kraus, Joachim-Has. Psalms 1-59 Minneapolis: Fortress P. 1993
Long, Kimberly Bracken. “The Shepherd Jesus.” Journal for Preachers (2006): 51-55.
Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Lancaster Bible College, Lancaster. 29 Mar. 2008. Keyword: Shepherd.
Mamreov, Anna F. A Day with the Good Shepherd. New York: Eaton & Mains, 1910.
Mein, Andrew. “Profitable and Unprofitable Shepherds: Economic and Theological
Perspectives on Ezekiel 34.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 31 (2007): 493-504. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Lancaster Bible College, Lancaster. 29 Mar. 2008. Keyword: Shepherding.
What Others are Reading:
Loading…
You must log in to post a comment.