There arose a division again ( ). As in 7:43 in the crowd (also in John 7:12; John 7:31), so now among the hostile Jews (Pharisees) some of whom had previously professed belief in him (8:31). The direct reference of (again) may be to 9:16 when the Pharisees were divided over the problem of the blind man. Division of opinion about Jesus is a common thing in John’s Gospel (John 6:52; John 6:60; John 6:66; John 7:12; John 7:25; John 8:22; John 9:16; John 10:19; John 10:24; John 10:41; John 11:41; John 12:19; John 12:29; John 12:42; John 16:18).

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

There was a division [ ] . Rev., more correctly, there arose. The word scisma, division, from scizw, to cleave, describes a fact which continually recurs in John’s narrative. See Joh 6:52, 60, 66; Joh 7:12, 25 sqq.; Joh 8:22; Joh 9:16, 17; Joh 10:19, 24, 41; Joh 11:37 sqq.; Joh 12:19, 29, 42; Joh 16:18, 19. Words [] . Or, discourses.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “There was a division therefore again,” (schisma palin egeneto) “Again there was a schism or faction,” among those unregenerate, pious, ceremonial, religious Mosaic law keepers who sought to put Jesus to death, Joh 9:16.

2) “Among the Jews,” (en tois loudaiois) “In and among the Jews,” as on previous and later occasions, Joh 7:11-12; Joh 7:43.

3) “For these sayings.” (dia tous logous toutous) “On account of these words,” of His testimony that 1) He was the door to the sheepfold, 2) The Good Shepherd, 3) “That the sheep and the fold belonged to Him and there should one day be only one Shepherd and one fold, after He voluntarily laid down His life for His sheep, Joh 10:1-18.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

19. A division therefore arose again. The advantage gained by Christ’s discourse was, that it procured him some disciples; but as his doctrine has also many adversaries, hence arises a division, so that they are split into parties, who formerly appeared to be one body of the Church. for all, with one consent, professed that they worshipped the God of Abraham and complied with the Law of Moses; but now, when Christ comes forward, they begin to differ on his account. If that profession had been sincere, Christ, who is the strongest bond of charity, and whose office it is to gather those things which are scattered, would not break up their agreement. But Christ, by the light of his Gospel, exposes the hypocrisy of many who, while they had nothing but a false and hypocritical pretense, boasted that they were the people of God.

Thus, the wickedness of many is still the reason why the Church is troubled by divisions, and why contentions are kindled. Yet those who disturb the peace, throw the blame on us, and call us Schismatics; for the principal charge which the Papists bring against us is, that our doctrine has shaken the tranquillity of the Church. Yet the truth is, that, if they would yield submissively to Christ, and give their support to the truth, all the commotions would immediately be allayed. But when they utter murmurs and complaints against Christ, and will not allow us to be at rest on any other condition than that the truth of God shall be extinguished, and that Christ shall be banished from his kingdom, they have no right to accuse us of the crime of schism; for it is on themselves, as every person sees, that this crime ought to be charged. We ought to be deeply grieved that the Church is torn by divisions arising among those who profess the same religion; but it is better that there are some who separate themselves from the wicked, to be united to Christ their Head, than that all should be of one mind in despising God. Consequently, when schisms arise, we ought to inquire who they are that revolt from God and from his pure doctrine.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(19) There was a division therefore again . . .The words carry us back to those of Joh. 9:16, where a like division was noted.

Among the Jews.The Pharisees are mentioned before, and they are the persons who have been present all through this discourse. (Comp. Joh. 9:40.) The wider word is here, and in Joh. 9:18, applied to them. They were identifying themselves with, and becoming leaders of, the party who were the enemies of Christ. (Comp. Note on Joh. 1:19.)

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

19. A division From the first interruption of Jesus by the Pharisees in Joh 9:40, he has prosecuted a discourse, expanding, in its progress, from reproof, through monitory picture, and finishing with the deepest, grandest truth and mystery of his death. The crowd, gathering perhaps as his discourse expanded, are not all one wilfully opposing mass. As at Joh 9:16, and Joh 7:43, there is a division. But the opposers are many, and the susceptible are only others. Had truth and honesty been their purpose the believers would have been all. They were free to choose right, but decided for the wrong.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘There arose a division among the Judaisers, because of these words. And many of them said, “He has a devil and is mad, why do you listen to him?”. Others said, “These are not the sayings of one possessed with a devil. Can a devil open the eyes of the blind?”

His suggestion that He had total control over His own destiny caused division between the Judaisers. The fact is often overlooked that they were not all against Jesus. Some were clearly almost convinced that He was from God. Others said, ‘He is demon-possessed and mad. Why listen to him?’ While still others said, ‘These are not the words of a demon-possessed man. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind’. The latter echoed their own officials, ‘no man ever spoke like this man’ (Joh 8:46). They were impressed both by His teaching and His actions, especially the opening of the eyes of the man blind from birth. The growth of belief among some of the Judaisers is an interesting and constantly emphasised aspect of John’s Gospel, but they were ever the minority.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Joh 10:19-21. There was a division therefore What our Lord said, affected the minds of the Jews in differentways; for some of them cried out that he was possessed and mad, and that it was folly to hear him: others, judging more impartially of him and his doctrine, declared that his discourses were not the words of a lunatic, nor his miracles the works of a devil. Moreover, they asked his enemies, if they imagined any devil was able to impart the faculty of sight to a man that was born blind,alluding to the astonishing cure which Jesus had lately performed: Can a devil open the eyes of the blind?

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Joh 10:19-21 . ] see Joh 9:16 .

.] These words refer to the Pharisees (Joh 9:40 ) who, in keeping with their relationship to Jesus (against De Wette), are designated according to the class to which they belonged (as the Jewish hierarchical opposition). The majority of them clung to the hostile judgment (compare Joh 8:48 ), which they had contemptuously expressed; some of them, however, felt themselves impressed, and deny the assertion of the rest. Comp. Joh 9:16 .

] i.e . of what use is it to you to listen to His discourses?

] in consequence of being possessed by a demon.

, etc.] surely a demon cannot , etc.; a confirmation of that denial from the miracle which had given rise to the entire discussion. We see from this that these belonged to the more unprejudiced and conscientious class which had given expression to its feelings in Joh 9:16 . At the same time, the conclusion must not be drawn that they would have refused to recognise any demoniacal miracles (were they even in themselves beneficent),

Mat 12:24 is opposed to this view; but they believed it impossible to attribute a miracle of so great a kind to a demon , who must have been working through the medium of Jesus. Note, moreover, that even here they do not get further than a negative judgment.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings. (20) And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him? (21) Others said, These are not the words of him that hath a devil. Can a devil open the eyes of the blind? (22) And it was at Jerusalem, the feast of the dedication, and it was winter. (23) And Jesus walked in the temple, in Solomon’s porch. (24) Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. (25) Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness of me. (26) But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

I beg the Reader to ponder what is here said. The observations made by the Jews concerning the person and office of Christ, is very striking. More than half convinced by reason and argument they frequently were, that Jesus was the Christ, but never brought into a belief of it by divine teaching. And so it is in the present hour. The carnal and the ungodly are not unfrequently alarmed in their consciences, but their apprehension of God’s truths is only head knowledge; no heart-influence. Devils have this knowledge. So they said, Luk 4:41 . But devils they remained, and will eternally remain. Reader! oh! see to it, that your knowledge of the Lord Jesus is of the Lord. It is God the Father makes known the Son. Mat 11:27 . God the Holy Ghost makes known the Son. 1Co 12:3 . And the consequence of this divine teaching produceth those blessed effects which Christ describes, Joh 6:45 . And the reverse of this Jesus teacheth in this chapter, and elsewhere. See Joh 10:26-27 . See also Joh 8:42-43 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

19 There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.

Ver. 19. There was a division therefore, &c. ] This our Saviour foresaw, and yet forbears not. God’s truth must be spoken, however it be taken. Men, be they pleased or displeased, God must be obeyed, and his whole will declared. If men refuse to receive it, we must turn them over to God, with a non convertentur, obstinate sinner, and then let him alone with them.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

19 21. ] The concluding words bind this discourse to the miracle of ch. 9, though not necessarily in immediate connexion.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Joh 10:19-21 . The result of this discourse briefly described .

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Joh 10:19 . As usual, diverse judgments were elicited, and once more a division of opinion appeared, Many thought Him possessed and mad, as in Mar 3:21 ; cf. of Paul, Act 26:24 . Others took the more sensible view. These words they had heard were not the wild exclamations and ravings they usually heard from demoniacs; and His acts, such as opening the blind man’s eyes, were not within the compass of a demon.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Joh 10:19-21

19A division occurred again among the Jews because of these words. 20Many of them were saying, “He has a demon and is insane. Why do you listen to Him?” 21Others were saying, “These are not the sayings of one demon-possessed. A demon cannot open the eyes of the blind, can he?”

Joh 10:19 As there were divided opinions about Jesus in Joh 6:52; Joh 7:12; Joh 7:25; Joh 7:43; Joh 9:16; Joh 10:19-21; Joh 11:36-37, this theme continues through John. The mystery of some receiving the gospel and others rejecting it is the tension between predestination and human free will!

Joh 10:20 “He has a demon and is insane” This was a common charge made against Jesus from two different perspectives.

1. in this verse, as in Joh 7:20, it was used to say that Jesus had a mental illness

2. this same charge is used by the Pharisees to try to explain the source of Jesus’ power (cf. Joh 8:48; Joh 8:52)

Joh 10:21 There are two questions in Joh 10:21.

1. Joh 10:21 a has ouk, which expects a “yes” answer

2. Joh 10:21 b has m, which expects a “no” answer

See James Hewett, New Testament Greek, p. 171. This verse shows, however, how difficult hard and fast rules are in Koine Greek. Context, not grammatical form, is the final determiner.

The healing of the blind was a Messianic sign (cf. Exo 4:11; Psa 146:8; Isa 29:18; Isa 35:5; Isa 42:7). There is a sense in which the blindness of Israel (cf. Isa 42:19) is being shown here as it was in chapter 9.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

was = arose.

a division. This was the third of three. See note on Joh 7:43.

among. Greek. en. App-104.

Jews. See note on Joh 1:19. for = on account of. Greek. dia. App-104. Joh 10:2.

sayings = words. Greek. Plural of logos. See note on Mar 9:32.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

19-21.] The concluding words bind this discourse to the miracle of ch. 9, though not necessarily in immediate connexion.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Joh 10:19. , a division) Whence do such various reasonings concerning Christ originate? I reply, Inasmuch as His person is not known.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Joh 10:19

Joh 10:19

There arose a division again among the Jews because of these words.-The teachings of Jesus always produced division among those who heard. Some were willing to hear and believe, others would reject it. It is so now. As much depends upon the condition of the heart of the hearers as upon the amount of the testimony given. Those not willing to believe are influenced and embittered by additional testimony.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

Our Assurance of Safe-Keeping

Joh 10:19-30

Our Lord did not shrink from the avowal of His divine origin and glory, when there was need or when they were challenged. See Joh 4:26; Mat 26:64. For the most part, however, He wished men to exercise their own faculties of discernment and to accept Him, not because He told them what He was, but because they were inwardly convinced.

In Joh 10:27 we have three characteristics of His sheep-to hear, to be recognized by Him, and to follow; and in Joh 10:28 there are also three privileges which they enjoy-to possess eternal life, never to perish, never to be snatched away by man or devil.

Note the safety of those who really belong to Christ. They are not only in His hand, but in the Fathers, because the Father and He are one. Your life is hid with Christ in God. Here is a double protection. They may wander far, lose joy and comfort, fall on dark and stormy times, but He is responsible for them, will seek them out, and bring them home. This also is true-that our relationship with Jesus involves our relationship with the Father. But if any should presume to live carelessly because of this divine grace, it is clear that such a one is not one of Christs sheep.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

Joh 7:40-43, Joh 9:16, Mat 10:34, Mat 10:35, Luk 12:51-53, Act 14:4, Act 23:7-10, 1Co 3:3, 1Co 11:18

Reciprocal: Luk 12:52 – General Joh 6:52 – strove Joh 7:12 – some Joh 7:43 – General 1Co 1:10 – divisions

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

NOT PEACE, BUT A SWORD

There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.

Joh 10:19

We see what strifes and controversies our Lord occasioned when He was on earth. We read that there was a division among the Jews for His sayings, and that many of them said He hath a devil, and is mad, while others took an opposite view.

I. It may seem strange that He Who came to preach peace between God and man should be the cause of contention. But herein were His own words literally fulfilledI came not to send peace, but a sword (Mat 10:34). The fault was not in Christ or His doctrine, but in the carnal mind of His Jewish hearers.

II. Let us never be surprised if we see the same thing in our own day.Human nature never changes. So long as the heart of man is without grace, so long we must expect to see it dislike the Gospel of Christ. Just as oil and water, acids and alkalies cannot combine, so in the same way unconverted people cannot really like the people of God. The carnal mind is enmity against God. The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God (Rom 8:7; 1Co 2:14).

III. The servant of Christ must think it no strange thing if he goes through the same experience as his Master. He will often find his ways and opinions in religion the cause of strife in his own family. He will have to endure ridicule, hard words, and petty persecution.

Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary

1

These verses are explained at chapter 7:20 and 9:16.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

We should notice, first, in this passage, what strifes and controversies our Lord occasioned when He was on earth. We read that “there was a division among the Jews for His sayings,”-and that “many of them said He hath a devil, and is mad,” while others took an opposite view. It may seem strange, at first sight, that He who came to preach peace between God and man, should be the cause of contention. But herein were His own words literally fulfilled: “I came not to send peace, but a sword.” (Mat 10:34.) The fault was not in Christ or His doctrine, but in the carnal mind of His Jewish hearers.

Let us never be surprised if we see the same thing in our own day. Human nature never changes. So long as the heart of man is without grace, so long we must expect to see it dislike the Gospel of Christ. Just as oil and water, acids and alkalies cannot combine, so in the same way unconverted people cannot really like the people of God.-“The carnal mind is enmity against God.”-“The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God.” (Rom 8:7; 1Co 2:14.)

The servant of Christ must think it no strange thing if he goes through the same experience as his Master. He will often find his ways and opinions in religion the cause of strife in his own family. He will have to endure ridicule, harsh words, and petty persecution, from the children of this world. He may even discover that he is thought a fool or a madman on account of his Christianity. Let none of these things move him. The thought that he is a partaker of the afflictions of Christ ought to steel him against every trial. “If they have called the Master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household.” (Mat 10:25.)

One thing, at any rate, should never be forgotten. We must not allow ourselves to think the worse of religion because of the strifes and dissensions to which it gives rise. Whatever men may please to say, it is human nature, and not religion, which is to blame. We do not blame the glorious sun because its rays draw forth noxious vapors from the marsh. We must not find fault with the glorious Gospel if it stirs up men’s corruptions, and causes the “thoughts of many hearts to be revealed.” (Luk 2:35.)

We should notice, secondly, the name which Christ gives to true Christians. He uses a figurative expression which, like all His language, is full of deep meaning. He calls them, “My sheep.”

The word “sheep,” no doubt, points to something in the character and ways of true Christians. It would be easy to show that weakness, helplessness, harmlessness, usefulness, are all points of resemblance between the sheep and the believer. But the leading idea in our Lord’s mind was the entire dependence of the sheep upon its Shepherd. Just as sheep hear the voice of their own shepherd, and follow him, so do believers follow Christ. By faith they listen to His call. By faith they submit themselves to His guidance. By faith they lean on Him, and commit their souls implicitly to His direction. The ways of a shepherd and his sheep, are a most useful illustration of the relation between Christ and the true Christian.

The expression, “My sheep,” points to the close connection that exists between Christ and believers. They are His by gift from the Father, His by purchase, His by calling and choice, and His by their own consent and heart-submission. In the highest sense they are Christ’s property; and just as a man feels a special interest in that which he has bought at a great price and made his own, so does the Lord Jesus feel a peculiar interest in His people.

Expressions like these should be carefully treasured up in the memories of true Christians. They will be found cheering and heart-strengthening in days of trial. The world may see no beauty in the ways of a godly man, and may often pour contempt on him. But he who knows that he is one of Christ’s sheep has no cause to be ashamed. He has within him a “well of water springing up into everlasting life.” (Joh 4:14.)

We should notice, lastly, in this passage, the vast privileges which the Lord Jesus Christ bestows on true Christians. He uses words about them of singular richness and strength. “I know them.-I give unto them eternal life.-They shall never perish,-neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” This sentence is like the cluster of grapes which came from Eshcol. A stronger form of speech perhaps can hardly be found in the whole range of the Bible.

Christ “knows” his people with a special knowledge of approbation, interest, and affection. By the world around them they are comparatively unknown, uncared for, or despised. But they are never forgotten or overlooked by Christ.

Christ “gives” his people “eternal life.” He bestows on them freely a right and title to heaven, pardoning their many sins, and clothing them with a perfect righteousness. Money, and health, and worldly prosperity He often wisely withholds from them. But He never fails to give them grace, peace, and glory.

Christ declares that His people “shall never perish.” Weak as they are, they shall all be saved. Not one of them shall be lost and cast away: not one of them shall miss heaven. If they err, they shall be brought back: if they fall, they shall be raised. The enemies of their souls may be strong and mighty, but their Savior is mightier; and none shall pluck them out of their Savior’s hands.

A promise like this deserves the closest attention. If words mean anything, it contains that great doctrine, the perseverance, or continuance in grace, of true believers. That doctrine is literally hated by worldly people. No doubt, like every other truth of Scripture, it is liable to be abused. But the words of Christ are too plain to be evaded. He has said it, and He will make it good: “My sheep shall never perish.”

Whatever men may please to say against this doctrine, it is one which God’s children ought to hold fast, and defend with all their might. To all who feel within them the workings of the Holy Spirit, it is a doctrine full of encouragement and consolation. Once inside the ark, they shall never be cast out. Once converted and joined to Christ, they shall never be cut off from His mystical body. Hypocrites and false professors shall doubtless make shipwreck for ever, unless they repent. But true “sheep” shall never be confounded. Christ has said it, and Christ cannot lie: “they shall never perish.”

Would we get the benefit of this glorious promise? Let us take care that we belong to Christ’s flock. Let us hear His voice and follow Him. The man who, under a real sense of sin, flees to Christ and trusts in Him, is one of those who shall never be plucked out of Christ’s hand.

==================

Notes-

v19.-[There was a division, etc.] This is the third time that we find our Lord’s words causing a division, or schism, among His hearers. Each time it occurred at Jerusalem. At Joh 7:43, it was among “the people;” at Joh 9:16, among the “Pharisees.” Here it was among the “Jews,” an expression in John’s Gospel generally applied to our Lord’s enemies among the Pharisees.

The special “sayings” which caused the division were probably our Lord’s words about His Father, His claim to have power to lay down His life and take it again, and His proclamation of Himself as “the Good Shepherd.” Words like these from a Galilean teacher of humble appearance, were likely to offend the proud Pharisees of Jerusalem.

That our Lord would be a cause of division,-a stone of stumbling to some, and set for the rise and fall of many in Israel,-had been foretold by Isa 8:14, and by Simeon, Luk 2:34. Divisions among His hearers are therefore no proof that He was not the Messiah, and divisions among hearers of the Gospel in the present day are no argument against the truth of the Gospel. Even now the same Gospel is a savor of death to some, and of life to others, calls forth love in some, and hatred in others. The same fire which melts wax, hardens clay.

v20.-[And many of them said, etc.] This is the sort of profane remark which we can well imagine many unconverted hearers of our Lord making: “What! a humble Galilean like this man call Himself the only good Shepherd, and talk of having power to lay down His life and take it again, and of having a special commission from His Father in heaven. He must surely have a devil, or be out of his senses. He must be mad. Why do you waste your time in listening to Him?” Thousands talk in this way now against Christ’s servants. They would probably have talked in the same way against their Master!

Let us note what blasphemous and slanderous things were said against our Lord. True Christians, and specially ministers, must never wonder if they are treated in the same manner.

v21.-[Others said, These are not, etc.] Here we see that there were some among the Pharisees who took our Lord’s part, and were disposed to believe on Him. Such probably were Gamaliel, Nicodemus, and Joseph of Arimata. They defend Him on the score both of His words and works.-As to His words, they argue that no one of common sense could call such words as our Lord had just spoken, the words of a man possessed with a devil. The devil and his agents do not desire to do good to man, or to glorify God. The calm, solemn, loving, God-glorifying language just used, was the very opposite to that which might be expected from a demoniac.-As to His works, they argue that no devil, however powerful, could work such a miracle as to open the eyes of the blind. Some wonderful works the devil might do, but no such work as that of giving sight. It is worth noticing that the Jews held that to give sight to the blind was one of the special miracles which Messiah would work. “Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened.” (Isa 35:5.)

The Greek word here rendered “words,” is not the same as that rendered “sayings,” in Joh 10:19. Webster says it is a stronger expression, and means “the whole transaction,” as well as the things said. The word “blind” here in the Greek is plural, and would be more accurately translated, “of blind persons.”

v22.-[And it was at Jerusalem.] Many think that an interval of time comes in between this verse and the preceding one. I doubt it. From Joh 7:2, where we are told it was the feast of tabernacles, the narrative runs on at first sight continuously: yet if we look at Joh 9:35, there must have been one break of time.-If there was any interval before the verse we are now considering, I think it must have been very short. The following verses show that the discourse about “the sheep” must have been fresh in the minds of the Jews, as our Lord refers to it as a thing they could remember: He would hardly have done so if the interval had been very long. At any rate, I can see no proof that our Lord left Jerusalem between the discourse about “the sheep” and the verse before us.

[The feast of the dedication.] This Jewish festival is one which is nowhere else mentioned in the Bible. It is however a matter of history, according to most commentators, that it was first appointed by Judas Maccabeus to commemorate the purging of the temple, and the rebuilding of the altar, after the Syrians were driven out. Its appointment is recorded in the Apocrypha, in 1Ma 4:52-59. The Apocryphal books are, no doubt, uninspired. But there is no reason to question the accuracy of their historical statements. The passage before us is often referred to, as proving that our Lord recognized, and tacitly sanctioned, a man-made and man-appointed festival. “The Church has power to decree rites and ceremonies,” and so long as it ordains nothing against God’s Word, its appointments deserve respect. At any rate our Lord did not denounce the feast of dedication, or refuse to be present at it.

Chrysostom and others think that the Feast of Dedication was appointed to commemorate the rebuilding of the temple after the Babylonian captivity, in Ezra’s time (Ezr 6:16.)

Some think that it was to commemorate the dedication of Solomon’s temple. (2Ch 7:9.) There is, however, no warrant for this view.

Pearce remarks, that John alone of all the evangelists records our Lord’s attendance at four of the great feasts of the Jews: viz., passover (Joh 2:13), pentecost (Joh 5:1), tabernacles (Joh 7:2), and dedication, here.

[It was winter.] This shows that three months had passed since the miracle of healing the blind man, which was worked at the feast of tabernacles. That was about Michaelmas, by our reckoning. The season of winter is here mentioned to explain why our Lord walked under cover, “in a porch.”

The mention of winter goes far to prove that the feast of dedication must have been appointed in commemoration of the work of Judas Maccabeus. Solomon’s dedication was at Michaelmas, in the seventh month; Ezra’s about Easter, in the first month.

v23.-[And Jesus walked.] This must either mean that “it was the habit” of our Lord to walk, or else that “one day Jesus was walking:” the latter seems the more likely sense.

[In the temple.] This means in the outer court, or area around the temple, which was a common place of resort for the Jews, and specially upon festivals. Here teachers expounded, and discussions on religious questions seem to have taken place. Here probably our Lord was found “among the doctors,” hearing and asking questions, when he was twelve years old (Luk 2:46).

[In Solomon’s porch.] The word “porch” rather means what we should call a veranda, or colonnade. It was one of those long covered walks under a roof supported by columns, on one side at least, which the inhabitants of hot countries appear to find absolutely needful. Singularly enough, one sect of heathen philosophers at Athens was called “Stoics,” from its meeting in a place called “Stoa,” here rendered a porch; while another was called “Peripatetics,” from its habit of “walking about” during its discussions, just as our Lord did in this verse. The cloisters of a cathedral or abbey, perhaps, are most like the building called a “porch” here.

Josephus says this porch was one of the buildings which remained partly undestroyed from Solomon’s temple.

Tacitus expressly mentions it as one of the defenses of the temple at the siege of Jerusalem.

v24.-[Then came…Jews round…said…him.] This would be more literally rendered, “encircled Him,” or surrounded Him in a circle.

[How long…make…doubt.] This would be more literally rendered, “Until what time dost Thou lift up our souls? How long dost Thou keep us in a state of suspense and excitement?”

Elsner thinks it means, “How long dost Thou take away our life (as at Joh 10:18), or kill us with doubt and perplexity?” Suicer, Schleusner, and Parkhurst, however, prefer, “hold us in suspense.” (See marginal reading in Luk 12:29).

[If…Christ, tell us plainly.] The Jews had no right to say they had not sufficient evidence that our Lord was the Christ. But nothing is more common with hardened and wicked men than to allege a want of evidence, and to pretend willingness to believe, if only more evidence was supplied.

“Plainly” here does not mean in plain language, and easily understood, but openly, boldly, unreservedly, and without mystery.

v25.-[Jesus answered…I told…ye believed not.] To what does our Lord refer here? I believe He refers to what He had said in the fifth chapter before the Sanhedrim, and in the eighth chapter in the discourse beginning, “I am the Light,” etc. The words would be more literally rendered, “I have told you, and ye do not believe.”

Henry observes, “The Jews pretended that they only doubted, but Christ tells them that they did not believe. Skepticism in religion is no better than downright infidelity.”

Hengstenberg thinks that “I have told you,” specially refers to our Lord’s recent proclamation of Himself as “the Good Shepherd.” To a Jewish ear it would sound like a claim to be the Messiah.

[The works…Father’s name…witness of Me.] Here, as in other places, our Lord appeals to His miracles as the grand proof that He was the Christ. (Compare Joh 3:2, and Joh 5:36, and Joh 7:31, and Joh 9:33-34, and Act 2:22.) It is as though our Lord said, “The miracles I have done are more than sufficient proof that I am the Messiah. Nothing can account for them but the fact that I am the promised Messiah.”

We should observe how our Lord says, “The works which I do in my Father’s name;” that is, by my Father’s commission and appointment, and as His Messenger. Here, as elsewhere, He carefully reminds the Jews that He does not act independently of His Father, but in entire harmony and unity with Him. His works were works which “the Father gave Him to finish.”

We should observe how our Lord always and confidently appeals to the evidence of His miracles. Those who try to depreciate and sneer at miracles, seem to forget how often they are brought forward as good witnesses in the Bible. This, in fact, is their great object and purpose. They were not so much meant to convert, as to prove that He who did them was from God, and deserved attention.

“Of Me,” would be more literally rendered, “concerning” or “about Me.”

v26.-[But ye believe not, because…not…sheep.] I doubt whether the word “because” does not put a meaning on this verse which it hardly bears in the Greek. It should rather be, “Ye neither believe my words nor my works, FOR ye are not in the number of my sheep. If ye were my sheep ye would believe: faith is one of their marks.” Not being Christ’s sheep was not the CAUSE of the unbelief of the Jews; but their unbelief was the EVIDENCE that they were not Christ’s sheep.

Tyndale and others think that the full stop should be after the word “sheep,” and that “as I said unto you,” should be taken with the following verse; but I see no necessity for this.

[As I said to you.] I think these words refer to two sayings of our Lord, which He had used in speaking to the Jews, one in Joh 8:47-“He that is of God heareth God’s words: Ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God;” and the other is at the third and fourth verses of this chapter: “The sheep hear His voice;”-“the sheep follow Him, for they know His voice.” (Joh 10:3-4.)

v27.-[My sheep hear my voice, etc.] Having told the Pharisees that they were not His sheep, our Lord goes on to describe the character of those who were His sheep; that is, of His own true people and servants. This He does in a verse of singular richness and fullness. Every word is instructive.

Christ calls His people “sheep.” He does so because they are in themselves singularly helpless and dependent on their Shepherd; because comparatively they are the most harmless and helpless of animals; because even at their best they are weak, foolish, and liable to go astray.

Chemnitius gives thirteen distinct reasons why believers are called sheep. They are too long to quote here, but will repay the examination of anyone who has access to his commentary.

He calls them, “My sheep.” They are His by God the Father’s gift,-His by redemption and purchase,-His by calling and choosing,-His by feeding, keeping, and preserving,-and His by their own consent and will. They are His peculiar property.

He says, “They hear my voice.” By this He means that they listen to His invitation, when He calls them to repent, believe, and come to Him. This supposes that Christ first speaks, and then they hear. Grace begins the work:-they, through grace, obey His calling, and willingly do as He bids them. The ears of unconverted people are deaf to Christ’s call, but true Christians hear and obey.

He says, “I know them.” This means that He knows them with a special knowledge of approbation, complacency, love, and interest. (See the word “know” in Psa 1:6, Psa 31:7, Amo 3:2.) Of course He knows the secrets of all men’s hearts, and all about all wicked people. But He knows with a peculiar knowledge those who are His people. The world knows them not, but Christ knows and cares for them (1Jn 3:1).

He says, “They follow Me.” This means that His people, like sheep, obey, trust, and walk in the steps of their Divine Master. They follow Him in holy obedience to His commandments; they follow Him in striving to copy His example; and they follow Him in trusting implicitly His providential leadings,-going where He would have them go, and taking cheerfully all He appoints for them.

It is almost needless to remark that this description belongs to none but true Christians. It did not belong to the Pharisees to whom our Lord spoke. It does not belong to multitudes of baptized people in our own day.

Luther says: “The sheep, though the most simple creature, is superior to all animals in this, that he soon hears his shepherd’s voice, and will follow no other. Also he is clever enough to hang entirely on his shepherd, and to seek help from him alone. He cannot help himself, nor find pasture for himself, nor heal himself, nor guard against wolves, but depends wholly and solely on the help of another.”

In the Greek of this verse, there is a nice distinction between the number of the verb “hear” and the verb “follow,” which the English language cannot convey. It is as though our Lord had said, my sheep are a body, which “hears” my voice, in the singular; and of which the individual members “follow” Me, in the plural.

v28.-[And I give, etc.] From the character of Christ’s sheep the Good Shepherd goes on to describe their privileges. He gives to them eternal life; the precious gift of pardon and grace in this world; and a life of glory in the world to come.-He says, “I give,” in the present tense. Eternal life is the present possession of every believer.-He declares that they shall never perish or be lost, unto all eternity; and that no one shall ever pluck them out of His hand.

We have here the divinity and dignity of our Lord Jesus Christ. None but one who was very God could say, “I give eternal life.” No Apostle ever said so.

We have here the perpetuity of grace in believers, and the certainty that they shall never be cast away. How anyone can deny this doctrine, as the Arminians do, and say that a true believer may fall away and be lost, in the face of this text, it is hard to understand. It is my own deliberate opinion that it would be almost impossible to imagine words in which a saint’s “perseverance” could be more strongly asserted.

We have here a distinct promise, that “no one,” man, angel, devil, or spirit, shall be able to tear from Christ His sheep. The Greek literally is not “any man,” but “any person,” or “any one.”

The doctrine plainly taught in this text may be called “Calvinism” by some, and “of dangerous tendency” by others. The only question we ought to ask is, whether it is scriptural. The simplest answer to that question is, that the words of the text, in their plain and obvious meaning, cannot be honestly interpreted in any other way. To thrust in, as some enemies of perseverance do, the qualifying clause, “They shall never perish so long as they continue my sheep,” is adding to Scripture, and taking unwarrantable liberties with Christ’s words.

So, again, Whitby’s interpretation, “They shall never perish through any defect on my part,” though they may fall away by their own fault, is a sad instance of unfair handling of Scripture.

Let it only be remembered that the character of those who shall never perish is most distinctly and carefully laid down in this place. It is those who hear Christ’s voice and follow Him, who alone are “sheep:” it is “His sheep,” and His sheep alone, who shall never perish. The man who boasts that he shall never be cast away, and never perish, while he is living in sin, is a miserable self-deceiver. It is the perseverance of saints, and not of sinners and wicked people, that is promised here. Doubtless the doctrine of the text may be misused and abused, like every other good thing. But to the humble penitent believer, who puts his trust in Christ, it is one of the most glorious and comfortable truths of the Gospel. Those who dislike it would do well to study the 17th Article of the Church of England, and Hooker’s sermon on the “Perpetuity of Faith in the Elect.”

Let it be noted that the last clause of the text plainly implies that many will try to pluck away Christians from Christ, and draw them back to sin. To feel that something is always “plucking” and “pulling” at us must never surprise believers. There is a devil, and saints will always feel and find his presence.

Let it be noted that, to be safe in Christ’s hand, and so never to perish, is one thing; but to feel that we are safe is quite another. Many true believers are safe, who do not realize and feel it.

Musculus observes that our Lord does not say in this verse that His sheep shall lose nothing in this world. They may lose property, liberty, and life, for Christ’s sake. But their souls cannot be lost. He also observes that all Christ’s sheep are in Christ’s hand. His hand holding them, and not their hand holding Him, is the true secret of their safety and perseverance.

The importance of the doctrine contained in this text cannot, in my judgment, be overrated. The Christian who does not hold it is a great loser. It is one of the grand elements of the good news of the Gospel. It is a safeguard against much unsound doctrine. Perseverance can never be reconciled with baptismal regeneration. The advocates of an extravagant view of baptismal grace, it may be observed, always have a special dislike to the doctrine of this text.

Hengstenberg wisely remarks, “It is cold consolation to say, if so long as they remain my sheep they are secure, and shall never perish. The whole strength of our soul’s desire is for a guarantee against ourselves. That there is such a guarantee is here assured to us.”

v29.-[My Father who gave, etc., etc.] Our Lord here strengthens the mighty promise just made, by declaring that His sheep are not His only, but His Father’s: His Father gave them to Him. “My Father,” He declares, is ‘almighty,’ or greater than all; the possessor of all power. No one is able to pluck anything out of my Father’s hand, so that my sheep’s safety is doubly secured.” Let it be noted that the word “them,” in the last clause of our English version, is not in the Greek.

It is probable that both in this verse and the preceding one, there is a latent reference to the case of the man whom the Pharisees had lately “cast out” of the Church, or excommunicated. Our Lord seems to say, “You may cut off and tear away from your outward Church-membership whom you will; but you can never pluck away any of my people from Me.”

Let it be noted here that the Father is just as much interested in the safety of believers as the Son. To leave out of sight the Father’s love, in our zeal for the glory of Christ, is very poor theology.

Melancthon dwells on this promise in a passage of singular beauty. He specially dwells on it as a ground of comfort against the invasion of Europe by the Turks, the persecution of truth by so-called Christian princes, and the furious strifes and controversies of teachers of the Church. There is a Church which nothing can harm.

Calvin remarks, “Our salvation is certain, because it is in the hand of God. Our faith is weak, and we are prone to waver: but God, who has taken us under His protection is sufficiently powerful to scatter with a breath all the power of our adversaries. It is of great importance to turn our eyes to this.”

Musculus observes that it is said the Father “gave” the sheep to Me, in the past tense. Believers were given to Christ before the foundation of the world.

v30.-[I and the Father are one.] In order to explain how it is that the Father should take as much interest in the sheep as the Son, our Lord here declares in the plainest and most explicit terms, the deep truth of the essential unity between Himself and His Father. Literally translated, the sentence is, “I and my Father are one thing.” By this, of course, He did not mean that His Father and He were one Person. This would overthrow the doctrine of the Trinity. But He did mean, “I and my eternal Father, though two distinct Persons, and not to be confounded, are yet one in essence, nature, dignity, power, will, and operation. Hence, in the matter of securing the safety of my sheep, what I do, my Father does likewise. I do not act independently of Him.”

This is one of those deep and mysterious texts which we must be content to receive and believe, without attempting to pry too curiously into its contents. The cautious and exact words of the Athanasian Creed should be often remembered: “Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the substance. There is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost: but the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one, the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal.”

Augustine remarks that this text alone overthrows both the doctrine of the Sabellians and the Arians. It silences the Sabellians, who say there is only one Person in the Godhead, by speaking of two distinct Persons. It silences the Arians, who say the Son is inferior to the Father, by saying that Father and Son are “one.”

Let it be noted that the doctrine of this verse is precisely the same that our Lord had maintained on a former occasion (in the fifth chapter) before the Sanhedrim. There it was expounded fully: here it is briefly asserted. And the interpretation put on His meaning, in both cases, by the Jews, was exactly the same. They regarded it as a claim to be regarded as “God.”

The practical use of the text to a believer in Christ is far too much overlooked. It shows the entire childlike confidence with which such a one may look at the Father. “He who hath the Son hath the Father.” The remark is only too true that while some ignorantly talk of the Father, as if there was no Christ crucified, others with no less ignorance talk of Christ crucified as if there was no God and Father of Christ, who loved the world!

Chrysostom observes, “That thou mayest not suppose that Christ is weak, and the sheep are in safety through the Father’s power, He addeth, ‘I and the Father are one.’ As though He had said, ‘I did not assert that on account of the Father no man plucketh them away, as though I were too weak to keep the sheep. For I and the Father are one.’ He speaks here with reference to power, for concerning this was all His discourse; and if the power be the same, it is clear that the essence is also.”

Ecolampadius remarks, “He does not say we are one in the masculine gender,-that is, one person; but one in the neuter gender,-that is one in nature, power, and majesty. If you were to say one Person, you would take away both, and leave neither Father nor Son.”

Maldonatus quotes a saying of Augustine’s, “that it is invariably found in Scripture that things called ‘one’ are things of the same nature.”

It is fair to admit that Erasmus, Calvin, and a few others, think the “oneness” here only means unity of consent and will. But the vast majority of commentators think otherwise, and the Jews evidently thought so also.

Fuente: Ryle’s Expository Thoughts on the Gospels

Joh 10:19. There arose a division again among the Jews because of these words. The effect related in chap. Joh 7:43, Joh 9:16, is again produced. This time however (as in chap. Joh 8:31) the Jews themselves are divided. The preceding parable therefore must have been spoken in the hearing of many who were hostile to Jesus, as well as of Pharisees (chap. Joh 9:40) who may have been half convinced.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Here the evangelist shews what different effects this sermon of our Saviour had upon the Jews; many of them calumniate and slander him, as one possessed and mad, and therefore not to be heard and minded; others of calmer thoughts said, That the doctrine be taught, and the late miracle which he had wrought in curing the blind man, were abundantly sufficient to confute such a groundless slander.

Learn hence, That the doctrine of Christ meeting with diversity of dispositions, it is no wonder that it occasions different effects, to the softening of some, and hardening of others: even as the same sun that melteth the wax, hardeneth the clay; yet is not this to be imputed to the doctrine of our Saviour, but to men’s corruptions which oppose the truth, and the maintainers of it. There was a division again amongst them.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Joh 10:19-21. There was a division among the Jews These sayings of our Lord affected the minds of the Jews differently, for some of them cried out that he was possessed and mad, and that it was folly to hear him; others, judging more impartially of him and his doctrine, declared that his discourses were not the words of a lunatic, nor his miracles the works of a devil. Moreover, they asked his enemies if they imagined any devil was able to impart the faculty of sight to one that was born blind alluding to the astonishing cures which Jesus had lately performed. Macknight.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Vv. 19-21. There was therefore again a division among the Jews because of these discoursings. 20. Many of them said, He is possessed of a demon, and is mad; why do you listen to him? 21. Others said, These are not the discoursings of one possessed; can a demon open the eyes of the blind?

Always the same result; a division, which forms the prelude to the final choice; comp. Joh 7:12; Joh 7:30-31; Joh 7:40-41; Joh 9:8-9; Joh 9:16. The word , again, awakens the attention of the reader to the constant repetition of this result. The words: Why do you listen to Him? show with what uneasiness the decidedly hostile party observed the favorable impression produced by the discourses of Jesus on those who were better disposed. The answer of these latter (Joh 10:21) contains two arguments in juxtaposition. The first is the simple avowal of their impression: the discourse of Jesus does not appear to them to be that of a madman. But immediately they seem to be ashamed of this avowal and withdraw behind another argument which is less compromising: the patent fact of the cure of the blind man. The second argument might be connected with the first by an And besides.

Thus continually more and more do the sheep of Jesus in the vast inclosure of the theocracy separate themselves from the mass of the flock; and for the theme: I and you, which was that of chap. 8 is substituted more and more that theme which is to sum up the new situation: I and mine.

Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)

10:19 {6} There was a division therefore again among the Jews for these sayings.

(6) The gospel uncovers hypocrisy, and therefore the world must necessarily rage when the gospel comes forth.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

The division among Jesus’ hearers 10:19-21

Again Jesus’ claims resulted in some of His hearers believing in Him and others disbelieving (cf. Joh 7:12; Joh 7:43; Joh 9:16). Here the expression "the Jews" refers to the Jewish people generally, not specifically to the religious leaders, as it usually does in this Gospel. Evidently it was the apparent contradiction between Jesus’ claim to be the coming Shepherd of Israel and His claim to die for the sheep that caused the cleavage. Some even concluded that He was demon possessed and therefore mad (cf. Joh 7:20; Joh 8:48). Others concluded that He was sane and sober because of His gracious revelations and His ability to cure the man born blind (Joh 9:1-12). John continued to stress the two opposite conclusions that people continued to draw even though Jesus’ witness to His deity was consistent and clear. This should be an encouragement to all of us who testify for Him. Not even Jesus Himself convinced everyone that He was God’s Son.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)