�鶹��ý

The Bible contains numerous references to shepherds and shepherding. To name a few, Abel, son of Adam, was a “keeper of sheep” (Genesis 4:2). Isaac’s son Jacob tended the flock of his father-in-law Laban (see 30:31–33). While in the wilderness of Midian, Moses likewise “kept the flock of Jethro his father in law” (Exodus 3:1). Before the prophet Samuel identified him as the new king of Israel, David was a young shepherd in the fields around Bethlehem (see 1 Samuel 16:11). In the New Testament, shepherds who were watching their flocks at night witnessed an angel of God announce the birth of “Christ the Lord” (Luke 2:11), who was himself referred to as “the Lamb of God” (John 1:29) by John the Baptist. Jesus himself, during his mortal ministry, was moved with compassion toward people, whom he viewed “as sheep not having a shepherd” (Mark 6:34), and then as a resurrected being encouraged Peter, the chief apostle, to “feed my sheep” (John 21:16–17). This may be one reason why Peter called his master “the chief Shepherd” (1 Peter 5:4).[1]

Perhaps the most famous reference to shepherds in the New Testament is when Jesus referred to himself as “the good shepherd” who knows his sheep and gives his life for them (John 10:11, 14–15). For Latter-day Saints, one of the most striking features of this Good Shepherd sermon is the Savior’s declaration “Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd” (v. 16). Although the New Testament had not been written yet, when the resurrected Christ appeared to his Nephite disciples in the New World, he quoted to them this teaching that would eventually become John 10:16.

There are only two places in the Book of Mormon where Jesus refers to teachings he gave in the Old World and they are recorded just as they would one day be written in the New Testament. The most famous is 3 Nephi 12–14, usually called the Sermon at the Temple, which follows closely Matthew 5–7, known as the Sermon on the Mount.[2] The connections between these two sermons have been extensively examined.[3] The other is 3 Nephi 15:17, which mirrors the teaching in John 10:16. Unfortunately, there is no comprehensive study that links together an examination of the Savior’s Good Shepherd sermon in John 10 and its complementary teachings about other sheep in 3 Nephi 15–16.[4] This essay is an effort to begin this conversation in Latter-day Saint scholarship.

This study is divided into several sections. First I will present what is known concerning the setting and audience for the Good Shepherd sermon in John 10, including Old Testament background. Next I will discuss the actual parable of the good shepherd found in John 10:1–5 as well as Jesus’s interpretation and application of it, sharing insights from what is known about ancient shepherding. After this I will analyze what Jesus taught in his Good Shepherd sermon about his other sheep as well as modern interpretations of these teachings. Lastly, I will present what the resurrected Jesus revealed to his Nephite disciples about his discussion of other sheep with his original Jewish audience as recorded in 3 Nephi 15–16, with respect to the Nephites as a people but also to others as well. I will also examine other features of this conversation with the Nephite disciples that may provide clues to more clearly identify the audience to whom he gave his Good Shepherd sermon. My hope is that bringing together all elements of Christ’s teachings concerning his other sheep, in both the Old and New Worlds, will promote better understanding of the Good Shepherd sermon as well as the supplementary teachings of the Savior from modern scripture. This increased understanding can also provide a greater appreciation for the great love that the Savior has for all his children, no matter where they may live.

Setting and Audience

Placing the Good Shepherd sermon in its proper setting within the narrative of the Gospel of John will help illuminate why Jesus presented these teachings to this particular Jewish audience. Following his Bread of Life sermon given “in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum” (John 6:59), Jesus traveled from Galilee to Jerusalem. This journey must have been toward the end of September because the “feast of tabernacles was at hand” (7:2). In Jerusalem, Jesus instructed a man who was born blind to “wash in the pool of Siloam” and who subsequently “went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing” (9:7). A few months later, “it was winter” and time for “the feast of the dedication” (10:22), or in other words, Hanukkah. Between the references to these two Jewish festivals in the Gospel of John is the Savior’s Good Shepherd sermon (see vv. 1–16).

There are no additional indicators of chronology in John’s narrative to more precisely locate the sermon. The hostile reaction of the Jewish leaders toward the healed man in John 9:24–34 seems to provide an impetus for the Savior’s discussion of good and bad shepherds. In addition, the most proximate identification of an audience for the sermon is the reference to “some of the Pharisees” (v. 40) who overheard Jesus’s conversation with the newly healed man.[5] Because of its connections with the previous chapter, some scholars situate the Good Shepherd sermon in John 10 during or close to the time of Tabernacles.[6] On the other hand, the content of the Good Shepherd sermon reflects an abrupt change in subject matter: from sight and spiritual blindness in John 9:39–41 to shepherds in John 10:1–16. In addition, Jesus spoke of other sheep who hear his voice while he was at the temple during Hanukkah (see 10:26–27), a conversation that assumes the same audience who heard the earlier sermon. Because of these references, other scholars connect the sermon to that winter festival.[7]

In his discussion of the setting of the Good Shepherd sermon, Raymond E. Brown reminds us that a characteristic feature of the Gospel of John is to “look both forward and backward.” In other words, there are a number of instances where the material in John’s narrative seems to “resume themes already seen and point forward to themes to come.”[8] This phenomenon can be detected in the case of the Good Shepherd sermon. As we will see in the analysis below, the discussion of good and bad shepherds in John 10 seems to be, at least in part, a commentary on the response of the Jewish leaders toward the healed man. But at the same time, as Gary M. Burge has pointed out, one of the important themes of Hanukkah was reflecting on the lessons of the Maccabean revolt against the Greek ruler Antiochus IV and the Hasmonean leaders who eventually became corrupted themselves, thus presenting an opportunity to explore the issue of who was the true shepherd authorized to lead the people of Israel.[9]

Brown proposes that a restrictive either/or approach to the setting of the Good Shepherd sermon (either during Tabernacles or during Hanukkah) is unnecessary. Rather, “even if we take the present sequence literally, there is nothing to indicate that the incident in ix and the discourse in x 1–21 may not have taken place between Tabernacles and Dedication.”[10] The proposal that John presents Jesus’s sermon on the Good Shepherd as having taken place sometime between the two festivals helps make better sense of the literary connections that both precede and follow the discourse. It also renders unnecessary the suggestion by Rudolf Bultmann and others to reorder the material and place the reference to the Feast of Dedication before the Good Shepherd sermon.[11]

Bad Shepherds

This section will provide further context from the Old Testament and the Gospel of John for Jesus’s teachings about different kinds of shepherds. Although there are no direct quotations from the Old Testament in the Good Shepherd sermon, numerous scholars have proposed that it should be read in light of Jehovah’s pronouncements upon bad shepherds in Ezekiel 34 as well as the Jewish leaders’ treatment of the healed man in John 9.[12] Referring to the leaders of the people metaphorically as shepherds, Jehovah instructed the prophet Ezekiel to “prophesy against the shepherds of Israel” because they “do feed themselves” but they “feed not the flock” (Ezekiel 34:2–3). In verses 4–6, the accusations of the Lord were severe against such leaders. These shepherds of Israel greedily used the sheep for their own benefit, specifically for food and clothing, but they had no compassion on the diseased and sick sheep who were in need of healing and assistance. They did not guide and protect the sheep along the paths of safety but allowed them to wander and become scattered. And when the sheep were lost, the shepherds of Israel did not seek to recover and rescue them, with the result that the sheep were killed and devoured by wild beasts. Addressing these bad shepherds, the Lord accused, “With force and with cruelty have ye ruled them” (v. 4).[13]

As many commentators have pointed out, the Lord’s assessment of bad shepherds in Ezekiel 34 can be understood as a backdrop for John’s description of the Jewish leaders’ treatment of the man healed in John 9. After leaving the temple courtyards on the Sabbath, Jesus and his disciples “saw a man which was blind from his birth” (John 9:1). The disciples wondered aloud if this man’s disability was the result of some sin that he or his parents had committed. Jesus reassured them that such was not the case, and he went on to say that through this man he would “work the works of him that sent me” (v. 4).[14] After Jesus anointed the man’s eyes with clay, the man washed in the pool of Siloam “and came seeing” (v. 7).

The response of onlookers concerning Jesus was mixed. A group of Pharisees investigated this miracle, and some of them said, “This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day” (John 9:16), a reference to the fact that Jesus has broken their oral tradition concerning work such as kneading on the Sabbath, since “it was the sabbath day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes” (v. 14).[15] Evidently not everyone was against Jesus, however, because we are told that others responded by asking, “How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles?” (v. 16). The parents of the healed man, however, were reluctant to respond to inquiries concerning their son because they knew the Jewish leaders had decided that “if any man did confess that [Jesus] was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue” (v. 22). When these critics confronted the healed man and he in turn defended Jesus, “they reviled him . . . and said unto him, Thou wast altogether born in sins. . . . And they cast him out” (vv. 28, 34). Thus, just like the leaders in the days of the prophet Ezekiel, these self-proclaimed shepherds of Israel were also neglecting the sick and diseased sheep who needed healing and help. They were not guiding and protecting the flock from danger, nor were they seeking to recover them, but rather they were reviling the sheep and casting them out. They were, as Jehovah had declared through Ezekiel, ruling the sheep with force and cruelty.

The Parable

Understanding more deeply the parable of the good shepherd and Jesus’s subsequent commentary, especially in light of ancient shepherding traditions, allows us to better appreciate these important teachings in their ancient context. While parables are common in the synoptic Gospels, these verses are the best example of that type of figure of speech found in the Gospel of John.[16] The actual “parable” (John 10:6) is contained in verses 1–5, and then Jesus applies the story to himself in verses 7–18. In the parable, Jesus outlines the realities of a shepherd’s primary duties to protect and lead the sheep.[17] He mentions the “sheepfold” (v. 1), or sheep pen—an open-air enclosure typically consisting of low walls made with field stones where the flock would have been corralled at night for protection. There were two ways to gain access to the flock in the sheep pen. One way was through “the door” (v. 2), meaning the gate or opening in the wall that was guarded by “the porter” (v. 3), or gatekeeper.[18] The other way was to climb over the wall. Such a person who “climbeth up some other way” in order to force his way into the sheep pen is referred to as “a thief and a robber” (v. 1). The sheep not only refuse to follow this impostor, but they “will flee from him.” This is because they do not recognize “a stranger,” for “they know not the voice of strangers” (v. 5).

Only the true shepherd is allowed through the gate to access the sheep. The sheep themselves recognize the shepherd not only because he has entered the sheep pen by legitimate means, but also because they “hear,” or recognize, his voice when he “calleth his own sheep by name” (v. 3). The phrase “his own sheep” may presuppose that within the sheep pen are sheep from different flocks of the local community, and the shepherd calls for only the sheep that belong to him.[19] But the main point, as some scholars have concluded, is that “the sheep and shepherd know each other.”[20] Though it is not quoted directly in this parable, such an intimate relationship between shepherd and sheep recalls these words of Jehovah in the book of Isaiah: “I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine” (43:1).[21] Unfortunately, those who heard Jesus utter this parable “understood not” (John 10:6).

Sheepfold and Shepherds

Following the parable, Jesus continued with what is not so much an interpretation, but more accurately an expansion and application of the parable, in which he addresses each of the primary elements: the sheepfold, the thieves and robbers, the shepherd, and the sheep.[22] Concerning the sheepfold itself, Jesus declared, “I am the door of the sheep” (John 10:7), or in other words, the entrance to the sheepfold.[23] Jesus is the only legitimate means by which his sheep may enter the protection of the sheep pen and exit in order to safely find food: “By me, if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture” (v. 9). This recalls the Book of Mormon prophet Jacob’s declaration to the Nephites that “the keeper of the gate is the Holy One of Israel; and he employeth no servant there; and there is none other way save it be by the gate” (2 Nephi 9:41).[24] Thus, applying Jacob’s statement to the parable, both “the door” (John 10:9) or gate to the sheepfold and “the porter” (v. 3) or gatekeeper represent the Savior himself. Not only is Jesus the one who guards the way, but as he later testified to his disciples at the Last Supper, he is “the way, the truth, and the life” and “no man cometh unto the Father” except through him (14:6).[25]

Jesus compared “all” other leaders who preceded him to “thieves and robbers” whose intent was “to steal, and to kill, and to destroy” (John 10:8, 10).[26] Notice here that the Savior specifies that the bad shepherds not only steal the sheep but also kill and destroy them. One scholar has suggested that this means that “the sheep are stolen not in order to be added to someone else’s flock, but to be slaughtered for food, and thus ‘destroyed.’”[27]

It is common to understand the phrase “before me” (John 10:8) in a temporal sense, meaning “all who arrived before I did.”[28] In light of this, some later scribes who were possibly wishing to protect the reputation of such notable past leaders as Abraham, Moses, and John the Baptist (each of whom Jesus had previously endorsed in John’s Gospel)[29] omitted either the word all or the phrase “before me” from the text.[30] But it is likely, as Marianne Meye Thompson has proposed, that Jesus was condemning “any authorities or leaders who do not bear witness to Jesus, or whose mission or work does not lead or point to Jesus.”[31] This interpretation is supported by the Joseph Smith Translation, where the Savior clarifies that these illegitimate leaders “testified not of me” (JST John 10:8).[32] Thompson concludes that the explicit design of such bad shepherds may not have been to literally kill and destroy, but “where life and death are stark opposites, as they are in John, whatever does not lead to life leads to death.”[33]

It should also be noted that J. Ramsey Michaels has proposed that the phrase “before me” could also be understood in a spatial sense, meaning “all who came and stood before me to gain entrance.”[34] According to this understanding, the “thieves and robbers” approach the door of the sheep pen desiring to access the sheep, but they are denied entrance because the sheep do not “hear” or recognize the voice of strangers (John 10:8) and also because the gate is closed to such impostors. This would explain the attempts of such illegitimate shepherds to climb over the wall of the sheep pen.

In any case, these so-called shepherds who came before Jesus were evidently more concerned about themselves than they were about leading the sheep to the true shepherd. They were not really shepherds to whom the sheep belonged and whom the sheep trusted, but rather “hirelings,” or hired hands, who “careth not for the sheep” (John 10:12–13). The result of having a shepherd who has no concern for the flock is that when there is danger, he “leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep” (v. 12). Thankfully, the true shepherd’s flock refuses to “hear” (v. 8) or hearken to the hirelings.

On the other hand, Jesus emphatically declared of himself, “I am the good shepherd” (John 10:11, 14). This is one of seven “I am” sayings in the Gospel of John, each of which teaches something about the identity of Jesus.[35] Jesus’s audience would have understood that in the Old Testament, Jehovah himself is often described as the shepherd of his people. One popular example among many is Psalm 23:1–2: “The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want. He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.”[36] They would also have known that through the prophet Ezekiel God had promised his people that one day he would “set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David” (Ezekiel 34:23). Since King David had died many years before the time of Ezekiel, Christians typically interpret this as a reference to the future Messiah who would be a descendant of David and by the time of Jesus was sometimes called “the Son of David” (Matthew 22:42).[37]

A closer look at the Greek text clarifies our understanding of what John was trying to convey by the phrase “good shepherd” (John 10:11, 14). The typical Greek word translated as “good” in the New Testament is agathos, but in this case the word is kalos and may be better translated as “noble” or “genuine.” This adjective emphasizes more than just that this “good shepherd” was not a bad shepherd, but rather that a noble shepherd was the ultimate model or example of what a true shepherd was supposed to be.[38] Thus, by contrast to thieves and robbers, the true shepherd’s purpose was not to endanger the lives of his sheep, but to care for and protect them so “that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly” (v. 10). Rather than viewing the flock with indifference or greed, the true shepherd and his sheep have special knowledge of each other: he knows each of them and they know and trust him (see vv. 13–14).

The outcome of this devoted relationship is distinctly different from that of the hired hand. Rather than fleeing at the first sign of danger, leaving the flock exposed to possible harm, “the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep” (John 10:11). One might think it would make better sense to say that a good shepherd is willing to die for his sheep, because a dead shepherd cannot protect the flock any longer.[39] As one scholar has pointed out, “the actual course of Jesus’ life determines the depiction of this shepherd,” because in the case of the Savior “the death of the shepherd is the very means by which his work of protecting the lives of the sheep is accomplished.”[40] Thus Jesus directly applies this eventual fate to himself: “I lay down my life for the sheep” (v. 15). Jesus reminded his audience, “Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life” (v. 17). This sacrificial offering reveals the great love that the true shepherd himself has for his sheep. Recall Jesus’s teaching at the Last Supper: “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends” (15:13). In this sense, many of the early disciples would themselves be called upon to be true shepherds who were willing to give up their own lives as martyrs for the sheep.

Sheep and Other Sheep

The sheep themselves are the underlying or fundamental feature of the parable and of Jesus’s application of it. This section will provide further context for Jesus’s teachings about his sheep, both to his original Jewish audience as well as to the Nephites in the New World. With respect to being identified as a member of the flock, it has been pointed out that the primary emphasis is on hearing first, and then sight and knowledge follow as a result of the hearing.[41] As the good shepherd, Jesus knows his sheep and they know him (see John 10:14). Importantly, however, Jesus says that they know him not from sight but specifically because they hear him and recognize his voice (see vv. 3–4). This describes the experience of the man who was born blind. When he initially encountered the Savior, he did not see Jesus, but he heard his voice, followed his instructions, and as a result “came seeing” (9:7). When he was interrogated afterward concerning Jesus, the healed man testified, “One thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see” (9:25). The miracle was indeed that the man could now see, but the miracle of sight was a direct result of hearing and obeying the voice of the true shepherd.[42]

The fact that Jesus referred to those who hear his voice as “my sheep” (John 10:14; emphasis added) may again suggest, as previously mentioned, that the intent of this metaphor is to help us understand there are other sheep in the sheep pen who are not yet his.[43] If this is true, the other sheep in the sheep pen are not his because they do not recognize his voice and follow him. This describes the Jewish leaders in response to the healing of the man who was born blind. When they approached the man and asked who healed him, he declared: “I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore would ye hear it again? will ye also be his disciples?” (9:27). In this context, the healed man’s question to the Jewish leaders was essentially “Will ye hear him and be his sheep?” Their answer was an emphatic no: “Thou art his disciple; but we are Moses’ disciples” (v. 28). When Jesus subsequently arrived, he testified to them that he came “into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind” (v. 39). In response, these Jewish leaders responded, “Are we blind also?” (v. 40). They did not see or know the good shepherd and were not his sheep precisely because they did not hear his voice. And the narrative explicitly states this was the case, for when Jesus uttered to them the parable of the good shepherd, “they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them” (10:6).[44]

Jesus then testified concerning something not explicitly mentioned in the parable itself: there are more sheep than those in this particular sheep pen: “Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd” (John 10:16).[45] Who are these other sheep? We are told specifically that they will hear the voice of the shepherd and will be brought into his fold. Although there are different interpretations of this passage, many scholars have concluded that Jesus was referring to Gentiles.[46] It is noteworthy that in the Gospel of Matthew Jesus instructed his apostles to “go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not” (10:5; emphasis added). But the prohibition against the disciples seeking out Gentiles and Samaritans was only temporary. It was rescinded when the resurrected Christ later commissioned them to “teach all nations” (28:19), meaning “teach all Gentiles.”[47] There were doctrinal reasons for the focus on preaching to descendants of Abraham first.[48] Perhaps a practical reason for the injunction against teaching non-Jews was to keep his disciples near so they could learn from Jesus’s example among non-Jews, because in spite of the temporary prohibition, it is evident that Jesus himself ministered to Gentiles[49] and Samaritans[50] during his mortal ministry. After Christ’s resurrection and the Great Commission to teach all nations, early disciples went forth to teach Samaritans and Gentiles just as Jesus had done during his mortal ministry.[51]

Jesus himself certainly taught that Gentiles would eventually become part of God’s covenant people and receive salvation. Concerning the faith of the Roman centurion, for example, Jesus testified of other Gentiles entering the fold: “Many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 8:11).[52] The Gospel of John explains that God gave his Son to provide everlasting life for “whosoever believeth in him” (John 3:16), that Jesus gave his flesh “for the life of the world” (6:51; emphasis added), and that his death on the cross would “draw all men” to him (12:32; emphasis added). Thus, it is logical and understandable that many scholars interpret “other sheep who are not of this fold” to be a reference to Gentiles.

But at least one biblical scholar has concluded that “other sheep” may refer to more than just Gentiles. Marianne Meye Thompson has proposed that “‘other sheep’ may simply refer to all those who did not enjoy either temporal or physical proximity to Jesus: those who neither saw nor heard him.” For Thompson, this category of people could include Gentiles, but it also may refer to “Diaspora Jews.”[53] The Gospel of John explains that the death of Jesus would provide a way for him to “gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad” (John 11:52)—a possible reference to such Diaspora Jews who were living in various locations around the Roman Empire and beyond.[54] Richard Holzapfel and Thomas Wayment have reminded us that Jesus’s reference to “other sheep” does not distinguish specifically any group, such as the Nephites, without further prophetic guidance.”[55] One should remember as well that the Nephites—Jews who were scattered to foreign lands around 600 BC because of the Babylonian conquest—could certainly be understood to be a portion of the various groups traditionally designated as Diaspora Jews.[56]

Nephite Other Sheep

The brief sojourn of the resurrected Jesus Christ among the Nephites in the New World consisted of three visits.[57] When he first appeared among them, he chose twelve disciples from among the Nephite people.[58] These twelve Nephite disciples were essentially equivalent counterparts to the twelve Jewish apostles whom he had chosen during his mortal ministry in the Old World.[59] On the first day of his visit among the Nephites, Jesus directly addressed “those twelve whom he had chosen” (3 Nephi 15:11).

He informed his Nephite disciples that the Father had not commanded him to tell those in Jerusalem about them, nor “concerning the other tribes of the house of Israel, whom the Father hath led away out of the land” (3 Nephi 15:15). But importantly, Jesus revealed to his twelve Nephite disciples that the Father had indeed commanded him to tell those at Jerusalem the information that is recorded in John 10:16: “Other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd” (3 Nephi 15:17).[60]

The Book of Mormon often employs language that is also present in the King James Version of the New Testament.[61] As mentioned earlier, besides his quotation of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5–7) in 3 Nephi 12–14, however, the reference to John 10:16 in 3 Nephi 15:17 is the only other place where the resurrected Christ explicitly quotes to the Nephites his teachings to the Jews as they would appear in the New Testament.[62] The Savior quoted this particular teaching about other sheep to the Nephite disciples precisely as it is recorded in the King James Version of John 10:16.[63] The New Testament verse does not contain any significant variants among the ancient manuscripts.[64] Neither are there noteworthy variants among the various manuscripts and early editions of the Book of Mormon.[65]

Unfortunately, as the resurrected Savior informed his twelve Nephite disciples, their “brethren at Jerusalem” did not understand what Jesus was teaching them because of their “stiffneckedness and unbelief”—and as a result the Father commanded Jesus “to say no more” about this (3 Nephi 15:14, 18). The Savior probably did not mean that all the Jews in Jerusalem were wicked, for his own disciples at the time were Jews, and in addition he had many supporters among the Jewish population of Jerusalem.[66] Rather, Jesus may have had in mind the Jewish leaders, in particular the group of Pharisees who were in the audience in Jerusalem at the time he gave the sermon.[67]

Perhaps Jesus was also referring, at least in part, to his disciples who may have been present for the Good Shepherd sermon. Jesus told the Nephite twelve disciples that the Father had not given him a commandment to mention anything about them “unto your brethren at Jerusalem” (3 Nephi 15:14) except the reference to other sheep. It may be noteworthy that in the Gospel of John the resurrected Jesus also referred to the Jewish disciples as “brethren.” After appearing to Mary Magdalene, he instructed her, “Go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father” (John 20:17; emphasis added). In addition, Elder Jeffrey R. Holland has suggested that the commandment for Jesus to “say no more” (3 Nephi 15:18) about other sheep was perhaps a reason for his statement to his Jewish twelve apostles at the Last Supper: “I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now” (John 16:12).[68] Thus, the audience who was present at the Good Shepherd sermon included a group of Pharisees (9:40), but also possibly some of Jesus’s own disciples. Jesus stated that because of “iniquity” among some Jews in Jerusalem they did not know concerning the Nephites in the New World, nor did they know concerning “other tribes” that “the Father separated from them” (3 Nephi 15:19–20).

It is at this point in the narrative that Jesus answered a couple of important questions about the interpretation of his reference to other sheep. First, to whom was Jesus referring when he taught his audience in Jerusalem about his other sheep who would hear his voice? Jesus stated plainly to his Nephite disciples, “Ye are they of whom I said: Other sheep I have which are not of this fold” (3 Nephi 15:21).[69] He reassured them, “Ye have both heard my voice, and seen me; and ye are my sheep” (v. 24). Brant A. Gardner has proposed that the Savior’s teachings in verses 20–21 would have filled the Nephite twelve disciples with comfort because of three implications: they were not alone in their separation from the covenant people, for other tribes had been separated as well; their continued separation was not a result of their own iniquities; and importantly, Jesus had not forgotten about them but specifically had taught the Jews in Jerusalem about them.[70] Recall that a few decades earlier there were at least some Nephites who seem to have expressed this kind of disappointment in feeling forgotten when they responded to Samuel’s prophecies of the signs of Christ’s birth: “Why will he not show himself unto us as well as unto them who shall be at Jerusalem?” (Helaman 16:18).[71]

Second, to whom did Jesus’s original Jewish audience think he was referring? For the Nephite disciples, Jesus answered this question as well: “And they understood me not, for they supposed it had been the Gentiles” (3 Nephi 15:22). This is, as was mentioned above, the standard conclusion of modern scholarship as well. In John’s narrative, the rumor that Jesus would minister to the Gentiles was already spreading by the time he gave his Good Shepherd sermon. After he arrived in Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles, Jesus told the Jewish leaders, “Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am, thither ye cannot come” (John 7:34). They responded: “Whither will he go, that we shall not find him? will he go unto the dispersed among the Gentiles, and teach the Gentiles?” (v. 35). But to the Nephites, Jesus pointed out an important flaw in this conclusion: “They understood not that the Gentiles should not at any time hear my voice” (3 Nephi 15:23). How are we to understand this?

As we mentioned above, Jesus commanded his disciples to “go not into the way of the Gentiles” (Matthew 10:5). But apparently this directive did not apply to Jesus himself, for he repeatedly traveled in areas that were primarily inhabited by Gentiles, such as the regions of “Tyre and Sidon” as well as the “Decapolis” (Mark 7:31).[72] And within these regions, Jesus ministered to those who were explicitly Gentiles, such as a Syro-Phoenician woman (see Matthew 15:21–28), as well as those who were likely Gentiles because they were living in gentile areas in the Decapolis, such as a man possessed with demons (see 8:28–34) and a deaf man (see Mark 7:31–37).[73] Jesus even ministered to a Roman centurion in Capernaum (see Matthew 8:5–13). All these Gentiles indeed heard the voice of the Good Shepherd. Thus, the Savior’s declaration that “the Gentiles should not at any time hear my voice” does not refer to individual Gentiles, with whom Jesus interacted on occasion. Rather, as Robert J. Matthews has concluded, it likely means that during his mortal ministry Jesus was not going to “manifest himself personally nor by his audible voice to a Gentile nation.”[74]

Concerning this misunderstanding among his original audience, Jesus also clarified that “the Gentiles should be converted through their preaching” (3 Nephi 15:22; emphasis added). But to whom does the pronoun their refer? Who would preach to and convert the Gentiles? Remember that as best as we can determine from the text, the bulk of the audience for the Good Shepherd sermon was “some . . . Pharisees” (John 9:40). We also know that by the time of the Jerusalem Council there were in Jerusalem “certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed” (Acts 15:5). It is possible that among his audience were some who would one day be converted and preach the gospel at a future time. Groups of converted Pharisees did indeed preach to Gentiles, for example traveling to Antioch of Syria, where they taught a form of Christianity rooted in the Mosaic law (e.g., “Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved,” v. 1). More likely, however, Jesus had in mind other former Pharisees, such as Paul, who, after his own conversion, rejoiced in “the conversion of the Gentiles” (v. 3) and became “the apostle of the Gentiles” (Romans 11:13).[75] Although Paul was not present when Jesus spoke the Good Shepherd parable, it is possible, as mentioned above, that other of Jesus’s disciples were present and that he was referring in a general and collective way to these Jewish disciples who would feed his sheep and “teach all nations” (Matthew 28:19) after his resurrection and ascension.

Other “Other Sheep”

After Jesus identified the Nephites as his other sheep, he proceeded to inform his Nephite twelve disciples that their people were not his only other sheep: “I have other sheep, which are not of this land, neither of the land of Jerusalem, neither in any parts of that land round about whither I have been to minister” (3 Nephi 16:1). He told them that these additional other sheep “are they who have not as yet heard my voice; neither have I at any time manifested myself unto them” (v. 2). Who are these other sheep? Jesus called them “the other tribes whom they know not of” (v. 4); in other words, they were “the lost tribes of Israel” (17:4).[76] According to the resurrected Savior, the Father commanded him that he should “go unto them” so they might “hear [his] voice” (16:3).

Concerning the location of these lost tribes, the prophet Nephi declared, “It appears that the house of Israel, sooner or later, will be scattered upon all the face of the earth, and also among all nations” (1 Nephi 22:3).[77] This ambiguous designation means that these additional groups of other sheep could be anywhere among any nation of the earth. The Lord told Nephi that he would speak unto the Jews, the Nephites, and the lost tribes of Israel and each group would write down those teachings: “Behold, I shall speak unto the Jews and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto the Nephites and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto the other tribes of the house of Israel, which I have led away, and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto all the nations of the earth and they shall write it” (2 Nephi 29:12). At a future time, each group would eventually have access to all these records: “And it shall come to pass that the Jews shall have the words of the Nephites, and the Nephites shall have the words of the Jews; and the Nephites and the Jews shall have the words of the lost tribes of Israel; and the lost tribes of Israel shall have the words of the Nephites and the Jews” (v. 13). Nephi also prophesied that when the “book of the Lamb of God” and “other books” would come forth, they would testify “that the Lamb of God is the Son of the Eternal Father, and the Savior of the world” and would also “be established in one; for there is one God and one Shepherd over all the earth” (1 Nephi 13:38, 40–41).[78]

When Jesus finished speaking with the Nephite twelve disciples on that first day, he told them, “I go unto the Father, and also to show myself unto the lost tribes of Israel, for they are not lost unto the Father, for he knoweth whither he hath taken them” (3 Nephi 17:4). Concerning the Savior’s visit to the lost tribes of Israel, Robert J. Matthews proposed, “When we receive the record of the lost tribes, it will contain an account of Jesus’ visit, showing his body to them with the same unmistakable evidence as he did to the Nephites, whereby they saw him, touched him, heard him, and knew for a certainty that he is the God of Israel and was slain for the sins of the world and raised from the grave as a resurrected personage.”[79]

Conclusion

Jesus’s Good Shepherd sermon contains teachings that were important for his opponents as well as for his disciples who were in Jerusalem. The parable of the good shepherd and the Savior’s subsequent explanations employed imagery from the everyday experience of a shepherd in order to instruct different groups of people who were present. These teachings rebuked a group of Jewish leaders who were claiming leadership of God’s covenant people but who were not properly guiding and protecting them. The Savior’s instructions also informed these Jewish leaders as well as his own disciples that they were not the only ones who would be given the privilege of hearing his voice and the opportunity to know and follow him. When the resurrected Christ visited the Nephites, he told his Nephite disciples of his Good Shepherd sermon and informed them they were his other sheep. He also let them know that although they were indeed his other sheep, there were additional groups of other sheep—each of whom would be given the same privilege and opportunity. Thus, the Good Shepherd’s teachings to his ancient disciples in the Old World and in the New World about other sheep are a testimony to the depth of love that he has for all his sheep, regardless of their circumstances or background.

These teachings also contain relevant information for modern disciples of Jesus Christ, who are also his other sheep. Latter-day disciples are also counseled to hear and follow the voice of Jesus Christ in order to be guided to safe pasture and protected from the spiritual dangers in today’s world. President Russell M. Nelson has urged everyone to “be ever more intentional” in our efforts to “hear Him,” just as God the Father directed Joseph Smith during the First Vision. The reason for this is, as President Nelson taught, “because when we seek to hear—truly hear—His Son, we will be guided to know what to do in any circumstance.”[80]

One of the primary messages of Jesus Christ right now is to assist in the gathering of Israel, as President Nelson has said: “Anytime we do anything that helps anyone—on either side of the veil—to make and keep their covenants with God, we are helping to gather Israel.”[81] Thus, being a latter-day disciple of Jesus Christ today means that we learn how to better and more clearly hear and recognize the voice of the Good Shepherd. As a result of this, we then reach out to his other sheep, wherever they may live and in whatever circumstances we may encounter them, and we encourage and compassionately help them become part of the fold, remain in the fold, or return to the fold. As we do so, we fulfill the Good Shepherd’s mission, which is to gather all his sheep into the fold so “there shall be one fold, and one shepherd” (John 10:16).

Notes

[1] For more references, see D. Kelly Ogden, Where Jesus Walked: The Land and Culture of New Testament Times (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1991), 105–11; and Dana M. Pike, “Jesus, the Great Shepherd-King,” in Celebrating Easter, ed. Richard Neitzel Holzapfel and Thomas A. Wayment (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2007), 61–72.

[2] There are a handful of variants between the New Testament’s Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5–7) and the Book of Mormon’s Sermon at the Temple (3 Nephi 12–14), some of which are a result of the different settings, but the sermons are essentially the same.

[3] See, e.g., Krister Stendahl, “The Sermon on the Mount and Third Nephi,” in Reflections on Mormonism: Judaeo-Christian Parallels, ed. Truman G. Madsen (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1978), 139–54; and John W. Welch, The Sermon at the Temple and the Sermon on the Mount: A Latter-day Saint Approach (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1990), which was later updated and published as John W. Welch, Illuminating the Sermon at the Temple and the Sermon on the Mount: An Approach to 3 Nephi 11–18 and Matthew 5–7 (Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1999).

[4] Robert J. Matthews briefly touches on some of these issues in his chapter “Christ’s Authority, His Other Sheep, and the Redemption of Israel,” in Studies in Scripture, vol. 8, Alma 30 to Moroni, ed. Kent P. Jackson (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1988), 162–66.

[5] Evidence will be presented below that suggests that some of Jesus’s disciples may also have been in the audience when Jesus gave this sermon.

[6] See the discussion in Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John (New York: Doubleday, 1966, 1970), 1:388–90, as well as the conclusion in Gerard Sloyan, John: Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Atlanta: John Knox, 1987), 126.

[7] See, e.g., Gary M. Burge, John (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2000), 287. Among Latter-day Saint commentators, see Monte S. Nyman, Divine Ministry: The First Gospel (Orem, UT: Granite, 2003), 233.

[8] Brown, Gospel According to John, 1:388.

[9] See Burge, John, 286–88; and Gary M. Burge, Jesus and the Jewish Festivals (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012), 88–97. See also C. K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John, 2nd ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978), 368; and John L. Fowles, “The Jewish Lectionary and Book of Mormon Prophecy,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 3, no. 2 (1994): 120–22.

[10] Brown, Gospel According to John, 1:389; emphasis in the original. This is also the conclusion of George R. Beasley-Murray: “We propose that 10:1–21 is set in close association with the narrative of the healing of the blind man in the period following the Festival of Tabernacles, while 10:22–39 falls within the Festival of Dedication, shortly after the preceding events.” John, Word Biblical Commentary 36, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999), 167.

[11] On the previous proposals to reorder the material, see Brown, Gospel According to John, 1:389–90; and Beasley-Murray, John, 166–67.

[12] See, e.g., F. F. Bruce, The Gospel of John (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983), 223–24.

[13] By contrast, the Book of Mormon prophet Alma emphasized the responsibility of the sheep to recognize and follow the voice of the good shepherd; otherwise, “ye are not the sheep of the good shepherd” (Alma 5:38). If this is the case, as Alma stated, “The devil is your shepherd, and ye are of his fold” (v. 39).

[14] Concerning those born with disabilities, Joseph Fielding Smith taught: “We must in all reason conclude that some physical defect at birth is due to some accident or other cause that can be laid at the door of mortal conditions and not to some premortal defect or punishment in the spirit world. When the disciples came to the Savior and asked the question concerning the man who was born blind, the question whether this defect came upon him because of a condition existing in the spirit world, he gave them the assurance that such was not the case. We have reason to believe that every spirit that comes into this world was whole and free from such defects in the preexistence.” Answers to Gospel Questions (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1966), 5:49–50.

[15] The Pharisees’ oral tradition forbade kneading on the Sabbath. See Mishnah, Shabbat 7:2, in The Mishnah, trans. Herbert Danby (New York: Oxford University Press, 1933), 106.

[16] See Sloyan, John, 125; and J. Ramsey Michaels, The Gospel of John (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2010), 577.

[17] For more on ancient shepherding see Oded Borowski, “Animal Husbandry,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Bible and Archaeology, ed. Daniel M. Master (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013), 1:21–24; Oded Borowski, Every Living Thing: Daily Use of Animals in Ancient Israel (Walnut Creek, CA: Alta Mira, 1998), 39–84; and Philip J. King and Lawrence E. Stager, Life in Biblical Israel (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002), 112–14.

[18] Andrew T. Lincoln has noted that “a large enough flock would have required an undershepherd or hired watchman to guard it at night and serve as a gatekeeper.” The Gospel According to St. John (New York: Hendrickson, 2005), 293.

[19] On this, see Burge, John, 289; and Gary M. Burge, The Bible and the Land (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 50–51.

[20] Marianne Meye Thompson, John: A Commentary (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, 2015), 223. J. Ramsay Michaels offers this clarification: “While it is also customary in any sheepherding culture for shepherds to give nicknames to certain sheep with identifiable features or characteristics, the notion that a shepherd calls every sheep ‘by name’ is an exaggeration prompted by the reality to which the imagery points, that is, Jesus’ intimate knowledge of, and love for, ‘his own’ disciples.” Gospel of John, 579; emphasis in the original.

[21] On the importance of knowing an individual’s name as an essential indication of identity and relationship, see Burge, The Bible and the Land, 99–109.

[22] See Barrett, Gospel According to St. John, 370.

[23] Andrew T. Lincoln has pointed out that “sometimes a shepherd might sleep across the opening of a sheep enclosure, thus acting as the door.” Gospel According to St. John, 295.

[24] See also 2 Nephi 31:17: “Wherefore, do the things which I have told you I have seen that your Lord and your Redeemer should do; for, for this cause have they been shown unto me, that ye might know the gate by which ye should enter. For the gate by which ye should enter is repentance and baptism by water; and then cometh a remission of your sins by fire and by the Holy Ghost.”

[25] See also Acts 4:12: “There is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” Compare 2 Nephi 25:20 and 31:21. C. K. Barrett points out frequent use of the ancient imagery of a gate of heaven. See Barrett, Gospel According to St. John, 372.

[26] Recall Paul’s warning to the elders of Ephesus at Miletus: “After my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock” (Acts 20:29).

[27] Michaels, Gospel of John, 585.

[28] For example, Jesus had already mentioned a purpose for this arrival (i.e., his coming): “For judgment I am come into this world” (John 9:39), and he will also say, “I am come that they might have life” (10:10).

[29] See John 8:39–40 (Abraham); 5:46–47 (Moses); and 5:33–35 (John the Baptist).

[30] See Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1994), 195–96.

[31] Thompson, John: A Commentary, 224.

[32] See Scott H. Faulring, Kent P. Jackson, and Robert J. Matthews, eds., Joseph Smith’s New Translation of the Bible: Original Manuscripts (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2004), 460–61.

[33] Thompson, John: A Commentary, 224.

[34] See Michaels, Gospel of John, 582–83.

[35] For a study of the “I am” sayings in the Gospel of John, see Catrin H. Williams, “‘I Am’ or ‘I Am He’? Self-Declaratory Pronouncements in the Fourth Gospel and Rabbinic Tradition,” in Jesus in Johannine Tradition, ed. Robert T. Fortna and Tom Thatcher (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, 2001), 343–52.

[36] For other examples, see Psalms 78:52–54; 79:13; 80:1; 95:7; 100:3; Isaiah 40:11; Ezekiel 34:11–16; and Zechariah 10:3.

[37] On the Messiah as a descendant of David, see 2 Samuel 7:12–17; Isaiah 11:1; and Jeremiah 23:5–6. See also Pike, “Jesus: The Great Shepherd-King,” 77–78.

[38] See, e.g., Lincoln, Gospel According to St. John, 296. J. Ramsey Michaels has concluded that the use of good here is similar to the use of the adjective true in other instances such as “the true Light” (John 1:9), “the true bread” (6:32), and “the true vine” (15:1): it emphasizes “what is ‘real’ or ‘genuine’ in God’s sight.” Gospel of John, 585.

[39] The Book of Mormon prophet Alma pointed out the desire of a good shepherd to destroy the wolf rather than die for the sheep: “For what shepherd is there among you having many sheep doth not watch over them, that the wolves enter not and devour his flock? And behold, if a wolf enter his flock doth he not drive him out? Yea, and at the last, if he can he will destroy him” (Alma 5:59).

[40] Thompson, John: A Commentary, 226. See also Pike, “Jesus, The Great Shepherd-King,” 71.

[41] See Michaels, Gospel of John, 580–81.

[42] Note the recent teaching of President Henry B. Eyring: “President Russell M. Nelson made clear for us that we can ‘see’ the Savior in the temple in the sense that he becomes no longer unknown to us. President Nelson said this: ‘We understand Him. We comprehend His work and His glory. And we begin to feel the infinite impact of His matchless life.’” “I Love to See the Temple,” Liahona, May 2021, 30, quoting from Teachings of Russell M. Nelson (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2018), 369.

[43] Recall from the original parable that “he calleth his own sheep by name . . . and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice” (John 10:3–4; emphasis added).

[44] J. Ramsey Michaels concluded: “They do not know what Jesus is telling them. Their inability to see (9:41) is compounded by an inability to hear or understand.” Gospel of John, 581; emphasis in original.

[45] The New International Version translates John 10:16 thus: “I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.”

[46] For example, see Beasley-Murray, John, 171; Barrett, Gospel According to St. John, 376; Burge, John, 292; Lincoln, Gospel According to St. John, 298; Michaels, Gospel of John, 588; and Sloyan, John, 131. For other interpretations having to do with the complex reconstructed history of the Johannine community, see Raymond E. Brown, “‘Other Sheep Not of This Fold’: The Johannine Perspective on Christian Diversity in the First Century,” Journal of Biblical Literature 97, no. 1 (1978): 5–22.

[47] The King James Version translates the Greek word ethnos as “nations”—but the meaning is “Gentiles.”

[48] Recall that Jehovah promised Abraham that “in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed” (Genesis 12:3). The Book of Abraham provides more details of this promise: “Thou shalt be a blessing unto thy seed after thee, that in their hands they shall bear this ministry and Priesthood unto all nations; . . . for I give unto thee a promise that this right shall continue in thee, and in thy seed after thee…shall all the families of the earth be blessed, even with the blessings of the Gospel” (Abraham 2:9, 11). Thus, during the mortal ministry of Jesus, Abraham’s descendants would be given the first opportunity to accept the gospel and to bless the earth with it.

[49] In the Gospel of John, there is a reference to a group of Greeks who seek after Jesus (see John 12:20–22). In the synoptic Gospels there are several examples of Jesus interacting with Gentiles, including the Roman centurion (see Matthew 8:5–13), non-Jews living in the Decapolis (see 8:28–34), and the Syro-Phoenician woman (see 15:21–28).

[50] Namely, the Samaritan woman and the people of the city Sychar (see John 4:4–42).

[51] For example, Philip taught Samaritans (Acts 8:5–25), Peter taught the Roman centurion Cornelius (Acts 10:25–48), and Paul devoted his missionary journeys to teaching Gentiles throughout Asia Minor and Greece.

[52] Nephi taught this principle as well: “For behold, I say unto you that as many of the Gentiles as will repent are the covenant people of the Lord; and as many of the Jews as will not repent shall be cast off; for the Lord covenanteth with none save it be with them that repent and believe in his Son, who is the Holy One of Israel” (2 Nephi 30:2).

[53] Thompson, John: A Commentary, 227. See also Richard Neitzel Holzapfel and Thomas A. Wayment, Making Sense of the New Testament: Timely Insights and Timeless Messages (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2010), 165.

[54] On these words in John 11:52 being a commentary on Caiaphas’s “prophecy” and not part of the words of Caiaphas, see Frank F. Judd Jr., “Interpreting Caiaphas’s ‘Prophecy’ of the Savior’s Death,” in Behold the Lamb of God: An Easter Celebration, ed. Richard Neitzel Holzapfel, Frank F. Judd Jr., and Thomas A. Wayment (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2008), 87–104.

[55] Holzapfel and Wayment, Making Sense of the New Testament, 165.

[56] See, e.g., Richard L. Bushman, Believing History: Latter-day Saint Essays, ed. Reid L. Neilson and Jed Woodworth (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004), 128; and Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith and the Beginnings of Mormonism (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1984), 138.

[57] The prophet Mormon mentions that “the Lord truly did teach the people, for the space of three days” (3 Nephi 26:13). The first visit is recorded in 3 Nephi 11:8 to 18:39, the second in 19:15 to 26:15, and the third in 27:2 to 28:12.

[58] See 3 Nephi 11:18–22 and 12:1.

[59] See Gaye Strathearn, “Disciples, Twelve Nephite,” in Book of Mormon Reference Companion, ed. Dennis L. Largey (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2003), 234. On the differing responsibilities of the two groups, see Monte S. Nyman, “The Judgment Seat of Christ,” in The Book of Mormon: Fourth Nephi through Moroni, From Zion to Destruction, ed. Monte S. Nyman and Charles D. Tate Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1995), 199–213.

[60] Jesus quotes this again in verse 21.

[61] See Nicholas J. Frederick, “The Book of Mormon and Its Redaction of the King James New Testament: A Further Evaluation of the Interaction between the New Testament and the Book of Mormon,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 27 (2018): 44–87.

[62] Recall that when the resurrected Savior was teaching the Nephites, the New Testament had not been written or compiled yet. On the complexity of quotations and allusions to the Bible in the Book of Mormon, see Nicholas J. Frederick, The Bible, Mormon Scripture, and the Rhetoric of Allusivity (Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2016).

[63] Brant A. Gardner has proposed there were no sheep in the New World at this time among the Nephites. For him, this means that the Savior “must have communicated this information using culturally familiar imagery for his Nephite audience.” Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon (Sandy, UT: Greg Kofford Books, 2007), 5:476. Because Ether 9:18 mentions sheep among the Jaredites, not all scholars agree with Gardner’s assessment. For a discussion of the complexity of these issues, see Wade E. Miller and Matthew Roper, “Animals in the Book of Mormon: Challenges and Perspectives,” BYU Studies Quarterly 56, no. 4 (2017): 133–75.

[64] Note, however, that all the ancient manuscripts and versions except the Latin Vulgate have flock instead of fold. The King James Version follows the Latin Vulgate in its translation. See Metzger, Textual Commentary, 196.

[65] See Royal Skousen, Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon (Provo, UT: FARMS, 2008), 5:3398–99.

[66] During his Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem, for example, a “very great multitude” of supporters accompanied him (Matthew 21:8). For a discussion of this, see Nyman, Divine Ministry, 233. In light of this, Elder Gerald N. Lund taught: “The primary instigators of the plot to kill the Savior were the Jewish religious leaders. They were the ones the Master and his teachings most threatened, and they were the ones who engineered the arrest and the trial before the Sanhedrin and who finally badgered the weak and vacillating Pilate into pronouncing the death sentence. . . . The Jewish leaders, not the Jewish people as a whole, and not even all of the leaders, were the ones who plotted Jesus’ death.” Jesus Christ, Key to the Plan of Salvation (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1991), 31–32.

[67] On the use of the term “the Jews” in the Gospel of John to typically mean the Jewish leaders, see Daniel J. Boyarin, “The Ioudaioi in John and the Prehistory of ‘Judaism,’” in Pauline Conversations in Context: Essays in Honor of Calvin J. Roetzel, ed. J. C. Anderson et al. (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002): 216–39.

[68] Jeffrey R. Holland, Christ and the New Covenant (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1997), 266. On this issue, see also Hugh W. Nibley, An Approach to the Book of Mormon, 3rd ed. (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1988), 325–28.

[69] President Russell M. Nelson has pointed out that this is one of the notable “biblical doctrines that are clarified by scriptures of the Restoration.” “Scriptural Witnesses,” Ensign or Liahona, November 2007, 45, 46n42.

[70] Gardner, Second Witness, 5:476–77.

[71] This inquiry is repeated in verse 19 as well: “Yea, why will he not show himself in this land as well as in the land of Jerusalem?”

[72] See Matthew 4:25 and 15:21.

[73] See also Matthew 15:21–28 and 8:28–34.

[74] Matthews, “Christ’s Authority,” 164; emphasis added.

[75] Paul mentions that he was a Pharisee (see Philippians 3:5). See also Acts 23:6 and 26:5.

[76] D. Kelly Ogden and Andrew S. Skinner have further suggested, “No doubt God has had various groups of righteous ‘sheep’ on this planet and on many other worlds.” Verse by Verse: The Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2011), 2:182.

[77] Nephi’s brother Jacob also taught: “The Lord God has led away from time to time from the house of Israel, according to his will and pleasure. And now behold, the Lord remembereth all them who have been broken off” (2 Nephi 10:22).

[78] Concerning the Savior’s prophecy in 2 Nephi 29 and Nephi’s prophecy in 1 Nephi 13, Brant A. Gardner concluded, “Both Nephi₁ and the Savior are speaking of the same events and, interestingly enough, use some of the same language: ‘one fold, one shepherd.’” Second Witness, 5:479.

[79] Matthews, “Christ’s Authority,” 166. Elder Bruce R. McConkie expressed his view this way: “Did not Jesus visit [the lost tribes of Israel] after he ministered among the Nephites? Answer: Of course he did, in one or many places as suited his purposes. He assembled them together then in exactly the same way he gathered the Nephites in the land Bountiful so that they too could hear his voice and feel the prints of the nails in his hands and in his feet. Of this there can be no question. And we suppose that he also called twelve apostles and established his kingdom among them even as he did in Jerusalem and in the Americas. Why should he deal any differently with one branch of Israel than with another?” The Millennial Messiah: The Second Coming of the Son of Man (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1982), 216. For more on this issue, see Kent P. Jackson, Lost Tribes and Last Days: What Modern Revelation Tells Us about the Old Testament (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2005), 65–68.

[80] Russell M. Nelson, “Hear Him,” Ensign or Liahona, May 2020, 89.

[81] Russell M. Nelson, “Let God Prevail,” Ensign or Liahona, November 2020, 92–93.