Came across this tonight. Wondered what you all thought of this–especially since Pastor/Teacher/Prophet Silva doesn’t permit comments from his sycophants readers detractors congregants disciples anyone at his ‘blog’:
[concerning John 10: 1 — "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter by the door into the fold of the sheep, but climbs up some other way, he is a thief and a robber."]
The sentence before us is a powerful and humbling one. That is [sic.] condemns the Jewish teachers of our Lord’s time all men can see. There was no “door” in their ministry. They taught nothing rightly about Messiah. They rejected Christ Himself when He appeared,—but all men do not see that the sentence condemns thousands of so-called Christian teachers, quite as much as the leaders and teachers of the Jews.
Thousands of ordained men in the present day know nothing whatever of Christ, except His name. They have not entered “the door” themselves, and they are unable to show it to others. Well would it be for Christendom if it were more widely known, and more seriously considered! Unconverted ministers are the dry-rot of the Church. “When the blind lead the blind” both must fall in the ditch.
If we know the value of a man’s ministry, we must never fail to ask, Where is the Lamb? Where is the door? Does he bring forth Christ, and give Him his rightful place? (Expository Thoughts on the Gospels, Vol. 3, 176)
J.C. Ryle
Thousands?
Could you please provide some statistical proof of such an assertion? I’m genuinely interested because the way I see it, it’s more like thousands of ordained men and women are actually leaving the ministry every year because people like you, who also inhabit, occupy, and wear-out the pew, have no concept of what it actually means to be and do the gospel.
So, in the interest of the Gospel, could you please provide some actual evidence to validate and support your assertion?
(PS–I think Ryle, for all his erudition, has quite missed the point of John 10:1 (2-6) and, consequently, Pastor Silva has erred too in his haste to make some larger point validating his own ‘ministry’ while running down and passing judgment upon the ministries of others. For all his talk about pointing to the Lamb, and the Door, and bringing forth Christ to his rightful place, he, Ryle, is doing exactly the opposite. The passage is, actually, demonstrating how Jesus is the expected one, Messiah; the Good Shepherd.
It is rather dangerous to extract verse 1 from its greater context of verses 1-6, indeed chapter 10 entirely. The focus of these verses is not the false teachers that are leading sheep blindly, even though they are clearly in the background (say, Ezekiel 34), but Jesus’ claim to be the True Shepherd whom the sheep recognize and follow. This passage is not pointing to ‘false teachers’ or ‘unconverted ministers’ of our day, or even in Jesus’ day, but to the True Shepherd of every day. Ryle has made a common hermeneutical mistake by attaching meaning to a verse that he has extracted from its context. Out of context, it can mean anything he wants it to mean. In it’s context it has but one meaning: The Sheep recognize the good shepherd and follow him; those same sheep reject all false shepherds, Messiahs. Turns out sheep aren’t so dumb after all. “Christ’s sheep inevitably follow him” (DA Carson, The Gospel of John, 383).
I have just a couple of points about Ryle’s application. First, Ryle says that “Thousands of ordained men in the present day know nothing whatever of Christ, except His name.” This may well be true, but that is not what Jesus says here, nor is it on his mind. Jesus says his sheep recognize him, his voice, follow him, and will not follow the voice of strangers at all. Ryle asserts a negative while Jesus is asserting a positive–and one quite opposite of Ryle’s point.
Jesus as ‘Good Shepherd’ here stands in contrast not with teachers or ministers–whether converted or un-converted, but with other shepherds, dangerous shepherds, who are rejected by those who are truly Jesus’ sheep. He, the Good Shepherd, is the one, he says, who ‘lays down his life for the sheep’; he is the Promised Davidic Shepherd: “The mingling of the foci–the promised shepherd is the Lord, or the promised shepherd is the Lord’s servant David–is peculiarly appropriate in a book where the Word is God, and the Word is God’s emissary, distinguishable from him” (DA Carson, The Gospel of John, 382). Thieves and robbers are not the Good Shepherd.
Second, Ryle writes, “They have not entered “the door” themselves, and they are unable to show it to others.” But that is not what Jesus is talking about, is it? The one who enters through the door in verse 2 is neither ‘converted ministers’ nor ‘unconverted ministers’ nor anyone else for that matter, but the Good Shepherd. Jesus said, “But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep…I am the Good Shepherd.” Jesus is talking about himself! The contrast is not between ‘converted’ and ‘un-converted’ ministers, but rather between the True Davidic Shepherd who was promised by God and those pretenders to the position, of whom there were, and are, many. Those who are in our day, and were in Ryle’s day, ministers, have nothing to do whatsoever with John 10:1-6. The passage is about Jesus–the True Shepherd who enters through the door and is recognized and followed by his sheep.
23 I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them; he will tend them and be their shepherd. 24 I the LORD will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the LORD have spoken. (Ezekiel 34)
Now this is not to say there are not ‘un-converted’ preachers or bad shepherds of the sheep. It is to say that Ryle’s and Silva’s use of John 10:1 to demonstrate it is a decidedly wrong application of the Scripture. Paul warns of false teachers in the church, as does Jesus. But not in John 10. I hope that clears up Ryle’s muddled and confused and decidedly wrong exegesis of this passage of Scripture. And I hope it helps Pastor Silva too as both he and Ryle are dangerously wrong because neither one is pointing to Christ, the Lamb, or bringing forth Christ and giving him his rightful place in their blanket condemnation of ‘thousands’.)
29 Comments(+Add)
Sometimes the shepherds are called to protect the sheep from wolves. And those wolves are not always shepherds who have expanded parameters concerning who is a wolf; sometimes these wolves really are false teachers and leaders who spring up “from among yourselves”.
Let us be gracious and humble but vigilant as well.
“To every thing there is a season…a time to rend and a time to sew; a time to keep silence and a time to speak…”
“…and a time to warn…” (RF)
Adventures in missing the point
ep, but climbs up some other way, he is a thief and a robber."]
I think you would agree, Jerry, that this is within the passage where Jesus proclaims himself both as the door and as the good shepherd. I think Ryle’s interpretation is spot on, and you missed the point. If you enter in to the sheep fold, as it were, by any means but by the gate (Jesus) you are a thief and a robber. I do not know how many ministers or professing Christians this is, but I can name a few that I have observed personally and over the internet that would qualify. There are many, as Paul said, that are ear ticklers, having a form of godliness, but lacking the power, and, of course, Jesus Himself noted in the last days perilous times would come, and that there would be a great falling away, a great apostasy, and that many would come in His name but would be false prophets. These are those people that are the thieves and the robbers John and JC Ryle are referring to- both in the pulpit and in the pews.
I agree again, heartily. Who was Jesus speaking to? He was speaking to the crowd, with Pharisees present, in the midst of what the ESV study Bible calls the festival cycle, where the persecution of the Jewish leaders was intensifying. All who came before Him, that is, those false prophets of his day as well as the false prophets of old, as well as the Pharisees and other Jewish leaders, were thieves and robbers, and the true sheep who knew Jesus’ voice did not listen to them. (John 10:8)
in regards to the Pharisees and the false believers. They know not the voice of God, because they are in the darkness. Only those who believe in the one true God can hear and comprehend the words of God. In the positive, the true convert can recognize and put into practice the words of God. They know the voice of their shepherd.
This can be directly applied to today with the example of many of the emergent camp, the purpose driven camp, and many old-line denominations. (It is across all denominations, really) The true sheep know the voice of God, a true consistent voice that Jesus has mentioned before (John
That also can be borne out by simple examination, by the word of God, looking into the fruits of the ministry. First, who does the ministry point to? Who is getting the credit? I submit to you, Jerry, that many of the purpose driven/ seeker sensitive churches out there today love people so much that they toss Christ out of the equation and make it all about the best media, the best entertainment, the most relevant topics, and questions about Jesus passing gas or not, and whether or not oral sex is biblical. Did Jesus die for this? Does Jesus live for this? Who is getting the glory? Those pastors and their brilliant plans to fill up their superdomes. Nothing whatever about the glory of God, the penal substitutionary atonement of Christ by which He was punished by His Father for our sins. Nothing about holy living, being living sacrifices- because that doesn’t sell- except by the true sheep. These thieves and robbers are appropriately called goat herders, because that is who they attract.
Amen. who do they attract? People who want to be ministered to their own perceived needs rather than ministering to God, worshipping Him alone, not themselves and their needs. Sheep seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness- and the promise is that all these other things will be added unto you. AMEN!
I would say that Ryle’s assessment was accurate for His time and for ours. A ministry that focusses on everything that is opposite of the word of God cannot be of God. Any ministry that says that unrighteousness, fornication, lying, stealing, drunkeness, homosexuality…etc is a-ok stands in opposition of the Word of God. Any faith that adds works of righteousness to salvation is filled with Goats- Justification is by grace alone through faith alone- not by works lest any man will boast. Anybody who adds anything to grace is ananthema, who says that justification was not completed by Jesus at the cross and affirmed by God through the resurrection, and therefore you must do works (baptism, communion, confirmation, church attendance, specific sabbaths) in order to be fully justified is dead wrong and likely unconverted, and at the very least deceiving many into Hell.
So I say, Jerry, that Ryle was being kind to say thousands. I think I might be accurate in saying most.
OMG, Pastorboy disagrees with me and agrees with Pastorsilva.
Newsflash.
I don’t agree with Ryle because that is not what Jesus is talking about in this passage at all. Jesus is talking about himself.
That point can only be made if this passage is extracted from its larger context. The only way it applies to ministers, whether converted or un-converted, is if those ministers have set themselves up in opposition to Jesus Christ or made themselves The Gate or The Shepherd instead of Jesus.
I don’t think you can make that case. You are, as usual, reactionary because you want to be. You haven’t done a good job of assessing either Scripture (John 10) or Ryle. Sorry, but I don’t agree with you at all. And what is shocking is that you claim to be a pastor! Oh, the irony is thick.
I’m sorry John, but you don’t believe this. Nor does Silva. Nor does Ingrid. If you believed in grace as you say and as you define it, most of the blogs on the internet wouldn’t exist. I say it again: You don’t believe this for a minute.
One final thought, John, in case you missed it. Here is how I ended my post:
So I don’t disagree with the statement per se. I disagree strongly with the idea that such a thought can be drawn from John 10:1.
#3,4,5
Whatever.
You are dead wrong, this is not just 10:1, this is 10, and a lot of John’s Gospel where Jesus- yes Jesus- calls out the false prophet, the Pharisee, the scribe, and those who claim to believe. It is not too far of a bridge to cross to apply it to pastors and to modern-day evangelicals.
Ah. Yes. Unless you prescribe to YOUR atonement theory you are not about Christ.
John,
Concerning your statement in #6 that it is not just about 10:1, but 10, I refer you to the first line of my second paragraph in the PS section of my post:
So, as you can see, I have not pulled this exegesis out of context. Mr Ryle and Mr Silva are the only two who are commenting on 10:1 alone; not me.
jerry
I’m fairly certain that Ryle would not be all that fond of being quoted by ADMs. This was a man who took particular concern of those who occupied the pulpit. He trained them, cared for them, and pastored them rather than raining loveless antagonism from afar.
There’s two key ways in which Ryle differs from ADMs:
And
Much like other men often quoted by ADMs such as Luther, Tozier, and Spurgeon, if Ryle were still alive he’d be excoriated by ADMs for his “compromise” which would be evidenced by his large church, and graciousness towards his fellow clergyman (not to mention being a part of the Anglican church).
Bo,
Thanks for the insightful reply. I did read another article by Ryle about pastors before I wrote this, and I have to agree with you: He’s not their friend in this case.
jerry
09
The Anglican church is awesome; not the modern Episcopal version, mind you. And Ryle was writing about the Anglican church of his time…hmmm…
PB,
I doubt very much you know much of anything about the Anglican church beyond a few choice quotes you’ve cherry picked here and there given how extraordinarily Catholic it was for a very, very long time.
Bo Diaz,
I am a baptized and confirmed Anglican.
Thank you very little.
Anything you need to know, I have my Book of Common Prayer here and some choice church history books.
I openly do not care what any denomination believes, today or way back. What do YOU believe?
PB,
That you know nothing of the church you were baptized in makes you no different from the vast majority of people in the baptismal rolls of the Church of England.
“Choice history books”… yeah I bet.
We were baptized into Christ, not a church. Baptismal rolls and church membership are man made formalities that are used to control and substantiate their existance.
OK, here is a post which is…well…absurd to the point of risible. Besides taking something simple and constructing a theological labrynth, I could not help but notice this swipe at Phil Johnson.
Of course the post title, “The Pernicious Error of Theological Academic Intellectualism”, becomes ironic when the post itself drills caverns of doctrinal intellectualism that we Arminians find inane and without gospel purpose. How is it that men have taken the glorious simplicity that is the gospel of Jesus Christ and created a doctrinal monstrosity?
Calvinism now has more flavors than Baskin Robbins. It’s like explaining how to place a plug into a wall socket using a one thousand page manual. We Arminians have three basic “clubs”.
The shallow club.
The Biblical club.
The works club.
Calvinism is way too complicated and necessitates far too much intellectual energy than I am willing to give, which reveals its unscriptural essence. These are not unconverted ministers; many are now doctrinal professors that strain at gnats and swallow camels. Five point, four point, 3.5 point, and 6 point Calvinists are consumed with over sifting the nano-parts of doctrinal truth.
However, I think I would have become a Calvinist had it not been for Calvinists.
#17
That is terrible writing. Forget whatever the point is/was. the style is awful
#18
At least his writing has a point. Your Pastor’s writing is simply an attempt to obfuscate the truth. He likely is one of those Ryle points to.
Wow, John. That was a really profound point. Thank you for that keen insight.
John you truly are a tool for the Lord.
all the more to regret that they are so poorly written
I object to writings with 5 points.
I know all you want to make plans to be at this conference. It’s called,
With
JesusCalvin in the theatre of God.I can’t wait!!
Poor Piper,
He was rebuked by our ever present ODM’s.
Uh…oh sounds almost new agey to me. Drama, relevant, always on display???? Next thing you know they’re going to encourage us to meditate on the word of God.
What do I care what vision of God that Calvin lived?
We do not need the vision of some man; we need to see Jesus and see as does Jesus. What would happen if the followers of Jesus became the greatest friend sinners ever knew, and the word spread that if a sinner was in trouble or came to the end of himself, he could find hope in a follower of Jesus Christ?
What would happen if instead of taking delight in the names God gives wicked men , we seriously take up the ministry of reconciliation and stand in the gap for the blind goats that are precious in the eyes of our Lord? What if we gave our lives for the lost instead of using our tongues to both attack the lost and praise ourselves?
Why is the “ministry” of the “watchman” seem so empty of redemption and humility? Why do we lift up men and not Christ?
The whole world is thirsty and yet we are bottles and not rivers. The whole world lives in darkness and yet we are flashlights and not beacons. The whole world is dead and yet we are condemners and not life sharers.
Sinners do not need Calvin or Luther or Whitefield or Bell or MacArthur or most of all they do not need Frueh. They need Jesus and they do not realize He lives right beside them.
A child cries from hunger.
Even so come Lord Jesus.
A gay man is dying.
Even so come Lord Jesus.
A family is dividing.
Even so come Lord Jesus.
A teenage girl sells herself.
Even so come Lord Jesus.
A homeless man begs.
Even so come Lord Jesus.
A drug addict gets another fix.
Even so come Lord Jesus.
A young man wants to kill himself.
Even so come Lord Jesus.
Another unborn baby dies.
Even so come Lord Jesus.
Sin is exalted.
Even so come Lord Jesus.
“But I have already come”, Jesus says, “Now you go, they are waiting for you to come”.