Now the feast of the dedication was celebrating at Jerusalem, and it was winter.
John gives both a date and a season: the Lord is in Jerusalem for a festival the law of Moses never commanded, and the weather is cold. Why record a man-made feast at all, and why mention the winter?
This festival was not one of the feasts God appointed in the law. It remembered the day the temple was cleansed after a foreign king had defiled it.
A yearly feast celebrating the dedication of the temple by Judas Maccabeus after Antiochus Epiphanes polluted it, 165 B.C. It began on the 25th of the month Chisleu and lasted eight days. The dedication of the temple under Ezra was on the 3rd of Adar, Ezra 6:15-16; but that was not made a yearly feast. The dedication of the temple under Solomon was at the Feast of Tabernacles. 1 Kings 8:2; 2 Chronicles 5:3.
The wording John chooses is worth noticing, and so is the timing of the month.
The Maccabean Jews set up the "Feast of Dedication," also called the "Feast of Lights." It remembered the re-dedication of the temple after the victories of Judas over Antiochus Epiphanes, who had desecrated it. The Chanuka generally falls in the month of Chisleu, or December, and so the mention of "winter." Notice that the Evangelist does not speak of it as a "feast" — that is, as if it had divine sanction.
Kelly is reading the original wording, which names the dedication without calling it a feast. English versions such as the ESV supply the word.
People have used this verse to argue that Jesus endorsed observances added by men. One writer answers that the text says only where He was, not what He joined in.
Many of us know the attempt to use the opening of verse 22 to support tradition and human authority in divine things. But it is useless. Here we learn nothing about our Lord taking part in any observances of men, whatever they may have been. We learn only that He was then in Jerusalem, winter as it was, and walking in Solomon's porch.
The porch still carried Solomon's name. But the temple the Lord walked in was not Solomon's temple.
The feast of the dedication of the temple came two months after the events just told, yet the connection with them is clear. The dedication being remembered was not Solomon's. It was the re-dedication by Judas Maccabaeus, after Antiochus had profaned the temple. Yet the Lord walking in Solomon's porch (or colonnade) is surely meaningful: it carries us back to that first dedication, if only by contrast. The massive foundations of Solomon's structure remained, but only in ruin... The glory was gone, the Living Voice that had once spoken to them was silent now. The ark and mercy seat were gone — the throne of the divine Inhabitant, where the covering blood should have been sprinkled.
Consider who was walking in that temple, and how the priests treated Him.
And now we have the surpassingly wonderful PERSON walking there. Shall we see the priests paying homage to the One greater than the temple, greater than the sacrifices, greater than the types and shadows?... And yet He was unknown. He was insulted, called a Samaritan, an outcast, charged with being demon-possessed, and no priest did Him homage. No wonder we have the sentence, "It was winter." Truly it was spiritual winter. Not a leaf on the dead tree of ritualism; the shell had no kernel, the profession had no reality, ordinances gave no satisfaction.
Commentators read the season as a picture of the nation's state.
"It was winter." Yes, "winter!" All was now over with Israel. They had ignored their springtime of mercy and refused the light of their summer. They closed their eyes to the long lingering shadows of their autumn, and now their "winter" had come. Their harvest was past and their summer ended.
Yet another writer points the same picture forward, because seasons change.
In Solomon's porch walked One whose glory far surpassed that of the famous king. Yet He was unwanted and unacknowledged... The Holy Spirit notes, "It was winter." This describes the condition spiritually as well as physically. When Israel is in a better frame of mind, summer will come, for themselves and for all nations.
Earlier in the chapter the Shepherd gathers His sheep. What is winter to them?
It may be "winter" outside (v. 22), but not for those within who are resting on Jesus' breast. No chilling blasts are felt inside the circle of the Father's love.
- Feast — A December festival remembering the cleansing of the temple under Judas Maccabeus. The law never commanded it, and John does not treat it as having divine sanction.
- Porch — Solomon's name still stood over the building. But the glory, the ark and the mercy seat were gone.
- Winter — The word fits the month and the nation. Their religion kept its anniversaries, but the tree was bare and the shell had no kernel.
- Person — On the temple's greatest day, the One greater than the temple walked there unknown, and no priest honoured Him.
- Warmth — One writer looks on to a summer for Israel. Meanwhile no cold reaches those inside the Father's love.
And Jesus walked in the temple in the porch of Solomon.
A colonnade is a covered walkway; this one stood on the temple grounds and carried the name of Solomon, Israel's greatest king. Commentators read that name — and the winter John notes — as a picture of the nation's state, and of the One walking among them unrecognised.
The mention of winter carries two meanings. It also sets the Lord's own walk against the deadness around Him.
In John 10:22-23 our blessed Lord was in the temple in Solomon's porch. The temple was a magnificent structure, with all its show of religious service, and the feast of dedication was in progress. Yet "it was winter." That was true of the season of the year. It was also a perfect description of the nation's condition. Where there was no life spiritually there was no movement toward God, for all its fair show. But there is something else to notice: "Jesus walked." What a delight for the Father to look down on His beloved Son in that winter scene! In Him alone He found something for Himself. There was One who walked for His glory, where every step gave off a sweet fragrance in contrast to the corruption.
The occasion was not one of the appointed feasts of Israel, and its date explains the mention of winter.
The Maccabean Jews set up the "Feast of Dedication," also called the "Feast of Lights." It marked the rededication of the Temple after the victories of Judas over Antiochus Epiphanes, who had desecrated it... It generally falls in the month of Chisleu, or December, and so the mention of "winter." Notice that John does not speak of it as a "feast." He does not treat it as if it had Divine sanction.
The feast marked a later dedication, not Solomon's own. The name on the porch sets the two eras side by side.
Yet the Lord walking in Solomon's porch, or colonnade, is significant. It carries us back to that first dedication, if only by way of contrast. The massive foundations of Solomon's building remained, but only in ruin. However much people tried to repair it, it testified to the failure and ruin that had come in... As it stood, it was the very witness of their showy rule-keeping, which covered up the decay and desolation underneath. The Glory had departed. The Living Voice that once spoke to them was silent now. The Ark and Mercy-seat were gone — the place for the sprinkling of the covering blood, the Throne of God who dwelt there.
There are plain reasons for the shelter, and for the crowd that gathered round Him.
It was winter, and Jesus was walking in the Temple in Solomon's porch. The season of the year may account for that. Further, we gather from the mention of this porch in Acts 3:11 and 5:12 that it was a place where people gathered. While He was walking there the Jews came round Him. With a show of earnest desire they said to Him: "How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly."
A question hangs over the scene. Would the priests honour the One walking among them?
And now we have the surpassingly wonderful PERSON walking there. Shall we have the priests paying homage to the One greater than the Temple, greater than the sacrifices, greater than the types and shadows? All this that lay before His eye was but the shadow. He was the SUBSTANCE. Without Him they would never have been, just as a shadow could not exist without the substance that casts it.
Much happened in that one spot before the Lord left it.
Solomon's Porch saw the remarkable blessing given to the sheep, and the definite condemnation of the unbelievers. It also heard that wonderful announcement of the Lord's oneness with the Father. And it was the place He left, to go back to where the testimony first began. It showed, in no small measure, the moral glory of His person, the stubbornness of His foes, and the end of His work among that guilty nation.
- Season — the December cold explains the covered walkway. Winter also pictures the nation: full religious show, no life.
- Setting — the feast marked a later rededication of the temple. John never calls it a feast God appointed.
- Shadow — the name "Solomon" recalled a glory now gone. No Ark, no Mercy-seat, no Voice: only massive foundations and patched ruin.
- Substance — the temple and its sacrifices were only the shadow. The One walking there cast it, and the priests gave Him no homage.
- Sheep — that same porch heard the blessing given to His sheep and His oneness with the Father. There His work among that nation closed.
The Jews therefore surrounded him, and said to him, Until when dost thou hold our soul in suspense? If thou art the Christ, say [so] to us openly.
The Jews crowd around Jesus in the temple at the Feast of Dedication and demand that He say plainly whether He is the Christ. They had already watched His signs, so two questions press: what did they mean by their "suspense," and why does His answer turn to what they are?
John records the time of year, and commentators read it as more than weather. The feast being kept was not one of the feasts given in the law of Moses.
This conversation takes place at the feast of the dedication (22-30). The law never commanded that feast. People added it to celebrate the cleansing of the temple after Antiochus Epiphanes defiled it. So it would suggest the reformation of the natural man. Note that we are told it was winter — a chilling time spiritually, for the air was full of unbelief.
The place carried its own irony. Solomon's porch recalled the temple's first glory, while the building standing there told a different story.
How much this second temple, again renewed with great magnificence by the bloody hands of the Edomite Herod, lacked of what the old possessed! As it stood, it was the very witness of their pretentious legalism, covering up the decay and desolation underneath. The Glory was departed, the Living Voice that had once spoken to them was silent now.
Their demand shows the state they were in.
The Jews had in fact rejected the Lord upon full evidence. They then, with the consciousness that they were going wrong, gather round Him, saying, How long do you distract our minds, deprive us of our ease of mind? "If you are the Christ, tell us plainly"; we wish to be set at ease about it. They felt they were astray.
Notice where they put the fault.
Men often charge God with being the cause of their unbelief. Their difficulties, they say, need clearer light than God has given. If He gave more, they would be convinced and believe. It is a worthless excuse, and it will not stand up in God's judgment. So here the Jews spoke as if they wanted full assurance that the Lord's claim to be the Messiah was valid: "How long will You keep us in suspense?" The hindrance, they said, lay with Him.
His reply is simply that He had told them. Writers point back to the long record of teaching already given in this Gospel.
Take only His words recorded in John 5, John 6, and John 8. No testimony could be plainer or richer. But testimony does not always last. God gives it freely, fully, and patiently. He may then turn it away from those who reject it, and to those who will hear.
He had also answered them in a way that did not depend on words.
They appeal to Him: "How long will You keep us in suspense? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly." But what assurance would that give them? A man may say a great many fine things about himself, but on what ground is he to be believed? Had He not told them very plainly? And yet they had not believed. He had told them by the signs He had done under their eyes.
They wanted information about Him. He gave them a diagnosis of themselves.
Jesus said at once that He had told them plainly. His works, just as much as His words, had given plain witness to Him. Then He told them plainly that their unbelief had put the veil over their eyes. The evidence was there plainly enough, but they could not see it... they were not "My sheep," though sheep within the Jewish fold. They were spiritually dead, and so they did not respond. So Jesus told them plainly not only the truth about Himself but the truth about themselves.
People still make the same complaint today, and the answer still rests on the Word of God.
The Jews came to the Lord with a false suggestion. They said, "How long will You keep us in suspense? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly." His answer was, "I told you." He gave them His spoken word which was the Word of God... Today we have not the spoken Word of God. It stopped when the inspired apostles passed from the scene. The written Word of God remains and is the antidote to all doubts. It alone has authority.
- Winter — the season matched the scene: a feast the law never commanded, and an air thick with unbelief.
- Suspense — they said He was unsettling them. Commentators see the unease of people who knew they were going wrong.
- Excuse — they blamed God for their doubt and asked for clearer light. That plea will not stand in judgment.
- Evidence — He had already answered twice: in His words in John 5, 6 and 8, and in the signs they watched Him do.
- Diagnosis — He told them plainly, but about themselves: unbelief was the veil, and they were not His sheep. The cure for doubt is His Word, not a fresh proof.
Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye do not believe. The works which I do in my Father's name, these bear witness concerning me
The Jews surround Jesus in the temple and demand a plain answer: is He the Christ? He replies that He has told them already, and that His works have spoken for Him too.
The Jews blame Him for their unbelief, as though He had been unclear. One writer notes how common that excuse still is:
Men often charge God with being the cause of their unbelief. Their difficulties, they say, need clearer light than God has given. If He gave more, they would be convinced, and believe — a vain excuse, which will not stand when God judges. So here the Jews seemed to want to be fully sure that the Lord's claim to be the Messiah was valid. They spoke as follows: "How long will you keep us in suspense?" The hindrance, as they declared, lay with Him. Why not, then, speak plainly, and remove our uncertainty?
The Lord's first answer is that the telling has already happened. Commentators point to earlier chapters of this Gospel as the record. They also note that such testimony does not last for ever:
"Jesus answered, I told you, and you do not believe." Take only His words recorded in John 5, John 6, and John 8. A plainer and richer testimony could not be. But testimony does not always last. It is given freely, fully, patiently, and may then be turned aside from those who reject it to those who hear.
The second half of the verse turns from words to deeds. Notice the pronoun, and the name attached to it:
Notice the pronoun "I": "I do in my Father's name." It matters greatly here. It is characteristic of the Son, and it shows His Person. Elsewhere He says, "The Father who dwells in me does His works." But He and His Father are one. … The works were done in His Father's name, for that was His Sonship, and so they bore witness of Him. Done in His own name, they would have witnessed nothing. Done in His Father's name, they witnessed "concerning me" — this Sonship, and glory in that character.
These works showed something about the Father Himself:
They could not deny those works of mercy, grace, love and power, done by the Righteous, Just, Holy and True One. They showed the Father's Name. They made clear what the Father is to those who had eyes to see, and to our faith today; for, as we have said, He came in His Father's Name.
They asked for plain speech. They got it — though not the kind they wanted:
Their demand was, "If you are the Christ, tell us plainly." Jesus at once said that He had told them plainly. His works, just as much as His words, had borne plain witness to Him. Then He told them plainly that their unbelief had put the veil over their eyes. The evidence was there plainly enough, but they could not see it.
Another writer asks what more words would have been worth to such hearers. He points instead to what stands written:
Of what value to these men would His word have been? A moment later they take up stones to stone Him, because He said, "I and the Father are one." They ask Him to tell them plainly, yet refuse His word about who He is. The truth is, they did not want to hear. … This Gospel does not record many of the works of power that Jesus did. They are not called miracles but signs. They are recorded so that we should believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing we might have life through His Name.
- Demand — They ask Him to end their suspense, and blame Him for it. Writers call that a vain excuse: the hindrance was in them, not in the evidence.
- Witness one: His words — "I told you" points back to John 5, 6 and 8. Such patient testimony may in time be turned from those who reject it to those who hear.
- Witness two: His works — Done in the Father's name, they testify to His Sonship. Done in His own name, writers say, they would have witnessed nothing.
- What they showed — The works were mercy, grace, love and power. They made clear what the Father is, to those with eyes to see and to faith today.
- Result — He answered plainly after all: plainly about Himself, and plainly about them. Their unbelief had veiled their eyes. The signs stand written so that readers may believe and have life.
but ye do not believe, for ye are not of my sheep, as I told you.
It is winter, and Jesus is in the temple, where a crowd demands a plain answer: is He the Christ? His reply does not blame a lack of evidence; it tells them who they are — so whose fault is their unbelief?
They asked for a plain answer. He pointed back to what He had already said and done in front of them.
In verse 24 they say to Him, "If you are the Christ, tell us plainly." He replied, "I told you, and you do not believe." Then He appealed to His works, done in His Father's name. They were the clearest witness to His personal glory, and evidence enough. "But," He said, "you are not among my sheep." The fault was theirs. They had zeal. They made many loud claims to know God. But unbelief had blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts.
Their question, asked at that moment, told its own story.
He told them who He was, but they did not believe Him. His works bore witness to the same, but they did not believe them either, because they were not of His sheep. The very fact of asking such a question at such a moment was full proof of their spiritual condition.
The words do not read as an excuse handed to the unbeliever. Their refusal is what showed where they stood, and the marks of the real sheep follow immediately.
His answer is plain: He had told them and they disbelieved. Also His works, done in His Father's name, were an unquestionable witness. If there were any doubts, this was their fault, not His. But their unbelief was evidence that they were not of His sheep. For His sheep were subject to Him: they had ears for His voice: He knew them as vitally His own: they followed Him.
Jesus speaks of "My sheep." That group is not the same as the nation.
Jesus had already told them, and they did not believe. He appeals to His works, which bore witness of Him. But they did not believe, because they were not of His sheep. It is only a question of His sheep, of those who belonged to Him, outside the outward election of the people of Israel. Here the Lord takes the occasion to bring out the blessedness of His sheep.
Another writer sets this reason beside the one Jesus gave in John 8.
If the people did not believe the testimony of His works, it was because they were not of His sheep. That was the true reason, and it put an end to all argument on the subject… In chapter 8 He had revealed the real cause of their unbelief in God's words (His own testimonies): "they were not of God." Here He declares they were not His sheep, because they did not believe His words.
These words were not aimed at people far from religion.
Religion is no guarantee that we are His. Those to whom He said, "you are not among my sheep," were prejudiced religious people, connected too with the place of the Lord's name. Jesus said this in the temple, as He walked in Solomon's porch. "It was winter" in more senses than one. They were keeping a religious feast, and they surrounded Him with questions of unbelief…
after They were strangers to the faith that works by love. At heart they were unbelievers, whatever their reasoning may have been.
They looked for signs, and signs beyond counting stood in front of them.
There were works of the same character, and the Jews were in the habit of looking for a sign. If they had looked honestly, they might have seen signs beyond counting or measure. "The works that I do in my Father's name bear witness about me." What could account for such hardness in any heart? "But you do not believe because you are not among my sheep." A solemn answer to a difficulty, to resistance to truth, to a rejection of Christ — as true now as ever!
The earlier chapters show how the nation reached this point.
In chapter 7 we find their definite rejection of the Lord. In chapter 8 they discredit His words, and in chapter 9 they disallow His work. Then in chapter 10 their "winter" has set in. "You are not among my sheep" was the solemn and dreadful charge pronounced against them. It was all over with the nation. Grace dealt with people one by one, but the nation had set its seal on its own condition.
If they were not His sheep, what is true of those who are?
Here a security is assured that nothing can overturn. Neither inner failure nor outer force could endanger their life. The Father and the Son maintain it, and they were not more truly one in divine nature than in loving care for the sheep.
- Evidence given — Christ had already told them, and His works bore witness. The failure was on their side, not in the proof.
- Evidence refused — their unbelief did not create their condition. It exposed it. The question itself showed where they stood.
- Sheep, not nation — belonging to Christ is personal. It stands outside the outward election of Israel as a nation.
- Religion is no guarantee — those He spoke to were keeping a feast in the temple. They were still strangers to the faith that works by love.
- Winter, or security — the nation sealed its own condition, and winter set in. For His sheep, the Father and the Son together keep their life safe.
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me;
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
and I give them life eternal; and they shall never perish, and no one shall seize them out of my hand.
Jesus is speaking about His own sheep, and His death is near. Can His sheep lose what He gives? Everything turns on who gives it and whose hand holds it.
The verse opens with a gift. One writer sets that word against what sin pays instead.
Now notice the security of Christ's sheep. First, they have everlasting life. "I give them eternal life." This is His gift. It is in no way earned or deserved. No. "For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." Eternal life, then, comes to us as a gift. Christ does not give less. It is not life for a day or a year, but for ever — eternal life.
The word "eternal" is not only about length. It names a particular life, one already seen in the Son on earth.
He gives them eternal life, eternal security, and assures them of divine care. Already the Lord has said that He came to give life to the sheep, and to give it abundantly. Now we learn that the life He gives is "eternal life" — the life that was with the Father and shown in the Person of the Son on earth. The sheep have this life in Christ. It is to be shown in them and enjoyed now, even if they only enter into its fulness when they are with Christ in life's eternal home.
The verse says two things, not one: the life lasts, and the sheep last. One writer explains why that is not mere repetition.
First of all, the life is everlasting. But then it is not merely that the thing itself is eternal — they shall never perish. For it might be claimed that although the life lasts for ever, this depends on something in those who receive it. No: "they will never perish" — the sheep themselves. So not only the life, but those who have it by grace in Christ, shall never perish. Last of all, and crowning everything, their security answers the question of any hostile power… There was no inward source of weakness that could endanger the life, and so there should be no outward power to cause anxiety.
Some agree that no enemy can take a believer away, but say the believer can ruin himself. One writer answers from the exact wording.
Some say that He said "no one can snatch them out of His hand", but we can do it ourselves by living in sin, and so on. The correct rendering of His words answers this fully: "they will never perish." It means literally, "they shall in no way ever perish." This is absolute; it covers everything.
Why can the life not fail? Because of whose life it is.
"I give them eternal life." It is a life that is eternal, not a life to be taken away again… Christ must give eternal life; for if one of His sheep could perish, Christ must perish. And it must be a holy life too that He gives, for the same reason. What Christ gives must be holy, for He is holy. "They will never perish." A sheep is a perishing thing; but His sheep do not perish. There are two points to this security. First, Christ is in them, as their life. Second, they are in His hand… You must find someone more powerful than God, if you can be snatched out of His hand.
The verse puts safety in a hand — His, not ours. One writer pictures the shepherd carrying the found sheep home.
As sheep, our security is the responsibility of our Shepherd. Of each saved sheep it is written, "And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing." The struggle of the sheep would not be to keep on, but to get off. We are not saved by our "holding on". Sheep have no hands to hold on by… So the eternal safety of every sheep is the blessed Lord's own personal responsibility and care.
The promise is huge, but it covers one group: the sheep. One writer warns readers not to claim that comfort too quickly.
These words of our Lord Jesus give us full assurance that His sheep cannot perish. But one must be a sheep — a true believer in Jesus Christ. Someone who claims to be a Christian but has little or no thought for God's claims on his life may not be a sheep at all… His sheep have eternal life.
- Given. The life is a gift, never earned — sin pays wages, Christ gives eternal life.
- Divine. What He gives is the life that was with the Father — ours now, and enjoyed in full at home with Christ.
- Unbreakable. The promise covers both the life and the sheep: no inward weakness ends it, no outward power seizes it.
- Absolute. "They will never perish" means they shall in no way ever perish. That answers every objection, even our own sinning.
- Carried. Sheep have no hands to hold on with. Their keeping is His own responsibility — and the promise belongs to real sheep, true believers in Jesus Christ.
My Father who has given [them] to me is greater than all, and no one can seize out of the hand of my Father.
In the temple at Solomon's porch, the Jews press Jesus to say whether He is the Christ. He answers by talking about His sheep, and this verse traces their safety past His own hand to the Father who gave them to Him.
The Jews were disputing whether this man had any right to a flock at all. His answer points away from Himself to His Father.
Nothing could answer the Jews' objection about Jesus' rights to the sheep more completely than this: the Father had given them to Him. It is this that makes us so precious to Him that He will never let us perish.
That same gift also says something about the Father's own attachment to them.
We have heard in the sixth chapter of the Father's gift to His Son. Reminded of that here, we learn how secure the sheep must be if His hand keeps them. It also shows how precious they must be to the Father. He will never drop them, or let anyone snatch even one of them out of His hand. And the Father and the Son can never differ in counsel or will about the security of the sheep, now or in the end, for He and the Father are one.
Westcott counts the things that make the sheep safe. The last one on his list is the Father Himself.
The remaining three things are these. (5) They have the assurance that they will never perish. (6) The Lord's own hand protects them. (7) Anyone trying to take them would have to reckon first with the Father, who "is greater than all," and whose hand covers them too.
The wording shifts between the two verses. In verse 28 the Lord states a fact about what will happen; in verse 29 He states something about power itself.
But there was indeed a great secret between Him and His Father, stated here. "My Father, who has given them to me" — and that means not the sheep alone, but the whole work, plan, counsel, and glory. He "is greater than all," yes, greater than all things. And "no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand." Before, the point He had stated was that no one will; here it is that no one is able.
Verse 28 puts the sheep in the Shepherd's hand; verse 29 puts them in the Father's. The keeping is doubled.
"No one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand." We are in the hand of the Son (v. 28), and in the hand of the Father (v. 29). "Kept by the power of God." 1 Peter 1:5. Our eternal security is in other and more powerful hands than our own.
The promise assumes the danger is real. It also names whose faithfulness the sheep depend on.
What is the good of saying, "no one will snatch them out of my hand" (John 10:28)? Because we are in danger of being snatched. "Snatches" is the same word: "the wolf snatches them and scatters them." I have perfect security in the Lord's faithfulness, not in my own, and from this I get dependence on Him.
The Father's hand and the Son's hand are not two separate securities. One care stands behind both.
Here is a security that cannot be overturned. No failure inside them and no force outside them could put their life at risk. The Father and the Son keep that life, and they were no more truly one in divine nature than they were one in loving care for the sheep.
- Given — The sheep are the Father's gift to the Son. That gift answers everyone who disputed His right to them, and it is why they are precious to Him.
- Greater — The Father who gave them is greater than all, so anyone who tries to take a sheep must deal with Him first.
- Held — Verse 28 places them in the Son's hand, verse 29 in the Father's; the keeping rests in hands stronger than our own.
- Unable — The wording moves from what will not happen to what cannot. No one has the power to take them out of the Father's hand. The danger is real; the outcome is not in doubt.
- One — The security rests where the passage ends: the Father and the Son are one. One in nature, and one in their care for the sheep.