Shepherds?

[MystyRock]

Ok. I've had this question for a few weeks. I read through Bible for the first time. In the old testament, shepherds are mentioned numerous times. They were even personally invited to Jesus' birth. Then, nothing. Jesus wasn't born in a family of shepherds. What happened to the shepherds?

 

[RomansFiveEight]

They're still here. If you want to go visit the middle east, you'll still find them! Operating, many times, in much the same way they did in the 1st century.

Shepherds are an important character because they represent the lowly and down trodden. They are the garbage collector or minimum-wage retail worker or farm laborer of yesteryear. Poor, low on the social status, doing a job nobody wants to do. Although in their case, they were particularly skilled at their jobs; despite being paid so little.

Rarely were the shepherds caring for their own sheep. Often the sheep were owned by an investor of some sort, who paid the shepherd to care for them. Sort of like what my wife does for a living; she's a real estate manager. People buy investment properties, then turn them over to her and and she finds tenants, deals with any legal issues that might arise, collects rent, and her employees maintain and repair the properties as needed (or she hires contractors to do so). 90% of the rent goes to the owner, 10% of the rent goes to her company(unless there are repairs needed; which she takes out of the owners portion). So the owner gets money for doing nothing other than having the capital to invest; and she gets money for a particular set of skills (though; unlike the shepherds, she is neither impoverished or low on the social ladder in that position, thankfully.)

So these shepherds worked hard to make someone else money while they starve. That's the kind of struggle God seems, throughout history, to really pay special attention to. Clearly, caring for the poor was an important part of Jesus' social gospel.

There's also a reason Jesus himself chooses to refer to himself as a shepherd. And it's not really because of the poverty or the low social status; but actually because of how the sheep are viewed by the shepherd as well as the inverse. The Sheep don't know an investor in some city own them. And the Shepherd's livelihood is in their well being. The sheep trust their shepherd. They follow their shepherd anywhere and everywhere. In fact, Sheep even begin to learn their shepherds voice. At night, when all sorts of predators and even thieves come around; Shepherds would sometimes pool their sheep together (They weren't raised on farms, but nomadic, grazing across the country side), and guard them together. In the morning when they departed, a shepherd needed only call his sheep, and from the writhing mass of everyones sheep, the sheep in his care and charge would emerge and follow him. Jesus uses the example of the shepherd to describe himself because it was something the people knew. It shows that Jesus cares tremendously about our own well being; and that we have a responsibility to learn our shepherds voice, and follow him. Even when, perhaps, it looks like greener pastures are in a direction different than where the shepherd is leading us (perhaps the shepherd knows the pasture is home to a wolves den), and when other voices attempt to snatch us away from the fold.

It's beautiful imagery. And ultimately, it was culture and context. As Christianity moved 'west', toward Greek speaking areas and Rome, Shepherds probably became less culturally relevant so other images were used. Jesus and the authors of the scriptures used examples the people knew. Things they would understand. When he spoke, he spoke in such a way that people said "Oh, I get it!". In that time, everyone knew that a shepherd was and what the implications of their fold was!

 

[GraceSeeker]

Ok. I've had this question for a few weeks. I read through Bible for the first time. In the old testament, shepherds are mentioned numerous times. They were even personally invited to Jesus' birth. Then, nothing. Jesus wasn't born in a family of shepherds. What happened to the shepherds?

You're going to have to help me out some more. It seems as if you imply that the shepherds disappear from the scriptures, but I don't see evidence of that. What leads you to ask the question?

 

[MystyRock]

When I was reading the old testament, shepherds were very prominent; David and others were specifically named. But in the new testament, not as much is mentioned. Jesus would probably be taught carpentry, but I didn't see any references to that profession. Mostly fishermen are in the new testament. I just find it interesting.

 

[RomansFiveEight]

Shepherds were still prevalent. And though he was a carpenter and the disciples were fishermen (among other things), when speaking of his own role in the kingdom of God, he referred to himself as a shepherd. As did Christians in the early days and even today. A portrait in the foyer area leading into the sanctuary of one of the churches I serve depicts Jesus (well, the white Italian version anyway) with a lamb over his shoulder and sheep grazing around him. The word "Pastor", in fact, has its origins in the word "Shepherd".

I see what you might mean though. I haven't counted but perhaps there are fewer specifically named shepherds in the New Testament.

 

[Qyöt27]

It's beautiful imagery. And ultimately, it was culture and context. As Christianity moved 'west', toward Greek speaking areas and Rome, Shepherds probably became less culturally relevant so other images were used. Jesus and the authors of the scriptures used examples the people knew. Things they would understand. When he spoke, he spoke in such a way that people said "Oh, I get it!". In that time, everyone knew that a shepherd was and what the implications of their fold was!

I think it's probably more likely that the difference is that the New Testament is decidedly urban-centered, dealing with the experiences of Christian communities in Greek and Roman cities. Italy and Greece have plenty of farmland and pastures, so they'd still know what kind of demands shepherd work had. Fishing was probably just more visible in an urban setting, as the fishermen would come back to port every day.

And, as I just saw when browsing the Wikipedia article, Greek images of pastoral work sometimes had explicitly sexual overtones dealing with Pan, which...wouldn't really be advisable to invoke with that audience.

 

[RomansFiveEight]

I think it's probably more likely that the difference is that the New Testament is decidedly urban-centered, dealing with the experiences of Christian communities in Greek and Roman cities. Italy and Greece have plenty of farmland and pastures, so they'd still know what kind of demands shepherd work had. Fishing was probably just more visible in an urban setting, as the fishermen would come back to port every day.

And, as I just saw when browsing the Wikipedia article, Greek images of pastoral work sometimes had explicitly sexual overtones dealing with Pan, which...wouldn't really be advisable to invoke with that audience.

Makes a lot of sense to me!

 

[GraceSeeker]

When I was reading the old testament, shepherds were very prominent; David and others were specifically named. But in the new testament, not as much is mentioned. Jesus would probably be taught carpentry, but I didn't see any references to that profession. Mostly fishermen are in the new testament. I just find it interesting.

There are 27,570 verses in the OT.
There are 7,956 verses in the NT.
So, the OT is roughly 3.47 times the size of the NT.

In the KJV, the term "shepherd" is used 57 times in the OT,
In the KJV, the term "shepherd" is use 17 times in the NT.
So, the term "shepherd" is used 3.35 times more in the OT than the NT.

This means that the term "shepherd" is mentioned once every 483.7 verses in the OT, and once every 468 verses in the NT.


Now, that's just numbers, but I want to suggest that one reason that one finds shepherds more often in the OT is simply because one finds more people in the OT. It's a bigger book. It tells more stories. And the principle story it tells is that of the family of Abraham, who is a shepherd. So, if it is going to tell the story of a shepherd and his family, while the NT tells the story of an itinerant preacher whose trade was that of a craftsman, we should not be surprised to find shepherds mentioned more frequently in the OT than in the NT.

Now, guess which part of the Bible mentions carpenters more frequently?

P
l
e
a
s
e

p
l
a
y

J
e
o
p
a
r
d
y

t
h
e
m
e

m
u
s
i
c

h
e
r
e

Give up?

The part of the Bible which mentions carpenters more frequently is ......
.... the Old Testament!!


That's right. Remember, it's bigger. But strangely the OT mentions carpenters 6 times more frequently than the NT, not the expected 3-4 times more. What does this mean? Absolutely nothing.

As Qyöt27 points out, there is a change from a agrarian society to an urban one for the setting in which the narrative is told, and I think that's pretty much all there is to it. But shepherds are still very much a part of the overall culture in first century Palestine so that many of Jesus' most well known and beloved parables and stories call on that image:
True and False Prophets -- Matthew 7
Separating the Sheep and the Goats -- Matthew 25
the Feeding of the 5000 is because Jesus sees the crowd as "sheep without a shepherd" -- Mark 6
Parable of the Lost Sheep -- Luke 15
Parable of the Good Shepherd -- John 10
instructions to Peter to "feed my sheep" -- John 21

And that doesn't even include that the first announcement of the Lord's birth is to shepherds keeping watch over their flocks.

 

[RomansFiveEight]

There are 27,570 verses in the OT.
There are 7,956 verses in the NT.
So, the OT is roughly 3.47 times the size of the NT.

In the KJV, the term "shepherd" is used 57 times in the OT,
In the KJV, the term "shepherd" is use 17 times in the NT.
So, the term "shepherd" is used 3.35 times more in the OT than the NT.

This means that the term "shepherd" is mentioned once every 483.7 verses in the OT, and once every 468 verses in the NT.


Now, that's just numbers, but I want to suggest that one reason that one finds shepherds more often in the OT is simply because one finds more people in the OT. It's a bigger book. It tells more stories. And the principle story it tells is that of the family of Abraham, who is a shepherd. So, if it is going to tell the story of a shepherd and his family, while the NT tells the story of an itinerant preacher whose trade was that of a craftsman, we should not be surprised to find shepherds mentioned more frequently in the OT than in the NT.

Now, guess which part of the Bible mentions carpenters more frequently?

P
l
e
a
s
e

p
l
a
y

J
e
o
p
a
r
d
y

t
h
e
m
e

m
u
s
i
c

h
e
r
e

Give up?

The part of the Bible which mentions carpenters more frequently is ......
.... the Old Testament!!


That's right. Remember, it's bigger. But strangely the OT mentions carpenters 6 times more frequently than the NT, not the expected 3-4 times more. What does this mean? Absolutely nothing.

As Qyöt27 points out, there is a change from a agrarian society to an urban one for the setting in which the narrative is told, and I think that's pretty much all there is to it. But shepherds are still very much a part of the overall culture in first century Palestine so that many of Jesus' most well known and beloved parables and stories call on that image:
True and False Prophets -- Matthew 7
Separating the Sheep and the Goats -- Matthew 25
the Feeding of the 5000 is because Jesus sees the crowd as "sheep without a shepherd" -- Mark 6
Parable of the Lost Sheep -- Luke 15
Parable of the Good Shepherd -- John 10
instructions to Peter to "feed my sheep" -- John 21

And that doesn't even include that the first announcement of the Lord's birth is to shepherds keeping watch over their flocks.

And the award for "Seminary Nerd" goes to....

Hehehe. Kidding! Thanks for the breakdown!

 

[MystyRock]

Thanks, Grace! Quite informative!

 

[Maid Marie]

And the award for "Seminary Nerd" goes to....

Hehehe. Kidding! Thanks for the breakdown!

 

[MystyRock]

In church today, the sermon was about shepherds. And I thought about that night in Bethlehem. If Mary and Joseph had found a room in the inn, would the shepherds still find them? And if they did, they probably wouldn't be welcome in the inn; the stable was more of a familiar environment to them.

 

[Anto9us]

I say -- Shepherds still would have found them.

They would have marched right into the lobby of the Marriott and found who the angels had talked about.

Shepherds in the bible had TALENT.

Poor lil shepherd boy David was also pretty good with a harp -- and even better with a slingshot -- he had talents above and beyond "being a shepherd boy"

Prophet Amos was a shepherd AND "a keeper of sycamore trees" - so he was a good horticulturist as well as shepherd -- and he was a bold Prophet besides -- went into Judah as well as Israel and told 'em which end of the cow ate the cabbage.

There is also a non-canonical piece of early Christian writing - a book called "The Shepherd of Hermas" -- it did not GET INTO THE BIBLE -- but it was not a heretical, gnostic book -- it was quoted widely by early Christian Fathers.

It was probably written AFTER the New Testament was finished - it is not a "bad" book -- just not part of canonized scripture.

Shepherd of Hermas -- some weird visions -- it was popular in early Christian times...

http://www.ntcanon.org/Shepherd_of_Hermas.shtml

 

[RomansFiveEight]

I think it's pretty easy to say God is unlimited and couldve made anything happen and that's very true. But I DO think it's great to look at the ways God actually did things in the past. I agree they would've bound and gagged Herod if they had to. But it's still great to know God didn't chose to come through royalty in the penthouse suite; but to an ordinary but faithful girl in the grit and grime of the real world.

Now if our paintings and manger scenes could stop making Mary white with a royal blue robe and spotlessly clean features, and Joseph a distinguished man with a neatly kept beard and noblemans robes and clothing (and even crown sometimes!)

 

[Anto9us]

heh heh

Manger scenes "prettify" everything - don't they?

It's a wonder they don't have Joseph in a three-piece suit -- and that guy from MEN'S WAREHOUSE saying "You're gonna like the way you look -- I garauntee it!"

And of course the mangers scenes have to have THREE WISE MEN along with the shepherds...

Bible puts the Magi getting there later - finding a toddler in a HOUSE - not a manger.

And says there were three kinds of gIFTS - not three wise men.

I wuld love to see a manger scene with just animals and shepherds

and another scene when Jesus was almost two -- with 8 or 9 magi, loaded down with gold, frankincense and myrrh comin up to the HOUSE.

And where that "Little Drummer Boy" got into the picture -- I haven't a clue.

Pah-RUMPA-PUM-PUM !

 

[GraceSeeker]

The concept of the manager of the local Holiday Inn turning away Mary and Joseph and pointing them to the barn or even a nearby cave turned into a stable is mostly the product of our imagination.

Were there "inns" in Jesus' day? Most certainly. Where they like our concept of an inn? Well, not actually that far off, they were a place with space for travelers, and they probably had space for any animals accompanying the travelers. But, that isn't the issue I have with the fairy tale we have created over the centuries. The problem I have is that the word which is translated "inn" in Luke 2 is NOT the word that us usually used to refer to an inn. The usual word for an inn is the one found in Luke 10 when the Samaritan takes the injured man he found beaten by robbers along the roadside to an inn and promises to pay the innkeeper for tending to him.

The actual Greek word καταλυματι (katalyma) is actually a rather generic word that can refer to everything from a traditional inn to a guest room in a house. The only other time it is used in the New Testament (Mark 14:14) it refers to the room where Jesus asks his disciples to prepare the Passover which we celebrate as his Last Supper.

From what we have learned about the typical design for home construction in first century Palestine it is much more like that Jesus was born in a house than anywhere else. But, because the town (really more of a hamlet) was filled with people returning for the census, it is likely that the room which would have been used for borders was probably filled with lots of people. Most likely relatives. And with Mary expecting, not exactly the quietest place for her to rest undisturbed.

Since the home had a guest room, it was probably a fairly substantial home that could actually afford to have the animals inside. That may not sound like a plus, but it was. The home would be two levels -- the lower level closed in on at least three side, maybe all four, with the animals kept below and the human living quarters above. But for Mary, staying down below with the animals would have given her more space, more privacy, and meant she didn't have to climb the ladder or narrow and steep stairs to the upper room while 9 months pregnant.

But, as for the shepherds finding them.... well, if my experience when I spent a week in a hamlet in the Yucatan peninsula is any clue, when someone has a baby during the night, everyone in town knows about. The only reason the shepherds needed the angels' announcement, wasn't to find which house the baby was in, but to tell them that something big had happened back in town and the full import of the meaning of the birth.

 

[RomansFiveEight]

The concept of the manager of the local Holiday Inn turning away Mary and Joseph and pointing them to the barn or even a nearby cave turned into a stable is mostly the product of our imagination.

Were there "inns" in Jesus' day? Most certainly. Where they like our concept of an inn? Well, not actually that far off, they were a place with space for travelers, and they probably had space for any animals accompanying the travelers. But, that isn't the issue I have with the fairy tale we have created over the centuries. The problem I have is that the word which is translated "inn" in Luke 2 is NOT the word that us usually used to refer to an inn. The usual word for an inn is the one found in Luke 10 when the Samaritan takes the injured man he found beaten by robbers along the roadside to an inn and promises to pay the innkeeper for tending to him.

The actual Greek word καταλυματι (katalyma) is actually a rather generic word that can refer to everything from a traditional inn to a guest room in a house. The only other time it is used in the New Testament (Mark 14:14) it refers to the room where Jesus asks his disciples to prepare the Passover which we celebrate has his Last Supper.

From what we have learned about the typical design for home construction in first century Palestine it is much more like that Jesus was born in a house than anywhere else. But, because the town (really more of a hamlet) was filled with people returning for the census, it is likely that the room which would have been used for borders was probably filled with lots of people. Most likely relatives. And with Mary expecting, not exactly the quietest place for her to rest undisturbed.

Since the home had a guest room, it was probably a fairly substantial home that could actually afford to have the animals inside. That may not sound like a plus, but it was. The home would be two levels -- the lower level closed in on at least three side, maybe all four, with the animals kept below and the human living quarters above. But for Mary, staying down below with the animals would have given her more space, more privacy, and meant she didn't have to climb the ladder or narrow and steep stairs to the upper room while 9 months pregnant.

But, as for the shepherds finding them.... well, if my experience when I spent a week in a hamlet in the Yucatan peninsula is any clue, when someone has a baby during the night, everyone in town knows about. The only reason the shepherds needed the angels' announcement, wasn't to find which house the baby was in, but to tell them that something big had happened back in town and the full import of the meaning of the birth.

Absolutely. At Christmas eve last year, I showed a picture of such a house (modern day, some homes are still built like that in those areas), and gave an example of what it might have looked like. But, baby steps, when it comes to decorations.

I had once read a commentary that suggested that perhaps one of the underlying themes of "no room in the Inn" is that they might've tried to stay with Josephs family, but were turned away for what may have appeared as Joseph and Mary's sin. Sort of like a woman I know who refuses to go to her daughters house because she lives there with a man who is not her husband. Likewise, this author suggested, Joseph and Mary were turned away by family who said "We don't want that here". So they ended up elsewhere. Alternatively, I've heard the suggestion that she was placed with the animals out of pity; but she wouldn't have been allowed in the 'main home' for the same reason.

Like you, I think it's much more pragmatic; the woman was about to pop. Put her in the "basement" so she doesn't have to climb. But I thought those perspectives were interesting, even if not particularly substantiated.