# Differences between sheep and goats



## Pergamum

Anyone got a list of the difference between sheep and goats? How would you explain a sheep versus a goat to someone who has never seen one before? Why are sheep made to be an appropriate image for believers and goats for unbelievers? Choosiness in eating, smell, ability to train them to follow?

If I was covering the whole subject of sheep and shepherds in Scripture, do you have any links or thoughts to help me?


----------



## irresistible_grace

Sheep need a shepherd to feed, protect & guide them.
Goats wander/roam freely & are content eating garbage.
OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD


----------



## chuckd

irresistible_grace said:


> Sheep need a shepherd to feed, protect & guide them.
> Goats wander/roam freely & are content eating garbage.
> OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD



The goats I've been around indeed had a shepherd and followed him. In fact, it was quite amusing cause he (the shepherd) would make a goat sound and they would all come running. And they ate whatever plant life was around. Though this was China and it may be different in the Near East.

The sheep I've been around are the dumbest animals I've encountered. They would run off a cliff if the shepherd did the same. This was in Iraq and they practically ate dirt. A closer look revealed there was some sort of small hay on the ground, but still. Not to blame them cause it was in the middle of the desert.

edit: I found a photo of the goats! I wish I had one of the shepherd. He was the cutest Chinese man.


----------



## irresistible_grace

I am aware that goats can be shepherded which it's why we have goats in the flock!
*BUT* Sheep *NEED* a shepherd!!! Goats, not so much!


----------



## irresistible_grace

Goats are low maintenance. Sheep are high maintenance.
Sheep are less intelligent, more dependent, and quiet frankly they tend to stink worse than goats.


----------



## TylerRay

Pergamum said:


> If I was covering the whole subject of sheep and shepherds in Scripture, do you have any links or thoughts to help me?



If you are speaking to a group that doesn't know what a sheep is, find some animal that is dealt with similarly to compare it to.

When it comes down to it, a plain explanation of what a sheep is and how it is dealt with will have to be given, but if there is something in the culture to liken it to, all's the better.

Maybe you could find away to import some sheep and/or goats, and explain what they are and what they're for. Go on to speak about them from Scripture.


----------



## chuckd

irresistible_grace said:


> I am aware that goats can be shepherded which it's why we have goats in the flock!
> *BUT* Sheep *NEED* a shepherd!!! Goats, not so much!



 just reporting on what I've witnessed. I'm far from a zoologist.

I also remember a difference in how they shepherded. The sheep-shepherd would throw little pebbles at the sheep to drive them. And since they were scared of their own shadow (they were really dumb), it was pretty effective. While the goat-shepherd would kind of walk along and the goats would be enjoying a particular bush until he called them and they would come running. Though, I don't think these are universal shepherding techniques. 

But you're right, sheep are really high maintenance.


----------



## Rich Koster

I think the illustration boils down to this. Sheep & goats eat about the same, can co-habitate in the same field, respond to sheep herders or goat herders in like manner and smell about the same. However, at the end of the day, in spite of their many similarities, goats are not sheep, even in the same pen with the same herdsman. Goats do seem to eat up the root too, so wherever they were is left barren. Sheep eat the above ground part, and it grows back.


----------



## SolaScriptura

I think the point of Jesus using the two animals wasn't to highlight the differences between them. Instead, they were simply two species that were common in his time and place, often raised and tended together. Therefore they served as a good picture of the point that the elect and the reprobate have many similarities, but they are nonetheless distinct.


----------



## Cymro

I'll stick up for the sheep! They are not so dumb,but it depends what nationality they are.
Our mountain sheep which roam the hills and come down into the villages, are prevented by cattle grids in the 
roads entering into the valley towns. But said animal has thought it out, and lies down and rolls over the grid(the more adventurous ones).
But holidaying on the Isle of Lewis,Scotland this year,proved to me the truth in John 10. The chalet we had was next to our host's bungalow, and
his backdoor opened out onto the hills. "Watch this",he said. His sheep were feeding with other sheep from the village,and when he called in Gaelic a word which means "little sheep" (more of a sound than a word),his sheep came running and the others lifted not their heads but kept munching grass.
"My sheep hear my voice and follow me."etc----I tried next day,and nothing happened! They would not listen to the voice of a stranger.
You could show a photo of a sheep,a lamb,and a flock to distinguish them. They are fitting examples of humans for their tendency to stray,
"all we like sheep have gone astray," but also their recognition of the Shepherd. The flock has also the distinctive marking that the shepherd places on them,
so that he knows them."I know my sheep,and am known of mine."
As for the smell, I am reminded of this. Those who aspire to the ministry and complain about people should understand that if you don't like the smell of the sheep, you shouldn't be a shepherd.


----------



## SeanPatrickCornell

SolaScriptura said:


> I think the point of Jesus using the two animals wasn't to highlight the differences between them. Instead, they were simply two species that were common in his time and place, often raised and tended together. Therefore they served as a good picture of the point that the elect and the reprobate have many similarities, but they are nonetheless distinct.



I agree with you entirely.

I am reminded of the following analogy:

"Analogies are like rubber bands. They serve their intended purpose as long as you don't stretch them too far. If you stretch them too far, they will break."

I think this is a case of trying to stretch the sheep and goats analogy too far.


----------



## SolaScriptura

Cymro said:


> Those who aspire to the ministry and complain about people should understand that if you don't like the smell of the sheep, you shouldn't be a shepherd.



But see, this is what happens when we try to turn a simple illustration into a full-blown allegory. Jesus likens the elect to sheep and the reprobate to goats. But you've broadened it so that "people" are sheep...


----------



## A5pointer

I would as suggested above look to the historical setting and how the animals were viewed, used, maintained and valued. And also look for use of the animals in Jewish literature of course focusing on the OT. You will find your answer there in discovering how the ancient audience would have understood it with impact. Always go back in time and mindset of the Jewish history and religion first. Using modern zoology or observations will likely not lead to the impact wrought to the audience.


----------



## Gforce9

Rich Koster said:


> ...... and smell about the same.



This concludes our lesson for today..............


----------



## Mushroom

Goats are stubborn and fight a lot.

Wait a minute....!


----------



## irresistible_grace

Cymro said:


> I'll stick up for the sheep! They are not so dumb,but it depends what nationality they are.
> Our mountain sheep which roam the hills and come down into the villages, are prevented by cattle grids in the
> roads entering into the valley towns. But said animal has thought it out, and lies down and rolls over the grid(the more adventurous ones).
> But holidaying on the Isle of Lewis,Scotland this year,proved to me the truth in John 10. The chalet we had was next to our host's bungalow, and
> his backdoor opened out onto the hills. "Watch this",he said. His sheep were feeding with other sheep from the village,and when he called in Gaelic a word which means "little sheep" (more of a sound than a word),his sheep came running and the others lifted not their heads but kept munching grass.
> "My sheep hear my voice and follow me."etc----I tried next day,and nothing happened! They would not listen to the voice of a stranger.
> You could show a photo of a sheep,a lamb,and a flock to distinguish them. They are fitting examples of humans for their tendency to stray,
> "all we like sheep have gone astray," but also their recognition of the Shepherd. The flock has also the distinctive marking that the shepherd places on them,
> so that he knows them."I know my sheep,and am known of mine."
> As for the smell, I am reminded of this. Those who aspire to the ministry and complain about people should understand that if you don't like the smell of the sheep, you shouldn't be a shepherd.





Rich Koster said:


> I think the illustration boils down to this. Sheep & goats eat about the same, can co-habitate in the same field, respond to sheep herders or goat herders in like manner and smell about the same. However, at the end of the day, in spite of their many similarities, goats are not sheep, even in the same pen with the same herdsman. Goats do seem to eat up the root too, so wherever they were is left barren. Sheep eat the above ground part, and it grows back.


They don't _smell_ the same at the petting zoo!!! We perfer to be around the goats because the sheep are funky, nasty, stinky... 


SolaScriptura said:


> I think the point of Jesus using the two animals wasn't to highlight the differences between them. Instead, they were simply two species that were common in his time and place, often raised and tended together. Therefore they served as a good picture of the point that the elect and the reprobate have many similarities, but they are nonetheless distinct.


 100% 
*BUT* 
The OP said...


Pergamum said:


> Anyone got a list of the difference between sheep and goats?


I was just responding to the question of _differences_... (many of which I've heard preached over and over and over again...)


----------



## Bob Carlberg

Just my humble opinion having grown up working on a farm and being around animals. Sheep are submissive in nature. Goats are obstinate. This is an important difference in relationship to Biblical illustration and in light of Jewish customs. Christ was likened unto a Lamb, not a Goat. He went to the cross in willing obedience to the father. A goat would not have gone in submission but would have rebelled. 

It is not a likeness of how they are shepherded, what they eat, or how intelligent they are. It is a reference to their character. 

I guess for those who have never encountered a sheep or a goat, it would be similar to the difference between a horse and a mule or a dog and a cat. Dogs and horses are very people oriented and can be trained to be submissive to their masters will. Mules and cats are more selfish and individualistic. They may do what the master wishes or they may do something completely opposite. 

Also sheep and goats held a special places in reference to sacrifice, forgiveness and fellowship under Levitical law.

Hope this helps.


----------

