John 15 Losing eternal life

Alexander the adequate

Well-known member
Calvinists help me here. I have never embraced the idea that eternal life could be taken away once we have been indwelt by Christ, but this passage has language that looks like we can be IN Christ and then be thrown away and burned.
What do Calvinists teach here about the dynamic being dicsussed by Jesus in te first few verses of John 15?
 

ReverendRV

Well-known member
The Parable of the Sower? Calvinists teach that only the Good Soil is Regenerated. It's a non argument over whether the Soils are Regenerated before or after the Seed is sown, because only one Soil was Regenerated. If every Soil was Regenerated, people can Lose their Salvation...
 
G

guest1

Guest
The Parable of the Sower? Calvinists teach that only the Good Soil is Regenerated. It's a non argument over whether the Soils are Regenerated before or after the Seed is sown, because only one Soil was Regenerated. If every Soil was Regenerated, people can Lose their Salvation...
How is that addressing the context of John 15 ?
 

fltom

Well-known member
The Parable of the Sower? Calvinists teach that only the Good Soil is Regenerated. It's a non argument over whether the Soils are Regenerated before or after the Seed is sown, because only one Soil was Regenerated. If every Soil was Regenerated, people can Lose their Salvation...
Calvinists also teach the unregenerate cannot respond to God in any positive manner even if only temporarily
 

PeanutGallery

Well-known member
that is not the passage in John 15, it is the vine and vine dresser
You mean this part?
John 15:4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
John 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
John 15:6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
Calvinists help me here. I have never embraced the idea that eternal life could be taken away once we have been indwelt by Christ, but this passage has language that looks like we can be IN Christ and then be thrown away and burned.
What do Calvinists teach here about the dynamic being dicsussed by Jesus in te first few verses of John 15?

This is another perfect example of the disingenuous tactic of "proof-texting", and only offering ONE self-serving proof-text that suggests what they want to suggest. I realize you believe in eternal security, but you're responding to this passage because it is "the" passage anti-Calvinists trot out when they want to attack our beliefs.

But once again, true theology can only be found when we embrace the TOTALITY of what Scripture teaches.

1) So what of the parable of the lost coin?
2) So what of the parable of the lost sheep?
3) So what of the parable of the lost Son?
4) So what about John 10, which says that nobody can snatch us out of God's hand?
5) What about the passages which teach that we are given the Holy Spirit as a GUARANTEE of our salvation? What does that mean, is God going to "recompensate" us if we lose our salvation?
6) What about Rom. 8 which assures us there is "no condemnation" for those who are in Christ Jesus?
7) What about ALL the passages which teach that upon believing, we HAVE "eternal life"? If we can "lose" it, then by definition we never had eternal life in the first place.

And all these were simply off the top of my head. I'm sure I could find many more if I spent some time on it.


As for your initial question about John 15, I'm not sure what you find problematic about the verse. Nothing in the passage says, "we can lose our salvation".
 

ReverendRV

Well-known member
that is not the passage in John 15, it is the vine and vine dresser
Ooopps, sorry; my Bible App sent me to the wrong chapter...

There are a couple of ways. One, we have to Persevere; or else. There is an 'Unrealized Potential' we can lose our Salvation, but it will never happen. We all want our children to reach their potential; but not like this. Also, many things Jesus said applied to Keeping the Old Covenant, because they were under the Old Covenant. Judas was never under the New Covenant, and as the Son of Perdition; he was cut off from the Messiah...

Your OP seems to say you believe in Eternal Security; so you should be glad to hear my explanation ;)
 
Last edited:

Alexander the adequate

Well-known member
You mean this part?
John 15:4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
John 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
John 15:6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.
Yes, I am interested in what a Calvinist would say this teaches concerning being In Christ?
 

Alexander the adequate

Well-known member
Ooopps, sorry; my Bible App sent me to the wrong chapter...

There are a couple of ways. One, we have to Persevere; or else. There is an 'Unrealized Potential' we can lose our Salvation, but it will never happen. We all want our children to reach their potential; but not like this. Also, many things Jesus said applied to Keeping the Old Covenant, because they were under the Old Covenant. Judas was never under the New Covenant, and as the Son of Perdition; he was cut off from the Messiah...

Your OP seems to say you believe in Eternal Security; so you should be glad to hear my explanation ;)
Yes, I love the idea of eternal security. But this passage troubles me with the word "in"
For me to bein Christ means to be indwelt forever,
Can you present a Calvinist view on this part of the passage?

Note: I did not intentionally skip you, just responded to what I saw first
 
Last edited:

Theo1689

Well-known member
Calvinists help me here. I have never embraced the idea that eternal life could be taken away once we have been indwelt by Christ, but this passage has language that looks like we can be IN Christ and then be thrown away and burned.
What do Calvinists teach here about the dynamic being dicsussed by Jesus in te first few verses of John 15?

James White often says "We stand on the shoulders of giants". And he's right. So we have a treasure of 2000 years of theologians, apologists, and commentators at our disposal. That is not to say we should blindly accept what they say, but we should consider their opinions, and make sure what they say is Biblical.

Now, since Calvinists don't usually use John 15 to "prove" eternal security, we have no obligation to prove our view from this passage. (Not all doctrines are taught in all verses.). But since no positive argument has been presented to show that this passage refutes eternal security, the bar isn't set very high.

I have a number of electronic commentaries in my collection, and the first one I turned to was the "People's NT Commentary", although it is not my favourite. But I did like what it said:

"2. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away. As the husbandman cuts off the unfruitful branches of the vine, so the Father severs the unfruitful branches from his Son. Judas, an unfruitful branch which did not have the life of the Vine, had just been severed and had gone forth. Every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it. The husbandman prunes and dresses the branches in order that they may be more healthy and fruitful. The Father cleanses, purifies, frees from sin, all who become branches of the True Vine."
-- People's NT Commentary, John 15:2

It is cut off because it is not connected to the root, that's why it's cut off, as it doesn't have life. It's very similar to the parable of the soils, were some of the seeds appeared to have life (since they sprouted), but didn't really (since they didn't bear fruit. I've said it many times before... Having faith is not the "requirement" for salvation, it is the EVIDENCE of salvation. It is the "litmus test" of whether or not someone has eternal life.

It's all about appearance. Something or someone can "appear" to be saved, but not really be saved (1 John 2:19). It reminds me of the wheat and the tares. I'm told that tares look similar to wheat, they have the "appearance" of wheat, but they aren't.

My go-to is Dr. A.T. Robertson, a Greek scholar:

"2. Branch (klēma). Old word from klaō, to break, common in LXX for offshoots of the vine, in N.T. only here (verses 2-6), elsewhere in N.T. klados (Mark 4:32, etc.), also from klaō, both words meaning tender and easily broken parts. In me (en emoi). Two kinds of connexion with Christ as the vine (the merely cosmic which bears no fruit, the spiritual and vital which bears fruit). The fruitless (not bearing fruit, mē pheron karpon) the vine-dresser “takes away” (airei) or prunes away. Probably (Bernard) Jesus here refers to Judas."
-- A.T. Robertson, "Word Pictures of the New Testament", John 15:2
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
Appeal to authority fallacy .

First of all, you are wrong.
I NEVER said, "This MUST be the correct interpretation because this authority said so".

I simply gave an interpretation I believe is reasonable, and gave credit to the proper source.

And do I need to point out that the same person who constantly cries "fallacy!" STILL hasn't presented an argument or exegesis of John 15 himself?

"Oops!"

"Next!"

"Tu quoque!"

"Hope this helps!"

🥱


😂

One final observation... This is the same poster who thinks going to scholars for understanding is "appeal to authority", but that he and Tom are perfect authorities.
Go figure...
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
Appeal to authority fallacy .

You see that, @Alexander the adequate ?

You can go to me, or Carbon, or Reformed, or David, or ReverendRV, but you CAN'T go to A.T. Robertson, or Adam Clarke, or Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, or Matthew Henry, or John Gill.... You DEFINITELY can't go to John Calvin.

(They'll probably let you go to Norm Geisler, or John Wesley...)
 
Last edited:
G

guest1

Guest
A fallacy is a fallacy . So Calvinism by default is a fallacy since it comes from Calvin as it’s authority on their doctrines

Oops

Yours Truly, Team Truth !

hope this helps !!!
 

Alexander the adequate

Well-known member
James White often says "We stand on the shoulders of giants". And he's right. So we have a treasure of 2000 years of theologians, apologists, and commentators at our disposal. That is not to say we should blindly accept what they say, but we should consider their opinions, and make sure what they say is Biblical.

Now, since Calvinists don't usually use John 15 to "prove" eternal security, we have no obligation to prove our view from this passage. (Not all doctrines are taught in all verses.). But since no positive argument has been presented to show that this passage refutes eternal security, the bar isn't set very high.

I have a number of electronic commentaries in my collection, and the first one I turned to was the "People's NT Commentary", although it is not my favourite. But I did like what it said:

"2. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away. As the husbandman cuts off the unfruitful branches of the vine, so the Father severs the unfruitful branches from his Son. Judas, an unfruitful branch which did not have the life of the Vine, had just been severed and had gone forth. Every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it. The husbandman prunes and dresses the branches in order that they may be more healthy and fruitful. The Father cleanses, purifies, frees from sin, all who become branches of the True Vine."
-- People's NT Commentary, John 15:2

It is cut off because it is not connected to the root, that's why it's cut off, as it doesn't have life. It's very similar to the parable of the soils, were some of the seeds appeared to have life (since they sprouted), but didn't really (since they didn't bear fruit. I've said it many times before... Having faith is not the "requirement" for salvation, it is the EVIDENCE of salvation. It is the "litmus test" of whether or not someone has eternal life.

It's all about appearance. Something or someone can "appear" to be saved, but not really be saved (1 John 2:19). It reminds me of the wheat and the tares. I'm told that tares look similar to wheat, they have the "appearance" of wheat, but they aren't.

My go-to is Dr. A.T. Robertson, a Greek scholar:

"2. Branch (klēma). Old word from klaō, to break, common in LXX for offshoots of the vine, in N.T. only here (verses 2-6), elsewhere in N.T. klados (Mark 4:32, etc.), also from klaō, both words meaning tender and easily broken parts. In me (en emoi). Two kinds of connexion with Christ as the vine (the merely cosmic which bears no fruit, the spiritual and vital which bears fruit). The fruitless (not bearing fruit, mē pheron karpon) the vine-dresser “takes away” (airei) or prunes away. Probably (Bernard) Jesus here refers to Judas."
-- A.T. Robertson, "Word Pictures of the New Testament", John 15:2
thanks for that. I am still interested to hear what more indiciuals have concluded about being IN Christ and being cut off.
 
Top