John 15 Losing eternal life

Josheb

Well-known member
He says in verse 2 "every branch in ME." Then verse 6 says if they do not remain.
You seem to be denying that Jesus says they are in Him, but they are and what happens if they do not remain.
That was what i wanted to discuss here, what dynamic is Jesus teaching?
Your discussion did not touch on those ideas, it appeared that you just went about looking at scripture that supported something you were interested in talking about.
lol! No, that is a conditional clause. Just because the word "if" is not stated does not mean it does not apply. The word "if" is stated three times in this passage, thereby making the conditional nature of the entire passage visible. Furthermore, as I have tried to emphasize, the passage must be read in light of whole scripture because any premise Jesus is producing fruitlessness of any kind is antithetical to his being the Son of God, the anointed one of God. Simply put, that would be a bad Christology.
You seem to be denying....
....it appeared that you just went about looking.....
I have noticed the comfort with which several posters in this op make assumptions about each other and do so negatively, derisively, dismissively. At least one poster has noted the ad hominem nature of that content.

I am going to ask you not to do that with me. Find some other wording to communicate any short comings thought to occur. If you are going to make assumptions about me, my motives, or the content of the posts then try to do so in an edifying manner. I am open to correction, but I don't read anyone finding any flaw with anything I have posted. If a flaw is found, then please state it plainly without impugning me personally in any way. Or better yet, ask instead of tell. I can clarify or articulate for myself anything that I haven't made clear.

It was just suggested verse 2 is a given, not a condition.

Okay. I can discuss that. Just do it without the ad hominems or straw men, please.

The reason verse 2 cannot be a given is because the logically necessary conclusion to that verse as a given is that Jesus produced bad branches. Jesus does not produce bad branches. A good plant does not produce bad fruit; it produces fruit of its kind and Jesus is the tree of life. I did in fact address this earlier. I did not overlook it or deny it. I addressed it in a direct and straightforward manner with directly scripturally self-relating scripture sampled from the whole of scripture.
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
He says in verse 2 "every branch in ME." Then verse 6 says if they do not remain.
You seem to be denying that Jesus says they are in Him, but they are and what happens if they do not remain.

Maybe we aren't denying Jesus' teaching, but only your interpretation therein.
There seems to be an incredible lack of charity in this forum, sadly.

"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. Cleanseth (kathairei). Present active indicative of old verb kathairō (clean) as in verse 3, only use in N.T., common in the inscriptions for ceremonial cleansing, though katharizō is more frequent (Heb. 10:2). That it may bear more fruit (hina karpon pleiona pherēi). Purpose clause with hina and present active subjunctive of pherō, “that it may keep on bearing more fruit” (more and more). A good test for modern Christians and church members."
-- A.T. Robertson, "Word Pictures".

Those "in me" who do not bear fruit are not in Him "spiritually".

" 15:2. He (i.e., the Gardener, the Father) desires fruit, which is mentioned eight times in this chapter (vv. 2 [thrice], 4 [twice], 5, 8, 16). A progression is seen: fruit (v. 2), more fruitful (v. 2), and “much fruit” (vv. 5, 8). The fruit which God desired from Israel was loving obedience, righteousness, and justice (Isa. 5:1-7). Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He cuts off. The phrase “in Me” does not mean the same thing as Paul’s words “in Christ.” Here it is part of the metaphor of the Vine and seems to mean, “every person who professes to be My disciple (a ‘branch’) is not necessarily a true follower.” A branch that bears no fruit is obviously dead. Therefore, like Judas, it is cut off. (See comments on John 15:6.) Every year in Palestine gardeners prune their vines. They cut off the dead wood which has no life in it and trim the living branches so that their yield will be greater."
-- Bible Knowledge Commentary (Edwin A. Blum)

You don't have to agree, but it would be nice if you would realize we have valid reason for disagreeing with you, and we're not "denying Jesus' teaching".
 

Carbon

Well-known member
Yes in Me has the same meaning as in Him, In Christ in Ephesians 1.

Good point . This is where doctrine must not supersede the plain meaning of the text . In Me, In Him , In Christ are all synonyms and interchangeable terms .

hope this helps !!!
 

Alexander the adequate

Well-known member
Maybe we aren't denying Jesus' teaching, but only your interpretation therein.
There seems to be an incredible lack of charity in this forum, sadly.

"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. Cleanseth (kathairei). Present active indicative of old verb kathairō (clean) as in verse 3, only use in N.T., common in the inscriptions for ceremonial cleansing, though katharizō is more frequent (Heb. 10:2). That it may bear more fruit (hina karpon pleiona pherēi). Purpose clause with hina and present active subjunctive of pherō, “that it may keep on bearing more fruit” (more and more). A good test for modern Christians and church members."
-- A.T. Robertson, "Word Pictures".

Those "in me" who do not bear fruit are not in Him "spiritually".

" 15:2. He (i.e., the Gardener, the Father) desires fruit, which is mentioned eight times in this chapter (vv. 2 [thrice], 4 [twice], 5, 8, 16). A progression is seen: fruit (v. 2), more fruitful (v. 2), and “much fruit” (vv. 5, 8). The fruit which God desired from Israel was loving obedience, righteousness, and justice (Isa. 5:1-7). Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He cuts off. The phrase “in Me” does not mean the same thing as Paul’s words “in Christ.” Here it is part of the metaphor of the Vine and seems to mean, “every person who professes to be My disciple (a ‘branch’) is not necessarily a true follower.” A branch that bears no fruit is obviously dead. Therefore, like Judas, it is cut off. (See comments on John 15:6.) Every year in Palestine gardeners prune their vines. They cut off the dead wood which has no life in it and trim the living branches so that their yield will be greater."
-- Bible Knowledge Commentary (Edwin A. Blum)

You don't have to agree, but it would be nice if you would realize we have valid reason for disagreeing with you, and we're not "denying Jesus' teaching".
you say that a person can be in Him, though not in Him spiritually.
In your own words, what would it mean to be in Him, as opposed to being spiritually in Him.
Can we talk about your ideas and the scriptures they come from?
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
you say that a person can be in Him, though not in Him spiritually.
In your own words, what would it mean to be in Him, as opposed to being spiritually in Him.
Can we talk about your ideas and the scriptures they come from?

Scripture interprets Scripture.
And your interpretation of the parable contradicts the rest of Scripture, IMO.
And Greek scholars concur that my interpretation is valid.
 

Alexander the adequate

Well-known member
Scripture interprets Scripture.
And your interpretation of the parable contradicts the rest of Scripture, IMO.
And Greek scholars concur that my interpretation is valid.
That's right, I keep forgetting, you had told me that you are the one who does not want to discuss ideas about scripture.
I will try to remember, sorry
 

christ_undivided

Well-known member
Maybe we aren't denying Jesus' teaching, but only your interpretation therein.
There seems to be an incredible lack of charity in this forum, sadly.

"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. Cleanseth (kathairei). Present active indicative of old verb kathairō (clean) as in verse 3, only use in N.T., common in the inscriptions for ceremonial cleansing, though katharizō is more frequent (Heb. 10:2). That it may bear more fruit (hina karpon pleiona pherēi). Purpose clause with hina and present active subjunctive of pherō, “that it may keep on bearing more fruit” (more and more). A good test for modern Christians and church members."
-- A.T. Robertson, "Word Pictures".

Those "in me" who do not bear fruit are not in Him "spiritually".

" 15:2. He (i.e., the Gardener, the Father) desires fruit, which is mentioned eight times in this chapter (vv. 2 [thrice], 4 [twice], 5, 8, 16). A progression is seen: fruit (v. 2), more fruitful (v. 2), and “much fruit” (vv. 5, 8). The fruit which God desired from Israel was loving obedience, righteousness, and justice (Isa. 5:1-7). Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He cuts off. The phrase “in Me” does not mean the same thing as Paul’s words “in Christ.” Here it is part of the metaphor of the Vine and seems to mean, “every person who professes to be My disciple (a ‘branch’) is not necessarily a true follower.” A branch that bears no fruit is obviously dead. Therefore, like Judas, it is cut off. (See comments on John 15:6.) Every year in Palestine gardeners prune their vines. They cut off the dead wood which has no life in it and trim the living branches so that their yield will be greater."
-- Bible Knowledge Commentary (Edwin A. Blum)

You don't have to agree, but it would be nice if you would realize we have valid reason for disagreeing with you, and we're not "denying Jesus' teaching".

This would be consistent with

Act 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being;
 

christ_undivided

Well-known member
That's right, I keep forgetting, you had told me that you are the one who does not want to discuss ideas about scripture.
I will try to remember, sorry

Psa 24:1 A Psalm of David. The earth is the LORD'S, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.

1Co 10:28 for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:

I don't understand your rejection. There is no life whatsoever if were not for God. Physical or Spiritual. God owns it all. You may not believe these Scriptures teach that fact but you can't deny it is a plausible explanation.
 

Alexander the adequate

Well-known member
Psa 24:1 A Psalm of David. The earth is the LORD'S, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.

1Co 10:28 for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:

I don't understand your rejection. There is no life whatsoever if were not for God. Physical or Spiritual. God owns it all. You may not believe these Scriptures teach that fact but you can't deny it is a plausible explanation.
I am not following you drift. THose talk about God's sovereignty over the earth and its inhabitants. What did you think I disagreed with?
 

HealTheLand

Active member
Maybe we aren't denying Jesus' teaching, but only your interpretation therein.
There seems to be an incredible lack of charity in this forum, sadly.

"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. Cleanseth (kathairei). Present active indicative of old verb kathairō (clean) as in verse 3, only use in N.T., common in the inscriptions for ceremonial cleansing, though katharizō is more frequent (Heb. 10:2). That it may bear more fruit (hina karpon pleiona pherēi). Purpose clause with hina and present active subjunctive of pherō, “that it may keep on bearing more fruit” (more and more). A good test for modern Christians and church members."
-- A.T. Robertson, "Word Pictures".

Those "in me" who do not bear fruit are not in Him "spiritually".

" 15:2. He (i.e., the Gardener, the Father) desires fruit, which is mentioned eight times in this chapter (vv. 2 [thrice], 4 [twice], 5, 8, 16). A progression is seen: fruit (v. 2), more fruitful (v. 2), and “much fruit” (vv. 5, 8). The fruit which God desired from Israel was loving obedience, righteousness, and justice (Isa. 5:1-7). Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He cuts off. The phrase “in Me” does not mean the same thing as Paul’s words “in Christ.” Here it is part of the metaphor of the Vine and seems to mean, “every person who professes to be My disciple (a ‘branch’) is not necessarily a true follower.” A branch that bears no fruit is obviously dead. Therefore, like Judas, it is cut off. (See comments on John 15:6.) Every year in Palestine gardeners prune their vines. They cut off the dead wood which has no life in it and trim the living branches so that their yield will be greater."
-- Bible Knowledge Commentary (Edwin A. Blum)

You don't have to agree, but it would be nice if you would realize we have valid reason for disagreeing with you, and we're not "denying Jesus' teaching".

One reason for (a perceived) lack of clarity is probably because people are often looking from this theology or that theology... but things could be wrong or only "in part" -- in many ways that we are /currently/ at in understanding...

An idea -- maybe you could remind all at times that --"we know in part and prophesy in part... " because we are not whole (perfect) ...and those who read / here are at varying levels of wholeness... so we / they are not really hearing -- like a completely honest, frank, truthful in all ways of the heart and mind kind of person -- would hear and listen.

I see what you are saying here (I think) -- at least one thing. this might help to explain it also (what came to mind when reading it): no fruit, some fruit, much fruit...no fruit, some fruit, much fruit... no fruit, some fruit, much fruit......
 
Last edited:

HealTheLand

Active member
@Chalcedon


maybe there is /some/ fruit, and maybe knows in part... as do we also?

it's helpful to to come to know / realize that we don't know -- everything ... that is -- to become as a child.

you do not see Christ (in another) ... but what does God see? ... who knows all -- not like us? we know In Part ...
 
Last edited:
G

guest1

Guest
maybe there is /some/ fruit, and maybe knows in part... as do we also?

it's helpful to to come to know / realize that we don't know -- everything ... that is -- tobecome as a child.

you do not see Christ (in another) .... but what does God see? ... who knows all -- not like us? we know In Part ...
ditto

Jesus does say you will know them by their fruits. A good tree bears good fruit.
A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.
Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
So then, by their fruit you will recognize them. Matt 7:18-20

Jesus reaffirms this teaching in John 15. Those who do not abide in Him ( produce fruit ) are cut down and thrown into the fire.

hope this helps !!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

4Him

Administrator
Staff member
ditto

Jesus does say you will know them by their fruits. A good tree bears good fruit.
A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.
Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
So then, by their fruit you will recognize them. Matt 7:18-20

Jesus reaffirms this teaching in John 15. Those who do not abide in Him ( produce fruit ) are cut down and thrown into the fire.

hope this helps !!!

I'm sure breaking the rules you agreed to abide by and personally attacking board posters, thinking you can tell if someone does or doesn't bear good fruit then proclaiming they don't over an internet discussion board isn't the picture of 'bearing good fruit."

hope this helps!!!
 
G

guest1

Guest
I'm sure breaking the rules you agreed to abide by and personally attaching board posters, thinking you tell if someone does or doesn't bear good fruit then proclaiming they don't over an internet discussion board isn't the picture of 'bearing good fruit."

hope this helps!!!
How is sharing scripture and what Jesus tells us is evident about bearing fruit. Are you saying we cannot know if there is fruit such as the parable of the sower teaches, Matthew 7 and John 15. Does ad hominem attacks qualify as good fruit or bad fruit ?

And you sure supported everything I posted when I was a calvinist and I'm much nicer as a poster now. But now that I'm no longer arguing against non calvinists but Calvinists I've been treated as a second class citizen by those who agreed with me for the past 20 years on CARM.

How is that " good fruit " and treating others with respect ?

If you guys don't want me here that is your decision, not mine. I'm the same person but nicer now but I'm just arguing against calvinism and not for it these days. And I was just looking through my old threads from 2020 as a calvinist where I was attacking people and was never banned and was repped by calvinists for doing that . I'm not the only one here who can see that bias. I use to be a moddrator here when Diane was here so I know how this works. Its definitely allot different now. We use to exchange emails frequently about the forum and I would get answers in a timely manner from moderators. Now I get no response. Things that make you go hmmm.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

HealTheLand

Active member
How is sharing scripture and what Jesus tells us is evident about bearing fruit. Are you saying we cannot know if there is fruit such as the parable of the sower teaches, Matthew 7 and John 15. Does ad hominem attacks qualify as good fruit or bad fruit ?

And you sure supported everything I posted when I was a calvinist and I'm much nicer as a poster now. But now that I'm no longer arguing against non calvinists but Calvinists I've been treated as a second class citizen by those who agreed with me for the past 20 years on CARM.

there is a third way... narrow... hard to follow always... takes much wisdom and thought... a going beyond

any side...

but the good is that one notices what one can see as not good, and wrong -- and against God? but love covers a multitude of sins... and all are our neighbors... and we are to treat them -- as our self

as much as within us lies and / but also speaking as God would lead us to -- which might be far different than we think to speak (or other's wish or say we should).

some thoughts.
 
Last edited:

4Him

Administrator
Staff member
How is sharing scripture and what Jesus tells us is evident about bearing fruit.

It isn't. You commenting on someone's fruit to another poster is a personal attack. You don't get to discuss board posters. Don't do it again. I suggest you re read the rules of CARM. You don't get to comment on board moderation either.
Does ad hominem attacks qualify as good fruit or bad fruit ?
If you know, why do you do it? That's a rhetorical question.
And you sure supported everything I posted when I was a calvinist and I'm much nicer as a poster now.
Not if you were personally attacking someone, which you still do, so how much nicer a poster are you? Another rhetorical question.
But now that I'm no longer arguing against non calvinists but Calvinists I've been treated as a second class citizen by those who agreed with me for the past 20 years on CARM.
Maybe you should re evaluate how you speak to people.
How is that " good fruit " and treating others with respect ?
Attacking a poster isn't treating them with respect.
If you guys don't want me here that is your decision, not mine. I'm the same person but nicer now
I'm sure some would say that's debatable.
but I'm just arguing against calvinism and not for it these days. And I was just looking through my old threads from 2020 as a calvinist where I was attacking people and was never banned and was repped by calvinists for doing that .
Really? I guess you got lucky and didn't get caught.
I'm not the only one here who can see that bias. I use to be a moddrator here when Diane was here so I know how this works. Its definitely allot different now. We use to exchange emails frequently about the forum and I would get answers in a timely manner from moderators. Now I get no response. Things that make you go hmmm.
You've never emailed me and not gotten a response.
 
Top