When A Branch Of The Vine Produces No Fruit . . .

[Exeter]

When a branch of the Vine produces no fruit what does that indicate?

You want grapes from your grapevine, you want passionfruit from your passionfruit vine, you want kiwifruit from your kiwifruit vine, and God the Father wants fruit from the branches of the true Vine which is Christ the Son.

John 15:1 "I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman."

The branches are those who are attached to Christ, are supported by Him in all things, are enlivened by Him, and expected to produce fruit.

John 15:5 "I am the vine, you are the branches: He that abides in me, and I in him, the same brings forth much fruit: for without me you can do nothing."

Branches that bear fruit get pruned but not removed. This pruning leads to the production of more fruit as long as the branch stays attached to the Vine.

John 15:2 "Every branch in me that bears not fruit he takes away: and every branch that bears fruit, he purges it, that it may bring forth more fruit."

When gardeners check out their vines and discover unproductive and dead branches there is only one solution - cut them off.

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."

It seems that the Vine does put forth some branches that prove to be unfruitful.

The fault is not with the Vine so what do others deduce about these unfruitful branches?

 

[cjab]

.

 

[cjab]

The fault is not with the Vine so what do others deduce about these unfruitful branches?

Parable of sower, of the tares, the parable of the foolish virgins who let the oil in their lamps run out, the man who hid his talent, etc, applies.

 

[Exeter]

Parable of sower, of the tares, the parable of the foolish virgins who let the oil in their lamps run out, the man who hid his talent, etc, applies.

Thanks for your reply, @cjab

The lesson is important because it exhorts us to abide in Christ and bear fruit rather than lapse into pretense and good intentions.

Quote from Matthew Henry' Commentary on the Whole Bible John 15:1-8
(1.) The doom of the unfruitful (Joh_15:2): They are taken away.
[1.] It is here intimated that there are many who pass for branches in Christ who yet do not bear fruit. Were they really united to Christ by faith, they would bear fruit; but being only tied to him by the thread of an outward profession, though they seem to be branches, they will soon be seen to be dry ones. Unfruitful professors are unfaithful professors; professors, and no more. It might be read, Every branch that beareth not fruit in me, and it comes much to one; for those that do not bear fruit in Christ, and in his Spirit and grace, are as if they bore no fruit at all, Hos_10:1.
[2.] It is here threatened that they shall be taken away, in justice to them and in kindness to the rest of the branches. From him that has not real union with Christ, and fruit produced thereby, shall be taken away even that which he seemed to have, Luk_8:18. Some think this refers primarily to Judas.

 

[cjab]

Thanks for your reply, @cjab

The lesson is important because it exhorts us to abide in Christ and bear fruit rather than lapse into pretense and good intentions.

Quote from Matthew Henry' Commentary on the Whole Bible John 15:1-8
(1.) The doom of the unfruitful (Joh_15:2): They are taken away.
[1.] It is here intimated that there are many who pass for branches in Christ who yet do not bear fruit. Were they really united to Christ by faith, they would bear fruit; but being only tied to him by the thread of an outward profession, though they seem to be branches, they will soon be seen to be dry ones. Unfruitful professors are unfaithful professors; professors, and no more. It might be read, Every branch that beareth not fruit in me, and it comes much to one; for those that do not bear fruit in Christ, and in his Spirit and grace, are as if they bore no fruit at all, Hos_10:1.
[2.] It is here threatened that they shall be taken away, in justice to them and in kindness to the rest of the branches. From him that has not real union with Christ, and fruit produced thereby, shall be taken away even that which he seemed to have, Luk_8:18. Some think this refers primarily to Judas.

Matthew Henry didn't write all the NT commentary of Matthew Henry' Commentary on the Whole Bible, as he died before it was completed. He finished it at Acts. Others wrote the rest of it.

The unfruitful will not often be taken away in this life, per the parable of the Tares, unless they are exceptionally wicked and get excommunicated, or take themselves away from the church. Per Paul, and the epistle of Jude, some of them will spend much of their time seeking to subvert the doctrines of the churches. Matt 15:15-20, Acts 20:29.

 

[Exeter]

Matthew Henry didn't write all the NT commentary of Matthew Henry' Commentary on the Whole Bible, as he died before it was completed. He finished it at Acts. Others wrote the rest of it.

The unfruitful will not often be taken away in this life, per the parable of the Tares, unless they are exceptionally wicked and get excommunicated, or take themselves away from the church. Per Paul, and the epistle of Jude, some of them will spend much of their time seeking to subvert the doctrines of the churches. Matt 15:15-20, Acts 20:29.

Thanks for the link to the short biography of Matthew Henry from which I have gleaned this quote:

He began work on his famous Commentary on the Whole Bible in 1704, completing it from Genesis to Acts by his death ten years later. Several of his fellow ministers compiled the remainder of the Commentary (Romans to Revelation) primarily from Henry’s own notes and writings.

There is a very distinctive style to Matthew Henry's writing and while I do not agree with all his comments I appreciate his insights.

 

[cjab]

Thanks for the link to the short biography of Matthew Henry from which I have gleaned this quote:


There is a very distinctive style to Matthew Henry's writing and while I do not agree with all his comments I appreciate his insights.

Yet I am not clear that the NT commentary further to the gospels really did come from Matthew Henry's "notes" (whatever that implies). Some of the NT stuff is quite third rate: in particular, the "Matthew Henry" commentary on the Johannine Comma in 1 John 5:7 here, which is seriously misleading, and hardly scholarship even when it was written, as the Comma's authenticity was in serious dispute even in his day, and so not to be imputed largely to "anti Trinitarian" bias, as the Commantary seeks to ascribe it.

 

[Exeter]

Yet I am not clear that the NT commentary further to the gospels really did come from Matthew Henry's "notes" (whatever that implies). Some of the NT stuff is quite third rate: in particular, the "Matthew Henry" commentary on the Johannine Comma in 1 John 5:7 here, which is seriously misleading, and hardly scholarship even when it was written, as the Comma's authenticity was in serious dispute even in his day, and so not to be imputed largely to "anti Trinitarian" bias, as the Commantary seeks to ascribe it.

Yes, agreed, some real doozies at times, but by and large I gain something by knowing I am at odds on some point whilst in agreement on others. I enjoy researching many resources to compare them.

Scofield is the same, some of his writings I learn from, but some of it I discard.

 

[cjab]

Yes, agreed, some real doozies at times, but by and large I gain something by knowing I am at odds on some point whilst in agreement on others. I enjoy researching many resources to compare them.

Scofield is the same, some of his writings I learn from, but some of it I discard.

Scofield I avoid, as I do pre-millennialism in general. Life is too short for that kind of thing. But the Darbyites did have some valuable insights into the OT, but as with other pre-millennialists, their NT "theology" (for want of a better word) I don't have time for. It is the NT which is the final arbiter of all theology, and as to which, so many modern and erstwhile theologians fall short.

Something of Scofield's self-aggrandizing quackery appears from his Wiki entry: "During the early 1890s, Scofield began styling himself Rev. C. I. Scofield, D.D.; but there are no extant records of any academic institution having granted him the honorary Doctor of Divinity degree."

 

[Exeter]

Scofield I avoid, as I do pre-millennialism in general. Life is too short for that kind of thing. But the Darbyites did have some valuable insights into the OT, but as with other pre-millennialists, their NT "theology" (for want of a better word) I don't have time for. It is the NT which is the final arbiter of all theology, and as to which, so many modern and erstwhile theologians fall short.

Something of Scofield's self-aggrandizing quackery appears from his Wiki entry: "During the early 1890s, Scofield began styling himself Rev. C. I. Scofield, D.D.; but there are no extant records of any academic institution having granted him the honorary Doctor of Divinity degree."

Quite a fruitful discussion, thankyou @cjab

 

[MMDAN]

In John 15:2-6, the branches that bear fruit and remain are genuine believers (like the remaining 11 disciples). The self-attached branches (cosmic connection) that bear no fruit and do not remain are not genuine believers (like Judas Iscariot). In John 15:2, Jesus mentions branches that bear no fruit and branches that bear fruit but Jesus says nothing about branches that bear fruit but then later stop bearing fruit.

Greek scholar AT Robertson points out that there are two kinds of connections with Christ as the vine (the merely cosmic which bears no fruit, the spiritual and vital which bears fruit). Probably (Bernard) Jesus here refers to Judas.

https://www.bibles.cloud/comments/robertson/43/15/2

 

[Exeter]

but Jesus says nothing about branches that bear fruit but then later stop bearing fruit.

Good points @MMDAN Thanks for your comment.

Yes, abiding in the vine is required to remain fruitful. Some previously fruitful branches on our ageing grapevine have to be cut away from time to time because when they stop feeding off the main trunk and its root system they die, never to recover.

Heb 6:4-6 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, (5) who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age— (6) and then have fallen away—to be restored to repentance, because they themselves are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting Him to open shame.

 

[Dant01]

.
Vines typically portray God's people; the Jews. In other words: John 15:1
could be paraphrased: "I am the true Israel." Now that says something very
unique about Jesus; and worth giving some serious thought.

FYI: John 15:1-7 portrays Jesus as a vine, whereas John 10:1-16 portrays him as a
shepherd.

John 15:1-7 portrays certain people as branches whereas, John 10:1-16 portrays
certain people as sheep.

Well; I had much rather be a sheep cared for by the shepherd than a branch tended
by God because the shepherd's sheep are 100% safe and secure whereas the vine's
branches are in danger of incineration.
_

 

[Exeter]

.
Vines typically portray God's people; the Jews. In other words: John 15:1
could be paraphrased: "I am the true Israel." Now that says something very
unique about Jesus; and worth giving some serious thought.

FYI: John 15:1-7 portrays Jesus as a vine, whereas John 10:1-16 portrays him as a
shepherd.

John 15:1-7 portrays certain people as branches whereas, John 10:1-16 portrays
certain people as sheep.

Well; I had much rather be a sheep cared for by the shepherd than a branch tended
by God because the shepherd's sheep are 100% safe and secure whereas the vine's
branches are in danger of incineration.
_

That's quite funny, @Dant01

Sheep need a shepherd, not because they are stupid but because they are helpless. So it is with us in Christ as David understood and wrote in Psalms.

Isa 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned, every one, to his own way; And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.

Vines are designed to produce fruit, so are we in Christ. Any branch of a vine not producing fruit is not being feed by the root so the Gardener prunes them right off. As long as we abide in Christ He makes sure we are feed, same with His sheep.

 

[Merton]

When a branch of the Vine produces no fruit what does that indicate?

The fault is not with the Vine so what do others deduce about these unfruitful branches?

I think the cutting away of the branch is a recognition by the vinekeeper that this branch is dead. In other words, once cut, you would see it was dry all the way through, not as when you prune what appears to be dead but you realize there was a green and moist pith inside after all. The fruit are external actions that people can observe, like declaring God's power with your mouth/speech, or doing a loving deed. But thankfully for us who may not have observable deeds, God sees into our hearts, to what I hope is a living pith.

(As a Catholic, I hope I am allowed to amicably discuss on this forum. It's been many years since I last posted here, and am not sure of the rules)

 

[Dant01]

.

The fault is not with the Vine

If Jesus as a vine is a 100% healthy, vigorous specimen; then how is it that he
is growing infertile branches?

It seems to me that any branch produced by Christ would surely be just as healthy
and vigorous as he. The unhealthy branches then, in my estimation, are probably
grafted. In other words: the infertile branches are in him-- that much we know for
sure --but I strongly suspect they are not of him.
_

 

[Dant01]

.

(As a Catholic, I hope I am allowed to amicably discuss on this forum. It's been
many years since I last posted here, and am not sure of the rules)

Hello;

I was christened an infant into the Roman Catholic Church in 1944, and eventually
attended catechism to complete First Holy Communion and Confirmation.

My siblings are Catholic, my mother was Catholic, my eldest brother entered the
priesthood and made it to Friar before passing away in May 2018 of cancer.
(Though he was a Friar, my brother was no saint. He had a problem with alcohol till
AA helped straighten him out).

My wife is a former Catholic, her dad was Catholic, his wife was Catholic, my aunt
and uncle were Catholics, My sister-in-law was a "religious" for a number of years
before falling out with the hierarchy that controlled her order, and my wife's cousins
are Catholic; one of them is an ordained Deacon.

I was loyal to Rome up until I was 24, then one day I was approached by a
Protestant who asked me if I was prepared for Christ's return.

Well; I must've been either asleep or absent the day that the nuns talked about
Jesus coming back because that man's question was the very first time in my whole
life that I can remember somebody telling me.

My initial reaction was alarm because I instinctively knew that were I called on the
carpet for a face-to-face with Jesus, it would not go well for me because I had a lot
to answer for. Well; I don't like being made to feel afraid so I became indignant and
demanded to know why Jesus would come back. That's when I found out for the
very first time that it was in the plan for Christ to take over the world. (I had
somehow missed that in catechism too.)

Then the Protestant asked me if I was going to heaven. Well; of course I had no
clue because Catholics honestly don't know what to expect when they pass away. I
was crossing my fingers while in the back of my mind dreading the worst.

Then the man said; "Don't you know that Jesus died for your sins?"

Well; I had been taught in catechism that Jesus died for the sins of the world; that
much I knew; but honestly believed all along that he had been a victim of
unfortunate circumstances. It was a shock to discover that Jesus' trip to the cross
was deliberate, and that his Father was thinking of me when His son passed away,
viz: my sins were among the sins of the world that Jesus took to the cross with
him.

At that very instant-- scarcely a nanosecond --something took over in my mind as I
fully realized, to my great relief, that heaven was no longer out of reach, rather,
well within my grasp!

That was an amazing experience. In just the two or three minutes of conversation
with that Protestant, I obtained an understanding of Jesus' crucifixion that many
tedious catechism classes had somehow failed to get across. Consequently, my
confidence in the Roman Catholic Church was shattered like a bar of peanut brittle
candy dropped to the sidewalk from the tippy top of the Chrysler building.

Long story short; I eventually went with that man to his church and, side by side
with him and a couple of elders, knelt at the rail down front and prayed a really
simple, naive prayer that went something like this:

"God, I know I'm a sinner. I would like to take advantage of your son's death"

My prayer wasn't much to brag about; but it was the smartest sixteen words I'd
ever spoken up to that time.

* There are folks at large who have never yet complied with the sermon on the
mount, and know in their hearts they never will. According to Matt 7:24-27 they
are in very grave danger of ending up on the wrong side of things.

I highly recommend they follow my example and speak with God by means of words
similar to mine rather than risk their chances at the great white throne event depicted
by Rev 20:11-15 where the losers will be terminated by a mode of death akin to a
foundry worker falling into a kettle of molten iron. Jesus' crucifixion has made it possible
for God to get people into a position of safety where they will never again doubt their
afterlife prospects.

● John 5:24 . . Amen, amen, I say to you: whoever hears my word, and believes in
the one who sent me, has eternal life and will not come to condemnation, but has
passed from death to life.

Buen Camino
Pleasant Journey
_

 

[Merton]

● John 5:24 . . Amen, amen, I say to you: whoever hears my word, and believes in
the one who sent me, has eternal life and will not come to condemnation, but has
passed from death to life.

Buen Camino
Pleasant Journey
_

Hi Dant01. I happened to look in on carm, and noticed you answered me. I'd like to answer in a way that keeps to the topic of the OP, which was regarding the vine and its branches.

I would say that a branch that is lying on the ground is dead, and is made alive by being attached to a living vine. It is being saved from its condition of being dead. Life is therefore what saves it from death. Then we can say that we are the dead branch, that God the Father is the vinekeeper who picks us up off the ground and attaches us to the vine, that Christ is the vine, and that the water (i.e., life or spirit) that we receive from the vine (Christ) (through the Holy Spirit coming to indwell us) is then what saves us from our dead state. This is all by grace, which refers to the fact that our Father as vinekeeper picked us up off the ground out of sheer love and concern for us, although we were obviously not producing anything good, and to the fact that the life we are being given and which is saving us from death is itself a gift.

Ephesians 2:4 . . But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our wrongdoings, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved)...

I would then add that we feel this water as love, the agape love of "love one another." We as branches then produce loving actions as good fruit. We did not have this love in us before, but now we do.

Ephesians 2:10 . . For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

To enter heaven is to remain in the vineyard, in which you already are, when the vinekeeper comes by to inspect and see which branches are alive and fruitful (they can remain) or dead (they get cut away, as they are not alive). How do you know if you have Christ's life in you? Well, do you have love in your heart, and live by it, and produce fruit of loving deeds by it? That's how you know.

It is true, though, that there are those who do 'loving deeds' as if following a script, and are not being moved by genuine love. So there is a possibility of self-delusion, which gives rise to the question, "Am I alive in Christ, really?" and, "How can I know that I did that loving deed out of love...or as following a requirement because I know I should?" In other words, how do you know if what you did was done by the law written on your heart (which would be evidence of life), or as a letter written on tablets like the Law (not by life)? And there is also the fact that if you have life in you now, how do you know that you won't change your mind in the future and fall away? Hence the famous "uncertainty" of the Catholic of which you speak... But there is hope, and the knowledge that God loves you and is not the one to deny you. If you go astray, it will be because you yourself wished it. Your path will lead where you yourself decide to go, either to follow Christ's voice as a sheep into the light, or to go into the outer darkness of your own wishing, like goats who go their own way. If you follow love as your guide, this love is how you feel God's life, and it is the water that you drink from that will be become eternal. If you stop letting love guide you, you are effectively cutting yourself off from the water from the vine, and will wither and die and be without spiritual life and will no longer know God - for God is love, and how can you know God if you don't know what love is? In short, love is not a "requirement" or a part of the "Law" as in a thing that God judges to see whether to let you in or not. Instead, love (AKA the gift of the Spirit, the water of the vine, sanctifying grace or simply "grace") is necessary because it is the medicine itself and the "life" itself that is saving you from your death - i.e., from the condition that you are in and the life you lead and the life you are surrounded by when you do not have love in you, i.e. the state of darkness and the dog-eat-dog world of hell.

Christ died on the cross out of love for you. Whatever punishment you believe you deserve and which you think disqualifies you for God's love...was taken by Jesus upon himself. God sent him because God already loved you. The cross is the way that God is able to move you to repentance, and to open you up so as to give you life and heal you, through faith. "By his stripes we are healed."

1 Peter 2:24 . . and He Himself brought our sins in His body up on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live for righteousness; by His wounds you were healed. For you were continually straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls.

Acts 5:31 . . He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

Acts 11:18 . . When they heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, “Well then, God has also granted to the Gentiles the repentance that leads to life.”

Galatians 3: 1 . . You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?

Romans 5:5 . . And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.

Romans 2:29 . . But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from people, but from God.

 

[Our Lord's God]

When a branch of the Vine produces no fruit what does that indicate?

You want grapes from your grapevine, you want passionfruit from your passionfruit vine, you want kiwifruit from your kiwifruit vine, and God the Father wants fruit from the branches of the true Vine which is Christ the Son.

John 15:1 "I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman."

The branches are those who are attached to Christ, are supported by Him in all things, are enlivened by Him, and expected to produce fruit.

John 15:5 "I am the vine, you are the branches: He that abides in me, and I in him, the same brings forth much fruit: for without me you can do nothing."

Branches that bear fruit get pruned but not removed. This pruning leads to the production of more fruit as long as the branch stays attached to the Vine.

John 15:2 "Every branch in me that bears not fruit he takes away: and every branch that bears fruit, he purges it, that it may bring forth more fruit."

When gardeners check out their vines and discover unproductive and dead branches there is only one solution - cut them off.

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."

It seems that the Vine does put forth some branches that prove to be unfruitful.

The fault is not with the Vine so what do others deduce about these unfruitful branches?

Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
Matthew 7:19