Commentaries on John 15

[djrakowski]

I’ve entered into a discussion with the senior pastor of the evangelical church I attended before my conversion to Catholicism, and we’re talking about the ‘vine and branches’ discourse in John 15. I’m going to read a commentary he recommended, but I’d like some suggestions for faithful Catholic commentaries on this passage to aide in my responses to him and his recommended book. Any ideas?

Dan

 

[runandsew]

Maybe this could help you. I just found the site and it seems to have some good resources on it.

Catena Aurea

Catena Aurea - The Golden Chain
Of St. Thomas Aquinas

The Golden Chain is a commentary on of the Gospels by the Early Church Fathers compiled together.

Webmasters: Please respect the hard work many people have put into bringing these texts online. You are welcome to put the text on your website, but please link to our website on each page that you use our texts.

 

[Chesster]

Go to Cornelius A Lapide’s commentary.

 

[lak611]

You might like the Haydock Commentary.

 

[djrakowski]

You might like the Haydock Commentary.

Hey, thanks for linking directly to the John 15 commentary

My wife looked this up for me a few days ago, and it didn’t give quite enough information for my purposes. This pastor holds to OSAS theology, and I was trying to point out an inconsistency in his interpretation of verse 2, but the Haydock commentary doesn’t say enough to help me.

 

[lak611]

Hey, thanks for linking directly to the John 15 commentary

You’re welcome.

My wife looked this up for me a few days ago, and it didn’t give quite enough information for my purposes. This pastor holds to OSAS theology, and I was trying to point out an inconsistency in his interpretation of verse 2, but the Haydock commentary doesn’t say enough to help me.

Sorry it was not helpful. Unfortunately, there is no commentary on verse 2.

 

[djrakowski]

Sorry it was not helpful. Unfortunately, there is no commentary on verse 2.

Oh, no need to apologize. You didn’t compile the commentary yourself

There is a short commentary on v. 2, but it doesn’t hit the part I need explained. It talks about the branches that are pruned, but not those that are cut off, taken away, etc (depending on the translation). The implications of cut off/taken away seem quite clear when linked with v. 6, but this pastor is suggesting something altogether different. Here’s an excerpt:

My question:

John 15:2 (NIV) - “He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful.”

You stated that it would be better to translate “cuts off” as “lifts up,” in a manner analagous to what’s done in horticulture when a sagging branch is trellised to allow more room for its fruit to grow. Is there any justification in the original language(s) to translate it as you suggest? I find no modern English-language translation in which it is translated as anything near “lifts up,” and wonder why that’s the case if it’s a better translation of the verse.

Pastor’s Answer:

The Greek word is aipei and you can use your Strongs concordance to see how the Greek word is used in other passages. That will help you a lot to understand it’s meaning in the John 15 passage. Too many commentators have translated verse 6 because of verse 6 rather than look at the grammar of verse 2. As some modern scholars have pointed out, people have read their theology into the text rather than first try to understand the analogy through the horticulture of the time. You can also read Bruce Wilkinson’s book The Secret of the Vine which is an accurate and practical treatment of the text.

Any suggestions? I’m going to read the Wilkinson book, as it’s relatively short, and his other stuff is quite easy to refute, so this should be as well.

Dan

 

[lak611]

Oh, no need to apologize. You didn’t compile the commentary yourself

There is a short commentary on v. 2, but it doesn’t hit the part I need explained. It talks about the branches that are pruned, but not those that are cut off, taken away, etc (depending on the translation). The implications of cut off/taken away seem quite clear when linked with v. 6, but this pastor is suggesting something altogether different. Here’s an excerpt:

Any suggestions? I’m going to read the Wilkinson book, as it’s relatively short, and his other stuff is quite easy to refute, so this should be as well.

Dan

The pastor is wrong. From the NASB:

Joh 15:2 "Every3956 branch2814 in Me that does not bear5342 fruit2590, He takes142 away142; and every3956 branch that bears5342 fruit2590, He prunes2508 it so2443 that it may bear5342 more4183 fruit2590.

From Strong’s, the Greek word for “prunes” is:

G2508
καθαίρω
kathairō
kath-ah’ee-ro
From G2513; to cleanse, that is, (specifically) to prune; figuratively to expiate: - purge.

Prune, purge and expiate are found in a Protestant source.

 

[djrakowski]

The pastor is wrong. From the NASB: From Strong’s, the Greek word for “prunes” isrune, purge and expiate are found in a Protestant source.

Kewl! Is Strong’s online? If not, what does it say about “takes away?” (# 142)

 

[lak611]

Kewl! Is Strong’s online?

Yes. I got it from e-Sword. It is included free upon installation of e-Sword.

If not, what does it say about “takes away?” (# 142)

G142
αἴρω
airō
ah’ee-ro
A primary verb; to lift; by implication to take up or away; figuratively to raise (the voice), keep in suspense (the mind); specifically to sail away (that is, weigh anchor); by Hebraism (compare [H5375]) to expiate sin: - away with, bear (up), carry, lift up, loose, make to doubt, put away, remove, take (away, up).

Also,

G846
αὐτός
autos
ow-tos’
From the particle αὖ au (perhaps akin to the base of G109 through the idea of a baffling wind; backward); the reflexive pronoun self, used (alone or in the compound of G1438) of the third person, and (with the proper personal pronoun) of the other persons: - her, it (-self), one, the other, (mine) own, said, ([self-], the) same, ([him-, my-, thy-]) self, [your-] selves, she, that, their (-s), them (-selves]), there -at, -by, -in, -into, -of, -on, -with], they, (these) things, this (man), those, together, very, which. Compare G848.

G848
αὑτοῦ
hautou
how-too’
Contraction for G1438; self (in some oblique case or reflexive relation): - her (own), (of) him (-self), his (own), of it, thee, their (own), them (-selves), they.

 

[djrakowski]

So the problem is that the word translated as “taken away” could be legitimately translated in the way that Pastor suggested, but I would contend that the context, especially considering v. 6, demands that it be translated just as it is. His suggestion is that we need to ignore v. 6 and simply translate v. 2 as an analogy to horticultural practices, where a drooping or unproductive branch is “lifted up” by a trellis to allow room for the plant’s fruit to grow. If I respond, I’m going to note that the primary definition, as suggested by Strong’s, is that it should be rendered exactly as it is.

He says that our reading is an attempt to force theology back onto the verse.

 

[OnlineHarvest]

So the problem is that the word translated as “taken away” could be legitimately translated in the way that Pastor suggested, but I would contend that the context, especially considering v. 6, demands that it be translated just as it is. His suggestion is that we need to ignore v. 6 and simply translate v. 2 as an analogy to horticultural practices, where a drooping or unproductive branch is “lifted up” by a trellis to allow room for the plant’s fruit to grow. If I respond, I’m going to note that the primary definition, as suggested by Strong’s, is that it should be rendered exactly as it is.

He says that our reading is an attempt to force theology back onto the verse.

You must also remember to read all these passages in light of the total deposit of God-breathed Scripture. There are other texts which deal very conclusively and clearly on this topic. Those verses which are more clear have greater weight than those which are not as clear.

And yes, when other texts are avoided, one can easily read a desired theology into a text. You will make the text mean what you want it to mean instead of what is biblically consistent.

 

[ryanoneil]

It might be helpful to compair John 15 with Rom 11:16-24. If we don’t bear fruit, we are cut off, wither up and die. This clearly demonstrates losing salvation. Fortunately we can be grafted back in if we believe again.

Peace,

Ryan

 

[OnlineHarvest]

It might be helpful to compair John 15 with Rom 11:16-24. If we don’t bear fruit, we are cut off, wither up and die. This clearly demonstrates losing salvation. Fortunately we can be grafted back in if we believe again.

Peace,

Ryan

That is inconsistent. If a branch is cut, John 15 says that it is picked up and thrown into the fire and burned. That branch cannot be grafted in again. If you want to look at this story as the Roman Catholic does, you will have to conclude that once the branch is cut (lose salvation), it cannot be put back (cannot regain that salvation once lost). If you want to be consistent…

If you are going to take stock in the imagery and the context, then tell me, which gardener cuts off a dead branch and reattaches it a time later? A dead branch will not grow again, especially when it is cut from the vine!

This is my point. I believe the OP and you are taking too much stock on this imagery when there are other more clear verses about the security of the believer, the TRUE believer.

 

[NotWorthy]

Why don’t you try Agape Bible Study:

**Verse 2: **“Every branch in me that bears no fruit he cuts away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes to make it bear even more.”

John is using a play on two similar sounding Greek verbs which we translate as “cuts away”= airein and “prunes” [better translation = *trims clean

] =*kathairein. *In the next verse he will use the adjective “clean” *= katharos *which corresponds to the second verb and unites the idea of cutting with cleansing or purifying.

**Question: **If God the Son is the True Vine, and God the Father is the vinedresser who prunes and maintains the branches what do the branches represent?
**Answer: **New Covenant believers, the Church, the new Israel.

**Question: **What is the relationship between Jesus the Vine and the New Covenant believers as the branches?
**Answer: **The branches are physically and spiritually united to the Vine and receive nourishment, life and fruitfulness, from the True Vine that is Christ.

**Question: **What is the “fruit” that the branches bear? Who is it who provides the life-force of nourishment to the branches that is the New Covenant Church?
**Answer: **God the Holy Spirit is the life-giving “sap” of the Father’s Vine which is Christ and God the Holy Spirit produces the fruit of the willing branches. The fruit that the branches bear is a life of obedience to the commandments, especially the commandment to love one another as Christ has loved us [see John 13:34-35 and 15:12-17]. This fruitful love will result in the works of God working through believers and reaching out to change the world. See CCC# 1108

**Question: **What happens to a branch that bears no fruit? What does this symbolism represent?
**Answer: **The significance of this statement is that to obey Christ’s command to love requires active faith. The failure to produce works of love jeopardizes the spiritual life of the branches which may become separated from the True Vine.

**Question: **What does this verse imply about the condition of our salvation?
**Answer: **To be part of the True Vine is to have life eternally = salvation.

Continued

 

[NotWorthy]

**Question: **Is it possible for a believer to loose his salvation? Hint: see John 15:6; 1Timothy 1:18-19 and Revelation 3:5; 20:12
**Answer: **Yes, but only if the believer chooses to separate himself from Christ through unrepented sin. The journey to salvation is a life-long process but he/she who perseveres in faith to the end will be saved! CCC# 161-162 *“Believing in Jesus Christ and in the One who sent him for our salvation is necessary for obtaining that salvation. ‘Since without faith it is impossible to please God’ and to attain to the fellowship of his sons, therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will anyone obtain eternal life but he who endures to the end.” *
[162]”*Faith is an entirely free gift that God makes to man. We can lose this priceless gift, as St. Paul indicated to St. Timothy: ‘Wage the good warfare, holding faith and a good conscience. By rejecting conscience, certain persons have made shipwreck of their faith.’ To live, grow, and persevere in the faith until the end we must nourish it with the word of God; we must beg the Lord to increase our faith; it must be ‘working through charity,’ abounding in hope, and rooted in the faith of the Church.” *

In His letter to the Church at Sardis Jesus promised: *“Anyone who proves victorious will be dressed, like these, in white robes; I shall not blot that name out of the book of life, but acknowledge it in the presence of my Father and his angels.” * To remain united to the True Vine is to have our name inscribed in the Book of Life and to secure our salvation.

This teaching is consistent with the Old Testament teaching of divine punishment as a result of disobedience to the Covenant in Ezekiel 15:1-6 where the prophet describes fire consuming the unfruitful vine just as Yahweh warns that He will destroy Jerusalem with fire “The fire shall yet consume them, and you will know that I am the Lord, when I set my face against them. And I will make the land desolate because they have acted faithlessly says the Lord God.”

**Question: **What does the God the Vinedresser do to the fruitful branches? What does He remove and what is the desired result? Explain the symbolism of this passage.

**Answer: **He “prunes” the branch to make it bear even more fruit. If you have ever kept a grape wine you know that wherever you prune new life springs back to produce fruit. The pruning sometimes seems sever when seemingly healthy grown has to be removed so the plant will continue to grow in the desired direction to produce the most fruit. So it is in our lives when God the Vinedresser prunes us to keep us from “growing astray”. In His fatherly discipline He prunes out our selfishness and indifference through the trials we experience in this life to encourage us to produce, through the work of the Holy Spirit, the desired “fruit”/works so pleasing to God [see Hebrews 12:5-11; James 1:1-4; 1Peter 1:6-7]… The desired result is a fruitful harvest of souls for heaven.

 

[OnlineHarvest]

Can you please just summarize why it wouldn’t be inconsistent. I’m allergic to cut and pastes!

 

[Church_Militant]

That is inconsistent. If a branch is cut, John 15 says that it is picked up and thrown into the fire and burned. That branch cannot be grafted in again.

If you are going to take stock in the imagery and the context, then tell me, which gardener cuts off a dead branch and reattaches it a time later? A dead branch will not grow again, especially when it is cut from the vine!

This is my point. I believe the OP and you are taking too much stock on this imagery when there are other more clear verses about the security of the believer, the TRUE believer.

OH,
The problem that you encounter here is that we are here dealing with Almighty God and not a man. This is the God that raises the dead and grafts the wild olive branch into the one in His garden.

The passage also says that God prunes branches that He wants more fruit from and that certainly has some application here as well.

The problem is that we, because we cannot know another’s heart, cannot say when and if a branch is cut off and bound for fire. It’s not our place to say that anyway, and according to the New Testament, we would open ourselves up to judgement by the same imperfect standards that we use. (No thanks…)

I guess…in the end, the best lesson is to make very sure that you are that faithful branch bearing fruit a hundred fold.

If you want to look at this story as the Roman Catholic does, you will have to conclude that once the branch is cut (lose salvation), it cannot be put back (cannot regain that salvation once lost). If you want to be consistent…

And Catholic theology is just that…consistent… with the total context of the New Testament.

The inconsistency IMO, is in those who say it cannot be lost in contradiction to the Word of God.

I believe that we are better servants of God if we are busy watching for and welcoming back those prodigals that Our Father is always watching and waiting for. If I am busy with these…I will have little time to waste with conjecture as to who may have lost their salvation.

In the eloquence of Bishop Fulton J. Sheen.

“There is a need to take hold of tortured souls like Peter, agnostics like Thomas, and mystics like John and lead them to tears, to their knees or to resting on His Sacred Heart.”

 

[Church_Militant]

NotWorthy, Just give the man the link to that study. that C&P exceeds the forum rules limit. Banned Topics# 22

 

[NotWorthy]

NotWorthy, Just give the man the link to that study. that C&P exceeds the forum rules limit. Banned Topics# 22

All right, boss! But:

a) The verse in question was embedded in a much longer html document, so I thought I’d do the work for him. And
b) It seems that rule hasn’t been enforced much lately.