Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament

SAVE OFFLINE

15:1–4​ ​ ​Vine​ ​imagery​ ​was​ ​common​ ​in​ ​the​ ​ancient​ ​world,​ ​as​ ​in​ ​the​ ​case​ ​of​ ​the​ ​cult​ ​of Dionysos,​ ​the​ ​Greek​ ​god​ ​of​ ​wine.​ ​The​ ​O1T​ ​frequently​ ​uses​ ​the​ ​vineyard​ ​or​ ​vine​ ​as​ ​a​ ​symbol 2 for​ ​Israel,​ ​God’s​ ​covenant​ ​people,​ ​especially​ ​in​ ​two​ ​“vineyard​ ​songs”​ ​found​ ​in​ ​Isaiah. 6 However,​ ​while​ ​the​ ​vine’s​ ​purpose​ ​of​ ​existence​ ​is​ ​the​ ​bearing​ ​of​ ​fruit​ ​for​ ​its​ ​owner, references​ ​to​ ​Israel​ ​as​ ​God’s​ ​vine​ ​regularly​ ​stress​ ​Israel’s​ ​failure​ ​to​ ​produce​ ​good​ ​fruit, 3 issuing​ ​in​ ​divine​ ​judgment​ ​(Carson​ ​1991:​ ​513). 7​​ ​In​ ​contrast​ ​to​ ​Israel’s​ ​failure,​ ​Jesus​ ​claims to​ ​be​ ​the​ ​“true​ ​vine,”​ ​bringing​ ​forth​ ​the​ ​fruit​ ​that​ ​Israel​ ​failed​ ​to​ ​produce.​ ​Thus​ ​Jesus,​ ​the 4 Messiah​ ​and​ ​Son​ ​of​ ​God,​ ​fulfills​ ​Israel’s​ ​destiny​ ​as​ ​the​ ​true​ ​vine​ ​of​ ​God​ ​(Ps.​ ​80:14–17). 8 The​ ​illustration​ ​of​ ​a​ ​vine​ ​and​ ​its​ ​branches,​ ​even​ ​more​ ​intimate​ ​than​ ​the​ ​shepherd imagery​ ​in​ ​John​ ​10,​ ​focuses​ ​on​ ​the​ ​organic,​ ​vital​ ​connection​ ​between​ ​the​ ​branches​ ​and​ ​the vine.​ ​In​ ​a​ ​major​ ​paradigm​ ​shift,​ ​Jesus’​ ​presence​ ​among​ ​his​ ​disciples​ ​is​ ​about​ ​to​ ​be​ ​replaced with​ ​the​ ​Spirit’s​ ​taking​ ​up​ ​residence​ ​in​ ​believers​ ​(cf.​ ​14:16–18).​ ​This​ ​spiritual​ ​relationship must​ ​be​ ​nurtured​ ​if​ ​Jesus’​ ​followers​ ​are​ ​to​ ​remain​ ​connected​ ​to​ ​their​ ​exalted​ ​Lord. “I​ ​am​ ​the​ ​true​ ​vine”​ ​(cf.​ ​Jer.​ ​2:21​ ​LX5X)​ ​is​ ​the​ ​last​ ​of​ ​John’s​ ​seven​ ​“I​ ​am”​ ​sayings​ ​and the​ ​only​ ​one​ ​adding​ ​a​ ​further​ ​assertion,​ ​namely,​ ​that​ ​the​ ​Father​ ​is​ ​the​ ​gardener.​ ​“True” (​ἀληθινή,​ ​alēthinē​)​ ​vine​ ​contrasts​ ​Jesus​ ​with​ ​O6T​ ​Israel​ ​in​ ​its​ ​lack​ ​of​ ​fruitfulness​ ​and spiritual​ ​degeneracy​ ​(Morris​ ​1995:​ ​593;​ ​Ridderbos​ ​1997:​ ​515;​ ​Beasley-Murray​ ​1999:​ ​272; Moloney​ ​1998:​ ​419).​ ​In​ ​the​ ​ancient​ ​Near​ ​East,​ ​vines​ ​generally​ ​lie​ ​on​ ​the​ ​ground​ ​or​ ​wrap themselves​ ​around​ ​a​ ​tree.​ ​To​ ​this​ ​day,​ ​they​ ​are​ ​a​ ​common​ ​sight​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Holy​ ​Land,​ ​especially in​ ​Judea.​ ​Joseph​ ​is​ ​called​ ​a​ ​“fruitful​ ​vine”​ ​in​ ​Gen.​ ​49:22.​ ​Building​ ​on​ ​the​ ​O7T​ ​depiction​ ​of Israel​ ​as​ ​a​ ​vine,​ ​the​ ​vine​ ​in​ ​later​ ​years​ ​served​ ​as​ ​a​ ​symbol​ ​for​ ​wisdom​ ​(Sir.​ ​24:17),​ ​the 9 dominion​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Messiah​ ​(2 Bar8.​ ​39:7),​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Judaism​ ​of​ ​Jesus’​ ​day. 9​​ ​The​ ​Jerusalem

OT​ ​Old​ ​Testament ​ ​Ridderbos​ ​(1997:​ ​515)​ ​calls​ ​it​ ​the​ ​“redemptive-historical​ ​description​ ​of​ ​the​ ​people​ ​of​ ​God.”​ ​See Isa.​ ​5:1–7;​ ​27:2–6;​ ​cf.​ ​Ps.​ ​80:8–16;​ ​Jer.​ ​2:21;​ ​6:9;​ ​12:10–13;​ ​Ezek.​ ​15:1–8;​ ​17:5–10;​ ​19:10–14;​ ​Hos. 10:1–2;​ ​14:7;​ ​see​ ​also​ ​Sir.​ ​24:17–23;​ ​2 Esdr.​ ​(4 Ezra)​ ​5:23.​ ​An​ ​extensive​ ​allegorical​ ​depiction​ ​of Israel​ ​as​ ​a​ ​vine​ ​is​ ​also​ ​found​ ​in​ ​Lev.​ ​Rab.​ ​36.2​ ​(with​ ​reference​ ​to​ ​Ps.​ ​80:9). 37​ ​ ​Since​ ​the​ ​OT​ ​develops​ ​the​ ​vine​ ​metaphor​ ​in​ ​predominantly​ ​negative​ ​terms,​ ​the​ ​notion​ ​of​ ​the vine​ ​as​ ​the​ ​source​ ​of​ ​life​ ​for​ ​the​ ​branches​ ​is​ ​largely​ ​absent​ ​(but​ ​see​ ​Sir.​ ​24:17–21).​ ​Schnackenburg (1990:​ ​3.98)​ ​notes​ ​that​ ​the​ ​vine​ ​is​ ​fruit-producing,​ ​not​ ​life-producing. 48​ ​ ​Sidebottom​ ​(1956–57:​ ​234)​ ​points​ ​to​ ​similarities​ ​in​ ​vocabulary​ ​between​ ​John​ ​15​ ​and​ ​the​ m ​ āšāl of​ ​the​ ​vine​ ​in​ ​Ezek.​ ​17.​ ​Other​ ​parallels​ ​are​ ​adduced​ ​by​ ​Vawter​ ​(1964).​ ​A​ ​general​ ​survey​ ​is​ ​found​ ​in Whitacre,​ ​DJG​ ​867–68. 5 LXX​ ​Septuagint 6 OT​ ​Old​ ​Testament 7 OT​ ​Old​ ​Testament 8 2 Bar.​ ​2​ ​(Syriac​ ​Apocalypse​ ​of)​ ​Baruch 99​ See Barrett 1978: 472. The term ἄμπελος (ampelos​,​ ​vine)​ ​occurs​ ​elsewhere​ ​in​ ​the​ ​NT​ ​only in​ ​Matt.​ ​26:29​ ​pars.;​ ​James​ ​3:12;​ ​Rev.​ ​14:18–19.​ ​References​ ​to​ ​vines​ ​and​ ​vineyards​ ​occur frequently​ ​in​ ​Synoptic​ ​parables​ ​(Matt.​ ​20:1–16;​ ​21:28–32;​ ​21:33–44​ ​pars.;​ ​Luke​ ​13:6–9). 1

26​

temple​ ​was​ ​adorned​ ​with​ ​a​ ​golden​ ​vine​ ​with​ ​large​ ​clusters​ ​of​ ​grapes​ ​(see​ ​commentary​ ​at 10 14:31).​1 0 “My​ ​Father​ ​is​ ​the​ ​vinedresser”​ ​(cf.​ ​1​ ​Cor.​ ​3:6–9)​ ​indicates​ ​that​ ​he​ ​is​ ​“in​ ​supreme 11 control​ ​of​ ​the​ ​whole​ ​process”​ ​(Barrett​ ​1978:​ ​473).​1 1​​ ​Though​ ​the​ ​Father​ ​is​ ​not​ ​referred​ ​to frequently​ ​in​ ​the​ ​present​ ​passage,​ ​he​ ​does​ ​reappear​ ​in​ ​15:8–10​ ​(Borchert​ ​2002:​ ​138).​ ​The γεωργός​​ ​(​geōrgos​,​ ​vinedresser​ ​[translated​ ​“farmer”​ ​in​ ​2​ ​Tim.​ ​2:6​ ​and​ ​James​ ​5:7])​ ​may merely​ ​be​ ​the​ ​one​ ​who​ ​tills​ ​the​ ​soil,​ ​which​ ​in​ ​Palestine​ ​is​ ​frequently​ ​all​ ​that​ ​is​ ​done​ ​for​ ​the vineyard.​ ​Yet​ ​the​ ​term​ ​can​ ​also​ ​refer​ ​more​ ​specifically​ ​to​ ​a​ ​vinedresser,​ ​as​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Synoptic parable​ ​of​ ​the​ ​tenants​ ​(Mark​ ​12:1–9​ ​pars12.;​ ​see​ ​Ridderbos​ ​1997:​ ​515​ ​n.​ ​113).​ ​Isaiah’s​ ​first vineyard​ ​song,​ ​which​ ​constitutes​ ​the​ ​background​ ​of​ ​this​ ​parable,​ ​depicts​ ​God​ ​as​ ​spading, clearing,​ ​planting,​ ​and​ ​taking​ ​care​ ​of​ ​the​ ​vineyard,​ ​only​ ​to​ ​be​ ​rewarded​ ​with​ ​sour​ ​grapes 13 (Isa.​ ​5:1–7;​ ​cf.​ ​Ps.​ ​80:8–9).​1 2 The​ ​theme​ ​of​ ​mutual​ ​indwelling,​ ​already​ ​mentioned​ ​in​ ​14:20,​ ​is​ ​now​ ​represented​ ​in terms​ ​of​ ​vine​ ​imagery​ ​(Carson​ ​1991:​ ​514).​ ​The​ ​statement​ ​in​ ​15:2​ ​prepares​ ​for​ ​an understanding​ ​of​ ​the​ ​critical​ ​expression​ ​μένω​​ ​(​menō​,​ ​remain)​ ​in​ ​15:4–16​ ​(Bultmann​ ​1971: 532).​ ​The​ ​vinedresser​ ​does​ ​two​ ​things​ ​to​ ​ensure​ ​maximum​ ​fruit​ ​production​ ​(“he​ ​removes​ ​… 14 he​ ​prunes”;​ ​cf.​ ​Heb.​ ​6:7–8).​1 3​​ ​In​ ​the​ ​winter,​ ​he​ ​cuts​ ​off​ ​the​ ​dry​ ​and​ ​withered​ ​branches. This​ ​may​ ​involve​ ​pruning​ ​the​ ​vines​ ​to​ ​the​ ​extent​ ​that​ ​only​ ​the​ ​stalks​ ​remain​ ​(Engel 1948–49).​ ​Later,​ ​when​ ​the​ ​vine​ ​has​ ​sprouted​ ​leaves,​ ​he​ ​removes​ ​the​ ​smaller​ ​shoots​ ​so​ ​that

​ ​Coins​ ​of​ ​the​ ​first​ ​Jewish​ ​revolt​ ​(​A.D.​​ ​66–70)​ ​feature​ ​a​ ​vine​ ​and​ ​branches​ ​as​ ​a​ ​symbol​ ​of Jerusalem,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​rabbinic​ ​school​ ​at​ ​Jamnia​ ​headed​ ​by​ ​Rabbi​ ​Yoh.anan​ ​ben​ ​Zakkai​ ​after​ ​the destruction​ ​of​ ​the​ ​temple​ ​was​ ​known​ ​as​ ​a​ ​“vineyard”​ ​(​m.​ ​Ketub.​ ​4.6).​ ​Philo,​ ​characteristically, interprets​ ​Isa.​ ​5:7​ ​in​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​“that​ ​most​ ​holy​ ​vineyard,”​ ​the​ ​virtuous​ ​soul​ ​(​Dreams​ ​2.26 §§172–73). 1111​ ​ ​Some​ ​interpreters​ ​(e.g.,​ ​Barrett​ ​1978:​ ​473;​ ​Carson​ ​1991:​ ​514;​ ​Witherington​ ​1995:​ ​258)​ ​view the​ ​depiction​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Son​ ​as​ ​the​ ​vine​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Father​ ​as​ ​the​ ​vinedresser​ ​in​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Son’s subordination​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Father.​ ​Indeed,​ ​this​ ​seems​ ​to​ ​be​ ​the​ ​implication​ ​in​ ​the​ ​present​ ​allegory, though​ ​it​ ​is​ ​not​ ​at​ ​the​ ​front​ ​of​ ​the​ ​message.​ ​Borchert​ ​(2002:​ ​140)​ ​affirms​ ​the​ ​functional,​ ​though not​ ​essential,​ ​subordination​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Son​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Father. 12 pars.​ ​parallels 1312​ ​ ​The​ ​Roman​ ​writer​ ​Lucian​ ​portrays​ ​God​ ​as​ ​γεωργός​ ​who​ ​acts​ ​without​ ​human collaboration​ ​(​Phalaris​ ​2.8​ ​[second​ ​century​ A​ .D.]​). 1413​ ​ ​Westcott​ ​(1908:​ ​2.198)​ ​notes,​ ​“Everything​ ​is​ ​removed​ ​from​ ​the​ ​branch​ ​which​ ​tends​ ​to​ ​divert the​ ​vital​ ​power​ ​from​ ​the​ ​production​ ​of​ ​fruit.”​ ​The​ ​term​ ​καθαίρω​ ​(​kathairō​,​ ​prune)​ ​is​ ​rare​ ​in the​ ​LXX​ ​and​ ​occurs​ ​only​ ​here​ ​in​ ​the​ ​NT.​ ​It​ ​is​ ​found​ ​frequently​ ​with​ ​reference​ ​to​ ​agricultural processes​ ​(though​ ​not​ ​necessarily​ ​pruning)​ ​in​ ​secular​ ​Greek​ ​(e.g.,​ ​Xenophon,​ ​Oeconomicus​ ​18.6; 20.11). On cutting, see Matt. 3:10 par.; 7:19; Rom. 11:22, 24 (ἐκκόπτω, ekkoptō​,​ ​cut​ ​off).​ ​On pruning,​ ​see​ ​Isa.​ ​18:5;​ ​Jer.​ ​5:10​ ​(cf.​ ​Heb.​ ​12:4–11).​ ​Commentators​ ​are​ ​virtually​ ​unanimous​ ​in detecting a play on words in the parallel use of αἴρω (airō​,​ ​remove)​ ​and​ ​καθαίρω​ ​in​ ​15:2 (e.g.,​ ​Carson​ ​1991:​ ​515). 1010​

the​ ​main​ ​fruitbearing​ ​branches​ ​receive​ ​adequate​ ​nourishment​ ​(R. Brown​ ​1970:​ ​675; 15 Schnackenburg​ ​1990:​ ​3.97).​1 4 The​ ​pruning​ ​activity​ ​of​ ​the​ ​divine​ ​vinedresser​ ​resembles​ ​that​ ​of​ ​every​ ​earthly 16 γεωργός​.1​ 5​​ ​Since​ ​the​ ​term​ ​underlying​ ​“cut”​ ​(α ​ ἴρω,​ ​airō​)​ ​can​ ​mean​ ​either​ ​“cut​ ​off” (negative​ ​purpose)​ ​or​ ​“prop​ ​up”​ ​(restorative),​ ​some​ ​have​ ​argued​ ​that​ ​the​ ​present​ ​reference 17 should​ ​be​ ​understood​ ​in​ ​the​ ​latter​ ​sense.​ ​But​ ​this​ ​is​ ​almost​ ​certainly​ ​erroneous.​1 6​​ ​More likely,​ ​the​ ​antithetical​ ​parallelism​ ​of​ ​the​ ​first​ ​part​ ​of​ ​each​ ​statement​ ​(“every​ ​branch​ ​in​ ​me that​ ​bears​ ​no​ ​fruit”/“every​ ​branch​ ​in​ ​me​ ​that​ ​does​ ​bear​ ​fruit”)​ ​is​ ​matched​ ​by​ ​corresponding divine​ ​action,​ ​be​ ​it​ ​judgment​ ​(negative​ ​[see​ ​15:6])​ ​or​ ​discipline​ ​(positive​ ​[Laney​ ​1989:​ ​esp. 58–60]).​ ​In​ ​the​ ​case​ ​of​ ​Jesus’​ ​followers,​ ​Judas​ ​was​ ​an​ ​example​ ​of​ ​the​ ​former,​ ​Peter​ ​of​ ​the 18 latter.​1 7 The​ ​term​ ​κλῆμα​ ​(​klēma,​ ​branch​ ​[found​ ​in​ ​the​ ​N19T​ ​only​ ​here​ ​and​ ​in​ ​15:4–6])​ ​occurs​ ​in the​ ​LX20X​ ​regularly​ ​for​ ​the​ ​shoot​ ​of​ ​a​ ​vine​ ​(e.g.,​ ​Num.​ ​13:23;​ ​Ezek.​ ​17:6)​ ​as​ ​distinct​ ​from the​ ​branch​ ​(​κλάδος​,​ ​klados​)​ ​of​ ​other​ ​trees.​ ​The​ ​expression​ ​is​ ​used​ ​particularly​ ​of​ ​vine tendrils,​ ​though​ ​it​ ​occasionally​ ​refers​ ​to​ ​heavier​ ​branches​ ​as​ ​well.​ ​In​ ​15:5,​ ​Jesus​ ​makes clear​ ​that​ ​the​ ​branches​ ​in​ ​the​ ​present​ ​symbolic​ ​discourse​ ​represent​ ​his​ ​followers.​ ​In​ ​the​ ​case of​ ​Jesus’​ ​followers,​ ​“in​ ​me”​ ​(15:2)​ ​would​ ​include​ ​Judas​ ​(cf.​ ​13:10–11;​ ​see​ ​R. Brown​ ​1970: 675–76;​ ​Morris​ ​1995:​ ​594​ ​n. 10).​ ​In​ ​the​ ​church​ ​age,​ ​the​ ​designation​ ​may​ ​extend​ ​to​ ​nominal 21 (but​ ​not​ ​true)​ ​believers.​1 8​​ ​Otherwise,​ ​Jesus’​ ​own​ ​credentials​ ​as​ ​true,​ ​fruit-producing​ ​vine would​ ​appear​ ​to​ ​be​ ​compromised​ ​(Carson​ ​1991:​ ​515). The​ ​repeated​ ​references​ ​to​ ​“does​ ​not​ ​bear​ ​fruit​ ​…​ ​does​ ​bear​ ​fruit​ ​…​ ​bear​ ​even​ ​more fruit”​ ​draw​ ​attention​ ​to​ ​the​ ​fact​ ​that​ ​the​ ​bearing​ ​of​ ​fruit​ ​is​ ​God’s​ ​primary​ ​creative​ ​(Gen. 1:11–12,​ ​22,​ ​28)​ ​and​ ​redemptive​ ​purpose​ ​(cf.​ ​John​ ​15:8,​ ​16).​ ​The​ ​O22T​ ​prophets​ ​envisioned ​ ​Philo​ ​refers​ ​to​ ​“superfluous​ ​shoots​ ​…​ ​which​ ​are​ ​a​ ​great​ ​injury​ ​to​ ​the​ ​genuine​ ​shoots,​ ​and​ ​which the​ ​husbandmen​ ​cleanse​ ​and​ ​prune”​ ​(​Dreams​ ​2.9​ ​§64;​ ​cf.​ ​Husb.​ ​2​ ​§10).​ ​For​ ​Palestinian horticultural​ ​practice,​ ​see​ ​Dalman​ ​1928–39:​ ​4.312–13. 1615​ ​ ​Note​ ​Horace,​ ​Epodi​ ​2.13:​ ​“cutting​ ​off​ ​useless​ ​branches​ ​with​ ​the​ ​pruning​ ​knife.” 1716​ See especially Carson (1991: 518), who notes that of the twenty-four occurrences of αἴρω in this​ ​Gospel,​ ​the​ ​term​ ​means​ ​“lift​ ​up”​ ​eight​ ​times​ ​and​ ​“remove”​ ​sixteen​ ​times,​ ​and​ ​states​ ​that​ ​no good​ ​evidence​ ​exists​ ​that​ ​the​ ​branches​ ​of​ ​vines​ ​were​ ​regularly​ ​lifted​ ​off​ ​the​ ​ground. 1817​ ​ ​Ridderbos​ ​(1997:​ ​517​ ​n. 119)​ ​rejects​ ​Judas​ ​and​ ​Peter​ ​as​ ​specific​ ​referents,​ ​yet​ ​it​ ​seems​ ​hard​ ​to deny​ ​that​ ​these​ ​two​ ​individuals​ ​(plus​ ​the​ ​rest​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Eleven​ ​alongside​ ​Peter)​ ​serve​ ​as​ ​excellent examples​ ​of​ ​the​ ​type​ ​of​ ​procedure​ ​described​ ​in​ ​the​ ​present​ ​verse. 19 NT​ ​New​ ​Testament 20 LXX​ ​Septuagint 2118​ ​ ​Contra​ ​Barrett​ ​(1978:​ ​473​ ​[cf.​ ​R. Brown​ ​1970:​ ​675]),​ ​who​ ​believes​ ​that​ ​the​ ​reference​ ​is​ ​to apostate​ ​Christians,​ ​perhaps​ ​with​ ​unfruitful​ ​Jews​ ​in​ ​the​ ​background​ ​as​ ​well.​ ​But​ ​see​ ​Carson​ ​(1991: 515),​ ​who​ ​rightly​ ​notes​ ​that​ ​in​ ​John,​ ​true​ ​disciples​ ​by​ ​definition​ ​persevere​ ​(6:37–40;​ ​10:28),​ ​while on​ ​the​ ​other​ ​hand,​ ​the​ ​NT​ ​as​ ​a​ ​whole​ ​acknowledges​ ​the​ ​existence​ ​of​ ​those​ ​who​ ​sustain​ ​some​ ​type of​ ​connection​ ​with​ ​Jesus​ ​but​ ​who​ ​nonetheless​ ​end​ ​up​ ​failing​ ​to​ ​exemplify​ ​the​ ​perseverance​ ​that would​ ​mark​ ​them​ ​as​ ​truly​ ​transformed,​ ​spiritually​ ​reborn​ ​individuals​ ​(e.g.,​ ​8:31–59;​ ​1​ ​John​ ​2:19;​ ​2 John​ ​9;​ ​Matt.​ ​13:18–23;​ ​24:12). 22 OT​ ​Old​ ​Testament 1514​

a​ ​time​ ​when​ ​Israel​ ​would​ ​“bud​ ​and​ ​blossom​ ​and​ ​fill​ ​all​ ​the​ ​world​ ​with​ ​fruit”​ ​(Isa.​ ​27:6;​ ​cf. Hos.​ ​14:4–8).​ ​Indeed,​ ​the​ ​bearing​ ​of​ ​fruit​ ​is​ ​the​ ​essential​ ​purpose​ ​of​ ​a​ ​vineyard​ ​(Morris 1995:​ ​594).​ ​The​ ​term​ ​καρπός​​ ​(​karpos​,​ ​fruit)​ ​occurs​ ​eight​ ​times​ ​in​ ​15:1–16​ ​and​ ​only​ ​twice in​ ​the​ ​rest​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Gospel​ ​(4:36;​ ​12:24).​ ​The​ ​Father’s​ ​intervention​ ​in​ ​15:2​ ​to​ ​ensure​ ​“more” fruit​ ​is​ ​continued​ ​by​ ​the​ ​“much”​ ​fruit​ ​borne​ ​by​ ​the​ ​one​ ​who​ ​remains​ ​in​ ​Jesus​ ​in​ ​15:5​ ​and​ ​is brought​ ​together​ ​in​ ​15:8,​ ​where​ ​the​ ​bearing​ ​of​ ​“much”​ ​fruit​ ​brings​ ​glory​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Father​ ​and provides​ ​evidence​ ​of​ ​discipleship​ ​to​ ​Jesus. In​ ​a​ ​reassuring​ ​statement,​ ​the​ ​disciples​ ​are​ ​pronounced​ ​“already​ ​clean”​ ​(or​ ​“cleansed”) because​ ​of​ ​the​ ​word​ ​Jesus​ ​has​ ​spoken​ ​to​ ​them​ ​(cf.​ ​15:7;​ ​13:10–11;​ ​see​ ​R. Brown​ ​1970: 676–77;​ ​see​ ​also​ ​1​ ​John​ ​2:24;​ ​contrast​ ​John​ ​8:31;​ ​1​ ​John​ ​2:19).​ ​As​ ​Ridderbos​ ​(1997:​ ​517) notes,​ ​the​ ​disciples​ ​are​ ​“so​ ​deeply​ ​bound”​ ​to​ ​Jesus​ ​“by​ ​his​ ​word​ ​that​ ​in​ ​virtue​ ​of​ ​that fellowship​ ​they​ ​are​ ​able​ ​and​ ​ready​ ​to​ ​do​ ​his​ ​word​ ​and​ ​to​ ​bear​ ​fruit.”​ ​In​ ​relation​ ​to​ ​the purifying​ ​force​ ​here​ ​attributed​ ​to​ ​Jesus’​ ​word​ ​(which​ ​may​ ​refer​ ​to​ ​the​ ​totality​ ​of​ ​Jesus’ teaching​ ​[e.g.,​ ​14:23];​ ​see​ ​Carson​ ​1991:​ ​515;​ ​R. Brown​ ​1970:​ ​660;​ ​Morris​ ​1995:​ ​595),​ ​see 23 other​ ​references​ ​to​ ​Jesus’​ ​word​ ​in​ ​this​ ​Gospel​ ​(5:24;​ ​6:63;​ ​8:31,​ ​51;​ ​14:23;​ ​17:17).​1 9​​ ​The logic​ ​of​ ​the​ ​present​ ​passage​ ​connects​ ​the​ ​bearing​ ​of​ ​“fruit”​ ​(most​ ​likely​ ​leading​ ​others​ ​to Christ)​ ​with​ ​believers’​ ​need​ ​for​ ​continual​ ​spiritual​ ​cleansing​ ​and​ ​sustained​ ​spiritual​ ​union with​ ​Christ​ ​(Schlatter​ ​1948:​ ​305). In​ ​light​ ​of​ ​the​ ​farewell​ ​setting,​ ​Jesus​ ​proceeds​ ​to​ ​urge​ ​his​ ​followers​ ​to​ ​remain​ ​(​μένω​, menō​)​ ​faithful​ ​to​ ​him​ ​after​ ​his​ ​departure​ ​(Ridderbos​ ​1997:​ ​517).​ ​Initially,​ ​“remaining​ ​with Jesus”​ ​had​ ​simply​ ​meant​ ​for​ ​Jesus’​ ​first​ ​followers​ ​to​ ​spend​ ​the​ ​night​ ​with​ ​Jesus​ ​(1:38–39). Yet​ ​already​ ​in​ ​6:56,​ ​the​ ​term​ ​occurs​ ​with​ ​a​ ​spiritual​ ​connotation.​ ​In​ ​8:31,​ ​“remaining​ ​in Jesus”​ ​involves​ ​continual​ ​holding​ ​to​ ​his​ ​teaching.​ ​The​ ​majority​ ​of​ ​theologically​ ​significant 24 instances​ ​of​ ​μένω​​ ​are​ ​found​ ​in​ ​John​ ​14​ ​and​ ​15,​ ​with​ ​ten​ ​references​ ​in​ ​15:4–10​ ​alone.​2 0 The​ ​disciples​ ​must​ ​remain​ ​in​ ​Jesus,​ ​in​ ​particular​ ​in​ ​his​ ​love,​ ​by​ ​obeying​ ​his​ ​commandments 25 (15:9–10).​2 1​​ ​The​ ​vine​ ​metaphor​ ​illustrates​ ​the​ ​close-knit​ ​relationship​ ​that​ ​Jesus​ ​desires with​ ​his​ ​disciples​ ​(cf.​ ​John​ ​10). Following​ ​the​ ​reference​ ​to​ ​Jesus’​ ​word​ ​in​ ​15:3​ ​(see​ ​also​ ​15:7),​ ​his​ ​insistence​ ​in​ ​15:4 that​ ​the​ ​Eleven​ ​must​ ​remain​ ​in​ ​him​ ​in​ ​order​ ​for​ ​him​ ​to​ ​remain​ ​in​ ​them​ ​entails​ ​first​ ​and

​ ​The​ ​adjective​ ​καθαρός​ ​(​katharos​,​ ​clean;​ ​cf.​ ​the​ ​verb​ ​καθαίρω​ ​[​kathairō​]​ ​rendered “prune”​ ​in​ ​15:2)​ ​is​ ​occasionally​ ​used​ ​in​ ​Greek​ ​literature​ ​in​ ​connection​ ​with​ ​the​ ​growth​ ​of​ ​vines (Xenophon,​ ​Oeconomicus​ 20.20: καθαίραι αἱ ἄμπελοι). Westcott (1908: 2.199) suggests​ ​that​ ​the​ ​word​ ​may​ ​contain​ ​an​ ​allusion​ ​to​ ​Lev.​ ​19:23. 2420​ ​ ​This​ ​is​ ​what,​ ​in​ ​application​ ​of​ ​Robert E.​ ​Longacre’s​ ​methodology,​ ​may​ ​mark​ ​15:1–17​ ​as​ ​the peak​ ​of​ ​the​ ​entire​ ​farewell​ ​discourse​ ​(Kellum​ ​2005:​ ​193–96).​ ​In​ ​the​ ​present​ ​chapter,​ ​“remain” seems​ ​to​ ​serve​ ​as​ ​a​ ​metaphorical​ ​substitute​ ​for​ ​“believe.”​ ​On​ ​the​ ​“strange​ ​absence”​ ​of​ ​the​ ​word πιστεύω​ ​(​pisteuō​,​ ​believe)​ ​in​ ​John​ ​15,​ ​see​ ​Morris​ ​1995:​ ​297​ ​(cited​ ​in​ ​Croteau​ ​2002:​ ​111). 2521​ ​ ​Though​ ​it​ ​cannot​ ​be​ ​explored​ ​in​ ​detail​ ​here,​ ​the​ ​implications​ ​for​ ​a​ ​biblical​ ​theology​ ​of sanctification​ ​are​ ​significant.​ ​Instead​ ​of​ ​focusing​ ​on​ ​self-effort​ ​in​ ​avoiding​ ​negative​ ​behavior​ ​(such as​ ​resisting​ ​sin),​ ​the​ ​believer​ ​ought​ ​to​ ​concentrate​ ​positively​ ​on​ ​nurturing​ ​his​ ​or​ ​her​ ​spiritual communion​ ​with​ ​Christ. 2319​

26

foremost​ ​their​ ​holding​ ​fast​ ​to​ ​Jesus’​ ​teaching​ ​(cf.​ ​6:56;​ ​8:31).​2 2​​ ​The​ ​“in”​ ​language​ ​harks back​ ​to​ ​O27T​ ​covenant​ ​theology,​ ​including​ ​prophetic​ ​texts​ ​regarding​ ​a​ ​future​ ​new 28 covenant.​2 3​​ ​“Remain”​ ​is​ ​formally​ ​imperative​ ​(Morris​ ​1995:​ ​595;​ ​Wallace​ ​[1996:​ ​720] calls​ ​it​ ​a​ ​“constative​ ​imperative”),​ ​which,​ ​especially​ ​in​ ​light​ ​of​ ​the​ ​elaboration​ ​in​ ​15:4b, entails​ ​a​ ​conditional​ ​force​ ​(so​ ​the​ N​ I29V​;​ ​Carson​ ​1991:​ ​516),​ ​describing​ ​the​ ​dynamic 30 involved​ ​in​ ​mutual​ ​spiritual​ ​indwelling.​2 4 Building​ ​on​ ​15:4a​ ​(Carson​ ​1991:​ ​516),​ ​Jesus​ ​proceeds​ ​to​ ​explain​ ​in​ ​15:4b​ ​that​ ​just​ ​as the​ ​branch​ ​cannot​ ​bear​ ​fruit​ ​by​ ​itself​ ​apart​ ​from​ ​the​ ​vine,​ ​so​ ​also​ ​the​ ​disciples​ ​must “remain”​ ​in​ ​Jesus.​ ​The​ ​vine​ ​imagery​ ​is,​ ​admittedly,​ ​strained​ ​when​ ​branches​ ​are​ ​given 31 responsibility​ ​of​ ​remaining​ ​(Carson​ ​1991:​ ​516).​2 5​​ ​By​ ​implication,​ ​external,​ ​apparent growth​ ​that​ ​is​ ​not​ ​fueled​ ​by​ ​pulsating​ ​life​ ​within​ ​is​ ​not​ ​indicative​ ​of​ ​true,​ ​spiritual​ ​life​ ​(this is​ ​the​ ​context​ ​in​ ​which​ ​“nothing”​ ​is​ ​to​ ​be​ ​understood;​ ​see​ ​Ridderbos​ ​1997:​ ​517).​ ​The​ ​entire passage​ ​is​ ​reflective​ ​of​ ​new​ ​covenant​ ​theology​ ​(Carson​ ​1991:​ ​516,​ ​alluding​ ​to​ ​Ezek.​ ​36​ ​and citing​ ​Malatesta​ ​1978;​ ​Pryor​ ​1988:​ ​49–50). 15:5–10​ ​ ​Jesus’​ ​statement​ ​in​ ​15:5​ ​reiterates​ ​the​ ​“I​ ​am”​ ​statement​ ​in​ ​15:1​ ​(though developing​ ​it​ ​in​ ​a​ ​different​ ​direction:​ ​in​ ​15:1​ ​toward​ ​the​ ​Father,​ ​in​ ​15:5​ ​toward​ ​the disciples)​ ​and​ ​then​ ​restates​ ​the​ ​essence​ ​of​ ​15:4;​ ​15:6​ ​is​ ​the​ ​counterpart​ ​of​ ​both​ ​15:5​ ​and 15:7​ ​(Barrett​ ​1978:​ ​474).​ ​“Without​ ​me​ ​you​ ​can​ ​do​ ​nothing”​ ​applies​ ​Jesus’​ ​assertion regarding​ ​himself​ ​to​ ​the​ ​disciples:​ ​“By​ ​myself​ ​I​ ​can​ ​do​ ​nothing”​ ​(5:30;​ ​see​ ​5:19–20;​ ​cf.​ ​2 Cor.​ ​3:5).​ ​The​ ​“fruit”​ ​borne​ ​by​ ​Jesus’​ ​followers​ ​is​ ​an​ ​all-encompassing​ ​reference​ ​to​ ​the manifold​ ​evidences​ ​of​ ​growth​ ​and​ ​its​ ​results​ ​in​ ​the​ ​lives​ ​of​ ​believers​ ​(Bultmann​ ​1971: 532–33;​ ​Beasley-Murray​ ​1999:​ ​273;​ ​see​ ​the​ ​warning​ ​against​ ​reductionism​ ​by​ ​Carson [1991:​ ​517]).​ ​This​ ​would​ ​seem​ ​to​ ​include​ ​love​ ​(Moloney​ ​1998:​ ​420–21;​ ​R. Brown​ ​1970: 32 676),​ ​Christian​ ​character​ ​(Morris​ ​1995:​ ​595),​ ​and​ ​outreach​ ​(Schnackenburg​ ​1990:​ ​3.100).​2 6

​ ​Schnackenburg​ ​(1990:​ ​3.99)​ ​notes​ ​the​ ​elliptical​ ​nature​ ​of​ ​15:4.​ ​The​ ​term​ ​μένω​ ​is​ ​found previously​ ​in​ ​the​ ​farewell​ ​discourse​ ​in​ ​14:10,​ ​17,​ ​25.​ ​See​ ​also​ ​additional​ ​note​ ​on​ ​15:4. 2622​

OT​ ​Old​ ​Testament ​ ​See​ ​Exod.​ ​25:8;​ ​29:45;​ ​Lev.​ ​26:11–12;​ ​Ezek.​ ​37:27–28;​ ​43:9.​ ​See​ ​Malatesta​ ​1978:​ ​esp.​ ​ch.​ ​8; Pryor​ ​1988:​ ​49–50;​ ​and​ ​the​ ​excursus​ ​on​ ​“in”​ ​terminology​ ​in​ ​John’s​ ​Gospel​ ​in​ ​Köstenberger​ ​1999a: 154–55. 29 NIV​ ​New​ ​International​ ​Version 3024​ ​ ​See​ ​Barrett​ ​1978:​ ​474;​ ​R. Brown​ ​1970:​ ​678.​ ​Contra​ ​commentators​ ​who​ ​view​ ​the​ ​statement​ ​in 15:4a​ ​as​ ​merely​ ​entailing​ ​a​ ​comparison​ ​(e.g.,​ ​Bultmann​ ​1971:​ ​536). 3125​ ​ ​Whitacre​ ​(1999:​ ​376)​ ​contends​ ​that​ ​“remaining”​ ​is​ ​more​ ​than​ ​simply​ ​“believing”—though​ ​that is​ ​crucial—but​ ​that​ ​it​ ​also​ ​entails​ ​“being​ ​in​ ​union​ ​with​ ​him,​ ​sharing​ ​his​ ​thoughts,​ ​emotions, intentions​ ​and​ ​power.” 3226​ ​ ​Carson​ ​(1991:​ ​517)​ ​lists​ ​as​ ​among​ ​the​ ​“fruit”​ ​obedience​ ​to​ ​Jesus’​ ​commands​ ​(15:10); experience​ ​of​ ​Jesus’​ ​joy​ ​(15:11;​ ​and​ ​peace​ ​[14:27]);​ ​love​ ​for​ ​one​ ​another​ ​(15:12);​ ​and​ ​witness​ ​to the​ ​world​ ​(15:16,​ ​27). 27

2823​

33

John​ ​15:6​ ​and​ ​15:7​ ​further​ ​develop​ ​the​ ​contrast​ ​of​ ​15:2.​2 7​​ ​The​ ​one​ ​who​ ​does​ ​not “remain”​ ​in​ ​Jesus​ ​is​ ​like​ ​a​ ​branch​ ​that​ ​is​ ​thrown​ ​away​ ​and​ ​withers;​ ​such​ ​branches​ ​are 34 picked​ ​up,​ ​thrown​ ​into​ ​the​ ​fire,​ ​and​ ​burned.​2 8​​ ​The​ ​present​ ​imagery​ ​may​ ​hark​ ​back​ ​to​ ​the parallel​ ​in​ ​Ezek.​ ​15,​ ​where​ ​a​ ​vine​ ​failing​ ​to​ ​produce​ ​fruit​ ​is​ ​said​ ​to​ ​be​ ​good​ ​for​ ​nothing​ ​but the​ ​fire​ ​(so​ ​Carson​ ​1991:​ ​517;​ ​cf.​ ​Ezek.​ ​19:12).​ ​Fire​ ​(​πύρ​,​ ​pyr​,​ ​only​ ​here​ ​in​ ​John’s​ ​Gospel) 35 is​ ​a​ ​common​ ​Jewish​ ​and​ ​biblical​ ​symbol​ ​for​ ​divine​ ​judgment.​2 9​​ ​Some​ ​who​ ​appear​ ​to​ ​be members​ ​in​ ​good​ ​standing​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Christian​ ​community​ ​may​ ​eventually​ ​turn​ ​out​ ​never​ ​truly to​ ​have​ ​been​ ​part​ ​of​ ​it​ ​in​ ​the​ ​first​ ​place,​ ​Judas​ ​being​ ​the​ ​paradigmatic​ ​example​ ​(see​ ​esp.​ ​1 John​ ​2:19). John​ ​15:7​ ​further​ ​develops​ ​15:4​ ​by​ ​adding​ ​the​ ​promise​ ​of​ ​answered​ ​prayer​ ​for 36 continued​ ​adherence​ ​to​ ​Jesus​ ​and​ ​his​ ​teaching.​3 0​​ ​Jesus’​ ​“words”​ ​refers​ ​to​ ​the​ ​entire​ ​body of​ ​teaching​ ​composed​ ​of​ ​his​ ​individual​ ​pronouncements​ ​(Carson​ ​1991:​ ​517).​ ​Hence,​ ​mutual indwelling​ ​involves​ ​more​ ​than​ ​just​ ​obedience​ ​(though​ ​certainly​ ​no​ ​less);​ ​it​ ​also​ ​entails​ ​a growing​ ​absorption​ ​of​ ​Jesus’​ ​teaching​ ​in​ ​one’s​ ​understanding​ ​and​ ​life​ ​practice​ ​that​ ​issues​ ​in the​ ​bearing​ ​of​ ​much​ ​fruit​ ​in​ ​one’s​ ​own​ ​character,​ ​one’s​ ​relationships​ ​with​ ​other​ ​believers, and​ ​outreach​ ​to​ ​those​ ​outside​ ​the​ ​faith.​ ​Because​ ​of​ ​this​ ​growing​ ​conformity​ ​to​ ​Jesus’ teaching,​ ​obedient​ ​believers​ ​will​ ​be​ ​effective​ ​in​ ​their​ ​prayers,​ ​since​ ​these​ ​will​ ​be​ ​uttered​ ​in accordance​ ​with​ ​God’s​ ​will​ ​(Carson​ ​1991:​ ​518). What​ ​is​ ​paramount​ ​for​ ​Jesus​ ​is​ ​his​ ​“Father’s​ ​glory”​ ​(cf.​ ​Isa.​ ​61:3).​ ​Frequently​ ​in​ ​John’s Gospel,​ ​God​ ​glorifies​ ​himself,​ ​and​ ​is​ ​glorified,​ ​in​ ​or​ ​through​ ​the​ ​Son​ ​(12:28;​ ​13:31;​ ​14:13; 17:4).​ ​Here,​ ​God​ ​is​ ​said​ ​to​ ​be​ ​glorified​ ​by​ ​the​ ​disciples​ ​(cf.​ ​21:19)​ ​in​ ​their​ ​abundant​ ​bearing 37 of​ ​fruit​ ​(cf.​ ​15:16).​3 1​​ ​Hence,​ ​both​ ​Jesus’​ ​and​ ​his​ ​followers’​ ​missions​ ​culminate​ ​in​ ​the bringing​ ​of​ ​glory​ ​to​ ​God​ ​(Köstenberger​ ​and​ ​O’Brien​ ​2001:​ ​207–8;​ ​Moloney​ ​1998:​ ​421; ​ ​See​ ​further​ ​Matt.​ ​3:10​ ​par.;​ ​13:30;​ ​cf.​ ​Gos.​ ​Thom.​ ​40.​ ​Similar​ ​imagery​ ​is​ ​used​ ​in​ ​Heb.​ ​6:8.​ ​The word​ ​ξηραίνω​ ​(​xērainō​,​ ​wither)​ ​is​ ​used​ ​only​ ​here​ ​in​ ​this​ ​Gospel. 3327​

​ ​As​ ​mentioned,​ ​Judas​ ​seems​ ​to​ ​be​ ​the​ ​prime​ ​example​ ​(cf.​ ​13:10–11;​ ​15:2;​ ​see​ ​Stibbe​ ​1996: 161–62). Both verbs ἐβλήθη (eblēthē​) and ἐξηράνθη (exēranthē​)​ ​are​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Greek aorist​ ​(lit.,​ ​“has​ ​been​ ​thrown”​ ​and​ ​“has​ ​been​ ​withered”),​ ​indicating​ ​the​ ​completeness​ ​of​ ​the​ ​divine judgment​ ​(see​ ​the​ ​discussion​ ​in​ ​Carson​ ​1991:​ ​519).​ ​Of​ ​the​ ​four​ ​verbs​ ​in​ ​15:6,​ ​the​ ​first​ ​two​ ​are passive​ ​and​ ​the​ ​second​ ​two​ ​active​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Greek,​ ​which​ ​is​ ​a​ ​bit​ ​awkward​ ​in​ ​English.​ ​Hence,​ ​several translations​ ​(such​ ​as​ ​the​ N​ IV​,​ N​ LT​,​ R​ SV​,​ ​NRSV​,​ ​and​ T​ NIV​)​ ​render​ ​συνάγουσιν​ ​(​synagousin​,​ ​they gather),​ ​for​ ​example,​ ​as​ ​a​ ​passive​ ​(but​ ​see​ K​ JV​,​ A​ SV​,​ N​ ASB​,​ N​ KJV​;​ ​Ridderbos​ ​1997:​ ​518).​ ​In​ ​either​ ​case, the​ ​agents​ ​are​ ​left​ ​unspecified. 3529​ ​ ​Lang,​ ​TDNT​ ​6:934–47,​ ​especially​ ​936–37,​ ​942;​ ​Carson​ ​1991:​ ​517;​ ​R. Brown​ ​1970:​ ​679; Ridderbos​ ​1997:​ ​518.​ ​See,​ ​for​ ​example,​ ​Isa.​ ​30:27;​ ​Matt.​ ​3:12​ ​par.;​ ​5:22;​ ​18:8;​ ​25:41;​ ​Luke​ ​12:49; Heb.​ ​12:29;​ ​2​ ​Pet.​ ​3:10;​ ​Jude​ ​7,​ ​23;​ ​Rev.​ ​20:14. 3630​ ​ ​On​ ​“my​ ​words​ ​remain​ ​in​ ​you,”​ ​see​ ​8:31;​ ​14:21,​ ​23.​ ​On​ ​“ask​ ​whatever​ ​you​ ​wish,​ ​and​ ​it​ ​will​ ​be given​ ​you,”​ ​see​ ​commentary​ ​at​ ​14:13. 3731​ ​ ​Conversely,​ ​fruitlessness​ ​fails​ ​to​ ​give​ ​God​ ​the​ ​glory​ ​that​ ​he​ ​so​ ​amply​ ​deserves​ ​(Carson​ ​1991: 518). The use of ἐδοξάσθη (edoxasthē​,​ ​lit.,​ ​he​ ​was​ ​glorified)​ ​resembles​ ​the​ ​similar​ ​instances of​ ​passive​ ​aorist​ ​forms​ ​(with​ ​the​ ​agents​ ​remaining​ ​unspecified)​ ​in​ ​15:6​ ​(Borchert​ ​2002:​ ​145).​ ​The conjunction ἵνα (hina​)​ ​functions​ ​appositionally,​ ​meaning​ ​“namely”​ ​or​ ​“that”​ ​(Wallace​ ​1996: 475–76). 3428​

R. Brown​ ​1970:​ ​662).​ ​The​ ​present​ ​statement​ ​establishes​ ​a​ ​close​ ​connection​ ​between fruitbearing​ ​and​ ​true​ ​Christian​ ​discipleship​ ​(see​ ​additional​ ​note​ ​on​ ​15:8).​ ​The​ ​term​ ​γίνομαι (​ginomai​,​ ​become),​ ​which​ ​is​ ​capable​ ​of​ ​a​ ​wide​ ​range​ ​of​ ​meanings,​ ​here​ ​appears​ ​to​ ​convey the​ ​notion​ ​of​ ​“showing​ ​oneself​ ​to​ ​be”​ ​Jesus’​ ​disciple​ ​(note​ ​the​ ​dative​ ἐ​ μοί​ ​[​emoi​,​ ​my];​ ​lit., 38 “to​ ​me”).​3 2 39 In​ ​15:9,​ ​the​ ​subject​ ​introduced​ ​is​ ​love.​3 3​​ ​Hence,​ ​the​ ​bearing​ ​of​ ​spiritual​ ​fruit,​ ​referred to​ ​in​ ​15:8,​ ​cannot​ ​be​ ​separated​ ​from​ ​the​ ​necessity​ ​of​ ​love​ ​(Schnackenburg​ ​1990:​ ​3.103). 40 Jesus’​ ​statement​ ​“Just​ ​as​ ​the​ ​Father​ ​has​ ​loved​ ​me,​ ​so​ ​have​ ​I​ ​loved​ ​you”​ ​(cf.​ ​5:20;​ ​17:24)​3 4 makes​ ​the​ ​Father’s​ ​love​ ​for​ ​Jesus​ ​the​ ​pattern​ ​for​ ​Jesus’​ ​love​ ​for​ ​his​ ​followers​ ​(Carson​ ​1991: 520;​ ​Barrett​ ​1978:​ ​475).​ ​The​ ​same​ ​link​ ​is​ ​found​ ​in​ ​Jesus’​ ​final​ ​prayer,​ ​where​ ​reference​ ​is made​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Father’s​ ​love​ ​having​ ​been​ ​extended​ ​to​ ​Jesus​ ​from​ ​the​ ​foundation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​world (17:24,​ ​26).​ ​In​ ​10:17,​ ​the​ ​Father’s​ ​love​ ​for​ ​the​ ​Son​ ​is​ ​mentioned​ ​in​ ​relation​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Son’s willingness​ ​to​ ​lay​ ​down​ ​his​ ​life​ ​(cf.​ ​15:13).​ ​The​ ​Father’s​ ​love​ ​for​ ​the​ ​Son​ ​is​ ​also​ ​the​ ​basis for​ ​his​ ​entrusting​ ​the​ ​Son​ ​with​ ​his​ ​mission​ ​(3:35;​ ​5:20). Having​ ​the​ ​Father’s​ ​love​ ​for​ ​Jesus​ ​as​ ​the​ ​source,​ ​and​ ​assured​ ​of​ ​Jesus’​ ​love​ ​for​ ​them, his​ ​followers​ ​have​ ​a​ ​task​ ​that​ ​is​ ​comparatively​ ​simple:​ ​all​ ​they​ ​have​ ​to​ ​do​ ​is​ ​“remain”​ ​in 41 Jesus’​ ​love.​3 5​​ ​Yet,​ ​importantly,​ ​this​ ​involves​ ​obedience​ ​to​ ​Jesus’​ ​commands​ ​(cf.​ ​14:15,​ ​21, 23;​ ​15:14),​ ​which​ ​include​ ​that​ ​the​ ​disciples​ ​love​ ​one​ ​another​ ​(15:12,​ ​17).​ ​Rather​ ​than​ ​obey Jesus​ ​out​ ​of​ ​a​ ​sense​ ​of​ ​obligation​ ​or​ ​fear,​ ​his​ ​followers​ ​ought​ ​to​ ​render​ ​obedience​ ​out​ ​of love​ ​(Carson​ ​1991:​ ​520;​ ​Ridderbos​ ​1997:​ ​519).​ ​In​ ​fact,​ ​not​ ​even​ ​Jesus​ ​is​ ​exempt​ ​from 42 responding​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Father’s​ ​love​ ​for​ ​him​ ​in​ ​obedience.​3 6​​ ​By​ ​his​ ​obedience,​ ​Jesus​ ​becomes​ ​a model​ ​for​ ​his​ ​disciples​ ​to​ ​emulate.​ ​The​ ​present​ ​reference​ ​to​ ​Jesus’​ ​obedience​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Father is​ ​in​ ​keeping​ ​with​ ​the​ ​evangelist’s​ ​overall​ ​portrayal​ ​of​ ​Jesus​ ​as​ ​the​ ​Son​ ​sent​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Father.​3 437

​ ​Note​ ​the​ ​parallel​ ​in​ ​13:35​ ​with​ ​reference​ ​to​ ​mutual​ ​love.​ ​See​ ​the​ ​(not​ ​entirely​ ​convincing) efforts​ ​of​ ​coming​ ​to​ ​terms​ ​with​ ​this​ ​in​ ​Morris​ ​(1995:​ ​597),​ ​who​ ​concludes​ ​that​ ​discipleship​ ​is​ ​a process,​ ​so​ ​that​ ​the​ ​true​ ​disciple​ ​is​ ​always​ ​“becoming​ ​more​ ​fully​ ​a​ ​disciple.” 3933​ ​ ​See,​ ​at​ ​the​ ​outset​ ​of​ ​the​ ​farewell​ ​discourse,​ ​13:1.​ ​See​ ​also​ ​13:34–35​ ​(cf.​ ​15:12). 4034​ ​ ​The​ ​chiastic​ ​arrangement​ ​is​ ​noted​ ​by​ ​Schnackenburg​ ​1990:​ ​3.103. 4135​ Similarly, Jude 21 (R. Brown 1970: 663). The noun ἀγάπη (agapē​,​ ​love)​ ​occurred​ ​earlier​ ​in John’s​ ​Gospel​ ​in​ ​5:42​ ​and,​ ​more​ ​significantly,​ ​in​ ​13:35.​ ​It​ ​is​ ​found​ ​four​ ​times​ ​in​ ​15:9–13​ ​and​ ​once​ ​in 17:26. The corresponding verb ἀγαπάω (agapaō​,​ ​love)​ ​is​ ​much​ ​more​ ​frequent;​ ​twenty-six​ ​of its​ ​thirty-seven​ ​occurrences​ ​in​ ​John​ ​are​ ​in​ ​the​ ​farewell​ ​discourse.​ ​The​ ​sober​ ​use​ ​of​ ​“love” terminology​ ​distinguishes​ ​John’s​ ​Gospel​ ​from​ ​other​ ​writings​ ​such​ ​as​ ​the​ ​Odes​ ​of​ ​Solomon​ ​(e.g., 8:1,​ ​11,​ ​20–21). 4236​ ​ ​The​ ​perfect​ ​τετήρακα​ ​(​tetēraka​,​ ​I​ ​have​ ​kept)​ ​sounds​ ​the​ ​notion​ ​of​ ​completeness (R. Brown​ ​1970:​ ​663;​ ​Morris​ ​1995:​ ​597​ ​n. 26). 4337​ ​ ​Cf.​ ​4:34;​ ​5:19–20;​ ​6:38;​ ​8:29,​ ​55;​ ​10:17–18;​ ​12:27–28;​ ​14:31. 3832​

Additional​ ​Notes 15:4.​​ ​The​ ​present​ ​subjunctive​ ​forms​ μ ​ ένῃ​ ​and​ ​μένητε​​ ​are​ ​found​ ​in​ ​‫​ ​א‬B,​ ​the​ ​aorist​ ​subjunctives 66vid​ μείνῃ​ ​and​ μ ​ είνητε​​ ​in​ ​P​ ​ ​D,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​evidence​ ​from​ ​A​ ​is​ ​mixed​ ​(​μείνῃ,​ μ ​ ένητε​).​ ​The​ ​present subjunctives​ ​are​ ​probably​ ​original,​ ​the​ ​aorist​ ​subjunctives​ ​presumably​ ​arising​ ​by​ ​assimilation​ ​to verse​ ​7​ ​(Barrett​ ​1978:​ ​474),​ ​but​ ​in​ ​any​ ​case​ ​the​ ​difference​ ​in​ ​meaning​ ​is​ ​minimal. 15:8.​​ ​The​ ​interpretation​ ​of​ ​this​ ​passage​ ​advocated​ ​in​ ​the​ ​present​ ​commentary​ ​stands,​ ​regardless​ ​of which​ ​variant​ ​(the​ ​aorist​ ​subjunctive​ ​γένησθε​​ ​[​P66vid​ ​ ​ ​B​ ​D;​ ​Carson​ ​1991:​ ​519;​ ​Beasley-Murray 1999:​ ​268​ ​n. d]​ ​or​ ​the​ ​future​ ​indicative​ γ ​ ενήσεσθε​​ ​[‫​ ​א‬A;​ ​Barrett​ ​1978:​ ​475;​ ​Moloney​ ​1998:​ ​423; Morris​ ​1995:​ ​597​ ​n. 22])​ ​is​ ​judged​ ​to​ ​be​ ​original​ ​(so,​ ​rightly,​ ​Barrett​ ​1978:​ ​475). 15:17.​​ ​Barrett​ ​(1978:​ ​478)​ ​appears​ ​to​ ​favor​ ​the​ ​omission​ ​of​ ​ἵνα​ ​because​ ​of​ ​its​ ​absence​ ​in​ ​P66​ ​ *​ ​D, 44 which​ ​would​ ​give​ ​the​ ​sentence​ ​a​ ​harsher​ ​and​ ​stronger​ ​flavor.

Andreas J. Köstenberger, John​ ​(Baker​ ​Exegetical​ ​Commentary​ ​on​ ​the​ ​New​ ​Testament;​ ​Grand Rapids,​ ​MI:​ ​Baker​ ​Academic,​ ​2004),​ ​449–460. 44