Charles Ryrie on John 15:2

[Steve Noel]

I am reading Charles Ryrie's So Great A Salvation in which he gives his understanding of John 15:2 which reads:

"Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit." (ESV)

What does it mean for these fruitless branches to be "takes away?" Ryrie says that the verb here translated "takes away" could also be translated as "lifts them up" (He gives Jn 1:29 and 5:8 as support). So he sees two possible understandings of this text:

1. If we translate it as "takes away" it "means that He removes them from the earth through physical death" (51).

2. If we translate it as "lifts them up" it means "God encourages the fruitless person to bear fruit by exposing him or her to the sunshine of life" (52).

He then declares that this text, "in his opinion," teaches that God "lifts them up in blessing and guidance, positioning them so that they can bear fruit" (52).

What say you? Is this what Jesus is saying about the fruitless branches? How does this harmonize or conflict with v. 6? Is their a third option: The fruitless branches eternally perish?

[Eli Brayley]

I don't agree with Ryrie on this point, for there is another way of reading it that hasn't been mentioned. It requires reading the passage (as we should with every passage) in the large over-arching context.

Akin to Romans 11:16-24, Jesus was referring to Israel's faith in Him. The Old Testament many times speaks of Israel as a vine - a vine which bore unrighteousness (Isaiah 5:1-7). Here Jesus declares that He is the true vine - the vine that bears righteousness - and by being in Him we have eternal life. We must remember that at this point Christ had only been ministering to the house of Israel. He was their Messiah and the promise and covenants truly belonged to them (Acts 28:20, Rom. 9:4, Eph. 2:12). "If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you..." (John 15:7a) Abiding in Christ is where Paul got His "in Christ" theology and language; it is by believing in Him that we abide in Him. Those who do not abide are cut off from Him. This can't be meaning the Gentiles for they never had a part with Christ in the first place (Eph. 2:11), therefore it is referring to the Jewish nation, and the following text captures the feel of what Jesus is saying:

"For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.
Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.
Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.
Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities." (Acts 3:22-26)

The original Hebrew expression for being "destroyed" from among the people was to be "cut off" from among the people - a very common expression used throughout the Old Testament which meant that an Israelite who belonged, or was "in", was cut off from Israel and had no part in the covenant any longer. The Jews considered this to be the most serious of all punishments, even worse than death. It is this word that is used to describe Christ's death in Daniel 9:26.

"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." (John 15:6)

Thus a Jew who rejects Christ is cut off from Israel, and the language of what happens to him is very descriptive of what has happened, and of many similar verses which describe the same severe consequences. I believe this is the same meaning of Matt. 5:13.

This doesn't mean that it doesn't have a larger application, as in Romans 11, but the point here is that Jesus is speaking about Israel remaining Israel through faith in Him. We know from other verses in the Bible that a truly born again person can never be lost or perish, and so this command of abiding Christ determines those who are God's elect and who are not. Those who are Christ's will overcome and have faith (1 John 5:4), and those who aren't will ultimately fall away (1 John 2:19) though they may follow for a season.

Though I am not a Dispensationalist, I believe we miss much and misinterpret much by not paying careful attention to whom verses are being spoken to and to the large overall context of God's redemptive plan.

[Steve Noel]

I appreciate the response Eli.

You say "We know from other verses in the Bible that a truly born again person can never be lost or perish..." "We" do not know this. I am convinced that the Scriptures teach otherwise. In fact, I think this very text states so.

You say that this is about Israel's faith in Jesus and about the cutting off of Jews who reject Christ. Yet the text is not about coming to Christ but remaining in Christ. The Jews who rejected Jesus were never in Christ in the first place. The passage isn't about remaining in Israel but remaining in Christ. Thus, it's the followers of Christ who are in view in this passage. This is made clear by what he says in v.3 "Already you are clean because of the word that I have spoken to you" (ESV). It is to these who are already clean that he says in v.4 "Abide in me..." To abide in Christ is not to believe in Christ as you state. To abide means to remain or continue. This does not apply to those who rejected Christ.

In this text Jesus tells His followers that are already clean that if they do not abide in him they will be cut off thrown into the fire and burned (2, 6). This goes against both the Free Grace teaching on Eternal Security and the Reformed teaching on the Perseverance of the Saints.

[Eli Brayley]

Hi Steve,

Notice the wording in verses 2 and 6: "Every branch...", "If a man...". Jesus is speaking generally and not of those whom He has just pronounced clean, for He would then have said "you" (as He does in verses 4, 7, etc.). To be sure He is telling them to abide in Him, which particularly means to continue in His love by faith. The warning is to all those who do not abide in Him. But Jesus had full confidence in His disciples (John 15:16, with the exception of Judas) that they would indeed abide and bear much fruit.

The true Israel of God is in Christ, and therefore to be in Christ is to be in Israel. When Gentiles are united with Christ they become members of Israel. When a Jew rejects Christ they are cut off from Israel. So the two are together. And yes, a Jew was indeed cut off from Israel and therefore from Christ, for they both belong to each other (please read Eph. 2:12 carefully). Christ came to His own, but most of them missed the day of their visitation, and therefore what was intended for their peace became their downfall.

Again, I do not believe Jesus was telling His apostles that if they don't abide they were going to be burned, but rather He was teaching His apostles about Israel specifically and mankind generally, that if they do not abide in Him they shall perish. You may disagree with me, but regardless of whichever audience we think He is speaking about, the fact remains that any interpretation that suggests that a born again person may lose their salvation cannot be reconciled with the rest of Scripture. I would love to discuss this in more detail with you if you'd like, Steve. Perhaps on your other thread. I am too tired to start writing about it now... you'll also have to put up with my busy schedule! But I think it would be profitable.

Sorry if I'm not very clear. I don't feel like I'm writing well. Good night!

[Steve Noel]

I would definitely be interested in hearing what you have to say about eternal security. I am currently working on a Bachelor's in Theological Studies online from The King's College in L.A. My theology teacher rejects Reformed theology but also holds to eternal security. He falls in the same general theological camp as you on this as I've asked about his position. He basically says it's the view of Charles Ryrie, Norman Geisler, Zane Hodges, and Charles Stanley. I was also directed to Joseph Dillow's 600+ page book on eternal security called The Reign of the Servant Kings. I just got it in the mail today. I also now have Ryrie's Basic Theology, So Great A Salvation, and Balancing the Christian Life is on the way. I have Hodges' Absolutely Free on the way and Geisler's Chosen but Free and his Systematic Theology: Vol. III Sin and Salvation. I've also got Stanley's Eternal Security on the way.

[Eli Brayley]

I noticed a typo which I corrected. I meant to cite Ephesians 2:12, not 2:11.