A Johannine Perspective Of The Human Responsibility To Persevere In The Faith Through The Use Of μενω And Other Related Motifs

By Christopher David Bass

[Christopher D. Bass received his Ph.D. in New Testament from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and is currently preparing to plant a church with NETS, a church planting apprenticeship program which seeks to plant gospel-driven churches in New England and abroad.]

I. Introduction

The more one reads John’s Gospel, the more the reader notices key themes and motifs that permeate throughout.[1] One such motif is that of “abiding,” which is certainly discernable to a conscientious first-time reader, but becomes increasingly evident to the one who works through this literature time and again.[2] Moreover, this theme is particularly salient to the reader of the Greek text due to the fact that most English translations vary the English gloss for (μένω within its semantic domain.[3] While it is affirmed that this is probably the best overall method for translation, it is also regrettably clear that the reader of these translations will inevitably miss some of the biblical author’s development of such key motifs as a result of this variation.[4]

This article will attempt to demonstrate that one of John’s primary purposes in his “abiding” motif is to incite his readers to persevere in their faith.[5] In addition, I will try to prove that while there is a major emphasis on human responsibility in this motif, John also sees his readers as living in the new covenant and therefore believes that they have a new and divine enabling that will empower them to abide. This thesis will be supported by an inductive study of John’s Gospel. Here I will examine both the concrete uses of μένω as well as those that are metaphorical with the belief that the former will help illuminate the latter.[6] Due to the proliferated usage of this term in the fifteenth chapter of John’s Gospel, the bulk of this study will focus there. Following this assessment of abiding, I will briefly discuss the new covenant motif in this Gospel and the importance it plays in our understanding of this theme.

II. What Does “To Abide” Mean In John?

The word μένω has a semantic range that includes but is not limited to “abiding,” “ remaining,” “ staying,” “ persevering,” “ enduring,” “ continuing,” and “tarrying.”[7] In this section, the usages of this word will be examined in four categories that have been derived through an inductive study of the Fourth Gospel.[8] These will include (1) physical abiding in a given location, (2) mutual abiding between the Father and the Son, (3) mutual abiding between Christ and the believer, and (4) the abiding Spirit.

1. Physical Abiding in a Given Location

Though this study primarily focuses on John’s metaphorical usages of the word μένω, a brief examination of the concrete usages might enable readers to see the abstract idea of spiritually abiding in a more concrete manner. The concrete usages of this term are found throughout this Gospel and speak of someone abiding at a particular place for a period of time (1:38, 39; 2:12; 4:40; 7:9; 10:40; 11:6, 54; 14:25; 19:31; 21:22, 23). Since μένω is used in similar fashion in each of these verses, I will survey only two examples for the sake of space.

In John 4:40, Jesus has just completed a discussion with the Samaritan woman, which is followed by a conversation with numerous town members, whereby they came to believe in him (4:39). Now convinced that they were in the presence of the “Savior of the world” (4:42), they requested that Jesus might “abide” with them. John tells us that Jesus does in fact honor their request and “abides” with them for two days. Here it is evident that in those two days, Jesus physically dwelled (abided) with the Samaritan people.

Likewise, in 14:25 Jesus reminds his disciples that he has taught them all things while “abiding” with them on earth. Here we have a picture of Jesus, who has left his throne in glory in order that he might physically dwell with his people (1:14). This passage is particularly informative due to its location in the Farewell Discourse and the context of Jesus’ explanation of the change that is about to take place. Though it will be examined in more detail below, for now it is adequate to point out that Jesus has served as a helper (παράκλητος) for his disciples, with whom he has been abiding (i.e., physically dwelling) throughout his earthly ministry. Now he is preparing them for his departure and informs them that he will send another παράκλητος, who will also abide (dwell) with them. This change is important in that it illustrates for us how the concrete idea of Jesus abiding (physical dwelling) with his people sheds light on the metaphorical abiding (spiritual dwelling) to which we now turn our attention.

2. Mutual Abiding Between The Father And The Son

In the metaphorical uses of μένω, believers are told such things as the Spirit of truth abides in them (14:17), they are to abide in Christ and he will abide in them (15:4), and the Father abides in the Son (14:10). It is this last example that I will handle first due to the fact that the mutual abiding between the Father and the Son is put forth as paradigmatic for the mutual abiding that believers are to have with Christ/Spirit/Father.

Jesus is found reassuring his followers at the beginning of John 14. In the previous chapter he had just informed them that he was about to depart to a place where they could not follow (13:33). Moreover, he declared that Peter, their vocal leader, would deny him three times before the rooster crowed (13:38). Now in the midst of such troubling news, Jesus comforts his disciples and tells them that they must not let their hearts be troubled (14:1). By necessity, he must depart so that he can go and prepare “abiding places”[9] for them in the Father’s house, so that when he returns, they might dwell with him and the Father eternally (14:2–3). Jesus then assures his troubled disciples that he is the one and only way to the Father and if they know him, they know the Father as well (14:6–7). At this Philip asserts that if Jesus would simply show them the Father, then that would finally be enough (14:8). Jesus’ response is most enlightening in that he tells them that he and the Father are one and that anyone who has seen Jesus has seen the Father because the Father “abides” in Jesus and works through him (14:9–11).[10]

John 14:10 is important for this study, for it is here that the mutual abiding between the Father and the Son is vividly displayed. Jesus asserts that his disciples ought to have recognized this mutual indwelling by now. He speaks and acts in the authority of (5:18–32; 17:2) and in obedience to (15:10) the Father, while the Father is actively working in and through him. Hence, there is an ongoing abiding relationship between them.

What then is the exact nature of this mutual indwelling and what does it mean for believers? It seems best to assert that there is a metaphysical union between the Father and the Son, which is categorically different from the union that any human might have with God due to the fact that the Father and the Son have eternally coexisted in the Godhead (1:1–2). On the other hand, this union should also be seen as the supreme example of the relationship that believers can have with God.[11] Thus it is clear that an analogy between the mutual abiding of the Father and Son and the mutual abiding between Christ and the believer should not be pressed too far, since Christ is ontologically different from a normal human being. Nevertheless, we can certainly glean a hint of what our mutual abiding with Christ might look like as we examine the relationship between Christ and the Father.[12]

3. Mutual Abiding Between Christ And The Believer

The mutual abiding that coexists between Christ and his elect is paramount for ascertaining John’s teaching of perseverance.[13] In this section I will interact not only with passages that speak of mutual abiding, but also those that are one sided (i.e., where believers are told to abide in Christ without specific reference to his reciprocal abiding in them). In addition, I will consider the passages where believers are exhorted to abide in the love of Christ or his word, since both of these are pertinent to the whole idea of mutual abiding.

1. The Extended Metaphor of the Vine. As noted above, the motif of abiding is highlighted especially here in the fifteenth chapter in the extended metaphor of the vine.[14] Rainer Borig rightly notes that the ten occurrences of μένω in vv. 4–10 alert the reader that there is an emphasis placed on the abiding relationship between Christ and the believer, which is clearly the “central goal” of this passage.[15] The emphasis is probably best explained by the fact that this narrative occurs during Jesus’ Farewell Discourse, where he seems to take up the role of Moses as seen in Deuteronomy before Israel enters the promised land. Just as Moses, in his farewell address, exhorts the Israelites to remain faithful to the Torah, Jesus, the new and greater Moses, now stands before his followers and exhorts this newly formed people to remain faithful to his teachings and to abide in him after his departure. As such, we may rightly affirm Jesus’ knowledge of his coming crucifixion and exaltation to be the impetus for the heightening of this “abiding” language.[16]

This pericope begins with Jesus’ proclamation that he is the ἄμπελος ἡ ἀληθινή. There are at least two reasons why the OT should be seen as the background to the vine metaphor.[17] First, John frequently appeals to the OT throughout his Gospel by way of direct citations, allusions, or echoes. Second, there is a replacement/fulfillment motif throughout the entire Gospel. By the time the reader comes to ch. 15, he would have already seen that Jesus has superseded the temple, Moses, and various Jewish feasts. Now in this passage Jesus “supersedes Israel as the very locus of the people of God.”[18]

Jesus as the “true” vine is thus crucial to one’s comprehension of the person and work of Christ due to the fact that in several instances in the OT, Israel was referred to as the vine.[19] Interestingly, the OT passages that refer to Israel as the vine articulate Israel’s failure to produce good fruit along with the corresponding threat of God’s judgment upon the nation. It is with this backdrop that Jesus stands before his disciples and asserts, “I am the true vine” over and against the weak and fruitless vine of Israel. He is the one to whom Israel pointed. In the past, those who were vitally connected to Israel took part in the blessing of God. Here Jesus elucidates the radical shift in salvation history by which those who now want to be a part of God’s blessing must be vitally connected to him, by abiding in him as the “true vine.”

We see in 15:1 that not only is Jesus the true vine, but the Father is the “vinedresser” or “farmer” (15:1b) of this vine.[20] Every branch that is “in” Jesus is either cleansed,[21] in order to bring about more fruit, or lopped off completely[22] by the Father. The paronomasia between αἴρει, καθαίρει, and καθαίροί is certainly not by accident. Jesus is clearly distinguishing between those who are taken away and those who are cleansed/pruned. Moreover, the use of καθαίρει, which does not appear to have been a viticultural term at the time of John’s writing,[23] makes manifest that the main point of this passage is people and purity, not vines and fruit.[24] The latter is merely symbolic of the former. Hence, Jesus is the “true vine” in whom genuine believers must abide, and the Father is the one who prunes/cleanses[25] those who bear fruit and lops off those who are simply dead wood (15:2–3).[26]

Jesus then informs his disciples that they are already clean (καθαροί) on account of the word (διὰ τὸν λόγον) he has spoken to them. The preposition διὰ plus the accusative λόγον should probably be taken as the ground and not the instrument of the cleansing.[27] Hence, it is because of Jesus’ word that his disciples are clean.[28] Since it was previously made apparent that Judas, the one who would betray Jesus and prove to be the Son of Perdition, is the only one of the twelve who was not clean (13:10–11), then it is probably best to interpret those “who are already clean” as true disciples who have been given to Jesus by the Father (6:37–40; 17:6).[29]

2. The Conditionality of Mutual Abiding (15:4a). With this in mind, we are now able to examine 15:4–11, which should be seen as the quintessential section on the mutual abiding between Christ and the believer. Jesus, the true vine, stands before his followers and commands them to abide in him and lets them know that he will reciprocally abide in them.[30] It is at this very point, however, that we are confronted with a major exegetical decision. There is much debate over the interpretation of the enigmatic statement of 4a, μείνατε ἐν ἐμοί, κἀγὼ ἐν ὑμῖν. The first part of the statement, μείνατε ἐν ἐμοί, is clear enough. Jesus boldly commands his hearers to make their abiding in him their utmost priority: “You abide in me!”[31] It is therefore the second half of this sentence, κἀγὼ ἐν ὑμῖν, that has prompted so much debate among scholars due in large part to the fact that it is a verbless construction. There are at least three ways in which this second part of 4a can be rendered.[32] It can be taken as (1) a parallel commandment which balances (μείνατε,[33] (2) a comparison,[34] or (3) the apodosis of a conditional sentence.[35]

Those who take the first option essentially see both clauses as hortatory commandments. In other words, Jesus is saying, “Let us both abide in one another.” This view is possible syntactically and has in its favor John’s overall theology of God’s sovereignty in the election (6:44, 70; 13:18; 15:16a) and preservation of his people (6:37, 39, 44; 10:27–29; 17:11 ff). In rendering both clauses as parallel commands, one could argue that Jesus is assuring his hearers that he will be with them. While I would affirm the theology of this rendering, the syntax of this view is quite strange. If Jesus were giving a mutual commandment, one might have expected the more common first person plural hortatory subjunctive in lieu of the second person imperative with which we are actually confronted.[36] Moreover, reducing this strong command, which was given in the second person, to a mutual exhortation does not appear to do justice to the emphasis being placed on human responsibility throughout this passage.

The second option takes these two clauses in the comparative sense. In other words, Jesus would be saying, “Abide in me just as I abide in you.” Here again, the espoused Greek construction is possible and John’s overall theology of God’s sovereignty in the salvation and preservation of his people stands in its favor. These things notwithstanding, this view seems quite difficult to defend. To begin with, while this view is possible syntactically, it is nevertheless awkward. Where we might have expected a comparative such as ὥσπερ, καθώσπερ, or καθώς,[37] we are instead faced with a καὶ. Moreover, it would be difficult to demonstrate how this view fits the context of the passage. This is due to the fact that the reader is confronted with warnings on both sides of the verse. It would therefore seem “indefensible to take the ‘I in you’ as an absolute promise regardless of the perseverance or fickleness of the ostensible believer.”[38]

Finally, while absolute certainty seems impossible, the third option, the conditional idea, appears to be the most convincing for the following reasons. If this option is selected, the actual structure would be the conditional imperative μείνατε ἐν ἐμοί followed by the expected καὶ and the implied future indicative μενῶ (i.e., μείνατε ἐμοί, κἀγὼ μενῶ ἐν ὑμῖν).[39] In other words, Jesus is saying, “YOU abide in me, and I will abide in you.”[40] Syntactically this view is certainly possible in that it is not at all uncommon in the NT to use an imperative as the protasis of a conditional sentence.[41] In fact, it can be argued that John has already used conditional imperatives in 1:39; 2:19; 7:52;[42] and will use yet another in 16:24.[43]

The weakness of this view is found in the strength of the other two, namely, John’s overall theology of the sovereignty of God in saving and preserving those he has chosen. Though this theology is affirmed in light of the whole of John’s Gospel, each particular passage must be allowed to speak for itself. That this passage is located right in the middle of Jesus’ Farewell Discourse is illuminating, since there is an intensification of the emphasis that the disciples must persevere in chs. 13–17, which is made manifest through the increased usage of the language of “abiding” and “keeping the commandments.” In addition, it has already been noted that this particular verse has warnings on both sides. As such, the conditional view seems to fit the context best. Here Jesus stresses that his disciples must persevere in living for him even in the midst of persecution (15:18–27).

It is important to note that in the end, the conditional view does not contradict John’s overall view of salvation. Throughout the Gospel there are compatible emphases that God is in control of the salvation and preservation of his people and that those he has called must continue in their belief (John 2:23–25; 8:30–31). These two emphases, then, should be seen as two sides of the same coin. God is ultimately the one who is in control of saving and preserving his own, and yet, those who are his must strive to follow him. Therefore, in arguing that the unrelenting abiding of the believer is the condition for Christ’s abiding, I am not asserting that the believer’s abiding is the ultimate cause of Jesus’ reciprocal abiding, but the occasional cause.[44] The illustration of the vine (15:4b–6) is helpful here in that the branch itself could never be the ultimate cause for the vine’s reciprocal abiding.[45] Its attachment to the vine is outside of its control. Nevertheless, if for whatever reason a branch should cease to be attached to the vine, one would no longer expect the vine to be able to abide in and empower the disconnected branch. Likewise, believers are commanded to abide in Christ. If they do so, he will reciprocally abide in them. Those who fail to abide are no longer attached to the true vine and thus Jesus does not mutually abide in and empower them.[46]

3. The Conditionality of Bearing Fruit (15:4b–5). If the above exegesis is correct, then it is clear that the human responsibility to abide is vital to the Christian life.[47] Believers are to make abiding in Christ their utmost priority. This leads to his reciprocal abiding, which results in the bearing of fruit. If this fruit bearing[48] is considered to be part and parcel of being a genuine believer, then the remainder of 15:4 further supports the conditional view espoused above.[49]

In John 15:4b–5, the emphasis on human responsibility continues as seen in the two complementary third class conditions of 4b. First, we see that if it (the branch) does not abide in the vine, then the branch will be unable to bear fruit. Likewise, if Christ’s hearers do not abide in him, then they too will be unable to bear fruit. This comparison is helpful. The branch that does not abide in the vine is unable to bear fruit, since it is cut off from the nutrients and life source (i.e., the vine) that enables fruit production. So also, those who do not abide in Christ are completely impotent in their fruit production, since they too are cut off from their life source. Hence, the condition that must be met if one desires to be fruitful is the continual act of abiding in Christ.[50]

This idea is made all the more explicit in 15:5. Here Jesus reiterates that he is the vine and his hearers are the branches and it is only those branches that are taking part in the continual act of mutual abiding (κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ) that are able to bear fruit. Apart from this abiding relationship, the production of fruit is absolutely impossible.[51]

4. The Result of Not Abiding (15:6). Not only are those who do not abide unable to bear fruit, v. 6 goes on to say that they are thrown out, dried up, and burned. Here again, another third class condition is utilized to drive this point home. This time, however, the apodosis is negative. If someone does not abide, then he is thrown out, dried up, gathered, and cast into the fire to be burned. The whole verse, then, serves as an illustration of the looming judgment reserved for the person who does not abide in Christ.[52]

The aorist verbs ἐβλήθη and ἐξηράνθη should probably not be seen here as indicating past time.[53] It seems best to consider each of these verbs as either expressing a gnomic idea[54] or indicating the idea of the completeness and decisiveness of the judgment.[55] Moreover, God the vinedresser stands behind the passive voice of these two verbs (15:2).[56] It is less clear, however, who the “they” refers to that gather the dead branches and cast them into the fire. With God standing as the overall caretaker of the vine and the divine passives just prior (ἐβλήθη, ἐξηράνθη) and immediately following (καίεται), it seems best to say that this too is the work of God.[57]

The image of the gathering and burning of the dried branches appears to be part of a judgment motif from the OT (Exod 9:23; Lev 10:2; Num 26:10; Deut 10:21; 12:3; Josh 6:24; 8:19; 1 Sam 30:1–3; and especially Ezek 15:1–8). Moreover, God is linked to fire in the OT (Exod 24:17; Deut 4:24; 9:3; 32:22), and this fire is often seen as a symbol of judgment in both the OT and the NT (Ps 11:6; Jer 4:4; Matt 3:12; 5:22; 13:40–42; Mark 9:47; etc.).[58] This, therefore, is a clear indication that those who do not abide in Christ will ultimately be cast into the fires of hell and burned.[59]

It is apparent then that we find in v. 6 a real and genuine warning of the danger that is present for those who do not abide in Christ. This has led many interpreters to infer that this passage articulates a reality that genuine believers can disconnect themselves from the true vine and thus lose their salvation.[60] In favor of this view stands 15:2, which reads that every branch “in me” (i.e., “in Christ”) that does not bear fruit is cut off or removed. There it is argued that since these branches are “in Christ,” they should be considered genuine believers. Likewise, by examining 15:6 in light of 15:3, where Jesus told his disciples that they have already been cleansed, it is again concluded that these cut-off branches are genuine believers who have lost their salvation.[61] At the very least, those who come to such a conclusion on this passage should be commended for taking the text seriously. It would appear to be an affront to the teaching of Jesus to argue somehow that this is not a real warning,[62] since the line of thought throughout this passage indicates that Jesus is in fact cautioning his disciples of the real and present dangers for those who do not abide.

To be sure, several questions arise at this point. Are we forced to believe that Jesus is teaching that a genuine believer can lose his salvation? Moreover, how does this teaching fit with the promises of God’s sovereign calling and preservation of his people that are strewn throughout this Gospel? Are we forced to conclude that Jesus can at one moment make bold assertions that God is completely sovereign in the salvation and preservation of sinners and then turn around and contradict himself by asserting that the believer is ultimately responsible to preserve himself by clinging to the vine with all his might and strength?

Before answering these questions, it is appropriate to examine at least two of the many promises already elucidated by Jesus regarding believers being called and kept by the power of God.[63] To begin with, in 6:37–44 Jesus unequivocally avows that those whom the Father has given him will certainly come to him. Moreover, those who come will most assuredly not be cast out.[64] Here it is quite illuminating that Jesus says that those the Father has given him will in no way be “cast out” (ἐκβάλω ἔξω) and in 15:6, those who do not abide are in fact “cast out” (ἐβλήθη ἔξω). It seems then that we have either a breaking of an earlier promise or an indication that there is another option here.

This same emphasis on God’s sovereign control in the salvation of his people is repeated in 6:44. Here Jesus is direct and to the point. People are unable to come to the Father (i.e., for salvation) unless the Father himself “draws” them. The use of ἑλκύσῃ is informative in that it carries a meaning of drawing or dragging by force[65] as seen in its other usages in the New Testament.[66] This would seem to indicate that ἑλκύσῃ carries in its meaning more than a simple wooing.[67]

In the tenth chapter of John there is further evidence that God is the one who is ultimately in control of preserving believers. In 10:26–29 Jesus makes it clear that only those who are his sheep truly believe in him (10:26). They hear his voice and follow him and this following is not in doubt. Moreover, it is Jesus, and not their own meritorious works, which gives them eternal life, and thus they most assuredly will not perish.[68] This is because no one is able to snatch them from either Jesus’ or the Father’s hands in which they dwell.

Therefore, the issue of whether or not a genuine believer can lose his or her salvation becomes a question of reconciling passages of promise and warning. Still, before proposing an answer, it must be pointed out that perhaps much of the difficulty comes as a result of a faulty view of conversion. Far too often individuals join themselves to a Christian church by such means as praying a prayer or being baptized, and are then hailed as Christians and assured that they can never lose their salvation. This, however, stands far from the biblical witness of conversion and perseverance. Throughout the NT, individuals are portrayed as having some kind of connection to the church, but through their lack of “abiding” in Christ and his church, they ultimately demonstrate that they were never really Christians to begin with.[69] This is certainly clear in the Johannine literature. In John 8:30–31, we see that after Jesus’ teaching, many believed in him. Interestingly, Jesus immediately turns to those who have believed and clarifies that only if they “abide” in his word are they truly his disciples. This is all the more apparent when we turn to John’s First Epistle. In 1 John 2:19, John contends that those who went out from us did so because they were never really of us. This is due to the fact that if they were really of us they would have “abided” (μεμενήκεισαν) with us. One’s being able to walk away (release himself from the vine if you will) demonstrates that he was never really a believer to begin with.[70] Perhaps then it is best to evaluate a person’s spiritual condition phenomenologically as opposed to ontologically.[71] In other words, we should evaluate more according to what we see as far as outward fruit than what is going on in a person’s very being. Thus, in our years of life we will see many who make a profession of faith and look like believers for a time. Nevertheless, if they fail to abide in Christ, they demonstrate that they were never genuine believers in the first place.

With this said, we are now able to posit an answer. Understanding that there are many who will appear as believers for a time, but by falling away will prove that they were never really joined to the vine to begin with (1 John 2:19), what are we to make of passages that seem to give the elect (i.e., the eleven in John 15) real warnings? It seems that the most cogent answer lies within the very tension itself. On one end of the spectrum, there is no denying that God is in complete control of the salvation and preservation of sinners. Paradoxically, on the other end of the spectrum, it is also painfully obvious that those who do not abide in Jesus are destined for hell. Both situations are simultaneously affirmed as true in John’s Gospel. The most plausible solution then, is to affirm that the warnings are real in that the one who does not abide in Christ will most certainly suffer the fires of hell. Likewise, we must also affirm that the promises that we are called and kept by the power of God are real in that those who do heed the warnings and abide in Christ are only able to do so because God has drawn them to himself (6:44) and placed them in the vine (15:16), where he firmly holds them with the very hands from which no one can steal (10:28–29), and thus they will escape judgment. Therefore, everyone who is confronted with such warnings must view them with utmost seriousness. At the end of the day then, we can rightly assert that it is the elect who take these warnings most seriously in that they are the ones who, when confronted by them, are struck with the severity thereof and fall on their face and cry out to their sovereign Father, pleading that he might give them the grace to persevere. In this vein, we can assert that warnings such as the one found in 15:6 are at least one of the means by which God preserves his elect.[72]

At this point, one might levy the complaint that functionally there is no difference between this view and that of the Arminian, since in both cases only the one who abides is saved.[73] The difference, however, is the question of who is ultimately in control.[74] In John it is clear that God is the one who is ultimately in control of every aspect of saving his people all the while his people are responsible for abiding in Christ. Therefore, we can rightly see this as analogous to working out one’s salvation with fear and trembling only to find in the end that it was God who was the one both willing and working in the believer for his good pleasure (Phil 2:12b–13).

5. Abiding in and Keeping Jesus Words (15:7–11; 5:38; 8:31). Whereas 15:6 clearly states a conditional warning regarding the real and frightful consequence for those who fail to abide, vv. 7–11 shift gears and focus on the positive results for those who abide. As in vv. 4–6, there is a sustained emphasis on the human responsibility to abide elucidated through John’s continued predilection for third class conditions. Nevertheless, the focus is positive and the promises are astounding for those who abide in Jesus.

In 15:7 Jesus promises answered prayer for those who meet the condition of abiding in him while his words mutually abide in them.[75] The construction and wording of this verse calls to mind John 8:31. There Jesus had just finished an extensive discourse with the Jews, and John tells us that many came to “believe” in him (8:30). Jesus immediately turns to those “who had come to believe” and tells them that if they continue in his word, then they are truly his disciples. In other words, a condition of being a true disciple is abiding in Jesus’ word. Therefore, by the time we reach 15:7 we are predisposed to the fact that the true disciples of Jesus are those who abide in his word. In 15:7, however, this emphasis is inverted. The condition for answered prayer is that of abiding in Jesus and his words likewise abiding in them. Here the plural ῥήματά should probably be seen as embracing the whole revelation and teachings of Jesus and thus in parallel with the λόγον of v. 3[76] as well as the ἐντολάς of Jesus (15:10), referred to below. In v. 3, it was the λόγον which Christ had spoken that was said to have cleansed his disciples. The perfect tense λελάληκα is an indicator of the continuing effect of this word, which is now evident in 15:7. Thus, believers are to abide in Christ while his words continue to abide in and cleanse them.[77]

Parallel to the idea of Christ’s words abiding in the believer is the command to abide in Jesus’ love by keeping his commands found in 15:9–10. The imperative of these two verses is grounded on the comparison of the relationship between Christ and the Father. The love Christ has for his disciples is compared to the love God has for Christ;[78] thus the disciples are commanded to abide in his love. Though abiding in Christ’s love can be seen as synonymous to abiding in Christ himself, it also gives an added impetus to this abiding, for as believers consider and are gripped by the magnitude of the love Christ has for them, they are all the more inclined to abide in that love.

Verse 10 is helpful in that it adds tangibility to the somewhat abstract idea of abiding. The mutual abiding commanded by Jesus is not simply a mystical experience between Christ and the believer.[79] This verse fleshes out what abiding in the love of Christ must look like by way of another conditional sentence. If you keep the commands of Jesus, then you will abide in his love. If you do not keep the commands of Jesus, one must only assume that you are not abiding in the love of Christ. To be sure, God’s love for his people is nothing but undeserved grace. Nevertheless, Jesus makes it clear that the response of the believer is a vital part of this relationship. Moreover, he teaches what this obedience is supposed to look like by appealing to his own example of obedience to the Father.[80] Just as he kept the commands of the Father (15:10), abided in his love (15:10), and laid down his life for his friends (15:13), so also the believer is to keep the commands of Christ, which obviously includes loving the brethren (15:12), abiding in his love (15:9), and producing fruit that abides (15:16). It is for this reason that Christ chose and appointed those who are his, which is most helpful to one’s understanding of faith and works at this point. Certainly there is a strong emphasis in this passage on the human responsibility to abide in Christ, but it is also clear that the root of this abiding is the very fact that Christ has chosen and appointed those who are his for the very purpose that they might abide and bear fruit that will abide.[81] The metaphor of the vine illustrates that the believer does not abide in Christ in his own power, but as he abides and Christ mutually abides in him, he is empowered to persevere and bear much fruit. The results of abiding in Christ’s love and having his words mutually abiding in us include answered prayer (15:7), the bearing of fruit that abides (15:8, 16), the demonstration of discipleship (15:8),[82] God being glorified (15:8), and the fullness of joy in the life of the believer (15:11).

4. The Abiding Spirit (14:17)

As the believer wrestles through the very issues involved in abiding, it is helpful that John makes it clear that the Holy Spirit abides in every believer. The permanency of the Spirit was made evident in John 1:32–33, where the Spirit was seen not only descending on Jesus, but also “abiding” (ἔμεινεν, μένον) on him. We should not miss the fact that the same word used in 1:32–33 to speak of the Spirit abiding on Jesus is also used in 14:17, where the Spirit abides with the believer. It is clear that the Spirit’s abiding with Jesus was an indicator of the permanency of the Spirit’s presence with him during his stay on earth and that all his ministry was “accomplished in communion with the Spirit of God.”[83]

While Jesus was abiding with his disciples on earth he served as a Paraclete (παράκλητος) to them.[84] Now as he departs and goes back to the Father, he promises his disciples that the Father will give them another Paraclete who will be with them forever (14:16).[85] The Spirit has been abiding with Jesus the whole time he has been with the disciples and thus, by being with Jesus, the disciples have been with the Spirit.[86] Now that Jesus is leaving them, there is a transfer of Paracletes. The Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive,[87] will now take the place of Jesus and continually abide with them and will be in them. Hence, as promised by John the Baptist, Jesus will soon baptize his followers in the Holy Spirit and the Spirit will then permanently take up his abode (“abide”) with them (14:17). This abiding (14:17) and enabling (16:13) of the Spirit should be seen as the fulfillment of the new covenant anticipated in both the Law and the Prophets, in which God would permanently dwell with his people, circumcise their hearts, and enable them to live for him (Deut 30:1–10; Jer 24:5–7; 31:31–34; 32:37–41; Ezek 11:14–21; 16:53–63; 36:22–35; 37:21–28).

III. The Johannine Motif Of “Abiding” And The New Covenant

It is therefore this understanding that Jesus was ushering in the new covenant that allows him to use the language of interior renewal and interior fidelity we have seen to be so common throughout his Farewell Discourse. Certainly some might object to the idea that John’s Gospel should be viewed through a new covenant framework, which is due in part to the fact that the word “covenant” does not appear in John’s Gospel at all.[88] Nevertheless, many recent scholars have rightly noted that even though the word itself might not appear, a new covenant motif permeates this Gospel.[89] There are at least four major new covenant themes that can be seen in the abiding passages alone.[90] These include (1) God dwelling with his people, (2) cleansing, (3) the language of interiority[91] (which includes the Holy Spirit), and (4) the obligations of interior fidelity.

First, God dwelling with his people is a major emphasis in both the old[92] and new covenants. The new covenant aspect of this promise is made clear in Ezek 37:26–28. Here God tells his people that his dwelling place will be with them and that he will set his sanctuary in their midst forever. This promise is most clearly fulfilled in John 1:14, where we see that the incarnate Son of God comes and tabernacles (ἐσκήνωσεν) with his people. Jesus dwelling with his people should be seen as nothing short of a claim by John that he and his readers are the “eschatological heirs of the experience of Israel in the past.”[93] This idea however, does not end with the wording that Jesus tabernacles with his people, but continues in the language of abiding. His people are to abide in him and he abides in them.[94] Pryor notes that a contrast has been set up between the old covenant (Exod 33:7) where Yahweh dwells outside the camp of Israel and the new covenant in which Jesus tabernacles “among us.” This, however, does not go far enough in the contrast, because John’s abiding language demonstrates that God not only dwells with believers in the new covenant, but actually abides within them through his Holy Spirit.[95]

Second, the idea of cleansing is a new covenant concept. In Ezek 36:25, 33, God promises to cleanse his people from all their filth, idols, and iniquities. A fulfillment of this purifying is seen in John 15:3 when Jesus tells his disciples that they have already been cleansed on account of the word.

Third, the idea of interiority is a fundamental element of the new covenant, most clearly seen in Deut 30:6; Jer 31:33b–34; 32:40; and Ezek 36:26–27.[96] Here Yahweh declares that he will circumcise the hearts of his people (Deut 30:6), write his laws within their hearts (Jer 31:33b), put the fear of God in their hearts (Jer 32:40), give them hearts that are new (Ezek 36:26), and put his own Spirit within them (Ezek 36:27). This kind of language is fulfilled in several ways in John’s Gospel, but perhaps most clearly in the language of mutual abiding. Believers who abide in Christ have Christ’s words abiding in them (15:7) indicating that answered prayer, obedience, and their being able to bring glory to the Father are the direct result of the mutual abiding enjoyed by new covenant believers.[97] Moreover, the Holy Spirit will abide in believers (14:17), teach them all things (14:26a), bring to remembrance all that Christ has said and taught (14:26b), and guide them in all truth (16:13). Hence, there is no doubt that believers who make up the new covenant community will have the words of Christ internalized in their hearts, have God’s own Spirit dwelling in them both leading and enabling them to live for him. They will therefore mutually abide in the closest possible relationship where “they will be made and kept holy by his indwelling, sanctifying presence.”[98]

Finally, the obligations that come with the interior divine enabling are perhaps the clearest aspect of the new covenant motif in John’s Gospel.[99] The obligations were evident as early as Deuteronomy, when Moses foretold that the Israelites would not keep the commands he was giving because they were not able. What was wrong with the law was not the law itself, but the people’s inability to keep it (Deut 29:4). Thankfully, Moses also prophesied that a day would come when God would circumcise the hearts of his people for the very purpose that they might be able to love him with all their heart and soul and be able to obey him (Deut 30:6–7). The promise of this divine enabling was seen in the prophets as well where we read that God’s people would receive a new heart and a new Spirit, in order that they might walk in his statutes and keep his ordinances (Ezek 11:20; 36:27; 37:24). The fulfillment of these promises is found in Jesus ushering in the new covenant, which was made manifest through John’s use of μένω and τηρέω, for both ideas are clearly used in the covenant language of the OT.[100] Thus, it is unequivocally the fulfillment of the new covenant promises such as God’s dwelling with and in his people, their total renewal, and the divine enablement for their obedience that stand behind these obligations to abide in Christ and keep his commandments.[101]

IV. Conclusion

In this article, a case has been made that John’s purpose for his “abiding” motif was to incite his readers to persevere in their faith. This was seen in the emphasis on the human responsibility to abide in Christ (15:4–7), abide in his love (15:9), and keep his commandments (15:10). In addition, I have sought to demonstrate that while there is a major emphasis on human responsibility in this motif, John also sees his readers as living in the new covenant and therefore believes that they have a new and divine enabling that will empower them to abide. This new covenant motif is evident in the fact that in John’s Gospel, God is found dwelling with his people (1:14; 14:23, 25; 15:4–7), cleansing them (15:3), mutually indwelling and empowering them (15:4–11, 16), and making clear the obligations of those who are part of the covenant community (15:10). Johannine abiding therefore includes the fact that those who abide in Christ will mirror the relationship between the Father and the Son (14:10), keep Christ’s commands (15:11), see their prayers answered (15:7), bear fruit that abides (15:8, 16), demonstrate that they are true disciples (15:8), glorify God through Christ’s work in their lives (15:8), and experience the fullness of Christ’s joy in their lives (15:11).

Notes

1. I take the terms “theme” and “motif” to be essentially synonymous and will vary my usage for stylistic purposes. These terms demand some defining due to the broad spectrum of meaning that has been assigned to them. I will work off the very basic definition that a theme or motif is an important and recurring idea found throughout a body of literature. This recurring idea can be seen in but not limited to a repetitious use of a keyword throughout a text as is the case here. R. Alan Culpepper rightly notes that such motifs “involve the reader more deeply in the work by weaving consistency and continuity while inviting the reader to discern patterns, implications, and levels of meaning which lie below the surface of the literary work” (Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel: A Study in Literary Design [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983], 184). To be sure, as readers of John’s Gospel work through the Greek text, they are confronted not only with the repetition of the word μένω, but also with an overarching motif of “abiding” or “persevering” in Christ as seen through this word repetition.
2. This is due at least in part to the fact that there are forty occurrences of μένω in John’s Gospel (out of 118 total in the NT, twenty-seven of which are found in his Epistles [24 in 1 John and 3 in 2 John]).
3. For example, in the Gospel of John the NAS translates μένω as “remain,” “stay,” “ abide,” “endure,” “ continue,” and “live.” The NRSV translates it “remain,” “ stay,” “endure,” “ abide,” “continue,” “ have a permanent place,” “ dwell with,” “ last,” “ left,” and “live.” The ESV translates it “remain,” “ stay,” “ abide,” “ endure,” “ dwell with,” and “continue.” See Moisés Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983), 137–69, on the importance of looking at each word in its context for the determination of its meaning.
4. See Robert Alter, The Art Biblical Narrative (New York: Basic Books, 1981), 93, who discusses the concept of Leitwort in the biblical text, which he defines as a “word or a word-root that recurs significantly in a text, in a continuum of texts, or in a configuration of texts: by following these repetitions, one is able to decipher or grasp a meaning of the text, or at any rate, the meaning will be revealed more strikingly. The operation of Leitwort, of course, will not be so evident in translation as in the original: Buber and Rosenzweig went to extreme lengths in their German version to preserve all Leitwörter; unfortunately, most modern English translations go to the opposite extreme, constantly translating the same word with different English equivalents for the sake of fluency and supposed precision.”
5. It has long been established in the world of biblical studies that there has been much abuse when it comes to word studies. Thankfully, in recent years much has been written in order to aid aspiring theologians in the evasion of such abuses. Some of the most helpful works on this subject include James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961); Eugene A. Nida and Charles Taber, The Theology and Practice of Translation (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1974); G. B. Caird, The Language and Imagery of the Bible (London: Duckworth, 1980); Arthur Gibson, Biblical Semantic Logic: A Preliminary Analysis (New York: St. Martin, 1981); J. P. Louw, Semantics of New Testament Greek (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982); Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning; D. A. Carson, Exegetical Fallacies (2d ed.; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001), 27–64. Every effort has been made here to avoid the pitfalls spoken of in these books. One area where some readers might take issue is my decision to translate μένω as “abide” throughout the entirety of this article. My purposes in doing this are not to disregard the fact that this word has different shades of meaning within its semantic domain, but to highlight the emphasis of repetition one notices while working in the Greek text. In the end, it will be up to the reader to judge whether I have been fair to the text and successfully avoided the many word study pitfalls.
6. I will use the term “concrete” to speak of John’s usages of μένω that simply refer to a person staying or remaining at a particular location. The term “metaphorical” will be employed in such instances as when believers are exhorted to abide in Christ, his word, his love, and the like. It should be noted that I am not asserting that the “concrete” usages have no metaphorical overtones or that the “metaphorical” usages have nothing in them that is concrete. To be sure, with John’s proclivity for double meaning the lines might be blurred at times, but it is still worth examining these separately in order better to understand John’s usages of μένω.
7. BDAG, s.v “μένω”; F. Hauck, “Mένω,” TDNT 4:574–88.
8. I have come up with these categories in an earnest attempt to understand what John intended in his use of μένω. Certainly there are other directions one could go when it comes to categorizing these usages. It is hoped that the reader will find these categories fair to the biblical text.
9. The word here is μοναὶ, which is a cognate of μένω. Possible implications will be examined below (cf. 14:23).
10. It should be noted that the idea of mutual abiding can be seen in places where the word μένω is not used. The idea of “being in” seen in the verb of being (εἰμἰ) with the dative of sphere ἐν is also used in demonstrating this same idea as in the beginning portion of this verse. Sometimes the verb of being is present while other times it is only implied. For a few examples, see John 10:38; 14:11, 20; 17:21. See Edward S. J. Malatesta, Interiority and Covenant: A Study of εἶναι ἐν and μένειν ἐν in the First Letter of Saint John (AnBib 69; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1978), 27–36, for an excellent discussion of the interplay between μένειν ἐν and εἶναι ἐν.
11. So also Barnabas Lindars, The Gospel of John (NCB; London: Oliphants, 1972), 474–75.
12. John 14:20 makes this more clear. Here we see the mutual abiding between the Father and Christ is linked to the mutual abiding between Christ and the believer.
13. I. H. Marshall, Kept by the Power of God: A Study of Perseverance and Falling Away (Minneapolis: Epworth, 1995), 180, says that “abide” “ might almost be the Johannine equivalent for ‘to persevere.”‘
14. There is much debate as to whether this is a parable, mashal, allegory, or whatever other label some might want to place on it. It seems best to refer to it simply as an extended metaphor similar to an allegory where all of the details seem to have significance (cf D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John [PNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991], 513; Rodney A. Whitacre, John [IVPNTC; Downers Grove: InterVarsity 1999], 371).
15. Rainer Borig, Der Wahre Weinstock: Untersuchungen zu Jo 15, 1–10 (Munich: Kösel, 1967), 44–46: “Μένειν ἐν wird jetzt in Vers 4–10 insgesamt zehnmal gebraucht, und schon daraus wird ersichtlich, daß es ein wesentliches Ziel der Weinstockrede ist, diese denkbar enge Gemeinschaft darzulegen, wie sie zwischen Jesus und seinen Jüngern besteht.”
16. It is worthy of note that the Farewell Discourse also sees a heightened use of “keeping the commandments” language (τηρέω), which is yet another indicator that we are dealing with new covenant theology. See Severino Pancaro, The Law in the Fourth Gospel: The Torah and the Gospel, Moses and Jesus, Judaism and Christianity According to John (NovTSup 42; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1975), 403–51, for an explanation of the predilection of the NT writers for the word τηρέω over the word φυλάσσω, which was used in the LXX to translate שמר.
17. Contra Rudolf Bultmann, The Gospel of John: A Commentary (trans. G. R. Beasley-Murray; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1971), 530–32, who sees the background as coming from the “myth of the tree of life” found in the Mandaean Gnostic literature. Current scholarship is almost unanimous in seeing an OT background for the vine imagery here. Some of those who take this view include J. H. Bernard, The Gospel According to St. John (ICC; New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1929), 477–78; T. Francis Glasson, Moses in the Fourth Gospel (SBT 40; Naperville, Ill.: Alec R. Allen-son, 1963), 91; Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John (13–21): A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 29a; New York: Doubleday, 1970), 669–71; F. F Bruce, The Gospel of John: Introduction, Exposition and Notes (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), 308; J. Carl Laney, ‘Abiding Is Believing: The Analogy of the Vine in John 15:1–6, ” BibSac (1989): 56; Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (rev. ed.; NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 593; Gail R. O’Day The Gospel of John: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections (NIB; Nashville: Abingdon, 1995), 9:756–57; R. Alan Culpepper, The Gospel and Letters of John (Interpreting Biblical Texts; Nashville: Abingdon, 1998), 213; Francis J. Moloney, The Gospel of John (SP 4; Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical, 1998), 419–20; George R. Beasley-Murray John (2d ed.; WBC 36; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1999), 272; Andreas J. Köstenberger, Encountering John (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999), 158–59; Rodney A. Whitacre, John, 372; Gary M. Burge, John (NIV Application Commentary; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), 416–18; Gerald L. Borchert, John 12–21, (NAC 25b; Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2002), 139.
18. Carson, John, 513.
19. See Ps 80; Isa 5:1–7; 27:2ff; Jer 2:21; Ezek 15:1–8; 17:1–21; 19:1–14; Hos 10:1–2.
20. BDAG, s.v “γεωργίς.”
21. LSJ, s.v. “καθαίρω,” says that the word καθαίρω typically means to “clean” or “purify” J. Schattenmann, “καθαίρω,” NIDNTT 3:102, notes that the particular “family of words which go with katharos embraces the realms of physical, cultic and ethical purity” It seems that cultic and ethical purity is most common, but BDAG, s.v. “καθαίρω,” notes two instances in Philo (Agr. 10; Somn. 2, 64) where it is seen in the agricultural realm of removing “superfluous growth from a plant.”
22. The word here is αἴρω, which can mean to “take away,” “ remove,” “cut off,” or “lift up” in this context. See BDAG, s.v. “αἴρω.” Some have argued that the word should be taken here as “to lift up,” which would mean that the fruitless branch is lifted so as to put it in a position where it might get more sunlight and therefore bear fruit (so James M. Boice, The Gospel of John [5 vols.; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978], 4:228; Joseph C. Dillow, “Abiding Is Remaining in Fellowship: Another Look at John 15:1–6, ” BibSac [1990]: 46; R. K. Harrison, “Vine,” ISBE 4:986; A. W. Pink, Exposition of the Gospel of John [3 vols.; Ohio: Cleveland Bible Truth Depot, 1929], 3:337). Due to the context of this passage, the vast majority of NT scholarship has rightly rejected this view. Most argue that “to lift up” does not fit the context of the passage in that it contradicts 15:6 and is best translated as”to remove” (so Brown, John 13–21, 660; James E. Rosscup, Abiding in Christ: Studies in John 15 [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973], 238–45; C. K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978], 395–96; Laney, “Abiding Is Believing,” 55; Carson, John, 518; Leon Morris, John, 669).
23. So Morris, John, 594 n. 10: “This incidentally helps us to see the meaning of the branches that are taken away. The term was applied to disciples in 13:10, with Judas explicitly excepted: ‘you are clean, though not everyone of you.’ The branches cut off are people like Judas. This man had had contact with Jesus, even close contact, but was not a real disciple. He was ‘the one doomed to destruction’ (more literally ‘the son of perdition’) (17:12).”
24. D. A. Carson, Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility: Biblical Perspectives in Tension (Eugene, Ore.: Wipf & Stock, 2002), 193.
25. While context would seem to indicate that “to prune” is the best translation here, one should not miss the cleansing implications. The question as to how one reconciles the fact that believers are apparently both continually cleansed (see the context coupled with the writer’s choice of the present tense verb in v. 2) in order to bear fruit, and have already been cleansed according to the word that has been spoken (v. 3, perfect tense) is a question for another article. For now we will have to settle for a somewhat oversimplified statement that the person is cleansed once and for all by the gospel (v. 3), but seems to undergo an ongoing cleansing/pruning process through the course of this life (v. 2).
26. Several interpreters have argued that the very fact that these branches are said to be “in” Jesus (15:2) demonstrates that believers can lose their salvation (so B. F. Westcott, The Gospel According to St. John [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1951], 217; Fernando F Segovia, “The Theology and Provenance of John 15:1–17, ” JBL 101 [1982]: 120-21; Marshall, Kept by the Power of God, 181; Ben Witherington, John’s Wisdom: A Commentary on the Fourth Gospel [Louisville: John Knox, 1995], 258; Whitacre, John, 373). This view will be examined below.
27. One would expect διὰ plus the genitive if the instrumental usage were in view
28. Adolf Schlatter goes so far as to say, “Der Christus spricht in seiner Vollmacht als der, dem ‘das Gericht gegeben ist’; indem sein Urteil sie rein heißt, sind sie rein” (Der Evangelist Johannes: Wie er spricht, denkt und glaubt [Stuttgart: Calwer, 1960], 305).
29. Compare the parallel idea in John 4:41, where the Samaritans are said to believe in Jesus on account of his word” (καὶ πολλῷ πλείους ἐπίστευσαν διὰ τὸν λόγον αὐτοῦ). For other instances where Jesus’ word or words (either λόγος or ῥῆμα) are in some way linked with salvation see 3:34; 5:24–25, 38, 47; 6:63, 68; 8:31, 37, 43, 47, 51; 12:47–48; 14:10, 23–24; 15:7, 20; 17:6, 8, 14, 17, 20.
30. It is important here to qualify the expression “reciprocal/mutual abiding” that will be used in this section. The indwelling is obviously not completely reciprocal in essence. This is due to the difference between Christ, the incarnate God, and the human beings with whom he is abiding It would be utterly absurd to argue that Jesus abides in men in a reciprocal trust and transformation of life (cf Carson, John, 298). Nevertheless, we must affirm the biblical truth that Christ takes up residence in the believer and the believer does the same in him.
31. Cf. Daniel Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 720–21. Wallace is probably correct in his assertion that μείνατε in 15:4 is to be taken as a constative imperative as opposed to an ingressive. If taken as an ingressive, we would say that Jesus told them to “begin to abide in me.” Since they were already believing and abiding, it does not seem that he is commanding them to begin this action. The force of this aorist imperative is therefore not on beginning an action, nor is it momentary or specific. Rather, the force is on the urgency, priority and completeness of abiding. “It is a solemn or categorical command” with the stress on the “solemnity and urgency of the action. Although the aorist is here transgressing onto the present tense’s turf it adds a certain flavor. It is as if the author says, ‘Make this your top priority”‘ (720). This understanding is contra Beasley-Murray John, 272, who says, “μείνατε (aorist tense) could signify ‘Step into union with me,’ which would be a suitable injunction for readers of the Gospel, and not wholly unsuitable for the group in the Upper Room in prospect of the new relationship with the Lord about to be initiated through his death and resurrection.”
32. Cf. Barrett, John, 4. In each of these views, one must supply a verb. We will see below that the first view supplies another imperative, the second view implies a present indicative, and the third view implies a future indicative.
33. So Whitacre, John, 375; Barrett, John, 4; Morris, John, 595.
34. So NRSV; Beasley-Murray, John, 272; Lindars, John, 489; John Marsh, The Gospel of St. John (Pelican Gospel Commentaries; London: Penguin, 1968), 522.
35. So NIV; Marshall, Kept by the Power of God, 180; Carson, John, 516; Borchert, John 12–21, 143.
36. See Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 464, who describes a hortatory subjunctive as the language tool which one would use “to exhort or command oneself and associates.” This use of the subjunctive is employed “to urge some one to unite with the speaker in a course of action upon which he has already decided.”
37. E.g., “μείνατε ἐν ἐμοί, καθώς μένω ἐν ὑμῖν.”
38. Carson, John, 516.
39. Besides having to imply the future tense verb, this is the standard structure of a conditional imperative (so James L. Boyer, “A Classification of Imperatives: A Statistical Study,” Grace Theological Journal 8 [1987]: 38).
40. Or “You abide in me, and if you do, I will also abide in you.” This view seems to me to be the only one that takes seriously the force of the second person imperative.
41. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 489, says that there are at least 20 such uses (cf Boyer, ‘A Classification of Imperatives,” 38–39; A. T Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament: In Light of Historical Research [Nashville: Broadman, 1934], 948–49).
42. Boyer lists this one as an example of an imperative over which interpreters debate whether to classify it as a command or condition (‘A Classification of Imperatives,” 40).
43. Ibid., 38-39; so also Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament, 948-49.
44. Carson, John, 516.
45. Obviously we cannot press this metaphor too far, for unlike a human being, the branch has no consciousness or will of its own.
46. See Marshall, Kept by the Power of God, 181: “John thus uses the verb abide to express the need for disciples to continue in their personal commitment to Jesus; the abiding of Jesus in them is not an automatic process which is independent of their attitude to Him, but is the reverse side of their abiding in Him. Just as men are summoned to believe in Jesus, so they are summoned to abide in Jesus, i.e., to continue believing.”
47. The word μένω carries an inherent durative aspect in the lexeme itself
48. Carson, John, 517, rightly notes that there is considerable dispute as to the exact meaning of “fruit” here: “The fruit, we are told, is obedience, or new converts, or love, or Christian character. These interpretations are reductionistic. The branch’s purpose is to bear much fruit (v. 5), but the next verses show that this fruit is the consequence of prayer in Jesus’ name, and is to the Father’s glory (vv. 7, 8, 16). This suggests that the ‘fruit’ in the vine imagery represents everything that is the product of effective prayer in Jesus’ name, including obedience to Jesus’ commands (v. 10), experience of Jesus’ joy (v. 11—as earlier his peace, 14:27). This fruit is nothing less than the outcome of persevering dependence on the vine, driven by faith, embracing all of the believer’s life and the product of his witness.”
49. See Marshall, Kept by the Power of God, 180, who says, “In John 15:4 the abiding of the disciples in Jesus is probably to be taken as the condition for His abiding in them, and it is in any case the condition for them to bear fruit and to receive answers to their prayers (John 15:4–7).”
50. So Moloney, John, 420. “Abiding is the sine qua non of fruitfulness.”
51. Interestingly, Brown, John 13–21, 678, notes that Augustine used this verse to combat Pelagius who argued that man’s natural power to bring forth good works was worthy of eternal reward.
52. Rudolf Schnackenburg The Gospel According to St. John: Introduction and Commentary vols.; New York: Seabury Press, 1980–1982), 3:101. Schnackenburg however, calls this person a disciple, a position I will evaluate below.
53. See Stanley E. Porter, Verbal Aspectin the Greek of the New Testament, with Reference to Tense and Mood (New York: Peter Lang, 1989), 222, who argues that they are “omnitemporal.” Contra Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 564, who takes them as proleptic.
54. Barclay M. Newman and Eugene A. Nida, Translators Handbook on the Gospel of John (New York: United Bible Societies, 1980), 482–83; Herman Ridderbos, The Gospel of John: A Theological Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 517; Moloney, John, 421; Borig Der wahre Weinstock, 51.
55. Carson, John, 519: “It is better ... to understand that the essential feature of the aorist form is the idea of completeness that the speaker or writer wishes to depict: the branch that does not remain in the vine is thrown away and withers—the judgment is complete, decisive.”
56. So Schnackenburg, John, 3:101; Borchert, John 12–21, 144.
57. See Matthew Black, An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1946), 91–92, who sees this as an indication of a Semitic background to John since this type of indefinite plural is far less common in Greek than in Semitic languages. So also Brown, John 13–21, 661.
58. So Brown, John 13–21, 678–79; Craig S. Keener, The Gospel of John: A Commentary (2 vols.; Pea-body: Hendrickson, 2003), 2:1001–2.
59. So Keener, The Gospel of John, 2:1001–2; Carson, John, 517. See especially Brown, John 13–21, 679, who says, “Naturally the scholars who refuse to see any final eschatology in John are reluctant to see here a reference to eschatological punishment, but it would not lie beyond the range of Johannine thought to suggest that those fallen away from Jesus are to be punished by fire (cf 29).” He rightly notes that the Synoptic Gospels offer some helpful points of comparison (Mark 9:43; Matt 3:10; 8:12; 25:41). Contra Beasley-Murray John, 273, who asserts that this metaphor simply speaks of what happens on a farm and not the fires of hell (cf. Schnackenburg, John, 3:101; Lindars, John, 489).
60. Schnackenburg, John, 3:101; Marshall, Kept by the Power of God, 180–83; Keener, John, 2:998–1002; Whitacre, John, 373–76.
61. Marshall, Kept by the Power of God, 181: “Those broken off are described as branches of the vine and hence as believers. The passage will then teach that believers who fail to continue in their belief will be cast away.”
62. This can be done in v. 2 by arguing that αἴρει means to lift up in order that the vine might receive more light. Then in v. 6, one could argue that the aorists should be taken as past time. Therefore, the throwing out and withering are seen as having been predetermined in the past and, thus, there are no real warnings here either.
63. I have chosen only two of the many passages throughout John where the idea of God’s sovereignty in salvation is undeniable. For a fuller treatment of such passages, see Robert W Yarbrough, “Divine Election in the Gospel of John,” in Still Sovereign: Contemporary Perspectives on Election, Foreknowledge and Grace (ed. Thomas R. Schreiner and Bruce A. Ware; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000), 47–62.
64. I get this strong wording from the οὐ μὴ plus the subjunctive in 6:37, which is of course the strongest way possible to negate something in Greek. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 468, notes that this construction denies even the potentiality of something.
65. LSJ, s.v “ἕλκω”; BDAG, s.v. “ἕλκω.”
66. In 18:10 we see Peter forcefully drawing his sword from its sheath in order to cut off the ear of the high priest’s servant. In 21:6 and 21:11 we see the same word employed to denote the forceful dragging of the fishing net in an effort to hoist in a miraculous catch. Moreover, outside of John, the only other place it is used in the NT is in Acts 16:19 where Paul and Silas are seized and dragged into the market place. Though it is not within the scope of this article to enter into a lengthy discussion of the use of this word in John 12:32, I would argue that it is being used in the same sense that we have discussed for 6:44. In other words, Jesus was teaching that when he would be lifted up, there would be an intense drawing of all kinds of men to himself. Of course there is a debate here that centers upon the meaning of “all,” to which I would argue that John is speaking about “all” without distinction (i.e., both Jews and Gentiles) and not “all” without exception (i.e., every single person).
67. Cf. Yarbrough, Divine Election in the Gospel of John, 50: It is hard to avoid the impression that John 6:44 refers to a ‘forceful attraction’ in bringing sinners to the Son.”
68. οὐ μὴ ἀπόλωνται.
69. Cf. Matt 7:21–23; 13:18–23; Heb 3:14–19.
70. Also 2 John 9.
71. So Carson, T he Farewell Discourse and Final Prayer of Jesus: An Exposition of John 14–17 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980), 97.
72. For a thorough explanation of this view, see Thomas R. Schreiner and Ardel B. Caneday The Race Set Before Us: A Biblical Theology of Perseverance and Assurance (Downers Grove: InterVarsity 2001). It should be made clear at this point that I am not asserting that the warnings are “the” means of God’s preserving his people; rather, they should be viewed as one of many means God uses in the preservation of his people. Other means found in Scripture include but are not limited to the inner working of the Holy Spirit (Rom 8:16), the encouragement and/or rebuke of another brother or sister in Christ (Gal 6:1–2), and the prayers of the saints (1 John 5:16; Jas 5:16–20).
73. See Marshall, Kept by the Power of God, 313: The Calvinist believer cannot fall away from ‘true’ faith, but he can ‘fall away’ from what proves in the end to be only seeming faith. The possibility of falling away remains. But in neither case [Calvinist or Arminian] does the person know for certain whether he is a true or seeming disciple. All that he knows is that Christ alone can save and that he must trust in Christ.. .. Whoever said, ‘The Calvinist knows that he cannot fall from salvation but does not know whether he has got it’, had it summed up nicely. But this can be counterfeit and misleading. The non-Calvinist knows that he has salvation—because he trusts in the promises of God—but is aware that left to himself, he could lose it. So he holds Christ. It seems to me the practical effect is the same” [emphasis added].
74. See Carson, Reflections on Assurance, 268–69, for an excellent critique of Marshall s statements found above in n. 73. Carson asserts that Marshall is correct only at a “mechanistic level.” It is, however, the focus of the two systems that is diametrically opposed. “Despite Marshall’s salutary emphasis on the promises of God, at the end of the day the security of the believer finally rests with the believer. For those from the opposite camp, the security of the believer finally rests with God— and that, I suggest, rightly taught and applied, draws the believer back to God himself, to trust in God, to renewed faith that is of a piece with trusting him in the first place.”
75. The parallelism of mutual abiding between 15:7 and 15:4 should not be missed. Verse 7 is parallel with v. 4 with “and my words abide in you” standing in the place of the verbless construction “and I in you” (cf Ridderbos, John, 518).
76. In other words the plural ῥήματά of 15:7 makes up the λόγον of 15:3.
77. So Pancaro, The Law in the Fourth Gospel, 414–20.
78. The aorists ἠγάπησέν (speaking of the Father’s love for the Son) and ἠγάπησα (speaking of the Son’s love for his disciples) are probably not speaking here of past time. Each of these should rather be seen as speaking of the timeless truth of this love and/or the completeness and perfection of this love.
79. Cf. Morris, John, 597: “This is not some mystical experience. It is simple obedience. It is when we keep Christ’s commandments that we abide in his love.” I would, however, want to disagree with Morris if he is here asserting that there is no mystical element at all.
80. This verse does not imply that abiding in Jesus means sinless perfectionism. What we are given here is the ultimate standard for our obedience. One should see John’s First Epistle for the outworking of the tension between the ultimate standard and what we really are.
81. I take the ἵνα plus the subjunctive ὑπάγητε a divine purpose clause, which brings about a guaranteed result.
82. The rendering of γένησθε is one of the more difficult textual issues in John’s Gospel. I am in agreement here with NA that the correct reading is the aorist subjunctive γένησθε. As such, I translate the last clause, “and so prove to be my disciples.” For “prove to be” as a legitimate gloss for γένησθε, see BDAG, s.v “γίνομαι.”
83. Barrett, John, 68.
84. So Schlatter, Der Evangelist Johannes, 298: “Darum war auch Jesus, solange er bei den Jüngern war, ihr Paraklet.” See also 1 John 2:1 where Jesus himself is called a Paraclete.
85. I am taking the ἵνα plus the subjunctive ᾖ as a result clause.
86. So James M. Hamilton, “He Is With You and He Will Be In You: The Spirit, the Believer, and the Glorification of Jesus” (Ph.D. diss., The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2003), 95.
87. Similarly, John told us that Jesus’ own did not receive him (1:11).
88. See Josef Schmid, ‘Bund, LT K (ed. Michael Buchberger; Freiburg: Herder, 1958), 2:778: “In den übrigen Schriften des NT fehlt der B.es-gedanke vollständig, od. Er spielt wenigstens keine Rolle, so namentlich bei Jo[hannes].”
89. John W Pryor, John: Evangelist of the Covenant People: The Narrative and Themes of the Fourth Gospel (Downers Grove: InterVarsity 1992); Pryor, “Covenant and Community in John’s Gospel,” RTR47 (1988): 44-51; D. A. Carson, “The Johannine Writings,” New Dictionary of Biblical Theology: Exploring Unity and Diversity of Scripture (ed. T Desmond Alexander et al.; Downers Grove: InterVarsity 2000), 135; Andreas J. Köstenberger, “John,” New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, 282–83; Köstenberger, Encountering John, 155; Craig L. Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of John’s Gospel (Downers Grove: InterVarsity 2001), 206–7. See also Malatesta, Interiority and Covenant. Though his focus is on the Johannine Epistles, he argues convincingly that both the wording of “abiding in” and “being in” are new covenant language. It should be noted that if this idea is correct, then it demonstrates a major weakness in the arguments of those who wish to assert that John’s community was sectarian in nature and therefore explain these passages in light of this view. For an example of this kind of argumentation, see W Meeks, “The Man From Heaven in Johannine Sectarianism,” JBL 91 (1972): 44-72; D. Moody Smith, “Johannine Christianity: Some Reflections on Its Character and Delineation,” NTS 21 (1976): 222-24; Fernando F Segovia, Love Relationships in the Johannine Tradition (SBLDS 58; Chico, Calif: Scholars Press, 1981), 204–19.
90. This is not to say that this is the extent of the new covenant motif in John. Certainly there are many other new covenant themes that are not surveyed here. I am simply evaluating those most pertinent to the Johannine motif of abiding.
91. Interiority can be defined as the divine renewal and placing (internalizing) of Christ/Holy Spirit, word(s)/commands of Christ within the very heart of the believer (cf Malatesta, Interiority and Covenant).
92. Exod 25:8; 29:43–46; Lev 26:11–12; Deut 12:11.
93. Pryor, John: Evangelist of the Covenant Community, 158.
94. See also 14:23 where we are told that Jesus and the Father will come and make their abode in the believer. The word used here is μονή which is the noun cognate of μένω.
95. Pryor, John: Evangelist of the Covenant Community, 158.
96. See also Jer 24:5–7; Ezek 11:14–21; 16:53–63; 37:21–28.
97. Cf. Pryor, John: Evangelist of the Covenant People, 159.
98. Edward S. J. Malatesta, “Covenant and Indwelling,” The Way 17 (1977): 28-29.
99. So Pryor, John: Evangelist of the Covenant People, 160.
100. Μένω can be found in such texts as Deut 27:26 (ἐμμένω) to speak of abiding in the obedience to the law (see also Isa 30:18; Ps 60:5, 8; Jer 38:32 in the LXX). Also the idea of “keeping the commandments” is of course very important to covenant language in the OT (see n. 16 above).
101. Pryor, “Covenant and Community in John’s Gospel,” 50.