Does God Really Cut Off Unfruitful Branches?

That appears to be what the bible says in John 15:2
[2]Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.
Take that at face value and you might be tempted to think that fruitfulness is a condition for remaining in Christ. On the contrary, fruitfulness is a result of, not a condition for, abiding in Christ.
Does God really cut off unfruitful branches in Christ? No, He does not. The phrase translated 'take away' in John 15:2 is actually from the Greek word 'airo'. 'Airo' means to bear up or lift up. In ancient Israel, vinedressers take notice of branches that are not bearing fruit. These branches are often the ones hanging down. To make them fruitful, they are lifted up from the ground, watered and then place in a top place where they can get more sunlight.
God does not cast any man away. Do not be deceived by those who say that God does not associate with unfruitfulness. God's way of dealing with unfruitfulness is to abound in Grace towards us more. If God were to be casting away unfruitful branches, then no man can actually abide in Christ. We are all going to get cast away.
It is not surprising that this verse is often erroneously used by those who think they have it altogether by themselves to whack those who seem not to be doing so well. What says the scripture about our Lord? John 6:37
[37]All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
Jesus said He will cast no one that comes to Him out, how do we then even think that He will cast away unfruitful branches? That will only make it appear that Jesus Himself is confused and does not really know what He was saying.
Beloved, your Father is not going to let go of you just because you seem not to be fruitful or you seem barren. Remember Isaiah 54? Let us see it. Isaiah 54:1-5
[1]Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail with child: for more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the LORD.
[2]Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them stretch forth the curtains of thine habitations: spare not, lengthen thy cords, and strengthen thy stakes;
[3]For thou shalt break forth on the right hand and on the left; and thy seed shall inherit the Gentiles, and make the desolate cities to be inhabited.
[4]Fear not; for thou shalt not be ashamed: neither be thou confounded; for thou shalt not be put to shame: for thou shalt forget the shame of thy youth, and shalt not remember the reproach of thy widowhood any more.
[5]For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.
God called Himself the Husband of this barren woman. She was not chosen for her fruitfulness. She was actually barren. God is not sticking with us for what we can offer Him. Picture your own earthly parents letting you know that they are only sticking with you for what they stand to gain from you. Will you consider them to be loving towards you? No, you will not. This is actually the picture that religion paints of our Father. He is seen as the God who needs to be appeased and who is after what we can offer Him. His disposition being that of 'perform or be fired'.
A bruised reed He will not break and a smoking flax will He not quench. A bruised reed is no longer fit for use and a smoking flax deserves only to be quenched. Yet Christ will not break the bruised reed nor quench the smoking flax. (Matthew 12:20).
How does God then lift up the unfruitful branches? It is through the word of His Grace. Hearing the law does not lift any man up, though it might stir up the flesh to get on the performance mill, but there will not be any true and lasting lifting in the man himself. Look around you, I am sure you will be able to point to one or two believers who seem to be doing more than you, but do you know how empty they might be feeling deep on the inside? A busy life is not necessarily a full life. It is only the word of Grace that truly lifts a man up. The word of His Grace is the word of hope. Christ in us is the hope of glory.
It is the same word of Grace that God uses to take up the unfruitful branches that He also uses to purge the fruitful one that it might bring forth much fruit. The word 'purge' in John 15:2 has the same root word as the word 'clean' in verse 3. The root word is 'katharos' which means 'to clean, to purify'. The unfruitful branch has fallen from Grace, so God takes it back up to His Grace. The fruitful one on the other hand is cleansed and purified more and more from the mixed 'gospel' (of Grace plus works) that seeks to corrupt it.
Dear, your maturity is hinged upon your security in Christ. God does not take away the unfruitful branch, rather He lifts it up. Now that is security. It is security that births maturity, not vice versa. Religion has taught many of us that our security is dependent upon our maturity, but that is an untruth. Without security, we cannot grow to maturity. In fact, our journey to maturity is simply that of knowing how secure He has made us in Himself. Out there in the world, business people consider the security of a place before setting up their businesses in that place. Why? Because the security will determine the growth and sustenance of their businesses. It is not the growth of their businesses that determines the security of that place.
In Christ Jesus, we are all secure and are not in danger of hell or losing our salvation. We are eternally secure and knowing this is what causes us to go on to maturity in Christ. Think you are not doing well enough? Well, God wants to lift you up, not cast you away. Rest, beloved.
Grace always!

The unfruitful branches cut off and thrown in the fire are those who live and die without Christ Jesus ,sinners who are condemned to the fire which is Hell.

Thanks for sharing this insight.

I think you should look at the passage in context of John 15 as well as the fuller context (which is the entirety of Jesus's teachings and commands)

Consider verse 6:

If Jesus will never cast out anyone who doesn't bear fruit, then what explanation do you have for the phrase "cast out"?

"If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned."
John 15:6 NKJV

In view of your explanation, kindly consider the below verse:

"I tell you, the Kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation that will produce the proper fruit."
Matthew 21:43 NLT

Please bear in mind that the audience Jesus was referring to in this context had the kingdom. However, it would be taken away from them according to Jesus and given to those who will bear fruit.

When a man doesn't have the kingdom of God, what would the man have? What is the state of the man who no longer possesses the Kingdom?

Please take your time to read the story that led to the conclusion of Jesus in the above verse.

After sharing the parable of the wicked vinedressers with his audience, Jesus asked them a very critical question:

“When the owner of the vineyard returns,” Jesus asked, “what do you think he will do to those farmers?”
Matthew 21:40 NLT

His audience then responded:

“He will put the wicked men to a horrible death and lease the vineyard to others who will give him his share of the crop after each harvest.”
Matthew 21:41 NLT.

The audience clearly judged themselves with the answer they gave. They clearly said what should be done to those who don't bear fruits. And Jesus never went against their reply. Rather, He further emphasized it.


Lastly, going back to the passage you referenced (John 15:2), you must realise that the meaning of the Greek word, "airō" isn't limited to "to raise up, elevate, lift up" It literally means "to raise up or take away"

When a vinedresser notices that a branch isn't bearing fruit, he will raise it to a vantage position where it can be well nourished and exposed to favourable conditions. However, if after all the patient assistance, the branch refuses to bear fruit, the vinedresser will be left with no choice but to take it away so it doesn't introduce corruption into the vine.

Please read another parable of Jesus below that further explains this:

"Then Jesus told this story: “A man planted a fig tree in his garden and came again and again to see if there was any fruit on it, but he was always disappointed. Finally, he said to his gardener, ‘I’ve waited three years, and there hasn’t been a single fig! Cut it down. It’s just taking up space in the garden.’ “The gardener answered, ‘Sir, give it one more chance. Leave it another year, and I’ll give it special attention and plenty of fertilizer. If we get figs next year, fine. If not, then you can cut it down.’”
Luke 13:6‭-‬9 NLT

Notice in the above that The Master gave the fig tree ample opportunity to bear fruit. However, he also stipulated conditions that would determine whether or not He would allow it remain on his farm.

There are things the believer must do in Christ to be fruitful. Fruitfulness is not automatic.

"But also for this very reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perseverance godliness, to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love. For if these things are yours and abound, you will be neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ."
II Peter 1:5‭-‬8 NKJV

Verse 10 says:
"So, dear brothers and sisters, work hard to prove that you really are among those God has called and chosen. Do these things, and you will never fall away."
2 Peter 1:10 NLT

The believer who doesn't work hard to become fruitful (or become diligent as stated by KJV) will fall away

Yadid:
Does God Really Cut Off Unfruitful Branches? That appears to be what the bible says in John 15:2.
Take that at face value and you might be tempted to think that fruitfulness is a condition for remaining in Christ. On the contrary, fruitfulness is a result of, not a condition for, abiding in Christ. Does God really cut off unfruitful branches in Christ? No, He does not. The phrase translated 'take away' in John 15:2 is actually from the Greek word 'airo'. 'Airo' means to bear up or lift up.

In what seems a desperate attempt to make God seem soft, you just threw Him under the bus in ignorance.

The same Jesus Christ reiterated the teaching found in John 15 vs 1 - 15 in Luke 13 vs 6 - 9, and notice how He equally says here that those who do not bear fruit after a period will be cut off?

6 Jesus told this story: “A man had a fig tree. He planted it in his garden. He came looking for some fruit on it, but he found none.
7 He had a servant who took care of his garden. So he said to his servant, ‘I have been looking for fruit on this tree for three years, but I never find any. Cut it down! Why should it waste the ground?’
8 But the servant answered, ‘Master, let the tree have one more year to produce fruit. Let me dig up the dirt around it and fertilize it.
9 Maybe the tree will have fruit on it next year. If it still does not produce, then you can cut it down.’” - Luke 13 vs 6 - 9

The above teaching applies to all who are born-again— those who are in the Kingdom of God.

9 “I have loved you as the Father has loved me. Now continue in my love.
10 I have obeyed my Father’s commands, and he continues to love me. In the same way, if you obey my commands, I will continue to love you.
11 I have told you these things so that you can have the true happiness that I have. I want you to be completely happy.
12 This is what I command you: Love each other as I have loved you.
13 The greatest love people can show is to die for their friends.
14 You are my friends if you do what I tell you to do.
15 I no longer call you servants, because servants don’t know what their master is doing. But now I call you friends, because I have told you everything that my Father told me.
16 “You did not choose me. I chose you. And I gave you this work: to go and produce fruit—fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you anything you ask for in my name. - John 15 vs 9 = 16

Those among them who fail to produce fruit.... they refuse to abide/ live their existence in continuous obedience to the teachings and commandments of Jesus Christ are enemies of Jesus Christ. And God cuts off those who are His enemies.

Yadid:
■ God called Himself the Husband of this barren woman. She was not chosen for her fruitfulness. She was actually barren. God is not sticking with us for what we can offer Him. Picture your own earthly parents letting you know that they are only sticking with you for what they stand to gain from you. Will you consider them to be loving towards you? No, you will not. This is actually the picture that religion paints of our Father. He is seen as the God who needs to be appeased and who is after what we can offer Him. His disposition being that of 'perform or be fired'.
■ A bruised reed He will not break and a smoking flax will He not quench. A bruised reed is no longer fit for use and a smoking flax deserves only to be quenched. Yet Christ will not break the bruised reed nor quench the smoking flax. (Matthew 12:20).

The barren woman in Isaiah 54 is God's Israel. It isn't a reference to an individual but instead, the Nation of Israel whom God chose. The same God is written to have utterly destroyed those among Israel who set themselves up as His enemy. So, let's not muddle these things up here.

2. That written in Matthew 22 is not a reference to how God will deal with those who are His enemies. No, instead, it is about the one chosen by God.

15 Jesus knew what the Pharisees were planning. So he left that place, and many people followed him. He healed all who were sick, 16 but he warned them not to tell others who he was.
17 This was to give full meaning to what Isaiah the prophet said when he spoke for God:
18 “Here is my servant, the one I have chosen. He is the one I love, and I am very pleased with him. I will fill him with my Spirit, and he will bring justice to the nations.
19 He will not argue or shout; no one will hear his voice in the streets.
20 He will not break off even a bent stem of grass. He will not put out even the weakest flame. He will not give up until he has made justice victorious.
21 All people will hope in him.” - Matthew 22 vs 15 - 21

The enemies of God in the Kingdom of God— those who are born-again yet refuse to do as Jesus Christ commands are not the bent stem of grass or weak flames. They are enemies of God, those who have set themselves against God.

Kobojunkie:
In what seems a desperate attempt to make God seem soft, you just threw Him under the bus in ignorance.

The same Jesus Christ reiterated the teaching found in John 15 vs 1 - 15 in Luke 13 vs 6 - 9, and notice how He equally says here that those who do not bear fruit after a period will be cut off?
The above teaching applies to all who are born-again— those who are in the Kingdom of God.
Those among them who fail to produce fruit.... they refuse to abide/ live their existence in continuous obedience to the teachings and commandments of Jesus Christ are enemies of Jesus Christ. And God cuts off those who are His enemies.

Build your strawman and destroy them by yourself. Nice occupation. Enjoy.

Yadid:
■ Well done sir. Keep building your strawman and knocking them down by yourself. Nice occupation by the way. Enjoy!

Explain exactly how pointing out the obvious errors in your convenient interpretation there amounts to a strawman.

ndukao2000:
Thanks for sharing this insight.

I think you should look at the passage in context of John 15 as well as the fuller context (which is the entirety of Jesus's teachings and commands)

Consider verse 6:

If Jesus will never cast out anyone who doesn't bear fruit, then what explanation do you have for the phrase "cast out"?

"If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned."
John 15:6 NKJV

In view of your explanation, kindly consider the below verse:

"I tell you, the Kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation that will produce the proper fruit."
Matthew 21:43 NLT

Please bear in mind that the audience Jesus was referring to in this context had the kingdom. However, it would be taken away from them according to Jesus and given to those who will bear fruit.

When a man doesn't have the kingdom of God, what would the man have? What is the state of the man who no longer possesses the Kingdom?

Please take your time to read the story that led to the conclusion of Jesus in the above verse.

After sharing the parable of the wicked vinedressers with his audience, Jesus asked them a very critical question:

“When the owner of the vineyard returns,” Jesus asked, “what do you think he will do to those farmers?”
Matthew 21:40 NLT

His audience then responded:

“He will put the wicked men to a horrible death and lease the vineyard to others who will give him his share of the crop after each harvest.”
Matthew 21:41 NLT.

The audience clearly judged themselves with the answer they gave. They clearly said what should be done to those who don't bear fruits. And Jesus never went against their reply. Rather, He further emphasized it.


Lastly, going back to the passage you referenced (John 15:2), you must realise that the meaning of the Greek word, "airō" isn't limited to "to raise up, elevate, lift up" It literally means "to raise up or take away"

When a vinedresser notices that a branch isn't bearing fruit, he will raise it to a vantage position where it can be well nourished and exposed to favourable conditions. However, if after all the patient assistance, the branch refuses to bear fruit, the vinedresser will be left with no choice but to take it away so it doesn't introduce corruption into the vine.

Please read another parable of Jesus below that further explains this:

"Then Jesus told this story: “A man planted a fig tree in his garden and came again and again to see if there was any fruit on it, but he was always disappointed. Finally, he said to his gardener, ‘I’ve waited three years, and there hasn’t been a single fig! Cut it down. It’s just taking up space in the garden.’ “The gardener answered, ‘Sir, give it one more chance. Leave it another year, and I’ll give it special attention and plenty of fertilizer. If we get figs next year, fine. If not, then you can cut it down.’”
Luke 13:6‭-‬9 NLT

Notice in the above that The Master gave the fig tree ample opportunity to bear fruit. However, he also stipulated conditions that would determine whether or not He would allow it remain on his farm.

There are things the believer must do in Christ to be fruitful. Fruitfulness is not automatic.

"But also for this very reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perseverance godliness, to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love. For if these things are yours and abound, you will be neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ."
II Peter 1:5‭-‬8 NKJV

Verse 10 says:
"So, dear brothers and sisters, work hard to prove that you really are among those God has called and chosen. Do these things, and you will never fall away."
2 Peter 1:10 NLT

The believer who doesn't work hard to become fruitful (or become diligent as stated by KJV) will fall away

Before you jump from scripture to scripture, hermeneutics demands that you first understand a single text within it's own complete context first. Your assertion about John 15;6 does not even follow the post. Now you have gone ahead to add other verses to it, taken out of context.

Kobojunkie:
Explain exactly how pointing out the obvious errors in your convenient interpretation there amounts to a strawman.

Errors? Did you say errors? You presume your assertions are correct and true then. Obvious errors my foot. Enjoy man. I have no time. Funny. Enjoy your "correctness".

Yadid:
■ Errors? Did you say errors? You presume your assertions are correct and true then. Obvious errors my foot. Enjoy man. I have no time. Funny. Enjoy your "correctness".

I don't presume my assertions are correct rather Scripture itself as presented even from the same context of John 15 vs 1 - 15 and Mattthew 22 stand as proof against your interpretations of portions of scripture whicu you lifted out of context. Open your eyes to see what is in fact written

Kobojunkie:
I don't presume my assertions are correct rather Scripture itself as presented even from the same context of John 15 vs 1 - 15 and Mattthew 22 stand as proof against your interpretations of portions of scripture whicu you lifted out of context. Open your eyes to see what is in fact written

I lifted scripture out of context? Coming from you? Really? Do you realise that everything you posted up there is not even a matter of just lifting scripture out of context but a massacre of bible texts? I think what you mean by context is something else known just to you. I'm wondering why I'm responding to you here when it is evident already that you're neither a student of hermeneutics nor of homiletics. You need the eye opening more actually. Now do yourself a favour, avoid my posts huh. Make your own posts stating your own "correct" interpretation of scriptures. You know so much and you're so objective. Take your trophy. I do not contend for it with you. Byeeeeee!

Yadid:
■ I lifted scripture out of context? Coming from you? Really? Do you realise that everything you posted up there is not even a matter of just lifting scripture out of context but a massacre of bible texts?
■I'm wondering why I'm responding to you here when it is evident already that you're neither a student of hermeneutics nor of homiletics. You need the eye opening more actually. Now do yourself a favour, avoid my posts huh. Make your own posts stating your own "correct" interpretation of scriptures. You know so much and you're so objective. Take your trophy. I do not contend for it with you. Byeeeee!

Massacre? You mean to say that where in the same John 15 vs 1 - 15, which you posted from earlier, where Jesus Christ divides the branches into those who are friends and those who are enemies, Jesus Christ was complicit in destroying scripture?

You mean to say that Isaiah 54 where The barren woman(the Nation of Israel which God first abandoned/punished with divorce) is told that she will eventually have more children than the other woman(the Nation of Judah), God and Isaiah were complicit in this destruction of scripture?

In Matthew 22 Jesus Christ quotes Isaiah 41 vs 1- 4 where it is explained that without even condemning any of those — Jesus Christ said He had come to save but not to condemn — whom He was sent to, Jesus Christ would bring true Justice. You think Jesus Christ was wrong and you are right for twisting the content of that passage to apply a completely different meaning?

2. I see you are versed in the art of special interpretation magic of the religious folks. You lost major in twisting and skewing that which is presented in Scripture any which way you can to replace the meaning intended by the writers with your special interpretations. Good for you, however, the Truth of God is everlasting and no amount of your special interpretation attempts can change that.

Kobojunkie:
Massacre? You mean to say that where in the same John 15 vs 1 - 15, which you posted from earlier, where Jesus Christ divides the branches into those who are friends and those who are enemies, Jesus Christ was complicit in destroying scripture?

You mean to say that Isaiah 54 where The barren woman(the Nation of Israel which God first abandoned/punished with divorce) is told that she will eventually have more children than the other woman(the Nation of Judah), God and Isaiah were complicit in this destruction of scripture?

In Matthew 22 Jesus Christ quotes Isaiah 41 vs 1- 4 where it is explained that without even condemning any of those — Jesus Christ said He had come to save but not to condemn — whom He was sent to, Jesus Christ would bring true Justice. You think Jesus Christ was wrong and you are right for twisting the content of that passage to apply a completely different meaning?

2. I see you are versed in the art of special interpretation magic of the religious folks. You lost major in twisting and skewing that which is presented in Scripture any which way you can to replace the meaning intended by the writers with your special interpretations. Good for you, however, the Truth of God is everlasting and no amount of your special interpretation attempts can change that.

Lol. 😂 Instead of him to just Google hermeneutics and homiletics, he's talking about "special interpretation magic". smh. Twisting and skewing scriptures? Lol. Why not just rest since you are the reservoir of the truth eh? I don't understand any more. You've added ad hominems to your initial strawman. E be things o.

Yadid:
■ Lol. 😂 Instead of him to just Google hermeneutics and homiletics, he's talking about "special interpretation magic". smh. Twisting and skewing scriptures?
■ Lol. Why not just rest since you are the reservoir of the truth eh? I don't understand any more. You've added ad hominems to your initial strawman. E be things o.

But, I am aware of the meaning of those terms which you religious minds, your scholars included, use in attempts to legitimize the lies you concoct by twisting the meaning of what is presented in Scripture as you please.

The reason you are not able to directly counter the content of my rebuttals so far has to do with the fact that you are aware of these treacherous religious dealings of your religious kind. When confronted with Scripture as is, you find yourselves stuck, and resort to attacking the messenger rather than the message, a tactic notoriously employed by the religious and ignorant everywhere.

2. Ad hominems? Nonsense, where?

Yadid:



Before you jump from scripture to scripture, hermeneutics demands that you first understand a single text within it's own complete context first. Your assertion about John 15;6 does not even follow the post. Now you have gone ahead to add other verses to it, taken out of context.

In your first post, you made a very important point about fruitfulness, which is the truth that Jesus actually wants us to be fruitful and that's why He called us in the first place. I commend that.

In response to your reaction...

Don't forget that John 15:2 doesn't have it's own context outside the entire chapter and even the entire Bible. Remember that the Book of John, just like almost every other book of the Bible, was not originally written in chapters and verses. The book of John was originally written as a letter from John to a specific audience (ie Jews and believers in the diaspora). Hence, you see why you can never accurately teach or explain one verse of the Bible in isolation. At best, you will make the word say something completely different from what the Author (the Holy Spirit) intended.

The same Jesus who spoke in verse 2 clearly stated in verse 6 that people will be cast out, become withered and be thrown into the fire if they don't abide in Him.

If you maintain that verse 2 doesn't connote being literally taken away, then you are clearly saying that Jesus contradicted Himself as we read further down in verse 6. And we all know that scriptures cannot be broken (John 10:35). Jesus started a very critical conversation on fruitfulness in verse 2 and then went further in verse 6 to show us how to be fruitful as well as the consequences of not being connected to Him.

Remember, a branch cannot be fruitful if it doesn't abide (remain) in the vine. It is commonsense that the branch which doesn't remain in the vine cannot be nourished. It will eventually die a natural death and wither away. It will then be discarded by the farmer because it will be useless, occupying good space.

Many errors have been created because some persons have interpreted one verse of the Bible outside the surrounding verses and even the entire Bible. Hence, attempting to explain 15:2 alone will only create confusion.

Yadid:
Does God Really Cut Off Unfruitful Branches? ...

What happened to Esau, king Saul, Solomon, Eli's sons? Isaiah 5.

Dtruthspeaker:


What happened to Esau, king Saul, Solomon, Eli's sons? Isaiah 5.

Read what you wrote again. How we read the bible as if the cross of Christ changes and means nothing requires a doctoral study in theology.

ndukao2000:


In your first post, you made a very important point about fruitfulness, which is the truth that Jesus actually wants us to be fruitful and that's why He called us in the first place. I commend that.

In response to your reaction...

Don't forget that John 15:2 doesn't have it's own context outside the entire chapter and even the entire Bible. Remember that the Book of John, just like almost every other book of the Bible, was not originally written in chapters and verses. The book of John was originally written as a letter from John to a specific audience (ie Jews and believers in the diaspora). Hence, you see why you can never accurately teach or explain one verse of the Bible in isolation. At best, you will make the word say something completely different from what the Author (the Holy Spirit) intended.

The same Jesus who spoke in verse 2 clearly stated in verse 6 that people will be cast out, become withered and be thrown into the fire if they don't abide in Him.

If you maintain that verse 2 doesn't connote being literally taken away, then you are clearly saying that Jesus contradicted Himself as we read further down in verse 6. And we all know that scriptures cannot be broken (John 10:35). Jesus started a very critical conversation on fruitfulness in verse 2 and then went further in verse 6 to show us how to be fruitful as well as the consequences of not being connected to Him.

Remember, a branch cannot be fruitful if it doesn't abide (remain) in the vine. It is commonsense that the branch which doesn't remain in the vine cannot be nourished. It will eventually die a natural death and wither away. It will then be discarded by the farmer because it will be useless, occupying good space.

Many errors have been created because some persons have interpreted one verse of the Bible outside the surrounding verses and even the entire Bible. Hence, attempting to explain 15:2 alone will only create confusion.

You gloriously shot yourself in the leg. Verse 2 talks about unfruitful branches IN HIM being lifted up so that it may bear fruit. verse 6 talks about a man that is NOT ABIDING IN HIM, but you are here to argue blindly. you don't even pay proper attention to what you claim to read. smh. The post explains how the Greek word "airo" does not mean "take away or cut away", and how the translation there in the English does not align with the original Greek text, that explanation you cannot say a thing about, and you cannot because you are just here to shove your opinion down people's throat saying yada-yada. Nairaland is big enough for you to create your own posts, huh. I advised you the last time. Take it. I'm having no engagement with you whatsoever hereafter. I've found you out elsewhere on Nairaland. Enjoy your grievances.

Yadid:

Read what you wrote again. How we read the bible as if the cross of Christ changes and means nothing requires a doctoral study in theology.

The cross changed nothing the blood of unblemished lamb did not change which is why throughout the new testament we see walk faithfully and circumspectively that we may do no wrong and be found wanting on that great and terrible day.