Abiding in the Lord (15:1–8)
15:1. We have the vine and the branches. This was imagery that every Jew would understand. In the Old Testament the vine appeared regularly as a symbol of Israel. The Father owns the garden, Jesus is the vine, and his followers are the branches. Christ and not the church is the true vine. Branches placed anywhere else are false branches. The word for gardener is georgos, the common word for farmer, a role retained by the Father himself. The vine with which these disciples would have been familiar was Israel, described in some detail in Psalm 80.
 
15:2. Three types of branches are named or inferred in this first part of the chapter: those who bear no fruit, those who bear some fruit and, later in verse 5, those who bear much fruit. The fruit-bearing branches, it would appear from the text of this verse, represent true believers.
 
15:3. The disciples, however, needed neither cutting off nor trimming clean because they had already been cleansed by the Lord’s Word. One thing is clear at the outset of the chapter: this is not a passage on salvation, a topic John covered in earlier chapters. Here he dealt with requirements for a fruitful life on the part of believers.
 
15:4. Another key here is the word remain (abide) which appears no fewer than eleven times in the passage. It seems to suggest an effortless resting in the Lord, confident in the promised union between the vine and the true branches. Furthermore, John used the word remain forty times in his Gospel and twenty-seven more times in his epistles. In the context of this passage, it seems to emphasize an ongoing faith and loving obedience to the Father and the Son that results in fruit. The fruit in this passage seems to focus on spirit-generated behavior of Christians. This is new covenant thinking. The disciples and all believers since them must give up the idea that true Christianity emphasizes memberships and associations rather than life in Christ through the Spirit. True believers, demonstrating the fruit of the Spirit because the Spirit of God lives in them, are pruned so their fruit will increase.
 
15:5. Here we have the key verse of the passage, although it only expands what we have already learned on the first paragraph. The fruit of the vine is Christlikeness. Although the Holy Spirit is not called a vine, He is a producer of fruit.
 
15:6. Verse 6 narrows verse 2. We struggle a bit with the words, “he cuts off.” But thrown away and withers takes it further than we want to go in any reference to people who may have been true believers at one time. Certainly the words thrown into the fire and burned could never refer to those who were at one time true believers.

​15:7–8. The focus of this passage is on the positive side (the branches remaining) and the Lord put aside all reference to branches that are removed. He also indicated that fruit-bearing is to the Father’s glory and that those who bear much fruit demonstrate their relationship to Christ. The distinctive factor here links an effective prayer life with fruit-bearing. D. A. Carson sums it up: “In short, Christians must remember that the fruit that issues out of their obedient faith-union with Christ lies at the heart of how Jesus brings glory to his Father. Those who are contemplating the claims of the gospel, like John’s readers, must reckon with the fact that failure to honor the Son is failure to honor God (5:23)”

12:20–26
The quest of the Greeks
These Greeks may have been Greek proselytes (Gentile converts to Judaism); if so they would have been able to join the Jews in the temple worship. But it is not certain that they were so committed. At least they were religious seekers since they had come to worship. Many Gentiles were attracted to Judaism’s ideas because of its higher moral emphasis compared with paganism. These men had probably come from the Decapolis and may even have known Philip who came from nearby Bethsaida. It may be assumed that their quest to see Jesus was prompted by a desire to learn from him rather than mere curiosity. Maybe John sees them as examples of the ‘world’ going after Jesus.

​It is difficult to imagine how they would have understood the opening words of Jesus. They would hardly have been so well informed as John’s readers about the significance of the hour (23). The Greeks may have thought in terms of the triumphal entry. But from the context it can be seen that for Jesus his ‘hour’ was his approaching passion. This is clear from the glorification theme and from the grain of wheat illustration. The formula I tell you the truth (24) points out the importance of the announcement. The principle in nature that death is essential for further life was applied by Jesus to himself by inference. Wheat reproduces its own kind, and Jesus regarded his passion in the same light. His death would produce life for many. The contrast between loving and hating (25) brings out in sharp relief the choice and consequence involved in personal reaction to Jesus. Loving and hating are here relative terms, standing in opposition to each other. 

The Bread of Life: The Reaction of the Crowd
John 6:25–40
The crowd finally catches up with Him. Jesus is discovered in the synagogue at Capernaum. These astonished seekers (numbering several thousand, John has not indicated otherwise) are more concerned to discover how Jesus got there than to continue to learn from his teaching. Jesus ignores their shallow question and criticizes them for their lack of perception. They should not seek a free lunch but concentrate on the spiritual food that endures to eternal life (v. 27). The fact that this saying is introduced with the solemn wording ‘I tell you the truth’ suggests that it be taken seriously. It should not be imagined that anything in John is not serious in intention, but some sayings are meant to have greater impact than others, and this is a case in point. Jesus is warning the Galilean masses of the spiritual dimension to life that they seem to overlook. Again John is alluding to the synoptic tradition in which Jesus warns that we cannot live by bread alone and that our prayer should be for daily bread of a spiritual nature.

​Up until now Jesus has been elusive with the crowd. He now enters a dialogue with them which, it has to be admitted, is equally elusive. Interaction and understanding are possible, but only if his hearers will allow their imaginations to include the spiritual dimension that Jesus prefers to work with. From now on Jesus will talk of spiritual realities in the language of heaven. Like the dialogue with the woman of Samaria, it is possible for the hearers to understand but only if they accept the heavenly origin of the words they hear. For instance it was not Moses that gave the bread in the desert but God (v. 32). As Matthew and Luke emphasize in the story of the temptation of Jesus (Matthew 4:1–11; Luke 4:1–14), it is ‘not by bread alone’ that they should live ‘but by the word of God’. That word is now addressing them in a language they can understand, if and only if they recognize its origin and authority. All that is required is that they, who have come on a quest seeking Jesus, come to him with their spiritual hunger which he claims he will satisfy. Like the woman at the well who heard Jesus talk of heavenly water, the crowd ask for a constant supply of ‘bread from heaven’ (v. 34).

The only way to earn this bread from heaven is for them to believe in Jesus as the very ‘bread of life’ (v. 35). ‘I am the bread of life; he who comes to me shall not hunger, and he shall not thirst.’ Sadly, it seems that some of the crowd cannot accept this (v. 36). Here we have yet another development of the theme, ‘he came to his own and his own received him not’ (1:12). But those who do receive this message will be sustained to eternal life (v. 40). 

​Son of God (5:16–30)
John informs his readers that because of this healing on the Sabbath, the Jews began to persecute Jesus. Legalism is a dreadful distortion of God’s will for those whom He created to live in fellowship with Him. Not outer deeds but inward postures matter to God. When the inner world is ordered around God’s dictates, then the outer world will exhibit utter holiness, a holiness defined by the life and ministry of Jesus. At this rebuke the Jews were outraged, not because Jesus was wrong (they didn’t answer His reply regarding healing on the Sabbath) but because “he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.”

I noticed 5 responses that Jesus had for the persecution given Him. First, the Son can do nothing without the Father. Second, the Father loves the Son and reveals everything to Him. Third, the power to bestow life itself is shared by the Father and the Son. Fourth, God has given all judgment over to the Son. Fifth, the Father and the Son share equal honor. Sixth, belief in the words of the Son result in eternal life. Finally, the very consummation of the age will be by and through the Son.

​The Jews’ objection was in light of their staunch monotheism (the belief in one God). Christians are monotheists as well yet maintain that the nature of the One True God is that He is Triune—three Persons, one God. To the Jewish mind Jesus’ claim to be God was blasphemous in view of the fact that it intimated two Gods. Of course, nothing of the sort was in mind in Jesus’ self-declaration as the Son of God. Rather, Jesus was proclaiming that He was God in human form, the second Person of the Trinity.

The Stewardship of Glory: Bankrupting False Glory (21:1–4)
Big idea: Stewardship is judged on what you have left, what you sacrifice for God, and the worship of it, but not what you give.
21:1. In the temple, teaching as usual during these final days, Jesus noticed the rich dropping their offerings into the temple coffers. The way they did it, one could hardly fail to notice them. They did this as they prayed (20:47) for show, to be seen by others.
21:2. Jesus did not focus on the rich. He zeroed in on a poor widow. She had two lepta, each worth about one one-hundredth of a denarius, the coin used for a day laborer’s daily wage. Thus, her contribution to the temple was tiny in terms of monetary value.
21:3. But her two lepta had spiritual power. They form the subject for teaching Christian stewardship to this day. Why are they so important? Jesus valued these “worthless” coins as worth more than all the rich people had put in.
21:4. Jesus’ reasoning is simple. The rich gave from their abundance, leaving much more for themselves. The widow gave from abject poverty, leaving nothing for herself. They gave out of discretionary funds. She gave her bread money. Giving is judged by the degree of sacrifice.

​The Pharisee and the tax collector (18:9–14)
This parable deals with the content of our prayers. Here are two men who went to the Temple. The Pharisee was ostentatious in his posture during prayer, by implication raising his eyes to heaven (see v. 13). How important it is that we approach God humbly. When we refer to ourselves in prayer, it should be to confess our sins, not boast of our virtues! Outwardly, the Pharisee was holy. He lived a good, religious, moral way of life. Yet God had no time for his self-centered gratitude. The tax collector (or ‘publican’) on the other hand, just beat his breast, saying ‘God, be merciful to me a sinner!’ This second man ‘humbled himself’ and went home ‘justified’ (v. 14)—that is, God proclaimed him as righteous in his sight. Why? Because of his humility before God. The Pharisee, however, was still in his sins, however good he appeared to men. To be ‘justified’ means to be ‘proclaimed righteous’ (v. 14). It is important that we understand this term, for it is used many times in Scripture. It means more than ‘forgiven’—it means that the person is to be regarded as good and right standing before God. We are justified by God because of our faith and humble standing before Him. God is the one who justifies us and saves us but it is done to us because our faith and humility as put us in that position. 

Luke 14:25-35
​
When Jesus left the Pharisee’s house, great crowds followed Him, but He was not impressed by their enthusiasm. He knew that most of those in the crowd were not the least bit interested in spiritual things. Some wanted only to see miracles, others heard that He fed the hungry, and a few hoped He would overthrow Rome and establish David’s promised kingdom. They were expecting the wrong things. Jesus turned to the multitude and preached a sermon that deliberately thinned out the ranks. He made it clear that, when it comes to personal discipleship, He is more interested in quality than quantity. A “disciple” is a learner, one who attaches himself or herself to a teacher in order to learn a trade or a subject. Perhaps our nearest modern equivalent is “apprentice,” one who learns by watching and by doing. The word disciple was the most common name for the followers of Jesus Christ and is used 264 times in the Gospels and the Book of Acts.

​To begin with, we must love Christ supremely, even more than we love our own flesh and blood. The word hate does not suggest positive antagonism but rather “to love less”. Our love for Christ must be so strong that all other love is like hatred in comparison. In fact, we must hate our own lives and be willing to bear the cross after Him. What does it mean to “carry the cross”? It means daily identification with Christ in shame, suffering, and surrender to God’s will. It means death to self, to our own plans and ambitions, and a willingness to serve Him as He directs. A “cross” is something we willingly accept from God as part of His will for our lives. The Christian who called his noisy neighbors the “cross” he had to bear certainly did not understand the meaning of dying to self.
Jesus gave three parables to explain why He makes such costly demands on His followers: the man building a tower, the king fighting a war, and the salt losing its flavor. The usual interpretation is that believers are represented by the man building the tower and the king fighting the war, and we had better “count the cost” before we start, lest we start and not be able to finish. But I agree with many commentators that the builder and the king represent not the believer but Jesus Christ. He is the One who must “count the cost” to see whether we are the kind of material He can use to build the church and battle the enemy. He cannot get the job done with halfhearted followers who will not pay the price.

Jesus had already told His disciples that they were “the salt of the earth”. When the sinner trusts Jesus Christ as Savior, a miracle takes place and “clay” is turned into “salt.” Salt was a valued item in that day; in fact, part of a soldier’s pay was given in salt. (The words salt and salary are related; hence, the saying, “He’s not worth his salt.”) Salt is a preservative, and God’s people in this world are helping to retard the growth of evil and decay. Salt is also a purifying agent, an antiseptic that makes things cleaner. It may sting when it touches the wound, but it helps to kill infection. Salt gives flavor to things and, most of all, makes people thirsty. By our character and conduct, we ought to make others thirsty for the Lord Jesus Christ and the salvation that He alone can give. Our modern salt is pure and does not lose its flavor, but the salt in Jesus’ day was impure and could lose its flavor, especially if it came in contact with earth. Once the saltiness was gone, there was no way to restore it, and the salt was thrown out into the street to be walked on. When a disciple loses his Christian character, he is “good for nothing” and will eventually be “walked on” by others and bring disgrace to Christ.

Discipleship is serious business. If we are not true disciples, then Jesus cannot build the tower and fight the war. If we tell Jesus that we want to take up our cross and follow Him as His disciples, then He wants us to know exactly what we are getting into. He wants no false expectancy, no illusions, no bargains. He wants to use us as stones for building His church, soldiers for battling His enemies, and salt for bettering His world; and He is looking for quality.
After all, He was on His way to Jerusalem when He spoke these words, and look what happened to Him there! He does not ask us to do anything for Him that He has not already done for us. To some, Jesus says, “You cannot be My disciples!” Why? Because they will not forsake all for Him, bear shame and reproach for Him, and let their love for Him control them.

​The Good Samaritan (10:25–37)
This parable follows a conversation Jesus had with a teacher of the Law of Moses, or ‘lawyer’. They spoke together about eternal life, and the Lord directed him to the law. It must be remembered that ‘the law is spiritual’ (Rom. 7:14) and therefore in no way takes us away from eternal life. Instead it exposes our sin and ultimately leads us to see our need of Christ (Gal. 3:24).
Sometimes the words of verse 27 (from Deut. 6:5 and Lev. 19:18) can trip off the tongue; yet do we really love God and our neighbour to the extent Christ intended? The lawyer desired to ‘justify himself’ (v. 29)—that is, he wanted to appear righteous.
The parable which follows is found only in Luke, yet is so familiar to us today that something of its impact can be lost. Jesus wanted people to identify with the wounded man, and so described a man who almost certainly was a Jew, undertaking a journey familiar to his hearers. It was a dangerous and solitary path, and the loneliness of this route can still be experienced by the modern traveler.
The man was set upon by thieves who left him in a terrible state, half-dead on the ground. Then two ‘religious’ Jews walked past. Here we feel the timeless quality of this parable, since people in all ages have walked past the needy lying in the road. Fear, embarrassment, helplessness all conspire to make people pass by. No doubt the priest and the Levite were in a hurry to do God’s work, yet they neglected the heart of the law—love for God and for one’s neighbour!
The Lord then, with great skill, cast a Samaritan in the role of heroic stranger. The Jews were no friends with the Samaritans, and regarded them almost on a level with demons (John 8:48). For a Samaritan to befriend the wounded man would have seemed unthinkable. Yet Christ’s kingdom would ultimately cross all boundaries of race, culture and class. The Samaritan, though apparently alone and unseen by others, showed great kindness. Too often, we are kind to others because we expect recognition and praise for it. The Samaritan could so easily have walked past, and let the man die. No one would have known, and therefore no one would have censured him. But he could not ignore the need.
He first ‘had compassion’ then bandaged the man’s wounds, pouring in oil and wine; the oil to soothe and heal and the wine to cleanse the wound. Next he put the man on his own animal and took him to an inn to care for him. The man paid money (equivalent to two days’ wages) to the innkeeper, and offered to pay as much as necessary for the man to recover fully.
The Samaritan had been the true neighbour. The answer to our Lord’s question was clear (v. 36) and his intention for his listeners was also unmistakeable: ‘Go and do likewise’.

​The Widows gift (12:41-44)
41 The “treasury” appears to have been located in the court of women and appears to have consisted of thirteen trumpet-shaped receptacles for both the temple tax and money given voluntarily for various purposes.
42 The “two very small copper coins” were two lepta (so the Greek text). The lepton was the smallest coin in circulation in Palestine and was worth 1/64 of a denarius, a day’s wages for a common laborer. It was not in circulation in the western part of the Roman Empire, where Mark apparently wrote. Therefore he explained that two lepta had the same value as a kodrantēs, the Greek transliteration of the Latin quadrans, which was a coin familiar to his readers/hearers. (The statement “which is a quadrans” is obscured by the NIV’s “worth only a fraction of a penny.” A similar obfuscation appears in most translations because most modern readers have no knowledge of ancient coins or their values.)
43–44 Jesus indicated that the thing of most importance is not how much is given but the extent to which the gift is a sacrificial one. Or to put it another way, the most significant thing is not how much is given but how much is left for one’s personal use after the gift. A major element of Jesus’ teaching is that attitude is more important than action. The widow’s total giving demonstrates an attitude of absolute trust in God.
Quite different is the interpretation that claims the widow was guilty of imprudence and that Jesus could not have commended her. Rather he condemned a system that permitted widows to be destitute and perhaps even made them destitute by pressuring them to give all they had. The same kind of extravagance, however, is commended in 14:6. There was so much poverty in ancient Palestine that the authorities could do little about it. The commendation of the widow does not imply that every disciple should give away everything.
The expression “calling his disciples to him” indicates that the teaching was intended for them and for all subsequent disciples. They too were to be generous in the extreme but without any ostentatiousness. In various ways they were to give their all as the widow did. But there is an additional lesson in the account. The sacrificial gift of the widow points to the sacrificial gift of Jesus. She gave her entire livelihood; he gave his very life. As Paul put it, “You know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich” (2 Cor 8:9). Therefore the account functions as a transition to the passion narrative in chaps. 14–15. With this beautiful story Mark ended his account of Jesus’ public ministry.

​Loving the lost (vv. 42–50).
This is our Lord’s longest and most awesome warning about future punishment. If we are not serving others (v. 35), we may cause others to stumble (“offend,” v. 42); and this might lead to their eternal condemnation. We must deal drastically with sin in our lives, both for our sake and the sake of others, for the fires of hell are real and everlasting. Jesus compared hell to a furnace (Matt. 13:42) and an unquenchable fire. The image here is of the garbage dump in the Valley of Hinnom outside Jerusalem (2 Kings 23:10; Isa. 66:24), where the waste was burned by fire and eaten by worms. The Gk. word for hell (“Gehenna”) comes from the Heb. “ge Hinnom”—the valley of Hinnom. Hell is a real place, and lost souls will suffer there forever. Do we have a love for the lost, or are we only concerned with being “the greatest”? God’s people would indeed be “salted with fire” (suffer persecution—v. 49), and it is important that we “have salt in ourselves”. The believers who read Mark’s Gospel during the “fiery trial” under Nero must have been encouraged by what Jesus said here.