From the thirteenth to the fifteenth verse, our Lord, in a brief digression, has justified a portion of the great commandment of mutual love. That love is to correspond with his love to the disciples, and to explain his self-sacrifice to them; tie proves to them that they are his "friends," and therefore the objects of his dying love. Then the appeal is still further clenched by showing the origin and purport of his friendship for them. Ye did not choose me ( ἐξελέξασθε … ἐξελεξάμην are middle, "you chose … I chose … for yourselves or for myself"), but I chose you. I selected you as individuals, not excluding thereby a gracious choice of other souls; I destined you to accomplish work dear to me and essential to my kingdom. Christ has already told them that he must "go away" from' them to the Father, and that they "cannot follow him now, but afterwards;" and he has also convinced them that, though he go away, he will "come again, and abide with them," and also that "severed" from him they can "do nothing." Consequently when he adds, I appointed you (see 1 Corinthians 12:28; 1 Timothy 1:12; Hebrews 1:2; Acts 20:28, for similar use of τιθέναι) as my apostles and representatives, to do work in my Name, there is no contradiction in his adding, that ye should go forth, depart into the world with my message and in my Name, as I am "departing" to the Father, to rule over you from a higher and more august position. And bear fruit. A passing reference to the imagery of the first part of the chapter, showing that their "going forth or away" upon this mission would not separate them from his Spirit, or divide the link without which they could bear no fruit at all. The "fruit" may here, in its issues, suggest another class of ideas. In the first case the "fruit" was the "fruit of the Spirit," but here it would seem to be the abiding consequence of the "greater works" which they would be called upon to do. This rich fruit includes all the victories they were to win over souls, and all the effects of their ministry. "Fruit" in either case is only valuable when it is utilized by the Husbandman and according to his purpose. "Fruit" is a Divine self-exhaustion of the living organism; it does no good to the branch nor to the stem; it is the sacred property of the husbandman, whether for his own joy or for fresh seed. In this case your fruit will abide for ever, not in the branch, but in the Father's hands, that ( ἵνα) whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my Name, he may give it you. It now becomes a question whether the second ἵνα introduces a clause which is co-ordinate with the former or one logically depending on the preceding. Meyer concludes the first, viz. that the granting of prayer brings about the fruit and its continuance (so De Wette, Lucke, Stier, Godet); and Olshausen maintains the second, viz. that by going and bringing forth fruit we enter into that relation with God from which proceeds the prayer in the name of the Son which the Father will grant, thus bringing the passage into close relation with John 14:13 and John 16:23. Hengstenberg says, "By their fruit they would show themselves to be true disciples of Christ, and to such the Father can deny nothing." But Westcott and Lange endeavor to combine both ideas. The co-ordination of the two clauses requires the inversion of their order, or the introduction of καὶ before the second ἵνα. Moreover, the thought that Christ chose and appointed them in order that whatsoever they should ask God would give, is out of harmony with "the conditions of acceptable prayer" elsewhere insisted on; while the bearing of fruit—in both senses,
(a) that of Christian grace and
(b) Christian usefulness
—completes the idea in a concrete form of abiding in Christ and having his words abiding in them. Surely the view that the second clause is conditioned by the first, is far from obscure, as Luthardt says, while he virtually accepts the same interpretation: "If they cause themselves to be found in the right service of Jesus, then will be granted to them what they ask in the name of Jesus." Moulton confirms the same interpretation. (On the clause, "in my Name," see John 16:24.)