Excellent question, Patrick!
As we can see from the above quotes, the WTS has certainly not given a definitive explanation for this verse. Especially have they avoided the portion of the statement that associated John’s remaining alive with Jesus’ return.
In the normal course of things, would Peter or anyone else who heard the statement conclude that Jesus could have been indicating that John would never die, ever? Even though the account says that a rumor went out that John would
not die (verse 23), that would not be reasonable to conclude that John would live three to four hundred years or more, as they knew that, in general, the life span of humans was limited.
If we consider the context or setting in which this statement was made, it would help us to understand what Jesus was indicating.
Jesus had just told Peter what the manner of his death would be. Verses 18 and 19 reads as follows:
“Most truly I say to you, When you were younger, you used to gird yourself and walk about where you wanted. But when you grow old you will stretch out your hands and another man will gird you and bear you where you do not wish.” This he said to signify by what sort of death he would glorify God.”
After Jesus made this statement to Peter, he, Peter, then turned and seeing ‘the disciple that Jesus loved following’ asked Jesus “Lord what will this man do?” (Verse 20) Jesus then made the statement we are now considering “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you? Continue following me.”
Since Peter’s martyrdom was the focus of the conversation at that point, Peter could have been asking if John would also die a martyr’s death. Jesus’ answer to him was ‘that’s none of your business, but if I so desire, he will be alive when I return.’ Historians agree that John did not die a martyr’s death.
But, we’re still left with the ‘until I return’ part of the statement. Was Jesus, by this statement, indicating that his return would be an indeterminately long period of time or was he indicating that his return could occur within the lifetime of this particular disciple since he said that if he desired, John would remain until such a return occurred?
We know that the Bible does associate Jesus’ return, coming or parousia with the end of the Jewish system of things. There are many such verses, but I will cite just one at this juncture. (See the article
“The Second Parousia of Christ – Reexamined” for additional scriptural support and indepth coverage of this topic.)
Matthew 3:7, 10-12 reads:
“When he (John the Baptist) caught sight of many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to the baptism, he said to them: “You offspring of vipers, who has intimated to you to flee from the
coming wrath?” Already the ax is lying at the root of the trees; every tree, then, that does not produce fine fruit is to be cut down and thrown into the fire. I, for my part, baptize you with water because of your repentance; but the one coming after me is stronger than I am, whose sandals I am not fit to take off. That one will baptize you people with Holy Spirit and with fire. His winnowing shovel is in his hand, and he will completely clean up his threshing floor, and will gather his wheat into the storehouse, but the chaff he will burn up with fire that cannot be put out.”
There is no question but that he was talking to and about the nation of Israel, warning them that a major event was at hand for them. He even referred to this event as the ‘coming wrath.’ And this event, we now know, happened in 70 CE, that is, the destruction of the nation and their system of worship. Jesus’ work with this nation would conclude with the fulfillment of verse 12 in which he would have ‘gathered his wheat into the storehouse and the chaff would have been extinguished.’
Did the apostle John live to see this event? Historical evidence indicates that he was alive when Jerusalem was destroyed. Can we say then that this was the ‘return of the Christ’ that Jesus mentioned in John 21:22? If we answer yes, then are we forgetting that Jesus is also associated with the destruction of this current system of things in which we live? We would be if it could be proven that the Bible associated the end of this system of things with the ‘return of Christ.’ But if we consider the words of the apostle Paul, recorded at
1 Corinthians 15:23-25, we can see that this is not the case.
It reads: “But each one in his own rank: Christ the first fruits, afterward those who belong to the Christ during his presence (return or coming or parousia). Next the end, when he hands over the kingdom to his God and Father, when he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power (the end of our present system of things). For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet.”
On the basis of the above verses, Jesus’ bringing to ‘nothing all government and all authority and power’ is not called ‘a return or parousia’, it is simply called ‘the end.’ Then we can conclude that the ‘return, coming, or parousia’ of Jesus occurred in 70 CE when he ‘repaid tribulation to those who made tribulation for you’ (the Christian followers of Jesus) at the hands of the disobedient nation of Israel who did not know Jehovah. (See 2 Thessalonians 1:6-8)
bejay
Or, is Jesus 2nd coming something quite different than what Jesus’ words say at John 21:22—a very-long “drawn” out time period that has lasted for nearly two thousands years