"IF I WILL THAT HE TARRY TILL I COME."
"So, when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep. Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkest whither thou wouldest; but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.—Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following, which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? Peter seeing him, saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me. Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die; yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die: but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?" John xxi, 15–24. SOME precious references to the Lord's coming have been lost by the habit into which many believers have fallen of understanding some plain passages in a figurative sense. Passages where Christ's coming is referred to have been considered as referring to the destruction of Jerusalem. Perhaps the verse that has given apparent countenance to this idea more than any other is that in John xxi, 21. The Lord had foretold what should be Peter's lot on earth, and by what death he should glorify God. Peter thereupon was emboldened to ask similar information regarding John, thinking (it appears) that Jesus, who loved him so peculiarly, and who had whispered to him who the traitor was at the last supper, (v, 20) would surely be willing to say something about the future career of one so favored. But Jesus refused to gratify needless curiosity. "Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me." It is evident, we think, that our Lord by that reply meant to make a wide supposition of what he could do, if it seemed right to him, not of what he meant actually to do. He said, "Were it my will, he might remain on earth without tasting death until I come again the second time,—but what is that to thee? Follow thou me." Here, then, let us ask a few questions:— 1st. Did the ten disciples understand "Till I come"28to mean the destruction of Jerusalem? No; the thought never seems to have crossed their minds. They said, "Our Master means to save his beloved disciple from the pang of dying!" The saying went abroad among them that he should not die! How, then, could they extract such a meaning from the Lord's words but by their having understood him to say, "He shall tarry till I come the second time." They overlooked the "If I will," and concluded that Jesus meant to say that John would abide on earth till his Lord returned. Had they understood the words to be, "He shall tarry until Jerusalem is destroyed," in that case they could only have said, "This disciple shall live long,"—but how would they arrive at the conclusion, "He shall not die?" But no; they were putting the obvious sense on the words "Till I come," but omitting to notice the clause "If I will." 2d. Did John himself understand this saying to refer to the destruction of Jerusalem? No; for he explains in v, 23 where the mistake of the brethren lay. It did not lie in their attaching a wrong sense to "Till I come," but (says he) it lay in not observing that Jesus only said "If I will that he tarry." They were wrong, he says, in saying he would not die, not because the words referred merely to such an event as Jerusalem's destruction,—no, for he really did live after that event,—but they were wrong in thinking that our Lord had asserted anything positive in regard to him; he had only made a supposition with the view of showing that disciples must submit to their Master's will, whether he reveals much or little. 3d. Is it at all natural to understand the words to refer to the destruction of Jerusalem? Surely not. For in that case the Lord would really be found revealing the time of John's death,—which was the very thing he declined speaking of to Peter. And after he had been so often with them, "speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God," (Acts i, 3,) and no doubt showing them clearly that he must first ascend and then return in glory, how natural was it, tacitly referring to some such conversations, to use his own language, "If I will that he tarry till I come." There is something very beautiful in his mode of declining to tell the future career of his disciple. "If it were my will that this disciple, who has leant on my bosom so often, and whom I have loved so peculiarly, if it were my will he should not die at all, but be caught up, like Elijah or Enoch, at my coming again, what is that to thee?" The sovereignty of our Master's will, even in his acts of tender love, must be acknowledged and implicitly relied on. Let us learn this lesson better, and go on "following the Lamb." Had it been possible, we believe there are some who would have escaped the objections that are conclusive against referring the words to Jerusalem, by saying "Christ's coming often means death." But they cannot think of that here; for the disciples all agreed in inferring from the words that John should not die. It is well worthy of observation that life, not death, was suggested to believers by the mention of Christ's coming in those early days. To them the mention of Christ's coming never seems to have suggested anything connected with death, except the victory over it, "the swallowing up death in victory." To speak to the early Christian of the Lord's being at hand, was equivalent to pointing him upwards to the clouds, not downward to the tomb. A reference to his "coming" suggested not "the night, wherein no man can work," but "the day," when every saint's work shall be rewarded,—not the laying of the body in the cold grave, but the raising it up in glory, like Christ's own glorious body. We might show, in like manner, that the words of our Lord, given by three Evangelists, regarding "some not tasting death till they should see the kingdom of God come with power," (see Matt. xvi, 28; Mark ix, 1; Luke ix, 27.) have as little to do with Jerusalem as this passage of John. They all refer to our Lord's Transfiguration, about "an eight days after"—when he did show a specimen of his future kingdom—himself the grand centre of attraction, the light and sun of all,—while his saints, now glorified, were beside him, and earth beneath his feet. The same Peter, whose question led to that interesting passage regarding John, has opened to us his Lord's meaning on the holy mount. For, in his Second Epistle, (i, 16, 17,) he says of that scene, that he was an eye-witness of his Lord's majesty, such as shall be displayed hereafter. "We made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ," are his words in referring to that scene, which he mentions as having been given to assure us of what shall yet be. And so truly was it a specimen of the coming kingdom, that he hesitates not to say that he was an eye-witness of the Lord's majesty, just as he said (1 Pet. v, 1) that he had been a true witness of his sufferings. Yes, truly, a Saviour coming to us is widely different from our going to him at death. And a Saviour coming to be glorified in his saints, and to give the troubled rest, is widely different from that same Saviour overruling all things by secret providence.—Advent Tracts Vol. I.