John 21:23, commentary and pictures

Jesus did not promise that John, the disciple whom he loved, would not die, but spoke only conditionally, leaving whether he would remain alive until the return to his own will, and the saying that he would not die spread by dropping the if.
To tarry till he comes means to abide alive without dying until Christ's own literal glorious second coming, not the fall of Jerusalem, not the believer going to him at death, and not his secret rule by providence.
The brethren themselves understood remaining until he comes to mean living and not dying before then, which shows his coming is a future event distinct from and opposite to death, not fulfilled whenever a saint dies.
His coming means life and not death, for it brings life to those who sleep in him, forever ends death's power over the righteous, destroys death and its author, and points upward to reward and a glorious body rather than downward to the tomb.
Peter's duty was to follow Christ and submit to the sovereignty of the Master's will rather than make another disciple's future his concern, and the correction of the mistaken tradition warns against carelessly repeating another's words as certainty.

Words and Setting

The saying belongs to Jesus' appearance by the Sea of Galilee or Tiberias after his resurrection, when Peter and the beloved disciple and other disciples were fishing. It was counted as his third meeting with the disciples and as the seventh recorded appearance. These appearances occurred at intervals during the forty days between resurrection and ascension.

Jesus did not say the disciple should not die and did not promise he would live until the return. He spoke only conditionally, with if I will that he tarry, leaving the matter to his own will. The saying that the disciple would not die spread by misunderstanding and dropping the if.

To tarry means to abide or remain alive without dying until he comes. It means to be kept alive and caught up as Enoch and Elijah were. It means to remain alive standing in the conflict until that day if it pleases the Lord.

Till I come means Christ's own literal, glorious second coming after his ascension to be glorified in his saints and to give rest. It does not mean the destruction of Jerusalem, which John lived past, nor believers going to him at death, nor his secret rule by providence. Putting die in place of come makes the question nonsensical. The brethren's mistake was not in taking till I come to mean the second coming, which is its obvious and right sense, but in overlooking if I will and turning a wide supposition of what Christ could do into a positive assertion. If they had meant only living till Jerusalem fell they would have said only that he would live long, not that he should not die.

The disciple in question is John, the disciple whom Jesus loved. He refers to himself in the third person rather than the first person.

Coming Is Not Death

The saying about the disciple remaining until the return sets that return apart from the death of a believer as a future event in its own right, not something fulfilled whenever a believer dies. The conditional form leaves open whether the disciple would die, while the mistaken report that he would never die shows the return was understood as an event that could take place during his lifetime, not as each person's death. To speak of remaining until the coming is not to speak of dying, for absence leaves children subject to death and the second coming brings life. The wording is until the coming, not until death, so the coming cannot be each person's death.

The disciples themselves took remaining until the coming to mean staying alive and not dying beforehand, treating tarrying until then as the opposite of dying. Their instant conclusion that the disciple would not die proves they set coming and dying as two different and opposite things and did not regard death as the coming. They knew death was not the coming, so if he tarried until the coming he would not die at all. The saying therefore concerned whether he would live until the coming, not whether dying itself would be the coming.

That coming means life, as it meant life to Lazarus, and so it will give life to all who sleep in him. It is the opposite of death, the event that will forever end death's power over the righteous when he comes as Life-giver, destroys death and its author, and swallows up death in victory. To speak of the Lord being at hand is to point upward to the clouds, not downward to the tomb, to the day when every saint's work shall be rewarded and the body shall be raised in glory like his own glorious body, not to the night wherein no man can work nor to the laying of the body in the cold grave.

There can be only one single second coming, not many comings as there are deaths, and death itself cannot be that coming. By setting the coming alongside the predicted death of Peter, the saying shows the coming and death are not the same, for the coming prevents death rather than being death. Those who remain alive until then will not die before it but will be living when he comes, since to tarry means to abide or remain. The disciples' error about whether the disciple would live until then did not mean the promise to return would fail.

Follow Christ's Will

Peter's duty was to follow Christ, not to make another disciple's fate his concern. Even if it were the Lord's will for John to remain alive until His return, that would not affect Peter's work. He was to follow without undue concern about the duty or future assigned to another, and not to seek knowledge of another person's future. The saying that the disciple would not die had spread through misunderstanding of conditional words, which were corrected to show no promise had been made that he would live until the return.

Both disciples' futures were in the Lord's hands, showing His supreme power. The conditional form asserted nothing certain about John but set forth only a supposition, teaching submission to the Master's will in tender love whether much or little is revealed. That sovereignty requires disciples to keep following even when what is revealed is little.

The conditional saying was used to decline to reveal the time or manner of John's death or future course. It drew on earlier teaching about the kingdom of God that He must first ascend and then return in glory. The saying also points to the Lord's will concerning those who wait for His coming.

Guarding Against Misreport

A saying of Jesus was misunderstood and passed on as tradition among the brethren that the beloved disciple would not die, though he had spoken only conditionally about remaining until his coming. The error arose and spread abroad even while the apostles were still living, and Scripture itself records the correction that he had not said the disciple should not die but only, if he willed him to tarry till he come, what was that to another. So even a tradition originating within the apostolic church could be wrong, and a misunderstanding of his own words could be circulated as truth among believers themselves. The conditional statement about remaining until his coming was inaccurately repeated as a certainty that the disciple would not die, warning that careless or inaccurate handling and repeating of someone's words can spread mistaken belief and lead far from the truth.

The wrongly spread saying does not establish as a prediction that the disciple would live forever or wander until the Second Coming. It does not say that he would never die, for the remaining was spoken only conditionally. Yet it was used to support the claim that he remained alive beyond death and would lead the lost tribes from the frozen North to Zion when Christ came to reign there.

No Sunday Proof

John 21 belongs to the account of the risen Jesus meeting the disciples in Galilee as repeatedly promised, finding them fishing on the lakeshore at the Sea of Galilee. The day of that fishing meeting is not stated and remains unknown, and the meeting itself did not alter the character of the day or render it holy. It therefore supplies no proof that the gathering fell on the first day of the week and no proof that Sunday was thereby made sacred. For the same reason the fishing episode cannot be used as evidence that the apostles kept Sunday as a Sabbath.

The gathering is counted as the third meeting after the resurrection, yet it is set forth as a fishing occasion rather than a religious or worship assembly to honor the resurrection or keep the Sabbath. It may have taken place on Sunday or on a first day of the week, after the disciples in discouragement had returned to fishing, but even so the occasion does not show the day to be holy. That later meeting by the Sea of Galilee was not on the Sabbath.