Is the apostle John still alive?

After the ascension of Christ, and the descent of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost, John became one of the chief apostles of the circumcision. But his ministry goes down to the end of the first century. With his death the apostolic age naturally closes.

There is a widely spread and generally received tradition that John remained in Judaea till after the death of the virgin Mary. The date of this event is uncertain. But soon after he proceeded to Asia Minor. Here he planted and watched over several churches in different cities, but made Ephesus his centre. Thence he was banished to the Isle of Patmos towards the close of Domitian's reign. There he wrote the Revelation. (Rev. 1:9) On his liberation from exile, by the accession of Nerva to the imperial throne, John returned to Ephesus, where he wrote his Gospel and Epistles. He died about A.D. 100, in the third year of the emperor Trajan, and about one hundred years of age.*

John, the son of Zebedee, and brother of James, who was martyred by Herod Agrippa, A.D. 42-44. (Acts 12:2.) John outlived all his apostolic brethren, and is believed to have fallen asleep at Ephesus, about A.D. 98-100.

Ephesus (?), A.D. 69 (?)*

The "disciple whom Jesus loved," spoken of in the Gospel attributed to John the Apostle, is generally supposed to be a designation of himself (see, further, note on John 13:23). To the disciple so described our Lord when dying bequeathed the care of His mother (John 19:26). This Apostle is, besides, spoken of as one of the "pillars" of the Church at Jerusalem (Gal. 2:19; cf. Acts 15, A.D. 51). The last glimpse we have of him in the New Testament is as an exile in the island of Patmos during the reign, Eusebius (ii. 18) states, of Domitian. Before that time, according to Tertullian (Præscr. Hæret.), while the Apostle was in Rome, he was cast into a cauldron of boiling oil, from which he emerged unhurt. Ecclesiastical tradition carries on the story of his life, when released from Patmos, by representing him as prominently connected with the churches of Asia Minor, with Ephesus in particular (Irenæus). Zahn supposes that he removed from Palestine during the fatal Jewish war of the year 69, whilst Blass, comparing Acts 15 with John 21 there, considers that he must have finally left Jerusalem by at least the year 54. His residence in Asia Minor has been questioned, on insufficient grounds, by Keim, Scholten, H. Holtzmann, Harnack, Bousset, and Schmiedel, from its not suiting their theory as to the authorship. Amongst other familiar incidents related of that period of his life are the stories of his reclaiming a notable backslider (Eusebius iii. 33), and of his meeting a Gnostic in a public bath, when he at once rushed out of the place. Irenæus's account (iii. 3, 4) gives Cerinthus as the name, but Epiphanius (xxx. 24) says that it was Ebion. The last-named writer states that the Apostle remained unmarried. John is generally reported to have passed away in Ephesus by a natural death soon after the year 98 — i.e., after the accession of Trajan (so Irenæus, ii. 22, 5). Eusebius (vii. 25) states that his grave was shown there, another account is that two graves were shown at Ephesus connected with the name John (see, further, note on John 21:22 f.).

Ans. B. John 21:23, clearly shows that the Lord neither said nor meant that John would not die. Nevertheless, the fact that the Lord's words are repeated, seems to imply that they were of special significance. Is there not an indication that the Lord was giving to John a special character of ministry, which would carry us on to the Lord's return? John's Gospel is different from the three others. In it there is unfolded what lies outside of all dispensations, the Father's world, with all its affections, joys and glories: that in which there is no human failure, for these things subsist in the Father and the Son, and are brought to us in the power of the Spirit. Already, in Paul's day, he saw the ruin of the church, in those things committed to men; but after Paul had gone, John remained, and was enabled by the Spirit to bring out "That which was from the beginning," and that which abides till the Lord comes. Moreover John seems to abide till the Lord comes in a very different character of ministry; that unfolded in the book of Revelation. It is indeed in marked contrast to the spiritual, heavenly and eternal things, revealed in the Gospel. Here he shows God's government of the world in the period just prior to the Lord's return, and including it; and also records the prophetic history of the church in the addresses to the seven churches; the last four of which contain reference to the Lord's return. So that we might quite well understand the Lord to mean that although John personally would pass off the scene before He returned, John would abide in his special ministry.

But this we learn of great practical moment from verse 23, how dangerous it is to trust tradition, even the earliest, and how blessed to have the unerring standard of God's written word. The saying that went forth among the brethren in apostolic times seemed a most natural, if not necessary, inference from the words of our Lord. But we do not well to accept unreservedly an inferential statement, still less to be drawn into a system built on such deductions. We have the word of the Lord, and faith bows to it for its joy and rest to God's glory. Error easily insinuates itself into the first remove from what He says, as the Apostle instructs us here that the Lord did not affirm that that disciple was not to die, but "If I will that he abide till I come." Yet those who let in this primitive mistake were not enemies, were not grievous wolves, or men speaking perverse things to draw away the disciples after them. It was "among the brethren" that the tradition, unfounded and misleading, got spread. Miracles did not hinder, nor gifts, nor power, nor unity. The mistake arose from reasoning, instead of cleaving to the word of the Lord. The brethren, through lack of subjection to God and of distrust in themselves, gave the words a meaning, instead of simply receiving from them their true import. No wonder another great Apostle commends us to God and to the word of His grace; for if we may fully profit by His word in simple dependence on Himself, we cannot duly honour Him if we slight His word. And though it is by the Holy Spirit that we are thus kept and blest, even He is in no sort the standard of truth (while He is power in every way), but Christ as revealed in the written word.394

The Lord's reply, "If I will that he tarry till I come," did not mean, I judge, what the disciples drew from it, viz., that John should not die. The Lord did not say so, hence it is important not to impute a meaning to His words, instead of receiving one therefrom. This latter the Holy Ghost alone can afford, for taken literally such a meaning might be drawn as the brethren then drew. I apprehend the meaning of the Lord's words to be that, in his ministry John went on to the end — to the coming of Christ personally to judge the earth.

It is traditionally reported that the beloved Apostle John and the then only survivor of "The Twelve," was brought before the Emperor, and after a brief examination, ordered to be cast into a cauldron of flaming oil, but after a few hours came out unhurt. Tertullian, who flourished in the third century, asserts the truth of it, and, it has been asked, which, if any, of the early writers denies it? It is certain, however, that John was doomed to perpetual banishment in the rocky isle of Patmos. In that dreary convict establishment of about 25 miles in circumference, washed by the waves of the Aegean Sea, the worst of criminals were sent to drag out a weary existence by labouring in the mines which then existed in the island. We may be sure that the stern Roman Emperor would allow the prisoner of the Lord no exemption from the hard toil and vicious society of Patmos. There is a Greek monastery in the island, and the lazy monks profess to point out the very cave where John was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, where the visions and sights narrated in the Apocalypse were seen, and where the prophecy was written. On the accession of Nerva, the edicts of Domitian were cancelled, the banished Christians recalled, and their confiscated property restored. John, on the general authority of antiquity, returned from the inhospitable isle of Patmos to Ephesus, the flourishing capital of Asia, and there peacefully ended his days at the advanced age of 100, full of love and labour for his beloved Master.

John. — At this juncture probably Christ was leaving the company, and Peter was following Him. Then looking backward, and seeing John coming after them, Peter asked the Lord, "And what shall this man do?" Now that was a matter between the Master and His servant John. The Lord would not enter on it with Peter, only replying, "If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou Me (22). "Till I come," said the Lord. Then He was, and is, coming back. He had promised that in 14:3. He here reaffirmed it. And His last words to John in Patmos, "Surely I come quickly" (Rev. 22:20), confirm it. He will come. But when? The disciples in early days misapprehended the Lord, thinking that He meant to return in the lifetime of John, so that John would never die. This was a misapprehension, which John here corrects (23). But it shows us how soon in those days was the coming of the Lord expected. And no event was looked for to precede it.

Peter was evidently a little disturbed that the Lord had singled him out of all the disciples to speak to him in this way; and instead of showing a thoroughly submissive spirit, he turns to observe John, who in fact was following, and asks, “Lord, what about this man?” But the Lord did not allow him to slip out of the spotlight in this way. What a lesson for us all! The flesh in us will twist and turn every way to avoid direct personal facing of responsibility, but the Lord's work with us will lead to our honest, stern self-judgment. He firmly tells Peter, “If I will that he remain till I come, what its that to you? You follow Me” (vv. 21-22). Whatever is the Lord's will for another should not in any degree influence my thoughts in regard to His will for me. Whatever others may do, I am simply, undividedly to follow the Lord. “You follow Me,” He says to each of us individually.

Yet the disciples so miss the point that they speculate as to John, assuming that the Lord meant that John would not die. How careful we should be to observe precisely what the Lord does say, rather than making inferences from His words. Inference may be correct if it is supported clearly (not ambiguously) by other scriptures; but let us be guided by scripture, not by inference. In answering this misconception, John does not elaborate at all, but simply repeats what the Lord had said. Yet there is no doubt a reason for His words. John did live longer that the other disciples, and his book of Revelation deals with the coming and glory of the Lord Jesus. In this sense it would seem he remained long enough to see the coming of the Lord, at least in the form of a vision.

A question has been raised whether John the Apostle died a natural death as generally supposed, or was, like his brother, martyred by Jews (cf. Matt. 20:23; Mark 10:38f.), as alleged in a Fragment of Philip of Side of the fifth century. See English edition of Schürer (p. 59), and a Chronicle of George the Sinner of the ninth or tenth century. Cf. Stanton, p. 167; Burkitt, p. 252. The statement of George the Sinner, which had already been given in Harnack's "Apostolic Fathers" (p. 87 ff.), that distinguished scholar himself discredits ("Chronology," p. 665 f.), because of the silence of Eusebius and Irenæus. Heitmüller, one of the latest writers, joins Schmiedel and others in crediting this mythology. Drummond (p. 223) had remarked, with reference to the Syrian martyrology in Burkitt (p. 254), that it does not imply that the brothers came by their deaths at the same time and place.

394 John 21:23-25. — Harnack supposes that the Evangelist was already dead when verse 23 was added (p. 676), and (as Ewald) that the writer is expressly distinguished from the disciple that "beareth witness and wrote." From verse 23 a curious notion has been derived by Pfleiderer (Scott follows suit) that the Evangelist gave up the chiliastic expectation (Rev. 20:4).