W W W W  World Wide Web Witness Inc. Home Page     Volume  What is New

CHAPTER FOURTEEN

GOD AND THE INDIVIDUAL

John 21:22

Part of the sheer marvel of the Lord is that He makes kinds, of birds, mammals, mankind. Some are significantly diverse and distinct, such as humming birds and crows; yet still clad with fathers and aerial capacities of staggering finesse, function and feature, such as the automated speeds which can occur in the wing beating, or the more leisurely cases, more immediately controlled by the bird as a norm. There is the same hi-tech character to the single cell, as first found, as in the delicate equipment of the bee for landing and making the other marvel, honey, fit for nourishment after a thousand years.

When it comes to varieties within kind, such as kinds of honey eaters, or kinds of man, then there is this fascinating combination of class characteristics, and items of individual wonder, in their differentiae. All may have the individually expressed marvel of protein folding, by a mini-machine, a requirement in kind from the first, and hard to duplicate even in advanced and complex computers now. Yet all have variabilities, some involving staggering additives, or stylised alternative styles, such as colouring which, in birds, like the maritime scenes over the sea, can be of the utmost art, startling to the aesthetic sense, and more than satisfying, rather a subject of delighted surprise and intense admiration.

In mankind, you have variabilities, not of far-flung additives in functional kind, but considerable variation in special features: larger heads (not by any means always containing the less inhibited brains, since some with smaller heads may have outstanding abilities), lesser sized ones, larger ears, smaller ones, a whole pattern series of noses, big feet and little ones, dwarf types and giants. But when one speaks to some of these, even those of different coloured skin and different modes of common action, called culture and often made into an idol, one can find astonishing similarities in sense of humour, intuitive discernment, perception and a commonality of category which becomes quite a discovery, like finding a new art museum with many diverse masterpieces never before seen. But they, like the varieties of mankind, were there. You might see in some instances of art display, very obviously the same painter.

Along with the commonality which is so striking (some in addition being afflicted with additional errors as well as variation within kind), there is the individuality which in variety moves from individualism to crowd submergence in trend. Some moreover come to a discernible saltiness, when salt is likeness to Christ in character, outstanding Christians; some betray in inconstancy, that for which they began to stand, and some who withered for a moment, like Peter, stand thereafter with a splash of spiritual colour and great depth of character, discernment of mind and authority of redress and commission.

Such a case comes as seen in John 21, where Peter, just recommissioned, in terms of pastoral care to. Being charged with his own special exit from this earth, to come, namely martyrdom, he is moved to ask what will be the case with John.
Instead of the imagery of martyrdom, more than clear enough, already revealed for Peter, what is to be the correlative, the individual sub-kind, the special kind of case amid life's ways and the commission's fulfilment, for John ? The question is most natural, as for a team.

That is for him, Christ intimates, his own special case. But what if John's position be this: that he, not dragged out in violence, instead endure and continue until his own life's term is reached; for they do reach a term. What if he "remains until I come."

This is NOT what was said, protests John in 21:23, in order to prevent false doctrine being misread here: that John would not die. No, this was emphatically NOT the content. What it was, as with the case of Peter's martyrdom, was left to the discernment, which was not so very hard, but so very graciously put, in a sort of kindly adversion. What then was what was said, not void of content, but having a content other than this ? A long life, remaining in a straightforward way in contrast to not doing so, comes into view, this also in a straightforward though severely testing manner.

But where does that leave us ? Is it not in describing the end of a life on this earth for a Christian, as correlative with, operative with the "coming" of Christ for Him, as in I Thessalonians 5:10, where whether the saint has passed away already, or is still living on this earth, he yet lives together with the Lord ? There is an immediate spiritual take-up, for as Solomon declared, the spirit returns to God who made it, Stephen in turn at once seeing Christ in glory, at the right hand of the Father, as the stones hit him, being intimately aware of his flight companion in His glory.

Now the eyes which saw the land which is very far off (Isaiah 33:17), see the Lord who is very near, and as the Christian goes to Him, so He comes in his/her reception. Now the coming to Him, in spirit on earth, and His earlier coming to the door of the heart to the sinner on earth, has this common feature, that He comes for the individual, not just for the human believing division in its entirety; and moves to receive, just as the sinner moved to receive Him; for as many as received Him, to them He gave the authority to become the children of God. Though many human persons fail their children, God does not fail His, for there is neither gap nor soul-sleep, but rather that awareness we note in the transfiguration, where prior to resurrection, Moses and Elijah are seen discussing the death which Christ is to accomplish in Jerusalem.

Let us then look a little more intimately at the text in John 21 concerning these matters.

UNTIL I COME

In John 21, we find a thrilling new thrust. Peter has been with gentle irony, but open-hearted grace, enabled to make affirmations, three, regarding his love for Jesus the Christ (21:15-17), a love which amounts to nothing less than religious devotion to Him as the only Son of God, incarnate, but including a friendly love. The Christ is not Someone not to lie for, or about, but to die for; this is what Peter in effect affirms concerning Christ. It is love which is "as strong as death", Song of Solomon 8:6, and though its domain be through a valley, yet its highlands are shown the more precious for it. When it is God who is in view, He is worth even that.

In John 21, we find that Peter has affirmed both his personal love of Christ and his religious acceptance of His deity. This has been a prelude to the commission, despite his fall and failure in one (extended) incident (Mark 14:68ff.), in terms of which he is to feed both the lambs and the sheep, both the young and the older in Christ's flock, which believes in Him.

There is to be a a notable and distinctive mark in this commission. This aspect is introduced in a slightly indirect manner, but with for all that, a decisive thrust. Christ contrasts Peter's freedom of choice about his goings and doings when young with what is his pastoral commission is to occur. If Christ died, so then will Peter; at the hands of murderous men, so Peter; in violent hands, so Peter. As for the Commissioner, so for the commissioned. The One ransoms, the other testifies, but the spirit of service is one (Matthew 20:28).

But what of John, whose appearance nearby Peter notes ? What is the nature of his correlative position in the realm of service and its particularities ? What is the parallel for him to the work and case of Peter ? That is the question and the case in view.

The answer having the same degree of indirectness, yet with the same thrust of decisiveness, Christ now does two things. First, He makes it intensely clear that as in Revelation, there is a name which no man can read except the one on whose stone it is written (Revelation 2:17). There is an intensively personal side to such questions, not a matter of en bloc or bulk, bureaucratic bundling, let alone bungling. Utter majesty with utter knowledge is speaking, as it has just done concerning Peter. From Him, it is ONE thing to be told your own personal, particular, peculiar path; it is quite another to be talking about that of another.

There is decisive scope for differentiation in the question at hand, namely the experiences to be found in the commission of each servant, and of these two servants in particular.

If then, not as in the case with Peter, there be another case with John, is that so remarkable ? It is enough for each to follow Christ in the interstices of his own special tasks and consequences of the same, but some neighbourly and not merely inquisitive concern is not obviously outrageous. God KNOWS them, the distinctives, but what is that to the one concerning the other in his correlative situation ? These are not a matter of accomplishments on earth, but terminations, in the sense that Peter's KIND of termination on earth HAS just been divulged, namely as martyrdom, not in detail, but in a very generic way.

What, in view of this, is the position for the other ? What of this man ?

What if he remain until I come ? asks Jesus Christ in reply. Does this mean that John will not die, that is, will still be busy remaining until the parousia, waiting until THAT coming ? Emphatically, John under the inspiration of that same Lord who spoke at the time, declares NO! The Lord has not intimated by any means that John will remain until the Age ends and the elect are summoned to heaven. That is NOT WHAT HE SAID. Such a view of the meaning of the divine statement is emphatically excluded from the words spoken. Their content neither included nor advised any such thing. For such a view, do not look at those words of Christ about John remaining "until I come."

Under inspiration, John rules out such an interpretation as unwarranted. What then WAS what the Lord said. It was that John, in contrast to the martyrdom's quick exit for Peter, cut off in the midst of his workings, had something which, for all the privacy of the matter, COULD yet be said. If it was not that he would not die, that was intimated, what then was it ? Presumably it was something, not vain or empty speech.

This is left in delightful suspension, NOT deathlessness, no, that is not in ANY way intimated. Content of this kind: ZERO. Yet he is to remain, and this in the context of correlation between the two disciples. It was as it were a hint, an indication, an intimation, generic because private, but yet definite because there is a slight lifting of the veil concerning John. Though the case be that of another man, and somewhat shrouded, yet it is not obscured entirely. Not rupture, then, as with Peter, the point of differentiation proceeds, but remaining.

What was ruptured ? normal life. What would remain in parallel  ? Normal life, that is the parallel.

NOT abnormal life, but the normal variety, where you remain continuing away with what you are doing, not in some supernatural elevation of age, or movement to some sudden stage, but simply as awaiting what in its own time, comes when your earthly pilgrimage is up. Indeed, it is not altogether its own time in this, that it is marked by a signal, it is this: it is not "until I come", the One concerned being Christ. Thus since "precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints" (Psalm 116), so it occurs when I come, and does not occur till then.  It is no normal severance which occurs for the child of God, but an attended one. Elijah's chariot confirms this in type, even though it was conducted, for educative purposes not least it seems, in high drama and heavy personal attention.

This "until I come," then represents  a beautiful and even charming notation for the martyr to hear in vicarious comfort, namely that not all go the rough way in terms of physical death, that there are varieties in the orchestra of the Church. It is  that some suffer and produce in one way, some in another, that all are not to be as if in isolation to be adulated, who are martyrs, in comparison with others; for there are works to be done THROUGH to considerable age, as well as in shorter terms such as that of the inspiring Stephen. This statement of Jesus Christ has so many messages involved in its very mode of diction, safeguarded against attribution of some new doctrine about age and virtual immortality, that it anoints the eye.

As then to some kind of extending life on the part of John, whatever was said, this was not it. It was not stated; it was not implied. As content, it is affirmed to be absent. Now it might be said that Christ was referring to such a thing for impact purposes, as it were, a nonsense to show just how wrong it was to be looking at John in this respect. No, one should not consider knowing anything about the manner of what is coming to him, the interpretation might read, even if it were so remarkable as to stay to the end of the Age, residing on this earth. This was not the meaning; only that even if it were, it would still be wrong to enquire. That is one view.

However, Peter's situation was intimately exposed, including the devil's desire to have him and Christ's coverage of the case with prayer, so that when Peter was done with betrayal, he might strengthen the brethren; and Lazarus' approaching death was clearly defined as not the outcome of the issue (John 11 :4-11), since Christ showed He was going to resurrect him. Judas in turn (John 6:70) was known to be a devil, the outcome for whom was prominently on display. Elisha knew of the coming death of Elijah, though it was surprisingly dealt with, being more a transformation than a mere corruption: still, an entire cessation of life on this earth. Indeed, many knew of its very near approach, even sons of the prophets! They knew so much, and no more.

They knew that Elijah would be taken away from Elisha but not HOW! It was by jumping to conclusions that they were keen to check if Elijah had fallen down somewhere or other; but as Elisha had told them, this was not the case. As to Christ's word, it was not "even if" he should remain till I come, but rather that IF he should so last, it is still not a matter for further investigation. There is no verbal expression or indication of a condition contrary to fact. If this should happen, what is that to you. If there is a contrast of an order of magnitude, in type of suffering, then what difference does this make to your own, not light, duty to which you must direct your keen attention!

You can know so much, but no more; and even this is being stated as the correct correlative to Peter's martyrdom: it is an index to differentiation rather than a crushing disjunction even from any intimations about the other. It was a kindly intimation in reply to one to be martyred,  concerning another person's differentials but without detail in that case: not a massive rebuke for daring to be concerned, directed at one revealed as himself to be subject to violent death. If it was a private matter in essence, yet concerning those as one apostolic body, it is not appalling to seek some idea when told of one's own coming experience when on service, concerning that of another. Nor would it collide with other scriptures, but rather abide with them.

Without violating individual intimacy, Christ allowed a touch to be felt, a principle to appear, and a difference to be outlined. It had just that pastoral discretion and understanding which THE great shepherd of the sheep so often displays, rebuke to the unruly, but if possible, encouragement with due care, to the faithful.

Let us then not make supposition of severity, but secede from it, keeping to the constraints of text and broader context. The "little while" of Christ (John 16) would indeed be little, and when He, by resurrection,  returned to the midst of ordinary human life, though with superior equipment, it was indeed a cause for inextinguishable joy (John 16:22), NO ONE taking this gift of gladness from them; and then  ? Some would live a little longer, some on this earth, a little more, but because He lived, they would live also (John 14:19), first to depart and be with Christ which is far better than remaining (Philippians 1:23), and then to be "clothed upon" with immortality, incorruptibility, which is the glory unveiled to the intimate uttermost (I Cor. 15, II Cor. 4-5).