It has nothing to do with his worthiness; he died before the flood, not in it.Methuselah wasn't worthy of salvation from the flood?
Except vatican didnt exist that far back. It was just a ain next to the Tiber. That land was donates by Pepin in 754 and added to by Charlemagne in 774 but only became a state unto its own in 1177 Saint Peters Basilica was built between 1506 and 1626. So keeping John there would habe to be post the reformation and I think Luther and Calvin amd many reformers would have opposed imprisoning John.That's true that it brings it into question, but it isn't proof because you haven't produced John and let him give his own reason for why he hasn't been heard from.
but didn't the apostles openly oppose the Pharisees, preaching the gospel daily in the temple?
just because Judaism had lost the path didn't make them all just keep quiet and hidden forever.
so why would John have given up?
which is why i guess you suppose he's been locked in a cell under the Vatican since 200AD...?
So John was never told he wasn't going to die and we can infer, that he was not told that he would tarry until Christ came again because the statement: If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Is written as a "third class" conditional statement. A third class condition is to be understood in the negative. That is, Christ did not will. If Christ had meant it to be understood in the positive, then it would have been written as a "first class" conditional statement and could be translated as "since" instead of "if".
Meditating on Scriptures is what all the religious men and women do. Just because I am a lay person, it doesn't mean I can't do the same. It is in plain language. Thanks for your concern, though. It's good to not go wild with the Scriptures as some people do. This just dawned on me some years ago. I thought I would share it here to see what everyone else thinks. I'm not surprised that some don't believe it's true.

"If" is a qualifying word. The whole context of the sentence hang on the word "if". That is always true of every statement that includes the word "if".I'm surprised that so many of you interpret it this way, that Jesus was merely stating the possibility of John being kept alive until His second coming. You have the right to your own opinions, but I think you're reading into the whole use of the word "if" too much. To me, Jesus told Peter in plain language what he was going to do with John because He loved him so much.
Well, Matthew 24.34 and John 21.22 both depict the same thing, that Jesus is keeping John alive until His second coming. With two places like that in Scriptures, it confirms that it is His intention to keep John alive."If" is a qualifying word. The whole context of the sentence hang on the word "if". That is always true of every statement that includes the word "if".
Basically Jesus was making an idiomatic statement equivolent to, its none of your business. Then there is the foĺlow up to where it is clarified.
"Jesus did not say that he would not die".
I'm surprised that so many of you interpret it this way, that Jesus was merely stating the possibility of John being kept alive until His second coming. You have the right to your own opinions, but I think you're reading into the whole use of the word "if" too much. To me, Jesus told Peter in plain language what he was going to do with John because He loved him so much.
Matthew 24 is not talking about John. The passage in Matthew 24 is echoed in Mark 13 and Luke 21.Well, Matthew 24.34 and John 21.22 both depict the same thing, that Jesus is keeping John alive until His second coming. With two places like that in Scriptures, it confirms that it is His intention to keep John alive.
In his eternal state, yes. In his earthly state, quite the contrary.So have established that John still lives?
So, you are the ones that are not teachable, then? Because I have been expounding the truth to you all.The problem here is this: (Your comments in blue)
I'm surprised that so many of you interpret it this way, that Jesus was merely stating the possibility of John being kept alive until His second coming.
So many believe this because we believe the Scripture evidence. It is what the Scripture says. It is the grammatically correct way to understand these verses and understanding the words, as written in the Kione Greek, is how one comes to the Truth - with the assistance of the Holy Spirit who guides us into that Truth. One can also come to the Truth with a good translation but it is still better to work in the language of the original autographs.
You have the right to your own opinions, but I think you're reading into the whole use of the word "if" too much.
My opinion is irrelevant - if not based on the proper Grammar and Hermeneutics and thus, provable by Scripture.
To me, Jesus told Peter in plain language what he was going to do with John because He loved him so much
And here is the problem - You said "To me"... If one is not willing to conform their understanding of the Truth when presented with the evidence - Then that one is not teachable and will most likely be susceptible to many false doctrines.
Hogwash and codswollop. You've been expounding your own wacky misinterpretations of Scripture which are based on poor reading skills and inadequate understanding of English grammar.So, you are the ones that are not teachable, then? Because I have been expounding the truth to you all.
So, you are the ones that are not teachable, then? Because I have been expounding the truth to you all.
Well, Matthew 24.34 and John 21.22 both depict the same thing, that Jesus is keeping John alive until His second coming. With two places like that in Scriptures, it confirms that it is His intention to keep John alive.
I don't see it that way. I see it as Jesus was telling the people of the generation that He spoke those words to to watch for those signs because when they finally see those signs, then the time of His second coming will be at hand. Of course, because the Evangelists put His words into the Gospels, future generations after that generation should all watch for those signs, as well.Again, you are misunderstanding the Scriptures
Thus, when you see these signs, like a fig tree about to bud new leaves - then THIS generation - the generation seeing the signs, will not pass away. That generation, will live to see the end days.
Call it what you will, I can handle it. It just makes sense to me that Jesus meant that He is keeping John alive until His second coming. For those of you who don't believe, it gives you something to think about, at least.
What you may not know (and what many Christians don't accept) is that the signs of which Jesus spoke were fulfilled within a generation (about 40 years) of the day He spoke them (read Josephus' Wars of the Jews).Call it what you will, I can handle it. It just makes sense to me that Jesus meant that He is keeping John alive until His second coming. For those of you who don't believe, it gives you something to think about, at least.