Where is John the Apostle now?

Were there persons t
Nope - Dino246, that is an Amillennial view - can't go there.

You do know that signs are for the Jews - right? Who was the audience that Jesus was talking to? Jews and He was on Jewish ground.

Those of us, in the church age, do not look for signs.

No they do not depict that. That is you imposing on the text.

Christians are to look for those signs, too; it wasn't exculsive to Jews. I disagree.

Ok, well, that's your opinion that I'm imposing on the text. It just figures when you compare John 21.22 with the other three passages: "This generation" will not die until Jesus returns, John will not die until Jesus returns.

We are not to look for sign. Jesus said it was a perverse generation that seeks a sign. Also we are warned against false signs.

He said a wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign, not looks for a sign. Watching for those signs He foretold is fine. Like watching to see when the sun goes dark and the moon turns to blood, Matthew 24.29, Mark 13.24, Luke 21.25, and Acts 2.20,

My question would be why did God give us this verse:

John 21:23-24
Then this saying went out among the brethren that this disciple would not die.
Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but, "If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you?"
This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true.

I believe that in light of the obvious statement that clarifies their false claim, that the OP has a serious reading comprehension issue. I will go a step further and say there are more serious errors in his/her dogma.

Several people have pointed that passage out and I haven't been saying that John will not die, as those brethren thought he would not. John will die, but not until Jesus comes again. The passage emphasizes that Jesus only meant that He'd keep John alive until He comes again, not that John would not die at all and live forever as if he had eaten fruit from the Tree of Life.

There's no reading comprehension issue. I understand the passage. What more serious errors do you see in my (his, not her) dogma?

If you cannot comprehend what this passage so obviously states, then there is a high probability there exists many other verses that you are unable to reconcile with reality.

No, I understand it. It's obvious to me that John is still alive. Well, reconciling with reality is what each of us must do each day; I'm no exception.

Various parts of John's body are on display in various churches around the world....fingers are in something akin to a scepter.

It really does not matter how we interpret the Gospel of John, Chapter 21, Verses 23-24, because John had Disciples of his own who were over the 7 Churches mentioned in first couple Chapters of Revelation. John, was overseer of the 7 Churches and why it's interesting that John gets this Vision of those Churches and once he's released from Patmos begins to be the Bishop over these Churches. Long story short, the Beloved Apostle John, is written down by most of his Disciples as dying as a very very old man around 110 A.D.

So, WE KNOW HE DID IN FACT DIE!!

Exactly ----if you read the Chapter in Context and your Spiritually Discerned ----this is what this piece of Scripture is saying -----not that john is still Physically alive today -----

The Scripture does not really says How John died ---some say he might have been raptured -----some say he died peacefully unlike the other Apostles ----- there are other theories as well -----

Jesus is saying we are not to be concerned with the fate of others ---we should stay focused on our own Faith and obedience to Christ -----

I say
Anything that God does not tells us in Scripture ---is not for us to know or be concerned with ----it is just all speculation on our part-----

Here are some theories about the death of -John ---read all for yourselves ----

https://www.gotquestions.org/apostle-John-die.html
How did the apostle John die?

i meant 100 AD, not 110 AD:

Irenaeus of Lyons explicitly tells us that John was still living at the time of Emperor Trajan's accession (AD 98):

Irenaeus was a pupil of Polycarp who was a disciple of John. Furthermore, Irenaeus grew up in early 2nd century Asia Minor, in a world saturated with John’s influence. He also studied the works of Papias (another disciple of John). Irenaeus is in an extraordinarily good position to know what he's talking about here.


Eusebius puts John in Ephesus during the reign of Nerva (AD 96-98)



Jerome puts John's death during Trajan's reign (AD 98-117):



Conclusion

We do not need to appeal to symbolic interpretation of Revelation to adduce the year AD 98; Irenaeus gives us the information explicitly. There are indeed many who have interpreted the kings/rulers/kingdoms of Revelation to indicate that Domitian was the present-day ruler when Revelation was written...but others have had no difficulty interpreting Revelation to say that Nero or Vespasian was emperor at the time, not Domitian.

Neither need we appeal to anonymous tradition--we have a very well-placed source in Irenaeus, who indicates John was still living in AD 98. This statement by Irenaeus is corroborated repeatedly by other historians.

We are not given the year 100 explicitly; it is a useful number to round to. John's ministry ended between AD 98 (Trajan's accession) and the writing of the epistles of Ignatius (~AD 107).



So the Apostle John died between the years of 98 AD and 107 AD

Seriously? I doubt anyone thought you meant John would never die. We knew what you meant: John has not yet
died, and been alive these two thousand years. Gosh. I wonder what a two thousand year old man looks like. .

Enoch would be like 5,000 years old and Elijah around 3,800 years old. If you could add John, that would be a trinity of saggy old men