John concludes his narrative by pointing to himself. He identifies the writer of the fourth Gospel narrative as the man who leaned upon Jesus’ breast the night before he was crucified (John 21:20, 24). It was he, the disciple whom Jesus loved, singled out from all others in that manner, who asked the Lord who would betray him. Peter asked him specifically to inquire of the Lord about the identity of the betrayer, precisely because he was not one of the Twelve, because Jesus said it would be one of the Twelve who would betray him. As Jesus and Peter walked together, the disciple whom Jesus loved followed at a distance, and Peter inquired of Jesus what would become of him (John 21:21). Nevertheless, Peter was told only what would become of himself, no one else (John 21:18). Jesus wanted to heal Peter’s depressed and broken spirit, not merely satisfy his curiosity (John 21:22).
Nevertheless, what Jesus did say about the disciple whom he loved affected the understanding of many of the disciples, who were told what Jesus said. He said: What is that to you, if I desire that he live until I come? You, follow me!” (John 21:22). Folks simply read into what Jesus said that this disciple would live until Jesus returned, but, as is testified by the writer of this narrative, that is not what Jesus said. He said **if** I wish, not that it was true that it would occur that way (John 21:23-24). Nevertheless, it is very interesting how things did turn out.
Consider the fact that the New Covenant text was written by seven men, seven witnesses: Matthew, Peter (Mark’s Gospel is actually Peter’s), Luke, John (actually Joseph, who was called Barnabas in Acts, but Lazarus in the Gospel narratives), Paul, James (the Less), and Jude. The Apocalypse, though part of the New Covenant text, is prophecy, but not meant to be a witness to Jesus’ ministry and what that means to us. The Apocalypse was written by a man named John (perhaps John Mark, but that’s only a guess). It was written to offer the disciples a timeline between Jesus’ ministry to the time of his return to judge Judah and bring the Old Covenant to an end, which was done in 70 AD.
We know that Peter and Paul were slain in Rome during Nero’s reign and just prior to the Jews’ war with Rome. The Apocalypse testifies that there would be seven witnesses (Revelation 5:6). They are Jesus’ witnesses—his valid witness of his ministry on earth, his death and his resurrection. A valid witness is two (or more) witnesses. In Revelation 11 we witness the death of Jesus “two witnesses” or the death of his valid witness—namely, the seven men who wrote the New Covenant text. Once Jesus’ witness was removed from the earth (through death), he returned to judge those who had them slain (Revelation 11:7, 15-19).
With this in mind, consider John’s second and third epistles. He identifies himself as **the** Elder. Peter once mentioned that he was **an** elder (1Peter 5:1). If the writer of these epistles is known as **the** Elder (2John 1:1; 3John 1:1), it implies he is the only witness left, and knowing that he will be slain as well (Revelation 11:7), indicates the nearness of Jesus’ return at the writing of those epistles. So, John concludes his Gospel narrative by saying Jesus had done many other things not recorded in this book, and if one should try to mention them all, the world itself would be too small to contain all the books that should be written to describe what Jesus said and did (John 21:25).[1]
____________________________________________________________
[1] The fact that the Apocalypse mentions that Jesus’ valid witness (the Two Witnesses – which is a legal witness and can be more than two) was destroyed in killing off all of Jesus’ eye witnesses before the destruction of Jerusalem, and this means that the writer of the Gospel of John had to be slain also. Moreover, this argument shows the Gospel of John had to have been written prior to the Jews’ war with Rome. The fact that ‘John’ was identified by the expression “the Elder” also shows that he was the last of Jesus’ surviving eye witnesses at the composition of the two letters. The obscure title, implies the need to avoid certain identification by the enemies of the Gospel, many of whom sought to slay the eyewitnesses and bring the Gospel effort to an abrupt end (see my first study in this series: When Was the Gospel of John Written?
Smoodock's Blog 