The Disciple "Whom Jesus Loved"

[Gabriel_of_12]

How do we interpret these passages then?

Isnt Jesus suggesting that John and James wil both suffer martyrdom?

I think that there is a tradition that St. John was martyred as well, but as you say there is another tradition that he lived to a ripe old age.

Is there a tradition that John was placed in boiling tar, nothing happened to him, so the Ruler put on the island of Patmos by himself?

 

[holdencaulfield]

I am thinking of visiting Turkey next year, the city of Ephesus where St. john is buried.

Do you have a list of where all the early saints are buried? Or where I can look. The only ones I know of are:

St. Peter - Rome

St. Paul - Rome

St. Mark - Venice

 

[holdencaulfield]

Is there a tradition that John was placed in boiling tar, nothing happened to him, so the Ruler put on the island of Patmos by himself?

The island does sound familiar.

 

[Righteousone]

Do you have a list of where all the early saints are buried? Or where I can look. The only ones I know of are:

St. Peter - Rome

St. Paul - Rome

St. Mark - Venice

The incorrupt body of St. Zita, patroness of domestic Workers is enshrined in a glass reliquary in the Basilica of St. Frediano in Lucca, Italy.
Padre Pio who was known for the Stigmata of christ is in San Giovanni rotondo, Italy.
St. rita, the saint of impossible and desperate cases, is in the Basilica of St. rita of Cascia, Italy.
St. Francis Xavier is is Bom Jesus in goa, india.
There are much more, if you want to know.

 

[marymol]

St.John is also thought to be the youngest among the disciples and thus possibly related the best to The Fatherly Heart of our Lord …yes, with the innocense and trust of that a child …

Being with The Mother , seemd to have strengetned his own fatherly affection to his disciples , as seen in the way he addresses his Epistles - John 1 :28 - ’ And now , little children, abide in Him…’

 

[holdencaulfield]

The incorrupt body of St. Zita, patroness of domestic Workers is enshrined in a glass reliquary in the Basilica of St. Frediano in Lucca, Italy.
Padre Pio who was known for the Stigmata of christ is in San Giovanni rotondo, Italy.
St. rita, the saint of impossible and desperate cases, is in the Basilica of St. rita of Cascia, Italy.
St. Francis Xavier is is Bom Jesus in goa, india.
There are much more, if you want to know.

Well I was thinking more along the lines of Apostles and like Early Church Fathers.

 

[holdencaulfield]

St.John is also thought to be the youngest among the disciples and thus possibly related the best to The Fatherly Heart of our Lord …yes, with the innocense and trust of that a child …

Being with The Mother , seemd to have strengetned his own fatherly affection to his disciples , as seen in the way he addresses his Epistles - John 1 :28 - ’ And now , little children, abide in Him…’

Yes he is supposed to be the youngest disciple.

 

[Righteousone]

Well I was thinking more along the lines of Apostles and like Early Church Fathers.

Ok, I will get back to you, let me get my book on this subject…

 

[holdencaulfield]

Ok, I will get back to you, let me get my book on this subject…

Cool, thanks.

 

[Rocky]

Quote by Irish Brigade:

…with a good deal of certainty (through textual, form, and historical criticism) we can establish that the Johannine corpus (the Gospel and the three Letters) and the Revelation to John, aka The Apocalypse, were written by separate individuals, at different points in time. If nothing else, the evident differences in the quality of Greek in the surviving manuscripts underly that position. Revelation was likely written by a Jewish Christian steeped in the context of ancient Jewish apocryphal literature (see Daniel in the Old Testament, as well as Apocalypse of Enoch in the Jewish Apocrypha)while the Johannine body of work was most likely a school of thought, perhaps centered in Ephesus, reflecting a highly developed Christological concept of metaphysical and earthly divinity, expressed through an apostolic medium…there are those who believe a strong strain of Gnostic philosophy running through the Gospel and the First letter, in its insistence on Christology (the Son of God) as opposed to the Synoptic message of Jesus (the Son of Man)…

It is modern-day people who confuse meaning of the terms “Son of God” and “Son of Man.” Jews of the first century would have had almost exact opposite meanings than what we think of now.

In the Book of Daniel the term “Son of Man” is used as a reference to the Everlasting King (Daniel 7:13-14). The term “Son of God” was in reference to an emissary from God (Daniel 3:25)

In Matthew’s Gospel, which was written for Jewish converts, the high priest asks Jesus if he is “the Messiah, the Son of God.” “Jesus answered: ’ It is you who say it, But I tell you this: Soon you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.’ At this the high priest tore his robes: ‘He has blasphemed!’” (Matthew 26:63-65

To the high priest Jesus’ blasphemy was equating Himself to God in using the term “Son of Man.”

 

[ralphinal]

John was young and hungry for truth. He did not have any preconcieved notions. He loved Christ as a brother was well as his God. Jesus knew that John also had the type of mind that would enter the metaphysical. He could and would be best suited to write the Gospel he wrote and Revelation. He was never martered, but died of old age.

Peter, however, was special. Jesus saw that he would have the unshakable faith that comes from learning the hard way. He woudl deny, then never deny again. He would question and be rebuked and still not be afraid to speak again. His mouth ran faster than his brain at times, but he tried to comprehend. Peter would be a better leader than John or the others because he had deeper trials and came back.

There are no perfect diamonds right out of the ground. Some need lots of work to chip away the stuff and leave the perfect gem. Some need little, but somehow they are never as perfect.

 

[deacon_d]

John was young and hungry for truth. He did not have any preconcieved notions. He loved Christ as a brother was well as his God. Jesus knew that John also had the type of mind that would enter the metaphysical. He could and would be best suited to write the Gospel he wrote and Revelation. He was never martered, but died of old age.

Peter, however, was special. Jesus saw that he would have the unshakable faith that comes from learning the hard way. He woudl deny, then never deny again. He would question and be rebuked and still not be afraid to speak again. His mouth ran faster than his brain at times, but he tried to comprehend. Peter would be a better leader than John or the others because he had deeper trials and came back.

There are no perfect diamonds right out of the ground. Some need lots of work to chip away the stuff and leave the perfect gem. Some need little, but somehow they are never as perfect.

Great synopsis on Peter. Ready, Aim, Fire. No wait

I agree on leadership. John seemed like the silent, but very devoted disciple. He didn’t speak much but when he did it was brilliant. Peter on the other hand was in your face and not afraid. Jesus obviously knew this and wanted this type of person to lead. I think Paul and Peter resemble each other in character.

 

[IrishAm]

Another observation on the disciple “whom Jesus loved” –

(From “The Little White Book: Six minute reflections on the Resurrection Narratives according to John,” published by Little Books of the Diocese of Saginaw (MI) with the notation “This Easter booklet is based upon the writings of Bishop Ken Untener and put together by Catherine Haven, editor of the Little Books, with the help of Sr. Nancy Ayotte, IHM, director of the Catechesis of the Good Shepherd.” April 11, 2007, reads as follows:

"Who is the ‘other disciple’?

At the Last Supper in John’s Gospel, a mysterious disciple is mentioned for the first time: ‘One of the disciples, the one whom Jesus loved, was reclining at Jesus’ side." This is the first of eight appearances of the ‘Beloved Disciple’ (also called ‘the other disciple’) in John’s Gospel. Who is he?

Traditionally the Beloved Disciple was thought to be John the Apostle. But most Scripture scholars in recent times think that he was not John, but rather another disciple whose name is never given. There are various theories. Here is a condensed version of what many scholars today would say.

The Beloved Disciple was one of the disciples of Jesus. During the public ministry, although he was very close to Jesus, he played a minor role. He isn’t even mentioned in the other three Gospels.

Some years after the death and resurrection of Jesus, this disciple was the founding father and leader of a Christian community in Ephesus, a coastal city in modern-day Turkey. This community looked upon him as an ideal disciple, someone to imitate.

Because he was a humble person, this unnamed disciple did not want his name included in the written story of Jesus and the author of the fourth Gospel repected that decision."

Note that this is not meant to credit this unnamed holy man with what we consider John’s writings. But it is very interesting.

 

[ralphinal]

Great synopsis on Peter. Ready, Aim, Fire. No wait

I agree on leadership. John seemed like the silent, but very devoted disciple. He didn’t speak much but when he did it was brilliant. Peter on the other hand was in your face and not afraid. Jesus obviously knew this and wanted this type of person to lead. I think Paul and Peter resemble each other in character.

I agree 100% about Paul and Peter. If you look at it, the strongest personalities were needed for their roles. Paul had to go out into the Gentile world and Peter had to deal with both groups. They both died in Rome together.