A division of the Fourth Gospel into a Book of Signs and a Book of Glory or Passion represents a relatively uncontended consensus in observations of its arrangement. Nearly as broadly conventional would be a summary like that of D.A. Carson and D. Moo in their Introduction to the NT that the book’s division falls into “two central sections, 1:1-12:50 and 13:1-20:31.” Commentaries widely agree in identifying the conclusion of the Book of Signs with the departure of Jesus in ch. 12 and the commencement of the Book of Glory with the anointing of Jesus at the Feast of Passover in ch. 13. Still, in the face of that broad consensus, Carson and Moo do allow that chh 11 and 12 might be treated “as something of a transition” between the books, suggesting that the partition of the book might fall somewhat earlier.
The examination of the Fourth Gospel that this paper proposes explores heuristically the possible exegetical benefits of pursuing that suggestion by identifying the fulcrum of the book at the resurrection of Lazarus, a chapter prior to the conventional division, partitioning Signs and Glory between 11:54 and 55.
The pairing of the resurrection of Lazarus as a seventh sign with the resurrection of Jesus as the culmination of seven days of passion week invites an exploration of further parallels. This paper will draw attention to a remarkable series of additional pairings between chh 1-11 and chh 12-20 that reinforce an arguably parallel design of the books of Signs and of Glory.
To cite a merely representative but illustrative list: the anointing of Jesus by Mary in 12:3 echoes the baptism of Jesus by John in 1:26; the cry, “King of Israel” at Jesus’ “coming” in 12:12f echoes the cry “Lamb of God” at his “coming” in 1:29; Philip from Bethsaida is named with Andrew in 12:22 as in 1:43f; the water basin for Jesus’ washing of feet in 13:5 echoes the water jars for purification at Cana in 2:6; the language of belief, agape love, eternal life in the Spirit, and Jesus’ manifestation to the world follow the same sequence in 14:12-22 as in 3:15-19; language of Spirit and truth occurs uniquely in 4:23f and in 14:17 (with 15:26, 16:13); abiding fruit in 15:8 and 16 matches the fruit for eternal life in 4:36; the ἀποσυνάγωγος of 16:2 matches its occurrence in 9:22; reference to Jesus’ use of παροιμία occurs uniquely in 10:6 and its paired pericope in 16:25-29; the paper will expand on this list.
What is the upshot of a consideration of the striking parallels between the two sections of the Fourth Gospel? Jesus’ prayer as high priest in ch. 17 might be usefully illumined by his extended self-identification as the good shepherd in ch. 10; the “works that no one else did” (15:24) would be anticipated by the specifics of the series of Jesus’ displays of power from ch. 4 to ch. 9. Like observations invite the paper’s development.