R. Alan Culpepper, Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel: A Study in Literary Design
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983 [pp. 94-98; 125-132]
PLOT (continued)
The tangled relationship between life and death is exposed In John 11. Jesus returns to call a dead friend to life in spite of Thomas' prophetic perception that the mission will cost Jesus his own life. Another misunderstanding underscores the point that real death is more than just "falling asleep" (11:11-14). Life is believing, and Jesus is resurrection and life (11:25-26). The occasion brings Jesus face to face with his own death, his own tomb, weeping women, and the symbolic stone which defends the tomb from the living. Jesus is shaken but, through the strength of his relationship to the Father, prevails over death. Some believe, but immediately the authorities plot his death, justifying it as necessary for national security (11:48-50). The narrator cannot resist explaining the irony (11:51-53). Now there is little reason to hope that the authorities will fail again.In many ways chapter 12 is a transitional chapter. It brings Jesus' public ministry to a close, describes the final preliminary steps toward his arrest and death, and forms a solid link between chapters 11 and 13. The opening scene is the anointing of Jesus' feet (not his head) while he reclines at table. Judas is again introduced as the one who was about to betray him, and Jesus links the event to the preparation of his body for burial (12:7). Upon his entry into Jerusalem, Jesus is hailed as king, a title that will assume significance at his trial and death. The request of Greeks to "see" Jesus triggers his inner sense that the hour of his death is at hand (12:23). After further interpreting the meaning of his death by likening himself to a seed dying to bear fruit (12:24), Jesus experiences the agony of accepting his death (12:27-28). He accepts it, however, because it will glorify the Father, overthrow "the ruler of this world," and be his exaltation from the earth. Through his death he will draw all men to himself (12:27-32). This statement suggests both the means and the meaning of his death (12:33). While Jesus withdraws into seclusion, the narrator interprets the reasons for unbelief. Jesus then offers a summarizing interpretation of his ministry in the form of a closing soliloquy.
John 13 opens with the narrator's explanation that Jesus knew that the hour for his return to the Father had arrived. The devil had already singled out Judas for the role of betrayer (13:2). Symbolically portraying the cleansing significance of his imminent death, Jesus washes his disciples' feet.40 Shaken again, but for the last time, Jesus predicts his betrayal and, having given his betrayer the choice morsel, sends him out into the night to set in motion the dark forces which will paradoxically lead to Jesus' glorification. The disciples, who will not be able to follow him are commanded to love one another, but even Peter will deny him that night. His departure will be to their advantage. He will prepare a place for them, return to abide with them in Spirit, and send the Paraclete, who will teach, remind, and comfort them, bear witness to him, and convict the world. The disciples will face severe testing. They will be excluded from the synagogue, persecuted, and scattered, but they will have joy and peace and their distress will pass. Before leaving the table to meet his adversaries, Jesus prays for himself, his own, and those who will follow in faith later. Again Jesus recognizes that the hour has come (17:1; cf. 12:23; 13:1; 16:32) and prays that he might be glorified so that the disciples may be set apart from the world, united with the Father, and sent to carry on the work of revealing Jesus to the world (17:21-23).
With chapter 18the waiting is over, and events begin to move quickly toward Jesus' death. Jesus is in control even while his enemies force a legal endorsement of their judgment upon him. The amassed political and religious forces which come to seize him are powerless in his presence, but he goes with them voluntarily after securing the release of his disciples. Peter, who has not understood that Jesus must die, tries to defend him with the sword and continues to be a foil for Jesus during the interrogations before Annas and Caiaphas. Inside, Jesus is saying that he has spoken boldly and publicly, challenging his accusers, and suggesting that they ask those who have heard him. Outside, Peter is attempting to remain anonymous and denying his discipleship to evade accusations. Whatever Jesus accomplished with his disciples during his ministry, it was not enough. The necessity of Jesus' death is established by the disciples' faithlessness.
Pilate's position between Jesus and his accusers is dramatized by having them remain outside, lest they defile themselves on the eve of Passover while they call for his death. Pilate goes back and forth between them and Jesus. The evangelist skillfully turns the full glare of the spotlight on Pilate. It is he who is on trial, and his judgment will be a verdict on himself as much as it is on Jesus. In the discussions between Jesus and Pilate the nature of authority and Jesus' kingship are clarified. Three times Pilate pronounces Jesus innocent, and in the end the title he nails to the cross, "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews," announces his recognition of Jesus' true identity. But, although he tries to deliver Jesus, the glory of men finally has a stronger claim on Pilate than the glory of God (19:12-13). When the Jews in effect commit blasphemy and renounce their heritage by claiming "we have no king but Caesar" (19:15), Pilate delivers Jesus to them. Jesus is crucified on the eve of Passover, the designated time for the slaughter of the Passover lambs. While soldiers cast lots for his garments, Jesus cares for his own by uniting his mother and the Beloved Disciple. Just before dying, the giver of living water thirsts. His only cup is a sponge. He drinks the wine, solemnly declares ``It is finished," and "hands over the spirit." Before dark the soldiers pierce his side, which is interpreted as further fulfillment of scripture, and Jesus is given a lavish, kingly burial by Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus.
On the first day of the week Mary Magdalene discovers the tomb empty. Peter and the Beloved Disciple run to the tomb and find the grave clothes are still there (cf. 11:44). The Beloved Disciple sees and believes. Mary Magdalene meets Jesus now risen, but does not recognize him until he calls her name. She is told that he has not yet ascended to the father, but to go and tell "my brothers," meaning the disciples. The choice of this term now that Jesus' work is complete probably signals that they have in fact become "children of God," brothers of the unique "son of God." The appearances that follow authorize their continuing mission to bring others to believe. Thomas, who at first demands physical proof that what the others saw was the earthly Jesus, offers the gospel's climactic confession, "my Lord and my God." With a beatitude upon those who will believe without seeing, the gospel reaches its original ending, a conclusion which affirms that the gospel was written to lead readers (or hearers) to believe.
John 21 is an epilogue apparently added shortly after the gospel was completed. It resolves some of the minor conflicts (the Beloved Disciple and Peter, Jesus and Peter), and brings the development of John's symbols to a climactic flourish. The characterization of Peter and the Beloved Disciple is completed by allusion to their roles in the future of the story world: Peter will die a martyr's death, but the Beloved Disciple too will bear a faithful witness. The gospel ends without an ascension, for the ascension in John is collapsed into Jesus' exaltation, his being "lifted up" on the cross and his resurrection. It is metaphorical rather than physical. Jesus is with the disciples at the end; the Paraclete will remain with them. His revelatory work will be extended through their testimony. Chapter 2 1 is, therefore, the necessary ending of the gospel. By alluding to the disciples' future work and the writing of the gospel, it bridges the gap between the story and the reader. The story may depict an ideal past, but the present is related to that past in such a way that the story becomes determinative for the reader's present.
CONCLUSION
The plot of the gospel is propelled by conflict between belief and unbelief as responses to Jesus. The centrality of this conflict is confirmed by the fact that almost half of the occurrences of the verb "believe" in the New Testament are found in John (98 out of 239).41 The repetitiveness of the gospel has also been noted by various critics. Its plot is episodic, and per-haps therefore defective.42 But the author uses the various episodes skillfully to enrich the texture of the whole. Like Fielding, the author "deprives most of these episodes of actional or propulsive value precisely in order to direct the reader to integrate them with the rest of the work not in terms of plot but of theme.''43 While the dialogues slow down the action, they intensify conflict and characterization and provide space for thematic development. John's pervasive thematic integration allows, furthermore, for readers who know the story to see its end and its meaning in each of the familiar episodes.44
The four constitutive features of a plot identified at the beginning of the chapter are present in John in ascending order of importance. Sequence or order, a feature which some commentators have found remarkably lacking in John, allows each episode to have a meaningful place in the story. Causality, though it is less important than thematic development, contributes to the story's unity. The affective power of the narrative, however, is the most important feature of its plot. By showing Jesus confronting a wide variety of individuals in everyday situations, the gospel dramatizes the message that the Word has become flesh and dwelt among us. At a wedding and a well, at the temple among the religious and at a pool among the wretched and lame, ordinary persons come step by step to recognize glory enfleshed. The gospel is the testimony of one who speaks for all those who recognized the Word in Jesus: "... and we have beheld his glory." The "we" can therefore be understood to include all the characters in the gospel who finally believe and bear witness: John the Baptist, the disciples, the Samaritans, the blind man, and the others. They have all beheld his glory, and the reader sees what they saw. The effect of this narrative structure, with its prologue followed by episodic repetition of the conflict between belief and unbelief, is to enclose the reader in the company of faith. The gospel's plot, therefore, is controlled by thematic development and a strategy for wooing readers accept its interpretation of Jesus.
CHARACTERS
THE JEWS
Set in distinct contrast to the disciples, who behold Jesus' glory, is the other important group in the gospel, the Jews. Closely associated with them are the Pharisees and other representatives of Judaism, the chief priests, rulers, Levites, and their servants. Our concern, again, must be limited strictly to John's characterization of the Jews. It follows from this, incidentally, that I have not thought it necessary to use quotation marks for every reference to the Jews, since it should be clear that we are no more concerned with the "historical" Jews than with the historical Jesus.
The primary concern of recent scholarship on this topic has been to distinguish various groups designated by the term 'Ioudiaos in John. Severino Pancaro, for example, identifies five: "(1) the opponents of Jesus; (2) the 'common' people or 'crowd' (‘o ’oxlos); (3) the Jewish people as opposed to the Gentiles; (4) the contemporaries of Jesus with their customs and practices; (5) Judeans.''53 In the most systematic study of the issue to date, Urban C. von Wahlde reduces the "neutral use" of 'Ioudaios (Jew) in John to two categories: the Jews as a distinct religious/political/cultural grouping, and the people of Judea or Jerusalem.54 In contrast, the "Johannine use" of the term has no nationalistic meaning since it distinguishes "Jews" from others of the same national, religious, cultural group and designates a group with a constant, unchanging hostility toward Jesus. In all but two instances (6:41, 52), von Wahlde concludes, these Jews are authorities rather than common people, and these two verses are the only occurrences of the hostile, Johannine use of the term for people outside of Judea. He therefore attributes these verses to a redactor rather than the evangelist.55
In many respects von Wahlde's work is sound and clarifying. The criteria he suggests to demonstrate that the "Johannine" Jews are almost always authorities are particularly helpful. Although it is obvious that ``Jew" and "Jews" are used in various ways in John, the limitation of current analyses is that they lead to the conclusion that the reader of the gospel must always be asking whether the Jews in a given passage are the
Jewish people in general, Judeans, or authorities hostile toward Jesus. If this is the case, the literary critic would need to analyze the characterization of each of these three groups. On the other hand, the amount of discussion generated by John's varied use of the designation shows that the gospel does not attempt to distinguish and separate these groups; all are called 'Ioudaioi. They are one group in John. Nevertheless, recent analyses may help us to see that John offers a three (or more) sided characterization of this group. How is this characterization worked out? How does it develop? And, what is its effect on the experience of reading the gospel?
We have already noted that the Jews are closely associated with the response of unbelief, and therefore they are integrally related to the advancement of the plot. We have also seen that the gospel is episodic. When each of the episodes is examined, some of the diversity of John's references to the Jews is clarified; for development within each episode is apparent, and there is generally an escalation of hostility from one episode to another.
Only ten of the gospel's seventy references to the Jews occur in the first four chapters. Likewise there are only three references to the Pharisees (1:24; 3:1; 4:1) and no mention of the crowd in these chapters. The role of these chapters in establishing the narrator's perspective was discussed in the previous chapter. Because of this "primacy effect" - establishing the narrator's perspective as the reader's first impression of who Jesus is - there is virtually no opposition to Jesus prior to John 5. The Jews are first mentioned in 1:19. Jewish leaders in Jerusalem send Pharisees to question John, the man sent from God. The opposition between the Jews in Jerusalem on the one hand and God, represented first by John the Baptist and then by Jesus, on the other is implicit, but only implicit here. The Jews make their first appearance asking questions, and most of the time their speech is reported in the first ten chapters they are asking questions. Thereafter, they ask only a few questions. The questions, of course, challenge, generate confrontation, and eventually demonstrate that the Jews cannot accept the answers they are given.
The first episode in Jerusalem is introduced by a reference to the festival of the Jews (2:6). The Jews question Jesus in the temple after his dramatic demonstration there. The questions convey disbelief, but not hostility. Jesus does not trust himself to those who believe, and Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews, cannot understand the answers he is given, but he is not hostile toward Jesus. The episode in Samaria distinguishes the Jews from the Samaritans and says that salvation comes from the Jews (4:22). Jesus himself has just been identified as a Jew (4:9). Elsewhere when a positive sense is intended, the evangelist normally uses the term "Israel" (1:31, 47, 49; 3:10; 12:13).
A second episode in Jerusalem (chapter 5) is again introduced with a reference to a festival of the Jews. In the healing of the man at the pool, the Jews appear opposite Jesus, and the man finally sides with them. The role of the Jews in the gospel is not established until 5:16~ 18. In these verses they receive their ‘script’ for the rest of the story: they will seek to kill Jesus because he violates the sabbath and commits blasphemy. The force of this characterization is obvious: the narrator is telling the reader what to expect from the Jews. The rest of the chapter is Jesus' discourse in response to this script. It begins to explore, from Jesus' perspective, why the Jews reject him. The plot line of the prologue has begun to unfold Jesus comes to his own and his own people do not receive him (1:11).
John 6, likewise, opens with a reference to a festival of the Jews (6:4), but this time Jesus stays in Galilee. Again there is a repetition of the development of escalating hostility within the episode. The people are at first referred to as "the crowd" (6:2, 5, 22, 24). They think that Jesus is a prophet and want to make him their king (6:15), but when he eludes them and will not feed them again they grumble, and now they are referred to as Jews (6:41). The grumbling then escalates to quarreling (6: 52). This is the first sign of division within their ranks, but they draw away many of Jesus' followers.
Another episode in Jerusalem (chapter 7) begins with the now expected reference to a festival of the Jews. This episode, however, begins at a higher level of intensity, since the aim of the Jews to kill Jesus is repeated at the outset (7:1). There is now some separation of the Jews from the crowd. Some of the crowd believe (7:12, 31, 40-41), and fear of the Jews is mentioned for the first time (7:13). The reasons for the response of unbelief, a matter to which we shall return, are explored in the central chapters of the gospel. The belief of part of the crowd in chapter 7 spreads to some of the Jews in the next chapter (8:31), but the reader was told earlier that Jesus would not give himself to those who believed in Jerusalem (2:23-24). They do not abide in his word (8:31), so they cannot be his disciples. After the most heated exchange in the gospel, the Jews take up stones against Jesus (8:57).
John 9 and 10 seem to form another episode. The reason for fear of the Jews is now explained: they had agreed to exclude from the synagogue any who confess that Jesus is the Christ (9:22), but we are also told again of division among the Jews (10:19). The nearness of the end is intimated by the Jews' question in 10:24, "How long?" Again the episode climaxes with an attempt to stone Jesus (10:31, 33), and he is forced to withdraw from Judea.
In John 11 and 12, which serve as the climax to Jesus' public ministry, the division within the Jews is heightened, and the sympathetic, receptive Jews in chapter 11 become the receptive, if unenlightened, crowd in chapter 12. Early in the episode (11:8), the attempts to stone Jesus are recalled. Many Jews, however, go out to Bethany to comfort Mary and Martha (11:19, 31, 33, 36), and many of these believe in Jesus as a result of the raising of Lazarus (11:45), but others report to the Pharisees. As a result of the council's decision to execute Jesus, he is unable to go about among the Jews, for many would report him. But many Jews believe in him (12:9, 11), and a receptive crowd of. Jews hail his coming. By this point the opposition to Jesus has solidified, and the gospel has explored its reasons. Jesus has come to his own, and his own have not received him. But some have. The division within the Jews has meant that some of them have become part of the crowd, which is receptive but generally lacking in understanding. Others will arrest him and kill him. At the trial and crucifixion the hostile Jews press for his execution, but the crowd is never mentioned.
The episodes in the first half of the gospel generally reveal a pattern, a rising level of conflict and opposition within each episode and from one episode to the next. This repetition of the development of the conflict allows for its reasons and causes to be explored. It also accounts for some of the oscillation between the neutral and hostile senses of ’Ioudaios in the gospel. The Jews, however, must be understood as a group. Some are receptive but the others do not accept Jesus' revelation.
Just as the other Johannine characters carry representative value, so do the Jews. One indication of their representational role is the way in which the designation "the Jews" sweeps away all class distinctions. As Robert Fortna has observed, "Gone are the rich and poor, sinners and righteous, Sadducees, Herodians, Zealots, scribes, elders, tax collectors, prostitutes. John's phrase gives the impression of a stereotype."56 How far this is true is further indicated by Jesus' repeated references to the Torah as "their Law' (7:19; 8:17; 10:34; 15:25), though he was himself a Jew. And when speaking to the disciples, themselves Jews, he could say, "as I said to the Jews" (13:33). The hostile Jews represent the response of unbelief and rejection of Jesus' revelation. In contrast to those who are blessed at the end of the gospel, "those who have not seen and have believed" (20:29), the Jews "have seen and have not believed" (6:36). The Jews legalistically maintain their observance of the festivals but do not recognize the reality they celebrate. At the festivals they are more concerned to catch Jesus in some offense. Even when a blind man is healed they show no delight, only concern that the law of God's day may have been broken. At the last festival, Passover, instead of celebrating how God spared them and delivered them from a foreign oppressor, they seize Jesus and deliver him to the Romans for execution. Having now no king but Caesar, the world's king, they kill in order to defend their nation and their holy place.
The reasons for the Jews' response are explained not in terms of their "Jewishness" but in universally applicable characteristics: they have never heard or seen the Father (5:37), they do not want to come to Jesus so that they might have life (5:40), they do not have the love of God in themselves (5:42), and they do not receive Jesus (5:43) or seek the glory of God (5:44). An even more basic reason emerges later: they are from a different world order. They live on the wrong side of John's dualism: "You are from below, I am from above; you are of the world, I am not of this world" (8:23). Thereafter they are associated with all of the negative categories and images in the gospel: the world, sin, the devil, darkness, blindness, and death. In their unbelief the Jews are "symbols, types of the universal human condition."57 By not having heard or seen the Father, they are Jesus' opposite; in their response to Jesus they are the opposite of the disciples. The pathos of their unbelief is that they are the religious people, some even the religious authorities, who have had all the advantages of the heritage of Israel.
Through the Jews, John explores the heart and soul of unbelief.58 As the representatives of unbelief, their misunderstandings touch all the vital issues. Jesus' origin and destiny with the Father are vital to the narrator's point of view. The Jews misunderstand both, and the weakness of their position is exposed by the conflicting charges. Jesus cannot be the Messiah because his origin is known: He is the son of Joseph (6:42) and he comes from Galilee (7:41, 52). On the other hand, the origin of the Messiah will be unknown (9:29). Their understanding of his destiny is equally dull. They think he is going to the diaspora (7:35) or that he will kill himself (8:21-22). With no understanding of Jesus' whence or his whither they misunderstand his words (6:41, 52; 8:27), his works (2:18; 6:30; 9:24; 11:46-47), and the witnesses to him (5:30-40). Although they search the scriptures, they cannot understand them (5:39; 7:23; 10:34) or obey them (7:19, 51). Moses himself will accuse them (5:45-47). Repeatedly Jesus emphasizes that it is their law (7:19; 8:17; 10:34; 15:25). By their law he should die (19:7). Their misunderstandings can be traced further. They arise from misdirected love: they love darkness rather than light (3:19-21), and the glory of man rather than the glory of God (5:41-44; 12:43; cf. 7:18; 8:50, 54). Another kind of false love is the love of one's life (12:25). They are blind (9:40-41) because they will not see beyond the literal, the superficial, the flesh, the signs, the earthly. As a result they ask "how" (6:41, 52; 7:15; 8:33; 9:10, 16, 19, 26; 12:34), but they cannot accept the answers. The alternative is that Jesus must be a sinner (9:24), demon possessed (8:48, 52; 10:20), or a Samaritan (8:48). Ultimately unbelief leads to attempts to stone Jesus (8:59; 10:31) and the cries, "Crucify him! Crucify him!" (19:6, 15).
The burden of unbelief which the Jews are made to carry is relieved in two ways, however. First, John affirms that belief must be given (6:37, 39). Believers must be called or drawn (10:3; 6:44, 65). Otherwise they cannot believe.59 Second, some of the Jews do believe (8:31; 11:45; cf. 7:31; 19:38). Jesus' words cause division among the Jews, the crowds, and even the Pharisees (7:43; 9'16; 10:19); so John allows hope that for some at least (i.e., those who are given) belief is possible. Because of an abominable history of misinterpretation, it must again be repeated that in spite, of the historical factors which may have led the evangelist to choose the Jews to represent unbelief, they like all the other characters in the gospel are representatives. The Jews carry the burden of the unbelief of "the world" in John. In that respect at least they are not unlike "the lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world" (1:29; cf. 16:9).
Closely related to the Jews are the Pharisees, who are mentioned 19 times in John. The Pharisees emerge as the leaders of the Jews. The Jerusalem Jews who sent to interrogate John the Baptist were Pharisees (1:19, 24). From the very beginning, therefore, there is the hint that the Jewish authorities are rival "senders" (1:19, 24; 5:33; 7:32; 18:24). Apart from these references and 11:3, the Gospel of John depicts God as the one who sends. The Pharisees are those most concerned about alleged violations of the law. At first at least they are depicted as being at some distance from Jesus. Hence the sending and the hearing of reports (4:1; 7:32). Only when the first attempts are made to seize Jesus do they become active (7:32ff.). They have authority to send priests and Levites (1:19, 24), they are in close association with the rulers (3:1; 7:48; 12:42) and chief priests (7:32, 45; 11:47, 57; 18:3), and the officers report to them (7:32, 45-47; 18:3). In fact, the Pharisees seem to be the power behind each of these other groups.60 They are distinguished from the crowd for whom they show some disdain (7:45-49), but following 9:17 they blend with the Jews (cf. 9:16, 18 and 9:40; 10:19). By this point the Jews have been provoked to take official action against Jesus. The Pharisees have therefore succeeded in their efforts. By means of this pattern of characterization, the evangelist lays the blame for much of the Jews' opposition to Jesus at the Pharisees' feet. If the unbelief of the world is represented by the Jews, then in similar fashion the hostility of the Jews toward Jesus is concentrated in the Pharisees.
The crowd is associated with the Jews, but their role is even more restricted than that of the Pharisees. They are mentioned eighteen times in chapters 6, 7, and 12, with only two further references in 5:13 and 11:42. This very concentration places them in the context of controversy over Jesus' signs. Although we expect references to the crowd in the passion narrative, there are none. The term there is "the Jews" again (twelve times in the plural in chapters 18-19, not counting the title "the King of the Jews"). The Jews and their priests, not the crowd, call for Jesus' death.
The crowd is introduced by the narrator as "following" Jesus in Galilee as a result of his signs of healing (6:2).61 The reader recalls the healing of the lame man and the cure of the official's son. Never mind that one of these healings was in Jerusalem and the other at a distance so that only the father knew what had happened, the healings are meant to be illustrative. Others are assumed. The point is made that the crowds come in response to the signs (6:2, 24, 26, 28, 30, 34). There is no mention of teaching until Jesus arrives in the synagogue in Capernaum (6:52). Instead of teaching the crowd, Jesus feeds them. Later the point will be made that Jesus and his words are the real bread. The grumbling of the Jews and the disciples in Capernaum in chapter 6 is easily transposed into a dispute among the crowds in Jerusalem (7:12). Some say that he is a good man, others that he deceives the crowd and has a demon (7:20). Still, many believe (7:31). Both of these responses have exact parallels where the Jews are mentioned (8:48; 8:31). It is the belief of many in the crowd that spurs the Pharisees to action (7:32). Some of the crowd hail Jesus as truly a prophet (7:40), but again there is division and some want to seize him (7:44). The Pharisees disdain the crowd as ignorant of the Law (7:49). In contrast, it is for their sake that Jesus prays at Lazarus' tomb (11:42). In 12:9 the crowd is a crowd of 'Ioudaios, and again they are drawn to Jesus by a sign (Lazarus; cf. 12:12, 17, 18). The crowd is perhaps best characterized by the final references to it. The scriptures have not been clear to them (12:34); they hear the voice of God and some say it thundered but others say they heard the voice of an angel (12:29). John's treatment of the crowd lacks the hostility of his characterization of the Jews. The crowd represents the struggle of those who are open to believing, but neither the scriptures nor the signs lead them to authentic faith. They are the world God loves (3:16).
NOTES
40. Cf. James D. G. Dunn, "The Washing of the Disciples' Feet in John 13:1-20," p. 249.41. Painter, John, p. 77.
42. Aristotle, Poetics, 1451b: "Of defective plots or actions the worst are the episodic, those, I mean, in which the succession of the episodes is neither probable nor necessary . . . ."
43. Sternberg, Expositional Modes, p. 169.
44. Cf. Paul Ricoeur, "Narrative Time," p. 179.
The paragraph which follows is informed by John Painter, John: Witness and Theologian, pp. 71-76.