That We Might Die with Him: Jesus’s Death and Resurrection as a Paradigm for Discipleship in Jn 11.1–12.11

Despite growing recognition that the Fourth Gospel’s ecclesiological vision is modeled on aspects of the Gospel’s Christology, the possibility that this extends to Jesus’s death and resurrection has received little attention. Offering a close rereading of John’s notoriously enigmatic story of Lazarus, this study seeks to demonstrate that the notion of Jesus’s death and resurrection as a paradigm for discipleship is embedded in, and sheds interpretative light on, the complexities of this lengthy Johannine story. Through a fresh, multidimensional analysis of Jn 11.1–12.11 and other contextual factors, it is concluded that undergirding this narrative is the disciple’s necessary participation in Jesus’s death and resurrection; that the semiotic import of death within this paradigm encompasses affliction; and that this functional dynamic enabled the Johannine community to locate its affliction within a broader, hope-laden, purposive framework.

In a paper drawing attention to an oft-neglected aspect of New Testament Christology, Larry Hurtado surveyed a number of biblical passages in support of the thesis that 'the NT refers to Jesus's death as "paradigmatic" impressively widely ' (2004: 413).Notably absent from Hurtado's discussion in this regard, however, is any reference to John, and, as this suggests, the presence of this dynamic in the Fourth Gospel has received little attention.This is somewhat surprising, as the past few decades of Johannine scholarship have witnessed a significant shift away from the largely anti-ecclesiological readings of the twentieth century to a recognition not only that John seeks to affect a communal reality through his Gospel but that this ecclesiological vision is grounded precisely in the Gospel's Christology.Thus, studies have unpacked variously how such axioms as Jesus's status as λόγος (Minear 1982), his incarnation (Schnelle 1991), his being sent (Ferreira 1998;Kysar 2001), his constituting the new temple (Coloe 2001;2007;Schneiders 2006), even his divine sonship (Akala 2014; Byers 2017) set in John a precedent for the nature of discipleship-situating 'believers as the continuing incarnation of the Word' (Kysar 2001: 375), as the 'ongoing presence and action of Jesus in the world' (Schneiders 2006: 355), 'able to continue the mission the Father entrusted to Jesus' (Coloe 2001: 217;cf. 1.12-14;15.12;17.11, 18, 21-23;20.21).
Through a multidimensional rereading of John's story of Lazarus in 11. 1-12.11, this study seeks to bridge the above two threads by indicating cumulatively how, as glimpsed elsewhere in the New Testament, John's Christologically grounded ecclesiology extends to include Jesus's death and resurrection as a paradigm for discipleship and how that dynamic is not only present in John but is embedded in, and sheds light on, the complexities of this lengthy Johannine story.
The contention that Jesus's death and resurrection is paradigmatic in Jn 11. 1-12.11implies that the former acquires an identifiable hermeneutical significance in the latter, and so, after relating a brief history of interpretation-indicating the need for an exegetical reevaluation of the episode-the investigation opens with some initial structural considerations pertaining to the significance of Jesus's death and resurrection in  To establish how that significance manifests itself in the trajectory of the story and, in so doing, lay the requisite narrative foundation for our thesis, we then examine the passage from the perspective of its overall narrative dynamics as propelled by the core responses of Jesus, Martha, and Mary to Lazarus's fate.With these dynamics revealing a pervasive emphasis on the necessity of Lazarus's death and a direct connection therein to Jesus's death and resurrection, we then undertake to explain this.Consolidating the threads of the discussion, we establish decisively the paradigmatic nature of Jesus's death and resurrection by approaching the narrative from the perspective of its ecclesiological application, turning first to the characterization of Lazarus as disciple and then to what we believe to be the pivotal yet widely neglected call of Thomas to disciples in 11.16.Having in this core part of the study arrived firmly at the expressed contention of this paper, we conclude by offering some reflections as to the semiotic import and sociohistorical function such a paradigm might plausibly have had for the author and intended audience.embedded narratological intent than the aforementioned perspectives suggest and, moreover, that this is tied specifically to the fate of Lazarus.
More promisingly, since Raymond Collins's work on 'representative figures' in John (Collins 1990(Collins [1976]]), a growing number have noted that Lazarus seems to serve some sort of 'representative' function. 5What exactly Lazarus is representative of, however, has attained little consensus and is by no means clear in the literature, with vague clichés often being paraded, such as his serving 'simply to be one loved by Jesus' or 'to whom life has been given' (Byrne 1991: 39;Culpepper 1983: 141).Where scholars have sought to be more specific, it has most commonly been supposed that Lazarus represents the resurrection that will occur at the end of time-either as an 'anticipation of what is to take place at the last day' 6 or reassurance of the 'destiny awaiting group members who have died'. 7Yet, this runs counter to the very thrust of the narrative, for 11.23-26 explicitly directs attention away from resurrection ἐν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ.
With such observations warranting a reappraisal of the Lazarus episode's overall import for the author, we turn to some initial considerations pertaining to the contention of this paper: the importance of Jesus's death and resurrection in the narrative presentation.That there is an intimate connection between the Lazarus story and the death and resurrection of Jesus is suggested immediately by three structural considerations.
Firstly, there is the way the story creates a bridge between Jesus's earthly ministry and the narrative of his Passion (Zimmermann 2008: 77).After Jesus's raising of Lazarus from the dead (11.38b-44), the author immediately inserts a scene in which the high priest responds by declaring it is 'beneficial ' (συμφέρει; 11.50) for Jesus to die-with which the Jewish officials formalize their plan to put Jesus to death (11.47-53).Through sheer political expediency for Caiaphas, readers are here informed emphatically that, in declaring this death 'beneficial', Caiaphas unwittingly utters a transcendent truth as to the divine purpose behind Jesus's death (11.51-52; cf. 16.7).This comes as little surprise to readers of the Gospel at this point.For not only has Jesus's death-repeatedly invoked in chapters 1-10 9 -already been alluded to as the divinely mandated means by which he is 'exalted' and 'glorified', 10 but just prior to the Lazarus episode it was declared that Jesus lays down his life both for his 'sheep' (10.11, 15) and, rather strangely, 'in order that' (ἵνα) he might take his life up again (10.17). 11Yet, the way this is conveyed directly to the reader in 11.51-52 suggests that this 'beneficial' nature of Jesus's death is of relevance to the author's narratological intent in 11. 1-12.11.More strikingly, the narrative seems to be consciously patterned on the death and resurrection of Jesus.As many have noted en passant, numerous references in the scene of Lazarus's resurrection echo the Johannine passion narrative. 12 These include the prominent role of women close to the deceased (11.39;cf. 20.1-18;Keener 2003: 848); the poignant use of κραυγάζειν (11.43;cf. 18.40;19.6, 12-15;Zimmermann 2008: 77-78, 87); the question ποῦ τεθείκατε αὐτόν (11.34), echoing Mary Magdalene's question about Jesus: ποῦ ἔθηκας αὐτόν (20.15;O'Day 1987: 92); the description of the gravestone (11.41; cf. 20.1), which is 'lifted up' (αἴρειν), not 'rolled' (as in the synoptics); and the burial wrappings (11.44; 19.40; 20.5-7): both Jesus and Lazarus having been 'bound' (δεθῆναι) in bandages (κειρίαι/ὀθόνια) with a σουδάριον around their head.Oddly, however, commentators have often focused on the detail that, contra Lazarus, Jesus's bandages are already removed (which serves a literary function that has no place in chapter 11), as suggesting the author intends a contrast between the two along the lines of 'Lazarus dies again, Jesus does not' (Keener 2003: 848).However, not only do the aforementioned correspondences vastly overshadow such a minute difference, but numerous additional factors serve to link the entire episode both to details in the passion narrative and to broader themes, terms, and concepts surrounding Jesus's death and resurrection running throughout the Gospel.These include the repeated ὃν ἤγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν (12.1, 9; also 12.17), recalling the ἠγέρθη ἐκ νεκρῶν said of Jesus in 2.22 (Schnelle 2008: 139); the recurrence of such Christologically loaded language as ὑπάγειν (11.8), πορεύεσθαι (11.11), ὥρα (11.9-10), and δόξα (11.4, 40); 13 and the otherwise superfluous reference to being ἐγγὺς τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων (11.18; cf. 12.12; 19.17), even down to Lazarus failing either to speak or act, it progresses 'entirely in terms of what happens to him and how others respond to him' (M.M. Thompson 2013: 461).We have already noted that the Jewish officials respond by sentencing Jesus to death and unwittingly affirming the 'beneficial' nature of this death within the divine plan (11.45-57).With the rest of the story consisting chiefly of the responses of three figures-Jesus, Martha, and Mary-we now assess their core contributions to the overall narrative dynamics of 11. 1-12.11.
Jesus and the (Intentional) Death of Lazarus ὑπέρ τῆς Δόξης τοῦ Θεοῦ (11.1-16)Having introduced Lazarus as one suffering an unspecified affliction (ἀσθενεῖν; 11.1-2), 15 the story opens with Jesus receiving from Lazarus's sisters an 'indirect request . . .[to] come and heal the sick man' (11.3) (Bultmann 1971: 397;cf. Schneiders 1987: 51;Klink 2017: 496).Jesus's 'love' for Lazarus is emphasized twice in this opening segment (11.3, 5; also 11.36), yet this only heightens the perplexing nature of Jesus's response.In what Wendy Sproston North deems 'one of the strangest moments in the entire Gospel ' (2001: 136), Jesus does nothing about Lazarus's affliction but remains where he is for two days (11.6), on the grounds that this ἀσθένεια is not πρὸς θάνατον, but ὑπὲρ τῆς δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ (11.4).Jesus's lack of action is then reemphasized in 11.7 by a double timeindicator placing emphasis on the delay (Morris 1971: 480;Kok 2016: 218 n. 31;Klink 2017: 498), in which Jesus, 'then, after this' (ἔπειτα μετὰ τοῦτο), makes his way to Lazarus with his disciples (11.7-16).Before they can reach him, Jesusassuming an omniscient role in the story-informs his disciples (and, via their misunderstanding, the reader) that Lazarus has now 'fallen asleep' (κεκοίμηται) and 'died' (θανάτου . . .ἀπέθανεν) (11.11-14).Not only does this stand in notable tension with the not-πρὸς-θάνατον utterance of 11.4, but in 11.15 Jesus actually 'rejoices' (χαίρω) at Lazarus's death.The difficulty here lies not only in that this is 'marked by a certain degree of harshness' and is 'difficult to understand' (Klink 2017: 500) but that this rejoicing, together with Jesus's intentional delay and omniscience in the story, virtually necessitates that Jesus waited deliberately in 11.6 for Lazarus to die. 16Even more, as Jesus's delay was juxtaposed with his 'love' for Lazarus, so, in his rejoicing at Lazarus's death, it is stressed that Lazarus was Jesus's 'friend' (ϕίλος;11.11).The reader, then, is confronted with 15.To 'suffer a debilitating illness, . . .experience some personal incapacity or limitation, be weak . . .be in need' (BDAG,142).16. So already, Chrysostom, Hom. Jo. 62.1;also, e.g., Bruce 1983: 242;Moloney 2003: 512;Koester 2003: 65;Köstenberger 2004: 328 a tension in Jesus's response to the fate of Lazarus.Jesus's intentional delay (11.6-7), and rejoicing at Lazarus' resultant death (11.15), is juxtaposed with the affirmation that this same Lazarus was a beloved friend of Jesus (11.3, 5, 11).Such a dynamic cannot but ascribe some positive, purposive function to Lazarus's death within the divine plan.And this would seem to be confirmed by further consideration of Jesus's programmatic interpretation of what is about to happen in the story in 11.4.Thus, while the initial import of 11.4a, that Lazarus's ἀσθένεια 'is not πρὸς θάνατον', is that he will not die (Lindars 1972: 387), the ensuing developments necessitate that this be reconceptualized as Lazarus's ἀσθένεια not finding its ultimate end in death.With this, we see that the ἀσθένεια of 11.4 actually incorporates Lazarus's death, while leaving this unstated in 11.4 allows the ensuing verses to convey their intentionality within the divine plan. 17Lazarus's ἀσθένεια→θάνατος for Jesus, then, does 'not find its ultimate end in death' 'but'-11.4continues-occurs 'in order to reveal the glory of God (ὑπὲρ τῆς δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ), 18 in order that the Son of God might be glorified through it (ἵνα δοξασθῇ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ δι' αὐτῆς)'.As Dennis Sylva (2013: 32) notes, the way that δόξα is placed ultimately in contrast to Lazarus's death here leads readers naturally to think of Lazarus's ensuing resurrection as the referent of the latter part of the verse (cf.Schnackenburg 1980: 322), and this is confirmed when in 11.40-theonly other reference to δόξα in the story-Jesus speaks again of this revealing of divine δόξα precisely when Lazarus is to rise from the tomb.In the reference to Jesus's glorification that will occur through Lazarus's fate in the second, somewhat awkwardly connected, purpose clause, however, scholars have naturally discerned a secondary reference to the fact that Jesus's raising of Lazarus will become the occasion for his own 'glorifying' death (cf. 11.7-8, 16, 47-53).The two-fold purpose clause vis-à-vis Lazarus's ἀσθένεια→θάνατος in 11.4, then, would appear to refer both to Lazarus's resurrection and to Jesus's death as the means by which he is (to be) glorified (Sylva 2013: 32 n. 59), 19 indicating that, for Jesus in this narrative, death becomes a 'prerequisite, even a necessity' (Zimmermann 2008: 99)-without which neither Lazarus's nor Jesus's resurrection/glorification would have been possible.
With this opening response of Jesus setting the divine agenda for the interpretation of the story, attention turns to Martha, the narrative's second primary 'responder'.
Martha's Imperception: Lazarus's Rising and the Ἀνάστασις of Jesus (11.17-27, 39-40) Reinforcing Jesus's intentional delay, on coming out to meet Jesus en route to her (by now dead) brother (11.20; cf. 11.17), Martha's opening words take the form of the indirect rebuke (Klink 2017: 503): 'Lord if you would have been here, my brother would not have died' (11.21).Contra Jesus's perspective on Lazarus's death, then, for Martha Jesus should have come sooner, in order that Lazarus would 'not die ' (οὐκ . . . ἀπέθανεν; 11.21).In response, Jesus informs Martha that her dead brother shall consequently rise (11.23), to which Martha responds that she 'knows' he will, 'at the resurrection on the last day' (11.24).While such an end-time perspective is not necessarily out of place in John, not only have scholars detected a note of dissatisfaction in Martha's response here (Morris 1971: 396;Klink 2017: 504) but, in accordance with several affirmations in the Gospel thus far, 20 in 11.25-26 Jesus actually orients her away from this model of endtime resurrection (Coloe 2007: 86), indicating that Martha continues to be at odds with Jesus's perspective.The form Jesus's rejoinder takes, however, is striking.While in 11.4, the fates of Lazarus and Jesus were paired conceptually in terms of the necessity of their deaths, the correct understanding of Lazarus's 'rising ' (ἀναστήσεται; 11.23) is now predicated on the already given fact of Jesus's own present embodiment of ἀνάστασις: 'I am the resurrection and the life' (11.25).In other words, reversing the causal chain that was intimated in 11.4,Jesus's (death and) resurrection is now tied causally to the fate of Lazarus.Thus, following this foundational appeal to himself as 'the resurrection', Jesus proceeds, with obvious reference to Lazarus, to speak of the 'life' that shall follow the 'death' of the one believing 'in him' (εἰς ἐμὲ; 11.25b)-while, echoing the θάνατος-not-πρόςθάνατος dynamic of 11.4, juxtaposing this paradoxically with an affirmation that he will, in another sense, never truly die (11.26a).
Following this striking presentation, Jesus asks Martha: 'Do you believe this?' (11.26b).While many have taken Martha's ensuing 'confession' positively as the narrative's 'climax', in her response of 11.27 we, in fact, find no reference whatsoever to the πιστεύω utterances apropos life, death, and resurrection that form the actual content of Jesus's question (πιστεύεις τοῦτο; 11.26b).Instead, we find a stock reply in terms which, while sounding Johannine (cf.20.31), 'do not respond to the question Jesus asked her' (Moloney 2003: 514): an unengaged response marked by a 'wooden, formulaic quality', suggesting lack of conviction (Attridge 2010: 168), and by Martha's use of the perfect πεπίστευκα, signaling that her response in no way entertains Jesus's revelatory words but is based solely on prior knowledge (cf.Moloney 2003: 513-14).In 11.27, then, Martha continues to evidence an inadequate faith, failing to assimilate Jesus's 20.E.g., 3.14-18, 36; 4.36; 5.24-25; 6.47, 51, 58.perspective on Lazarus's death. 21Confirming this, she then refers to Jesus with an epithet tied to lack of insight in this Gospel (διδάσκαλος,11.28).And, in her subsequent and final exchange with Jesus, she actually obstructs his raising of Lazarus with the poignant objection: 'Lord, already he stinks (ὄζειν), for he has been dead four days', in turn being rebuked by Jesus for lack of faith vis-à-vis the δόξα τοῦ θεοῦ (11.39-40)-which, as Keener (2003: 849) recognizes, cannot but allude to the 'divine purpose for which Lazarus had died' (11.4).
Martha's characterization in the story, then, is chiefly negative: an example of how not to think.Contra Jesus's positive, purposive perspective on Lazarus's death, Martha quite literally shrinks from the stench of it (11.39).Her repeated imperceptivity, however, has served not only to reinforce the positive, purposive nature of Lazarus's death but to significantly deepen the link intimated in 11.4 between Lazarus's fate and the death and resurrection of Jesus.
Mary's Perception: Lazarus's Death and the Ἐνταφιασμός of Jesus (11.28-38; 12.1-11) With the commencing of Mary's initial encounter with Jesus in 11.28, things appear equally unpromising.Meeting Jesus, she falls weeping (11.32-33a) and, highlighting once more Jesus's intentional delay, utters the same implicit rebuke as Martha: 'Lord if you would have been here, my brother would not have died' (11.32).Following this, Jesus twice becomes 'filled with anger' (ἐνεβριμήσατο; 11.33, 38).And, reinforcing beyond doubt the necessity of Lazarus's death, both instances of Jesus's anger follow causally (οὖν) protestations to the effect that Lazarus need not have died: Mary's echoing of Martha's rebuke to the effect that Jesus should have come sooner so that Lazarus would 'not die ' (οὐκ . . . ἀπέθανεν; 11.32-33), and 'some of the Jews' accompanying Mary (11.18-19, 31, 33) retorting, in light of Jesus's healing of the blind man in 9.1-7: 'was he not able . . .also to make it that this man not die' (μὴ ἀποθάνῃ; 11.37-38). 22In her initial encounter with Jesus, then, Mary too fails to grasp Jesus's positive, purposive perspective on Lazarus's death with which, as Moloney (2003: 518) puts it, Jesus becomes angered by an apparent 'universal lack of faith'. 23And with Martha's rebuke for lack of faith continuing this bleak presentation (11.39-40), by the time readers reach the scene of Lazarus's resurrection (11.38b-44), they are accordingly left wondering: 'Can everyone be wrong?' 24The introduction of Mary before Martha-contra the story's sequential development-in 11.1, and the proleptic reference to her anointing in 11.2, however, indicate the importance of Mary in this story.And by the time readers reach Mary's final encounter with Jesus at the narrative's close, a shift in perspective appears to have occurred.Having narrated Lazarus's raising (11.38b-44)-and the scene in which Caiaphas declares the 'beneficial' nature of Jesus's death (11.45-57)-the resurrected Lazarus is now reclining at supper with .Both sisters are present, yet in stark contrast to Martha's shrinking from the unpleasant smell of Lazarus's death (11.39), here, Mary not only embraces death by anointing Jesus for 'burial' (ἐνταϕιασμός; 12.7) but in so doing, the author emphasizes, associates death with the sweet aroma of perfume made of πιστικός ('pure', also 'faithful') nard: 'and the house was filled with the smell (ὀσμή) of perfume' (12.3).Given this vivid olfactory contrast to Jesus's final exchange with Martha, it seems hard to avoid the conclusion that Mary, unlike her sister, is portrayed as one having moved toward the positive perspective on death, sought by Jesus throughout the narrative.In accordance with this, while Jesus had reproached Martha for lack of faith (11.39-40), he now defends Mary's action against the reproach of Judas (12.4-8)-indicating that, at last, one of the story's characters has 'got it right' (Moloney 2003: 525).25 According to this 'right' perspective, we have seen, death becomes a necessity, a prerequisite both for the resultant resurrection of Lazarus and the glorification of Jesus.Though evidently tied to Lazarus's death and resurrection,26 that Mary's climactic understanding of this should take the form of an affirmation of Jesus's death in a way that, as with his 'resurrection' in 11.25, treats this not as an impending event but a 'fixed fact' (Kim 2017: 159) serves to confirm and complete the dynamic conveyed via Martha's imperception.Informing our initial observations pertaining to the hermeneutical significance of Jesus's death and resurrection in the story, a correct understanding of Lazarus's necessary death and resurrection is predicated on the already given fact of Jesus's own death (12.1-8) and resurrection (11.23-25).
The question now arises as to why the author should so disrupt the Gospel's linear progression.Why is Lazarus's dying and rising so deeply embedded in and dependent on that of Jesus?To answer this and, in doing so, arrive at the fundamental contention of this study, we now consider the story from the perspective of its underlying ecclesiological application.

Ecclesiology in Jn 11.1-12.11: Dying with Jesus as a Mark of Discipleship
In his work on narrative ecclesiology in John, Andrew Byers (2017: 20) noted how both 'the use of the first person plural in [the author's] narration and his occasional direct addresses to the audience indicate an acute consciousness of a communal reality . . . he intends to affect and shape'.The author's initial remark to the audience in 11.2 casts the Lazarus story in just such a narrative-ecclesiological light: 'The evangelist's use of "Lord" in a confessional/insider sense in Jn. 11.2 vividly reveals that in telling the story of Lazarus and his two sisters the evangelist is also speaking about the experience of his audience contemporary with him' (Esler and Piper 2006: 80).Further confirming this, not only is it to be observed that Jesus's rejoicing at Lazarus's death in 11.15 is linked directly to the 'faith' of his disciples 27 but that the 'universalizing language' deployed in 11.23-26 rhetorically invites a broader application of the 'sign' of Lazarus's death and resurrection to the Gospel's believing audience (Attridge 2010: 169).To draw out the contours of such an ecclesiological application, we now focus on two corollary aspects of the narrative: Lazarus's characterization as a disciple and the rhetorical effect of Thomas's declaration to his 'fellow disciples' in 11.16.

Lazarus-the Representative Disciple
As detailed by R. Alan Culpepper, Johannine characters are routinely depicted in such a manner that they may easily become 'types ' (1983: 145).In accordance with this, as earlier noted, a growing number of commentators have identified Lazarus as a 'representative' figure. 28While there has been little clarity or consensus as to the precise import of his representative status, many scholars have noted that, though not explicitly labeled 'disciple', Lazarus is characterized as a disciple.Thus, in his rejoinder to Martha's faulty perspective on Lazarus's death (11.23-24),Jesus proceeds to speak of the life that shall follow the death of 'the one believing' in him (11.25b).Again, where Lazarus is characterized as a 'friend' whom Jesus 'loves' (11.3, 5, 11, 36), these will both become key identity-descriptors for disciples following the Lazarus story. 29 Over and above this, several further features appear to characterize Lazarus as the ideal or exemplary disciple.There are the conspicuously repeated and emphatic references to Lazarus as ἀδελϕός (11.2, 19, 21, 23, 32), which, as noted by Koester (2003: 67-68), serve rhetorically to instill in the reader a sense that Lazarus is representative of 'any Christian ' (cf. 20.17; 21.23).Secondly, the full significance of Jesus's 'love' for Lazarus lies not only in its characterizing Lazarus as a disciple but, as Esler and Piper (2006: 77) observe, in that this is the very first individual that Jesus is declared to love in the Gospel: Lazarus thus, quite literally in this Gospel, serving as the prototype of the one loved by Jesus.Thirdly, Jesus willingly laying down his life for Lazarus (11.7-8, 11, 15-16, 47-53; cf. 10.11, 15), his calling Lazarus by name from the tomb with a great ϕωνή, and Lazarus's response (11.43-44; cf. 10.3-4, 16, 27) cast Lazarus as Jesus's ideal 'sheep' depicted in chapter 10. 30 Finally, the linguistic and thematic parallelism between the scene of Lazarus's raising and the utterances about believers in 5.24-25-where he who attains eternal life is one who 'has passed from death to life', and 'the dead' hearing the ϕωνή of the Son live-vividly portrays Lazarus as the 'paradigmatic disciple' (Frey 2000: 425). 31 A striking number of indicators, then, serve to characterize Lazarus, not only as a disciple but as the 'paradigmatic' disciple: 'in some way', as Brodie puts it, a 'representative of all those whom Jesus loves' (Brodie 1993: 387;also Brown 1966: 431).And, significantly, both Lazarus's identification with the ideal πρόβατον led out by Jesus's ϕωνή in chapter 10, and the believer passing through death to life in 5.24-25, tie this exemplary status directly to his dying and rising-something readily confirmed by the fact that this is all that Lazarus really 'does' in the narrative. 32Although many have supposed that Lazarus represents the end-time resurrection, besides this narrative explicitly directing attention away from resurrection 'on the last day' (11.23-26), both its hermeneutical framework and dynamics assessed previously suggest a much more complex import than this position acknowledges., Lazarus is one who, patterned and predicated on Jesus's own death and resurrection, necessarily undergoes death as a prerequisite to resurrection life.Lazarus's status as representative disciple, then, suggests that he represents the believer's own participation in such a dynamic as a disciple.This being the case, we turn now to Thomas's hitherto neglected remark in 11.16, where, at the close of Jesus's programmatic response to Lazarus's fate, reference is made to disciples dying μετ' αὐτοῦ.30.Cf. also Culpepper 1983: 141;Sproston North 2001: 49-51;Esler andPiper 2006: 84-85. 31. Also Hakola 1999: 233-35;Sproston North 2001: 91;Zimmermann 2008: 96-97;Attridge 2010: 164. 32.The suggestion of Esler and Piper (2006: 112), then, that Lazarus's representative status is to be located in the fact that, '[s]ince he is good . . ., he enjoys a prelude of the resurrection of life . . .mak [ing] visible what will eventually happen to all the "good" members of the group', is untenable.This 'goodness' is completely read into the text.Were there any specifically ethical aspect to Lazarus's exemplary status here, his moral character would surely warrant at least one mention in the narrative.
with Jesus's defense of Mary's correctly perceived emphasis on the necessity of death (12.3-8)-without any explicit references to the life-giving nature of this death.In terms of content, then, Thomas's emphasis on death seems to be of one accord with that of Jesus in the narrative.Even more, it precisely fits the rhetorical emphases in the section concerning Jesus and the disciples, of which Thomas's exhortation serves as the culminating word (εἶπεν οὖν Θωμᾶς . . .; 11.16).Thus, Thomas's call to 'go' (ἄγωμεν) mirrors the very repeated summoning of Jesus for his disciples to 'go ' (ἄγωμεν; 11.7, 15).The theme of 'going' that permeates this section 36 is repeatedly tied to Jesus's death throughout the Gospel. 37And, with Jesus further calling his disciples to 'go' not only to the dead Lazarus (11.15) but specifically to the life-threatening region of 'Judea' (11.7-8), 38 as all the stress lies on the journey to the place of danger and death ' (1978: 391).
As a fitting climax to the section concerning Jesus and his disciples, then, the most natural and immediate rhetorical effect of Thomas's call to his 'fellow disciples' to die with Jesus is surely that readers are prompted to the following premise: dying with Jesus as a 'mark of discipleship' (Waetjen 2005: 275).Moloney's objection, that this would overlook the 'ongoing misunderstanding of the disciples' (1998: 337), itself overlooks the very nature of the Johannine theme of misunderstanding, which, as Judith Lieu (1998: 76) notes, works 'not through total misunderstanding but through partial misunderstanding or through a level of truth that the speaker does not intend (as in '.Thus, albeit making little of this, Keener detects a sense here that, while Thomas's call is ironic in that the disciples are said later to leave Jesus in his hour of death (16.32), he 'inadvertently correctly applies' this statement to Jesus's journeying to 'the realm of death and his disciples following him there ' (2003: 835 n. 1; cf. 842).In like manner, Barrett detects that, as with the disciples as a whole in 11.12, Thomas is here made to speak an 'unconscious truth': the journey to Judea 'is for the purpose of death, and later dying with Christ will become the characteristic mark of discipleship ' (1978: 394).In fact, a hitherto overlooked factor lending direct textual support to such an ecclesiological import is to be found in the peculiar grammatical construction of 11.16 itself, whereby, following immediately Jesus's summons to the disciples to 'go' (11.15),Thomas calls his fellow disciples to 'also' (καὶ) go.As Michaels (2010: 623) notes, this reads as if Thomas 'were somehow speaking to a different group [beyond] Jesus and those he has just addressed.But no other group is present'.While Michaels simply notes this peculiarity without offering any solution, the most natural inference is that 36.Both dominating the subject matter of the exchange (ἄγωμεν: 11.7, 15, 16; ὑπάγειν: 11.8; πορεύεσθαι: 11.11) and bracketing the section by an inclusio (11.7, 16).37. E.g., 7.33-35; 8.21-22; 13.3, 33, 36; 14.2-5, 28-31; 16.5. 38.As opposed to the more logical 'Bethany ' (cf. 11.1, 18; 12.1).
Michaels's observation unwittingly reveals precisely that, at this point in the story, the author transcends the narrative level and addresses the συμμαθηταί of his audience. 39In other words, Thomas's call for συμμαθηταί to 'also' die with Jesus constitutes, almost transparently, a broader summons to every reader of the Gospel. 40 In the climactic exhortation of 11.16, therefore, we see that the entire narrative is set precisely in the context of a call to disciples collectively to die with Jesus as a defining 'mark of discipleship'.And, with this, the threads of our analysis fall effortlessly and cohesively into place.As the representative disciple who necessarily undergoes death as a prerequisite to resurrection life, in a narrative presentation framed by and patterned and predicated on the already given fact of Jesus's own death and resurrection, the dying and rising Lazarus represents the disciple's necessary participation in Jesus's death and resurrection.Ergo, behind the author's notoriously enigmatic narrative presentation in Jn. 11.1-12.11ultimately stands a specific ecclesiological vision: Jesus's death and resurrection is a paradigm for discipleship.
While this dynamic may be seen to undermine the Gospel's linear progression, such is in fact well at home with the overall 'post-Easter hermeneutical perspective' of this Gospel-namely, its self-consciously presupposing the death and resurrection of Jesus throughout. 41Also to be observed is that this paradigmatic nature of Jesus's death and resurrection in 11.1-12.11appears actually to resurface following the Lazarus episode. 42Thus, for example, in 12.23-26 the author has Jesus, upon referencing his own death as his hour of 'glorification ' (δοξάζεσθαι;12.23;cf. 12.33;Weidemann 2004: 120), present (a) a metaphor whereby a seed must 'die' (ἀποθνήσκειν) in order to bear fruit (12.24) and (b) a maxim that one must renounce (μισεῖν) their life in this world to experience 'eternal life' (12.25), which is concluded by (c) a direct exhortation that would-be disciples must 'follow' (ἀκολουθείτω; 12.26) 43 -a dynamic indicating that to 'follow' Jesus means undertaking the 'glorifying' journey of 'death' through to 'life' undergone by him. 44Again, in 15.12-14, the themes of love and friendship established in the Lazarus story are developed in terms of a call for believers to imitate Jesus in his death.
Having now arrived firmly at the contention of this paper, the question naturally arises as to what the pragmatic import of such a paradigm might have been for the author.Is he literally calling all believers to 'die' in order to experience life as authentic followers of Jesus?To conclude this study, we offer some reflections as to this pragmatic import.

Reflecting on the Paradigm: Death, Symbolism, and the Gospel's Sitz im Leben
In his Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel, Craig Koester (2003: 34-39) concluded that readers would have readily perceived that this Gospel author shapes his stories to convey symbolic significance.Such is hardly controversial, and accords precisely with the oft-cited early description of this Gospel as the so-called 'spiritual gospel' (Clement of Alexandria;apud Eusebius,Hist. eccl. 6.14.7).As Attridge affirms, in this Gospel more is going on in any given story 'than the surface themes indicate' (2010: 167 n. 24).Curiously, however, modern interpreters have tended not to move beyond the surface themes of the Lazarus story-generally presuming that it addresses straightforwardly, in one way or other, the issue of literal death.Indeed, discerning the call for disciples to die with Jesus in 11.16, Dodd considered this a blanket exhortation to martyrdom (1953: 367).While themselves espousing that the Lazarus story revolves squarely around the literal death of believers, Esler and Piper (2006: 127) note that among other early Christian groups there 'seems to have been an interest in death as metaphorical'.Furthermore, Keener notes indications in contemporary Jewish and Graeco-Roman sources that both death and resurrection (even, as 11.17, 31, 38; 12.17, when the grave is mentioned) could symbolically encompass various forms of hardship and deliverance. 45 That there is some form of symbolism at play in the 'death' paradigm of Jn 11. 1-12.11 is suggested immediately by the way in which, as Hurtado (2004: 417) detects elsewhere in the New Testament, 46 it is ultimately held out as the 'criterion for being a disciple of Jesus'.It seems prima facie unlikely that the Gospel writer desires the mass martyrdom of all believers.Certainly disciples are deemed, after the manner of Jesus (3.31; 8.23; 18.36), not to be 'of the world' in this Gospel (ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου; 15.19; 17.14, 16; cf. 1.12-13).Yet the author specifically has Jesus state his desire for disciples to remain 'in the world' (ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ; 17.11, 15), thus negating the idea that the writer desires the disciple qua disciple to seek out literal death-through which one 'leaves' (ἀϕιέναι) the world 45.Cf. Keener 1999: 434;2003: 843 n. 75, 844 n. 85. 46. Cf. Mk 8.34/Mt 16.24/Lk 9.23;Mt 10.38/Lk 14.27;Rom. 6.4;7.4;Gal. 6.14;Gos. Thom. 55. indicates that, ultimately for the author, the divine realm manifests itself, not by way of literal death per se but via various forms of affliction.
Secondly, we may recall the way that Lazarus is, first and foremost in this narrative, characterized as one suffering an unspecified ἀσθένεια (ἀσθενεῖν: 11.1, 2, 3, 6; ἀσθένεια: 11.4).Used regularly in the New Testament for generic infirmities, afflictions, and tribulations, as Brodie (1993: 387) observes, this is an intentionally ambiguous and catch-all designator that 'evokes much of human fragility' (cf.also 4.46; 5.3, 5, 7; 6.2).The ensuing theme of death notwithstanding, this reasonably leads Brodie to locate the central 'topic' of the Lazarus story ultimately in 'the relationship of God's love to human suffering and weakness ' (1993: 387).
Finally, it may be noted that this broader semiotic import of the call to 'die' (and 'rise') with Jesus in 11.1-12.11 is supported by the reception of the narrative in the early church.As the very opening exhortation of his treatment of the Lazarus episode, for example, Chrysostom encapsulates the essence of the story by declaring: 'Many men, when they see any of those pleasing to God suffering anything terrible, as, for instance, having fallen into sickness, or poverty, and any other the like, are offended, not knowing that to those especially dear to God it 49.Also, e.g., 1.11;4.44;5.43;7.5;e.g.,5.18;7.1,19,25,30,32,[44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52]8.37,40,59;39.belongs to endure these things' (Hom.Jo. 62.1).51 Again, apropos the many early visual depictions of Lazarus's death and resurrection, the earliest of these occur when, '[b]anished by persecution to the catacombs, Roman Christians fanned their hopes by painting scenes of Lazarus' resurrection' (Edwards 2004: 114).
There are thus numerous factors pointing cumulatively to the broader symbolic character of 'death' within the core paradigm uncovered in 11. 1-12.11, and to this 'death', strikingly proffered as constitutive of discipleship, encompassing various forms of affliction-afflictions whose meaning and direction are contained within the potent 'symbol' of the divinely mandated, paradoxically glorifying death of Jesus.
Taking our cue from the previous discussion, we may close by indicating, finally, that a sociohistorical function to the death → resurrection paradigm undergirding the Lazarus story can be found in the Fourth Gospel's Sitz im Leben.Together with this Gospel's notable preoccupation throughout with (would-be) followers of Jesus encountering hardship and persecution, 52 it is to be noted that myriad sociolinguistic studies on various components of the Fourth Gospel have converged in locating 'suffering and persecution as one of the critical life settings' of this Gospel (Kim 2017: 44). 53Given this underlying social reality behind the composition of the Gospel, it is a short step to recognize that, in the final analysis, by depicting Jesus's death → resurrection as a paradigm for discipleship in toto within the final and climactic 'sign' of , this serves a pragmatic function for the author and his intended audience in enabling them to locate their suffering and persecution within a hope-laden, purposive framework.Relocated to the symbolic framework of Jesus's 'death' as a paradigm constitutive of discipleship (11.16), their ἀσθένεια (11.4)-their seemingly loathsome existence (12.25), exclusion (ἐκβάλλεσθαι: 9.34-35; cf. 6.37; ἀποσυνάγωγος: 9.22; 12.42; 16.2), persecution (διώκεσθαι: 15.20), pain (λύπη, λυπεῖσθαι: 16.6, 20-22), sorrow (κλαίειν, θρηνεῖν: 16.20), affliction (θλῖψις: 16.21, 33)-the result of misfortune or even sin according to worldly convention (cf.9.2) become, just as in Lazarus's case, part of a broader divine prerequisite for beloved friends of Jesus.They become part of something paradoxically positive and of what it means to be authentic follows of 'the way' to the Father (14.6), to be 'children of God' after the manner of the Son (1.12-14)-namely, a necessary and inevitable journey through 'death' to 'resurrection life' and divine 'glory'.

Conclusion
Through a detailed revisiting of , this study has undertaken to unpack incisively and informatively how, as glimpsed elsewhere in the New Testament, John's Christologically grounded ecclesiology extends to include Jesus's death and resurrection as a paradigm for discipleship and how that dynamic is not only present in John but is embedded in the complexities of this lengthy Johannine story.Having indicated the need for an exegetical reevaluation of , upon a cumulative rereading of the passage from a structural, narrative, and ecclesiological perspective, it has shown how a light is cast on the complex contours of the whole by discerning therein a specific vision of discipleship as a necessary participation in Jesus's death and resurrection.By further reflecting on this paradigm from a semiotic and sociohistorical standpoint, it has additionally paved a way forward in terms of something all too often lacking in New Testament discussions of participation generally: namely, the concrete, pragmatic function such a 'participatory' vision of discipleship actually had for the author and his intended audience.In doing so, the present study hopes to have shed new light on the notoriously difficult passage that is ; to have opened this Gospel to the wider phenomenon of discipleship as 'the way of the cross' (cf.Mk 8.34;Mt. 10.38;16.24;Lk. 9.23;14.27;Gos. Thom. 55); and to have gestured toward how such a curious phenomenon functioned within earliest Christianity.