Source: Brian Neil Peterson, John’s Use of Ezekiel: Understanding the Unique Perspective of the Fourth Gospel (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2015), 65–97.
John’s Use of Signs and Ezekiel’s Sign Acts.wav
This podcast explores the striking similarities between the signs of Jesus in the Gospel of John and the sign acts of the prophet Ezekiel, arguing that John intentionally structured his gospel to mirror Ezekiel's ministry. The author suggests John likely selected specific signs to authenticate Jesus' divinity and messianic claims, much like Ezekiel's acts served to validate his prophetic message and Yahweh's authority. Both figures faced widespread unbelief and utilized symbolic actions to convey God's message, highlighting a shared rhetorical purpose and thematic connection between their ministries.
1. The Strategic Use of "Signs" in John's Gospel: The Gospel of John uses the Greek word sēmeion ("sign") specifically and frequently, employing it no less than seventeen times. John's own statement of purpose in chapter 20 makes it clear that specific signs were chosen from among many that Jesus performed. These chosen signs are central to the Gospel's aim, which is to help readers believe that Jesus is the Prophet foretold in Deuteronomy and the Son of God. The signs were performed publicly to appeal to visual senses, going beyond just words, and were explicitly identified as signs by John. Their primary function is presented as displaying God's glory in Jesus, thereby authenticating his claims and proving him to be God's true representative. The author argues that John uses signs as a key structural and rhetorical device within the Gospel.
3. Ezekiel as a Key Influence on John's Signs Motif: While other Old Testament traditions, such as the Exodus signs performed by Moses or the sign acts of other prophets, have been proposed as influences on John's use of signs, the source makes a strong case for Ezekiel being the primary influence. The text argues against the Exodus signs as the sole or main influence due to discrepancies in number and John's apparent negative connotation of the phrase "signs and wonders" characteristic of that tradition. Instead, the "prophetic-symbolic" nature of John's signs is emphasized, linking them more closely to prophetic sign acts intended to legitimate God's message and work through the prophet. Among the prophets, Ezekiel stands out because his sign acts are explicitly identified using specific Hebrew terms (ʾôṯ and môp̄ēṯ) which the Greek Old Testament (LXX) often translates with sēmeion, the same word John uses. Ezekiel is also uniquely told by God that he and his sign acts are a "sign for the house of Israel," further solidifying his prominence in this regard.
4. Structural and Rhetorical Correspondences Between the Books: The source suggests that John may have structured his Gospel, particularly the first half covering Jesus' public ministry, to parallel the structure and narrative flow of Ezekiel's book. This is not seen as a strict verse-by-verse or chapter-by-chapter parallel, but rather a broader pattern. Both books begin with the revelation of God's glory and the calling of the messenger. Notably, both feature the messenger performing their first sign(s)/sign acts in their "home" region (Ezekiel by the Chebar River in Babylon, Jesus in Galilee) before moving to Jerusalem to address issues related to the temple. This structural parallel, moving from the home region to the religious center, is highlighted as a clue to John's reliance on Ezekiel's literary pattern. The placement and choice of specific signs in John are seen as deliberate rhetorical strategies mirroring Ezekiel's presentation.
5. Detailed Parallels in Specific Signs and Sign Acts: The source explores specific instances where John's signs show thematic, rhetorical, and structural resemblances to Ezekiel's sign acts. Examples include:
◦The first sign at Cana, performed in Jesus' "home" region of Galilee, parallels Ezekiel's first sign acts performed at his "home" by the Chebar. This sign, revealing Jesus' glory, is also connected to the eschatological hope of abundance mentioned in Ezekiel.
◦The Temple Cleansing in John is compared to Ezekiel's early sign acts portraying a metaphorical siege of Jerusalem. Jesus' action is seen as laying spiritual siege and prophesying destruction, much like Ezekiel identified with the city's fate. Jesus likening his body to the temple also resonates with Ezekiel's identification "in the role of the city." Both highlight the theme of sin and impending judgment on the city and temple. Ezekiel's sign act of bearing the nation's iniquity while lying on his sides is also seen as a priestly motif that may prefigure Jesus bearing the sins of the world.
◦The healing and feeding signs in John (healing the official's son, man by the pool, blind man, feeding the 5000) are linked to prophecies in Ezekiel and Isaiah concerning God's provision and healing in the eschatological age. These signs demonstrate Jesus' ability to provide both physically and spiritually, reversing curses associated with judgment and siege (a common theme in Ezekiel's early sign acts focused on privation).
◦The raising of Lazarus, the last public sign in John, is paralleled with Ezekiel's last public sign act, the death of his wife. Both involve the death of someone beloved by the messenger and serve as a sign pointing to something greater (the destruction of the temple/city in Ezekiel's case, Jesus' own death and resurrection in John's). The source notes both parallels (death of a beloved one) and antithetical elements (Ezekiel was forbidden to mourn, Jesus wept; Ezekiel's wife was not raised, Lazarus and Jesus were).
◦The miraculous catch of fish is compared to Ezekiel's sign of the two sticks. Both occur in the latter part of their respective books, after major thematic shifts. Both are performed privately before being explained publicly and represent the ingathering and unification of God's people with eschatological significance.