536 Lars Kierspel Revelation of the New Order in Jesus”) (44). In 4,43–5,47, the healing of the basilikov"’ son and the paralytic at Bethesda are two signs followed by a discourse on their significance in relation to Jesus’ eschatological task; and so on (45). While the link between sign and discourse is a Johannine feature also noticed by others (46), the temple cleansing should not be considered a shmei'on, if for no other reason than that the healing is called the “second sign” (4,54) after the changing of water to wine (see 2,11) (47). Morris’ connection between the Samaritan discourse and the healing of the official’s son is thus more convincing (48). But even reading the temple cleansing as a shmei'on does not settle its position within the context. Köstenberger incorporates it into a structural pattern of “three inaugural signs” in John 2–4 followed by “three further signs which are characterized by mounting controversy” in John 5–9 and finishing with the climactic sign of Lazarus’ resurrection (49). (c) According to Kysar, the text in John 2–5 narrates a series of works and discourses that constitutes “the foundation of Jesus’ ministry and sets the direction which the following chapters take” (50). Yet the persecution and attempt to kill Jesus after his healing on a Sabbath (5,16-18) belongs to a response of hostility that is foreign to John 2–4 and unites John 5 with the following development of a growing conflict (51). On the other hand, John 5 and 6 are closely connected through the theme of Jesus’ superiority over Moses (52) which makes a major structural break between these chapters unlikely. (44) G.R. BEASLEY-MURRAY, John (WBC; Nashville, TN 21999), xci. See DODD, Interpretation, 297. So also D.A. CARSON, The Gospel According to John (Leicester 1991) 239. A. KÖSTENBERGER, “The Seventh Johannine Sign: A Study in John’s Christology”, BBR 5 (1995) 87-103. (45) BEASLEY-MURRAY, John, xci-xcii, also 79-80. (46) See my discussion in KIERSPEL, The Jews and the World, 136-138. (47) Within a chiastic reading of John 2–4, the semei'a in 3,2 could make narratological sense when referring to both signs in John 2,1-11 and 4,46-54. (48) L. MORRIS, Jesus is the Christ. Studies in the Theology of John (Grand Rapids, MI 1989) 23. (49) KÖSTENBERGER, “The Seventh Johannine Sign”, 102. (50) R. KYSAR, John (ACNT; Minneapolis, MN 1986) 44. (51) One indicator is that the terms diwvkw (15,20) and ajpokteivnw (5,18; 7,1.19-20.25; 8,22.37.40; 11,53; 12,10; 16,2; 18,31) do not occur before John 5. See also R.A. CULPEPPER, The Gospel and Letters of John (Nashville, TN 1998) 69, 128. (52) See C.S. KEENER, The Gospel of John. A Commentary (Peabody, MA 2003) I, 636.