The Bible and Culture
A One-Stop Shop for All Things Biblical and Christian
Follow Patheos Evangelical:
Here’s a link to the video of my lecture at Edinburgh April 30th.
Thanks for a great lecture! But I am still not sure why you seem so vehemently opposed to the possibility of extended (extensive?) chiasms in the NT. But perhaps I misunderstand the terminology–and we are thinking of different things. Personally I am convinced that much of the NT writing (and all of Paul’s letters) is composed of individual chiastic units, with the occasional section defined by parallelism instead. In Paul’s letters particularly, I also suspect that the divisions of these units corresponds closely with the different parts of Greco-Roman rhetoric.
I realize that for a single chiastic unit to encompass an entire letter would be extremely difficult (especially in the case of writing that also incorporate Greco-Roman rhetorical forms) and probably not all that useful. But writing a letter comprised of individual chiastic units would be much more feasible (though still an amazing feat of rhetoric) and useful in many ways. Could you agree with that? Or are you completely opposed to the possibility of any chiastic structure that exceeds a few verses?
Follow Patheos on
Copyright 2008-2014, Patheos. All rights reserved.