Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: Philippians as a Macro-Chiasm

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "John C. Hurd" <John.Hurd AT Squam.org>
  • To: Corpus-paul <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Philippians as a Macro-Chiasm
  • Date: Wed, 22 Sep 1999 09:38:37 -0400


I would not want Brian Tucker's interesting posting to go past without
comment. For a
considerable period I have been interested in chiastic structures in Paul,
and have
from time to time written on the subject (see "Concerning the Structure of 1
Thessalonians" and other essays in my The Earlier Letters of Paul -- And
Other Studies
[Frankfurt a. M.: P. Lang, 1998]). A few comments:

A. Porter and Reed's article takes without discussion the notion that one
should work
from the outside to the inside, i.e., that one should establish what is
probable about
the state of literary theory in the Hellenistic world in order to determine
what one
can find in Paul's letters. The setting is, of course, of interest, but I
would
rather read and re-read Paul and try to see what is there.

B. I am puzzled by all the talk of "laws". Talk of "laws" implies that Paul
should
be thought of like Bach when confronted by the rules for writing fugues,
i.e., if we
cannot derive a set of rules from the Pauline texts, then Paul cannot be said
to have
written chiasms.

C. Which raises the question of awareness. Are we talking of a conscious
decision on
Paul's part to adopt a particular literary structure, or do we include the
realm of
the unconscious? After all, Paul delivered his thoughts orally. Like most
preachers
he kept a set of forms in his head and filled them in with content as the
need arose.
And like some preachers he had a habit of winding his way into a discussion
and then
unwinding the thread so as to end where he began. There is sometimes detailed
parallelism in the elements of these blocks, and at other times the structure
is less
perfect. It seems to me difficult to quantify, but it surely can be observed.

D. Neither of these articles make any use of letter theory. In letters in
general
the opening section is concerned with the (re-)establishment of personal
relations
between the writer of a letter and its recipients. The body of the letter
deals with
the business at hand (one or more subjects). And the letter close returns to
the
personal area by its concern for the continuation of personal relationship
into the
future. There is, therefore, a natural A -- B -- A' structure to letters --
including
Paul's. Paul, however, is capable of surprising additional detail: for
example, he
opens "grace and peace" and ends some of the letters with a peace wish and
the grace
benediction. I would not begin the study of the subject by putting any
limitation on
what Paul is capable of.

These comments are random and off the top of my head, and I have not
discussed Brian's
five questions specifically. I hope, however, that others will join us in
thinking
about this important subject and keep the conversation going.

Best wishes to the list! -- John Hurd

Brian Tucker wrote:

> Greetings
>
> Bibliography:
>
> A. Boyd Luter and Michelle V. Lee. "Philippians as Chiasmus: Key to the
> Structure, Unity and Theme Questions." _NTS_ vol. 41, 1995, pp. 89-101.
>
> Stanley E. Porter and Jeffrey T. Reed. "Philippians as a Macro-Chiasm and
> its Exegetical Significance." _NTS_ vol. 44, 1998, pp. 213-231.
>
> Luter and Lee argue for a chiastic outline of Philippians which provides an
> overarching theme of "partnership in the gospel."
>
> Porter and Reed suggest that Luter and Lee lacked "theoreticl foundation"
> and "precision of detail or explicit criteria."
>
> They both interact with C. Blomberg's criteria for determining if a
> chiastic structure is present. Luter and Lee use his criteria to support
> their view, while Porter and Reed are a little more critical.
>
> What I would like to know is:
>
> 1. Does anyone on this list have any thoughts on the macro-chiastic
> possibilities of Philippians, specifically?
>
> 2. Big picture question: What is the basis for determining a Pauline
> chiasm, or the tests necessary to determine, for example, verbal
> parallelism?
>
> 3. Should we reject macro-chiasm and accept Thomson's _Chiasmus in the
> Pauline Letters_ intermediate chiasm?
>
> 4. What is the set of criteria to identify chiasm? Any bibliography on the
> topic would be helpful.
>
> Thanks
> Brian Tucker
> music AT riveviewcog.org
> Riverview, MI

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:: Prof. John C. Hurd Internet: John.Hurd AT Squam.org
:: 49 Wanless Ave. Office tel.: (416) 485-2429
:: Toronto, Ont. M4N 1V5 FAX (24 hours): 485-7320






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page