• Chiastic Structure
Chiastic Structure Psalm 110 *
To introduce the אתבשׁ “atbash” thought in looking at structure, since the previous discussion had mentioned making oaths and since Psalm 110 had been quoted, what better way to show the use of an atbash structure [aleph-tav, beyt-shin] than to see one author’s use of chiastic structure. According to this approach, the primary point of the Psalm is that YHWH made an oath, and that it was unbreakable. Rather than אתבשׁ , Dr. Miller uses A-A’, B-B’, etc. in his teaching. In a Chiastic structure, the author helps the reader focus on a primary message. Miller’s structure indicates the focus is what is listed in D, YHWH’s unbreakable oath.
A and A’, or א and ת parallel one another in some fashion, semantically, in words, in both [similar to what was discussed in the poetry chapter]. B and B’ or ב and שׁ similarly. The parallels can go on for quite a few steps, but they then lead to the central focus or to the periphery of the structure.
On pp. 72-74 of Dorsey’s book he notes that the most common pattern is for chiasms with an odd number of elements to focus centrally, and those with an even number to focus peripherally (not always).
We want to look closely at the narratives, both in structure and to see what wording is used to describe Elijah’s actions. There are curious findings, to be sure. First, turning to David A. Dorsey’s, book on Literary Structure,** we look at the chiastic structures in the Elijah narratives. There is a larger, general structure that is seen [these figures by the writer, from Dorsey]**:
Notice that this would lead the reader to focus on the outrageous behavior of Israel’s leaders at the time, Ahab and Jezebel. The people, of course, tend follow their leaders, including idol worship, which is a particular failing of Jezebel. The more focused chiastic structure, relating more precisely to our discussion of the drought, by Dorsey, is seen next.
Here we see that the focus is narrowed to the YWHW/Baal contest proffered by Elijah, and the revealing of God’s glory. Obviously, we will need to look at all parts of this chiastic structure, all showing how YHWH works through Elijah in numerous ways. But since the structure draws our attention to 1K 18:1-19, we begin there. We meet a man named Obadiah, whose name means “servant of Yah,” who “fears YHWH greatly” (v.3), yet who is the manager of Ahab’s household. In this section is laid out the conflict between two men, Ahab and Elijah [Ahab is clearly under the strong influence of Jezebel, but for now we can just say Ahab], which is an evil vs. good conflict, a conflict between unrighteousness and righteousness. As is so often the case in Biblical narratives, there is an intermediary of sorts that plays a role in the ultimate resolution of the conflict. A few intermediary examples are Michal saving David’s life from her father Saul in 1 Samuel 19; in 1S 20, Jonathan intervenes between his father Saul and David to save David’s life; a “young man” (frequently translated as servant) intervenes between David and Nabal by way of Abigail [two intermediaries in type] in 1S 25:1-32, esp. 25:14; and two sets of intermediaries in the case of Naaman, a Hebrew girl in 2K 5:2-4, and his own servants in 2K 5:13, who bring him down from his haughty position. Context is very important, as always.
This writer has looked at the 1 Kings 18:1-19 passage in close detail, and has proposed a chiastic structure within that passage, as shown here:
A “second witness” tending to focus on Obadiah as the “messenger” or “intermediary,” is seen here, once again self-derived.
In addition, there seems to be additional information that can be gleaned simply by looking at a word study of the passage with numbers:
There are two very important places where such a “type” of intermediary are seen in the GS, one of course being the Messiah himself.
And the other being the apostles, to whom he passed the “mantle/ cloak,” just as did Elijah to Elisha. The most pointed verses indicating this are:
• John 11:49-52 49 But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all. 50 Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.” 51 He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, 52 and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. [Regarding the Messiah.] And, regarding the apostles:
• Mark 10:38-40 38 Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?” 39 And they said to him, “We are able.” And Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink you will drink, and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized, 40 but to sit at my right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared.”
They indeed are sent as emissaries, apostles, intermediaries, and put their lives at risk for the good news message of the Kingdom.
In the previous chapter, Nebuchadnezzar was mentioned in a footnote, with numerous scriptural references, as being an “agent” of God’s work, even though we think of him as evil, having destroyed the Temple and removed the best and brightest from Jerusalem. If one reads the verses, though, it is clear that his word was appointed by God. He was an intermediary. Angels are frequently mentioned as intermediaries. Indeed, if we look at our own lives, we serve and intermediaries for one another. The influence we have upon one another can be positive or negative. It was/is God’s desire for his people to be intermediaries that teach others his nature by living out his principles. God is always teaching. We, as well, are always teaching those around us by our behavior, and occasionally by our words.
These structural elements will now, in the next chapter, be used to go somewhat deeper into the meaning, searching, of course, always for the answers to the initial proposed questions. Keep in mind the areas that these structural elements have focused us on, what is called “the central axis.” The central axis is the point of crossing of the inverted elements [see the description of Chiasm in the appendix of terminology].
* Chiastic Structures in the Scripture by J.R. Miller | Aug 16, 2012 Dr. J.R Miller is a Professor of Applied Theology and Leadership & Dean of Online Learning at Southern California Seminary. In addition, he is a church planter and coach for emerging leaders. http://www.morethancake.org/archives/711 Referenced 02232017
** The Literary Structure of the Old Testament, A Commentary on Genesis-Malachi, David A. Dorsey, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, MI, 1999. p139.
© Mar 2018 logandspeck.com please cite if copying