The Knotty NOT NOT Problem in Scriptures - Part III

The reason I am writing this series on NOT NOT is because Bible passages can get misinterpreted easily. At the heart of the issue is what linguists refer to as logic. By following certain logic principles when we read the Bible, we are more likely to come to a right understanding of a passage.

Consider this NOT NOT verse from Hebrews 4:15 (NASB),
15 For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin.

In the NASB's convention, the words we are, yet are placed in italics to indicate they are added for our understanding and are not in the original Greek text.

The High Priests
The statement ‘for we do not have a high priest’ would normally suggest we should look back to see what was previously stated about the topic. The problem is nothing is stated regarding the high priest before that verse. It is only when we reach the next chapter, Hebrews 5:1-3, where we read about the system of gifts and sacrifices for sins. In those three verses we see that these sacrifices are for both the sins of the people and his own sins.

5:1 For every high priest taken from among men is appointed on behalf of men in things pertaining to God, in order to offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins;
2 he can deal gently with the ignorant and misguided, since he himself also is beset with weakness;
3 and because of it he is obligated to offer sacrifices for sins, as for the people, so also for himself.

Based on verse 5:3, an inferred statement seems to accompany v4:15.
  ‘we have an order of high priests that can sympathize with our weaknesses.’
The high priest was prone to sin; his sacrifice was first for his own sins and then for the people.

In linguistics, that inferred or missing statement is called an ellipse, omitted word or words that are understood by the reader. The Hebrew reader of this text would certainly have known that the selected high priest is not perfect and not one without sin. For the non-Hebrew reader, it was included in verses 5:1-3 as shown above. Therefore, this inferred statement was not necessary and was omitted.

Jesus the Great High Priest
So lets go back to our NOT NOT verse from Hebrews 4:15,
15 For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin.

In this verse, there is also the comparison between Jesus, the great high priest, and the order of Levitical high priests. The question is, is it logically correct to substitute the name Jesus into that phrase and then change both NOT NOT statements to a positive? If we did, we would have,
  ‘For we have Jesus who can sympathize with our weaknesses [i.e. our sins].’
I suggest that, just as the Part I and II lessons attempted to show when there are two or more nouns or verbs: two negatives do not necessarily make a positive. Therefore, that statement is an incorrect inference from verse 4:15.

I believe that Jesus did not sympathize with us because He was inclined to sin, but He loved us because we are inclined to sin. That would yield this statement:
  ‘For we have Jesus who loves us despite our weaknesses [i.e. our sins].’
To me, there is a huge difference between one who sympathizes and another who loves. Sympathy may motivate an action such as a once-a-year sacrifice; true love motivated His perfect sacrifice.

Conclusion
Our school training may have taught us that two NOT statements become a positive. That is true in only a limited sense. In a more complicated manuscript such as the Bible, it becomes important to look at the number of nouns and verbs that are involved in the NOT NOT. The NOT NOT rule only applies to those that have a simple sentence structure.


This is the last of the Knotty NOT NOT articles. In the next series, I will discuss my favorite topic, literary structure in the Bible. I am anticipating that my forthcoming book Discovering Emphasis in the Bible: Hearing the Voice of God Through Literary Structure will soon be available for preview purposes.

The Knotty NOT NOT Problem in Scriptures - Part II

In this blog posting, I continue teaching how the Bible treats double negatives. Last time we looked at John 14:24, “He who does not love Me does not keep My words.” I used that example to show how two negatives, ‘not love’ and ‘not keep’, does not always indicate the positive: “He who loves Me keep My words.”

Consider this verse from John 12:47,48 (NASB),
“47If anyone hears My sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. 48He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word I spoke is what will judge him at the last day.”

This example also has two negatives, ‘not keep’ and ‘not judge’. Here again there are two objects, ‘them (referring to My sayings)’ and ‘him’. Therefore we can apply the same rule that two negatives do not necessarily make a positive. To put it another way, the corollary is not necessarily true: “If anyone hears My sayings and does them, I do judge him.”

These two verses are only about the decision to disobey His sayings. It does not address the obedient person, it addresses the disobedient.

Later in the book of John, that is in John 14:21 (NASB), we see a strong statement about obedience:
“21He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him.”

In this verse, the obedience is because of love. It is not obedience to some list of ‘do this’ or ‘do that’–it is the call to obey because our love for Christ.

Therefore, John 12:47,48 is a look at the Father's judgment, ‘Are the actions based on love?’ The double negative has more meaning than you might think.

In Part III of this series, we will look at another example of the Knotty NOT NOT problem.

The Knotty NOT NOT Problem in Scriptures - Part I

I remember from English class that two negatives make a positive. That is, if I say, “Jesus was never unfaithful“, that would be taken as “Jesus was always faithful.” The two negatives, ‘never’ along with the ‘un’ should always be taken as the equivalent of ‘always’. That is that I was taught and possibly you too. I believe that is correct.

However, that teaching does not always hold true in a more general sense: not in our normal speech, and not in the Scriptures. By incorrectly generalizing that rule, some false understandings can develop.

Consider this verse from John 14:24 (NASB),
“He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father’s who sent Me.”
The ‘does not love’ when paired with ‘does not keep’ creates a double negative. Does that mean that someone who ‘does keep’ can be assumed to ‘does love’? That is, is it correct to assume this passage means ‘He who keeps My words is one who loves Me’? I suggest the answer is, “Not necessarily.”

The proof of our love does not come from our actions. What we do may be indicative of our love, but only God knows the heart.

Therefore, John 14:23 (NASB) includes the positive statement,
“Jesus answered and said to him, ‘If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.’”
This now clarifies the intent of verse 14:24. True love creates true obedience, while lack of true love creates disobedience.

The difference between the first example, “Jesus was always faithful”, and John 14:23,24 comes down to how the two negatives are formed. In the first example, the two negatives refer to one object, the word ‘faithful’. In the second example, there are two objects, ‘love’ and ‘keep My words.’ If there is more than one object, the rule about two negatives may indicate the positive but it does not always apply.

In Part II of this series, we will look at another example of the Knotty NOT NOT problem.

All Scripture is Breathed Out by God - Part III

Today I read an article by another author that does not give credit to the Holy Spirit for inspiring the Bible. This author suggests that the writers of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John each modeled their descriptions of the resurrection story based on the writings of Moses. He was discussing the rhythm of the verses, not the individual writings. The article was interesting but it left out one key ingredient: the role of the Holy Spirit in inspiring the Bible.

How easily we talk today about Paul's writings or John's writings without mentioning the Holy Spirit. Or we ponder questions like, "Who wrote the book of XXX?" (fill in the XXX with the book of your choice) without a word about the Holy Spirit.

Certainly some books identify an individual: “I, John, your brother … was on the island called Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.” (Revelation 1:9). Or consider “Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus …” (Romans 1:1). I would be naive to suggest that a human being was not involved in recording the inspired words.

The important thing, I suggest, is the recognition of the source. As we saw in the first post in this series, 2 Timothy 3:16 states, " “All Scripture is inspired by God …”.

Then we looked last time at Hebrews 3:7—preceding the quote of Psalm 95, that verse states, “Therefore, just as the Holy Spirit says, ‘Today if you hear His voice, … ’”. This verse does not give the name of a human author, just the Holy Spirit.

We see that again in Acts 1:15,16 where it states,
“At this time Peter stood up in the midst of the brethren (a gathering of about one hundred and twenty persons was there together), and said, ‘Brethren, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit foretold by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus.’”
This verse does not state that David foretold this. Instead, it gives recognition to the Holy Spirit who used the mouth of David. There is a big difference.

When others hear us speak about authorship of one portion of the Bible or another, we may know about the inspiration of the Holy Spirit but they may not. To those on spiritual milk, or even those who have yet to make that journey, PLEASE, let us help them. The power of the Scriptures takes on much greater authority when we mention that the Holy Spirit inspired it into the hearts of Paul or John or anyone else.

All Scripture is Breathed Out by God - Part II

In the first post of this series, we looked at 2 Timothy 3:16, "All Scripture is breathed out by God" (ESV). I concluded that message by stating, "When you read this book we know as the Bible, think of it as the Holy Spirit's writings for you." In this posting, we'll look at Psalm 95 and the related verses in Hebrews 3:7-11.

Unlike many of the psalms that state, "A Psalm of David" or "A Psalm of Asaph", Psalm 95 does not identify a person's name. That psalm is among a collection of similar psalms from Psalm 93 through 100. Each one begins with either a song to the Lord or a recognition of His majesty. From that standpoint, they appear as man looking higher toward the Lord, signing praises about Him and knowing His awesome power. Again, no man is identified at the beginning of the psalm.

The first part of Psalm 95 is a song. In modern times, songs have been recorded that celebrate the words of the first seven verses.

The first part of Psalm 95 establishes that the entire psalm is written to the believing community, the so-called sheep of His pasture.

In the second part of Psalm 95, verses 7-11 were quoted in entirety in the book of Hebrews:

7 Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says,
“Today, if you hear his voice,
8 do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion,
   on the day of testing in the wilderness,
9 where your fathers put me to the test
   and saw my works for forty years.
10 Therefore I was provoked with that generation,
   and said, ‘They always go astray in their heart;
   they have not known my ways.’
11 As I swore in my wrath,
   ‘They shall not enter my rest.’”
Hebrews 3:7-11 ESV

I am currently studying the book of Hebrews at a Bible Institute named Psalm 19 Ministries. The institute director, Iris Godfrey, pointed out the importance of the first part of Hebrews 3:7, shown above. She noted that with, ‘Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says’, we need to understand that the voice behind Psalm 95, and for that matter the whole Bible, was the Holy Spirit. Read it again for yourself. It was not David, it was not a priest, it was not any other man, it was the Holy Spirit. That is what the text says.

The Holy Spirit breathed Psalm 95!

As an aside, I believe that the book of Hebrews is a great way of seeing hidden things in the Bible. If you were only familiar with the Old Testament writings, you would not understand the last portion of Hebrews 3:11, ‘They shall not enter my rest.’ Likely, you would think of rest as the land of milk and honey that was promised to the Israelites before and after leaving Egypt.

I believe this portion of Hebrews 3 is attempting to expose the hidden meaning of the word rest. Surrounding Hebrews 3:7-11 are two themes. In v3:1-6, the theme is God's house; in v3:12-4:11, the theme is rest. In a chiastic sense, these two themes are being compared and equated. In other words, the promised land of Moses' time is now replaced with a new land, the land of the Kingdom of God, the land where Jesus reigns, and the land where the sheep can follow into God's home. That home, I suggest, includes each and every temple within us, those who believe. John 14:2,3 defines that temple as a room, meaning a room in our heart.

If man wrote the Bible, subtleties such as the new meaning of rest would never have been written. Only our God could have done that. The Holy Spirit inspired the entire Bible.

All Scripture is Breathed Out by God - Part I

Do you recognize patterns easily? Can you sense when something is typical based on your prior experience? Or more exactly, can you discern when something is dramatically different from what is expected?

February 24, 2015

I've lived in Upstate New York since 1957. That's a long time. During those many years, I've come to recognize our weather patterns. Today, the first day of February, is often in a transition from our January thaw to the frigid winter conditions of February. This year is no exception. March and April are months of change in a more dramatic way with spring flowers just beginning to show. Freezing rain is a problem we sometimes encounter—we seem more likely to get those in late fall and early spring although I recall a significant storm in January about sixteen years ago. Its all part of the patterns.

An ice storm in July would be really freaky. We typically receive lake effect snowfall in the winter from Lake Ontario as an inch or two each day. Some of those lake effect snowfalls can be massive events. But not in the summer. That is not our pattern.

In the Bible there is a verse that is often quoted from 2 Timothy 3:16. Using various translations, the first part of that verse reads:
All Scripture is inspired by God (NASB)
All Scripture is breathed out by God (ESV)
All scripture is given by inspiration of God (KJV)
All Scripture is God-breathed (NIV)

The pattern is the same regardless of the translation. Even The Message, which is a paraphrase, reads,
Every part of Scripture is God-breathed (MSG)

As you read the Bible, you begin to recognize patterns. The gospels are very different from the Psalms. The writings attributed to Paul are not like the prophetic books. Winter is different from summer.

Reading further in the Bible, we start to see repetitions in the Word that take on another form. The heart of God begins to take shape. Jesus hidden in the old, revealed in the new.

For example, love as we see it in the writings that begin with Matthew is still love in those prior writings—we have to discern how love was displayed in the old and then presented in the new. It is the same love.

These various translations seem to get it correctly in 2 Timothy 3:16. The Lord was the source, not man, of the content that we now know is the Bible. Through the Holy Spirit, God somehow breathed or inspired each word, sentence by sentence, in its original language: Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek. It was the same spirit poured into different men at different times with the same heart of God.

When you read this book we know as the Bible, think of it as the Holy Spirit's writings for you. They are not just the words that Paul, Matthew, or Moses wrote—if we focused on that approach, we would perceive discrepancies. Think of these as words of the Holy Spirit, breathed into imperfect men, translated by other men, and now read by an imperfect you. It is that same heart of God and His same voice.

Christian Authors: Dealing With Aborted Writing Projects

Updates on November 30, 2015 are shown in red
If you are a Christian author, or any other type of author for that matter, you may understand the emotion behind a decision to abandon a work before it is completed. Please allow me to confirm your thoughts: it does bring out a strong emotional response.

Background
In 2010, I received an email from a missionary in Spain asking about A Topical Treasury of Proverbs, "Would you like your book in Spanish?" I responded that I needed to pray about it, hoping to get a direction from the Lord.

In 2011, I sensed the Lord's plans included not just a Spanish version but also versions in several other languages. A significant re-write was needed. I received permission from a well-known publisher that has produced various Bible translations in multiple languages. I began immediately.

The Preparation Effort
After two years effort including thousands of hours of toiling labor, I gave up. Here are the reasons why:

• The Input of Others – With the work probably 85% complete and a series of books under way, I began showing portions to others. Did you know that your comments, when combined with those of others, can really take the wind out of a person's sail? They did for me.
  At 5:30am on Thanksgiving morning, I was drawn back to this effort. The Lord showed me that I have been lured into putting too much emphasis on man's approval and not enough on His. I began again.
  
  
• Technology Issues – My approach was different than most writers. I used Microsoft Access to categorize Proverbs into roughly eighty topics and subtopics. My goal was to completely bypass Microsoft Word, going directly from the database to a PDF. While I used this technique for A Topical Treasury of Proverbs, the effort to include multiple languages with various fonts (think Russian and Chinese) was overwhelming to me. I also began thinking about the marketing effort to these countries. What words do I include on my webpages when marketing to the Spanish or French?
  The Lord basically instructed me to take one step at a time. For now, concentrate on the English version. There is much to be done, get on with my work. Therefore, I put on hold another more ambitious project that I was working on.
  
  
• Retribution – Proverbs includes many verses that discuss punishment and penalties for the disobedient person. Are you perfectly obedient? I'm not. In the New Testament sense, God gives grace to the sinner who believes in Him. He does not demand perfection, He is looking for faith and love. Proverbs does not provide the assurance of grace, faith, and love. I was not able to find a way to include that sense in the manuscript.
  The Lord drew me back to my most recent (2012) revisions about retribution. He had given me some understanding at that time; my sense is that He will complete this. So, there is hope in this after all.
  
  
• God's No Longer In This Project – I have written two other books, Joshua's Spiritual Warfare: Understanding the Chiasms of Joshua and A Garden of Love. In both of those books, I experienced the strong presence of the Lord as the Holy Spirit inspired one portion of the manuscript after another. In this Proverbs re-write, the work became drudgery. During those times, I had some divine inspirations but they were definitely not as frequent.
  As I started working on the description of the topics, the Lord modified my understanding of the major theme over a three-day period. Now I was inspired once again. I suppose the three year hiatus was necessary so that I could remove my old understanding as He revealed it more completely.
  
  

Dealing With Discouragement
Should I have given up? I don't know, but I will say that I have no desire to resurrect that project. The last time I really worked on it was in 2012.

Honestly, I no longer enjoy Proverbs as I do other books of the Bible. Maybe that is the heart issue that I'm dealing with. Or maybe it is deeper.

If I don't enjoy this re-write, why the discouragement? Because I am such a task-oriented fellow.

Yesterday, November 1, 2015, was the last day of a four-year period that I could have used that Bible translation in English. Today I am writing that Bible publisher a letter thanking them for that opportunity. I need to tell them that I was not successful.

Successful authors must be self-motivated and must complete their work. Readers do not buy incomplete works. I didn't complete it. So the enemy the devil then began to make me believe I am not successful. "No finished work, therefore not successful. God is not in it, stop writing." Can you see that train of thought?

The truth is that I gained a great deal of theological insight during the period when I wrote this. Through this and other venues at the same time, God was teaching me a greater understanding of grace. He was showing me the value of overlooking the high values I placed on myself and others.

God wants relationships, not perfection. Grace is then the vehicle for a relaxed view of perfection. Honestly, I'm still learning that but I believe I am much further than where I was.

How about you? Are there lessons you learned through your failures? What is the Holy Spirit attempting to have you receive?

If you have a large screen monitor, can you see the flower on the right side of the screen? That is the awesome blossom from a relatively unknown plant called Gaura. I placed that photo on this blog in 2011 or 2012. To me, this flower is a symbolic picture of Lady Wisdom – she is a key component to understanding this book of Proverbs.

So now the Holy Spirit has changed my plans. I'm enthused and I'm once again in pursuit. I need to contact that Bible translator for their permission once again. I wonder, do other authors give up, only to find they are led to resurrect a "dead" project?

The Beauty of the Chiastic Structure in Matthew 6:25-34

Do you read multiple books at the same time? I do and while it sometimes drives me crazy, I enjoy picking up what strikes my fancy based on my mood, time available, and the book's content. Recently I picked up Robert C. Tannehill's The Sword of His Mouth – I am just completing the first third of that text.

The stated purpose of Professor Tannehill's rhetorical and poetic study of the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) is to awaken the reader to new insight and move him to new action. I find the approach in The Sword of His Mouth to be encouraging in that it brings to light the beauty of the gospels by revealing the poetic effect of the gospel narrative. In the portion that I've read, the description of tension and patterns is refreshing to me. At the same time, I had to overlook the author's assumptions about redaction (see Chiasm Hint #3 - Use the Entire Passage) because I believe them to be erroneous.

Chiasms are unfortunately known by a number of different names – Professor Tannehill uses the name ′envelope structure.′ Some people call them ′inverted parallelism′ and others use names such as ′ring structure′, ′concentric symmetry′, and ′chiasmus′ – the concept remains the same, just the name changes.

On pages 59-67, Tannehill analyzes Matthew 6:25-33, noting that Luke 12:22-31 is essentially the same passage. These two passages quote Jesus' warning about anxiety: a comparison of our behavior with that of the birds of the air and the lilies of the field.

Again, this book is a look at the beauty of the Bible – the author uses the ′envelope structure′ to develop his point. This book is not an analysis of chiastic structures.

Noting the power of the chiasm, he instead focused on the beautiful comparison of the ′birds of the air′ with the ′lilies of the field′, and then the contrast to ourselves. This richly colorful text is seen as using common birds and a common flower to move us in an uncommon way with fresh insight and a call for action. The beauty is seen in these two analogies.

Here is my (not Tannehill's) analysis of the chiastic structure of Matthew 6:25-32. Tannehill's analysis primarily concentrated on the B and B′ levels:

A	Do not be anxious about your life  (v6:25)
	B	Consider the birds of the air  (v6:26)
		C	And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of life?  (v6:27)
		C′	And why are you anxious about clothing?  (v6:28a)
	B′	Consider the lilies of the field  (v6:28b-30)
A′	Therefore do not be anxious  (v6:31,32)

Tannehill's purpose is not to analyze the chiastic structure nor its center point (′And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of life?′ (Matthew 6:27 ESV). He simply observes the envelope structure (again, think ′chiasms′) while noting the Bible's inherent beauty. I agree, it is beautiful.

I believe it is through this poetic beauty that God can speak to us more effectively. In this, we hear in a profoundly more subtle way because the rhythm states to our inner spirit, ″Pay attention.″ And in this, we understand the profound conclusion to the center point of the message: ′But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.′ (Matthew 6:33 ESV)

And then we read a second and even more moving message – a message that concludes the entire chiasm together: ′Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.′ (Matthew 6:34 ESV)

I hope it touches you in the same way:

25 ″Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing?
26 Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?
27 And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of life?
28 And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin,
29 yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
30 But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith?
31 Therefore do not be anxious, saying, ′What shall we eat?′ or ′What shall we drink?′ or ′What shall we wear?′
32 For the Gentiles seek after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all.
33 But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.

34 Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.″ (Matthew 6:25-34 ESV)

Chiasm Hint #5 - Look for Meaningful Center Points

I have a friend, a wonderful pastor who is sometimes impatient, that seems focused on quickly finding the center points. As he reads and meditates on God's Word, he of course finds parallel thoughts – they are all over the place in the Bible. Once he discovers a parallelism, he immediately looks for an emphatic word from God that is potentially half-way between the first and last portions of his discovered parallel thoughts. If he finds that emphasis, he meditates on that application for a while; if he does not find it, he continues reading.

I like this pastor's approach to finding the heart of God's Word for him today, but I do wish he would slow down to ensure that it is really a chiasm.

Going back to the story of David and Bathsheba in 2 Samuel 11 and 12 from the previous lesson, it seems to makes sense that Nathan's prophetic word to David would be the emphatic portion of that story. In that prophetic word, Nathan states, "This is what the Lord, the God of Israel says: 'I have anointed you … '" (2 Samuel 12:7). When we think back on that story, we may remember David's sin with Bathsheba, his manipulation that led to Uriah's death, or David's mourning over the newly born son. But God's directive based on David's failures are contained in Nathan's words for David.

There certainly are passages in the Bible that are arranged in a chiastic form that do not have a strong emphasis in the middle. For example,

A	A good man obtains favor from the Lord,  (v2a)
	B	but a man of evil devices he condemns.  (v2b)
	B′	No one is established by wickedness,  (v3a)
A′	but the root of the righteous will never be moved.  (v3b)
	(Proverbs 12:2-3 ESV)

These two verses are a contrast between good (righteous) and evil (wicked) people. They are chiastic (A-B-B′-A′) but the impact does not seem to come from its structure; rather it is the distinction between these two opposing approaches that moves the reader. Here is a similar structure:

A	The wicked earns deceptive wages,  (v18a)
	B	but one who sows righteousness gets a sure reward.  (v18b)
	B′	Whoever is steadfast in righteousness will live,  (v19a)
A′	but he who pursues evil will die.  (v19b)
	(Proverbs 11:18-19 ESV)

Again in these two verses, there is a contrast between the wicked and the righteous. It is chiastic because wickedness pairs with pursuing evil in the first part (A and A′), and righteousness in B is repeated in B′. While there is an urgent call in the Bible to pursue righteousness, I suggest that the power in two verses comes from the contrast between wickedness and righteousness, not its chiastic structure. Most of the book of Proverbs is a contrast between two opposites – contrasts are another form of emphasis in the Bible.

Chiasm Hint #3 - Use the Entire Passage

Imagine someone thinking, "If only those three verses were not there, this would be a great chiasm." This third Chiasm Hint suggests that the entire Bible as we have it today is the received Word from the Lord – selectively removing passages from a structure should definitely be questioned.

Let's suppose you notice that both Mark 1:22-27 and v2:10 discuss Christ's authority so you suspect a chiastic or other structure. That's good. In your analysis, you see a large public healing, the statement by Jesus "That is why I have come", and then two more healing events. Immediately you suspect a chiastic structure with the center point around the declaration of Christ's purpose in ministry (v1:38). So far this seems like a good approach.

As you continue this analysis, you might then realize that before Jesus healed the paralytic, there was an action of faith by the four men and the paralytic in v2:1-5a. You have a problem because there is no corresponding discussion of faith:

A	Jesus calls four men to follow him  (v1:16-20)
	B	Jesus taught as one who had authority  (v1:21-28)
		C	NO CORRESPONDING VERSE(S)
			D	Many who were sick were healed and many demons were cast out  (v1:29-34)
				X	Regarding his ministry, Jesus stated, "That is why I have come."  (v1:35-39)
			D′	Jesus cleansed a leper (that is, Jesus healed him and cast out demons)   (v1:40-45)
		C′	Four men and a paralytic reveal their faith by going through the roof  (v2:1-5a)
	B′	Jesus showed his authority by declaring, 'Son, your sins are forgiven'  (v2:5b-12)
A′	Jesus called Levi to follow him  (v2:13-14)

The mistake that some people make is to ignore one or more elements of the structure for the sake of completion. You should look for all of the levels to be completed: no broken steps.

Redactors
For centuries, Bible scholars have wondered how the original text appeared. Some have suggested that portions of the Scriptures have been added, eliminated, and moved around to suit various needs. This rearrangement is in some ways like an editor that revises a manuscript prior to publication. Since the 1950's, a theory known as redaction criticism became more popular in some Bible colleges. According to that theory, some individual or individuals redacted (i.e. edited) the original composition.

Thankfully the redaction theory is not as widely discussed as in previous years. Yet it was argued that these alterations were intended to make the Bible appear more sensational, miraculous, or authentic. As stated in an article by Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry entitled What is Redaction Criticism?, "Redaction criticism reduces the quality of the biblical record, casts strong doubt on its inspiration, and implies that the Bible is not trustworthy as a historical document."

One of the problems that these Bible scholars had was that the arrangement of the Biblical text was not always in a linear manner. Instead, chiasms and other structures seemed to put passages out of their "normal" expected order. To them, this is further evidence that there must have been a redactor.

Your Application
Your take away? Don't allow stinking redaction thinking enter your analysis process. Deal with it!

There definitely are chiasms where one leg of the parallelism is considerably longer than its parallel counterpart, and other instances where an A-B-C-D … some verses … D′–C′–B′–A′ structure is present. But the normal pattern, the one you should initially pursue, should use all the verses in the structure. No broken steps.

Chiasm Hint #2 - Choose Meaningful Keywords

When analyzing a Bible passage to determine if it is chiastic, both keywords and themes can be used to identify the parallelism. Keywords are those Greek or Hebrew words that, when translated into English, are represented in the same way. Themes are ideas that give similar or opposite meaning but not exactly the same words. In this lesson, we will restrict ourselves to just keywords.

In this "Chiasm Hints" series, my intent is to help sharpen your skills when identifying chiasms in the Bible. In the first lesson we looked at "Order of Presentation". In this lesson, we will look at the choice of keywords. Appropriate selection of keywords should lead to better analysis and more meaningful understanding.

First Example
In this passage, the keywords make some sense with the overall structure:

¹⁹ Thus said the Lord to me: “Go and stand in the People's Gate, by which the kings of Judah enter and by which they go out, and in all the gates of Jerusalem,
²⁰ and say: ‘Hear the word of the Lord, you kings of Judah, and all Judah, and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, who enter by these gates.
²¹ Thus says the Lord.’” (Jeremiah 17:19-21a ESV).

Using keywords, a structure like this might be deduced:

A	Thus said the Lord to me  (v19a)
	B	Go and stand in the People's Gate,  (v19b)
		C	By which the kings of Judah enter and by which they go out, and in all the gates of Jerusalem,  (v19b)
			X	Hear the word of the Lord,  (v20a)
		C′	You kings of Judah, and all Judah, and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem,   (v20b)
	B′	Who enter by these gates.  (v20c)
A′	Thus says the Lord  (v21a)

In this structure, the keywords match as indicated by the violet, lime green, and light blue colors. The keywords meet the criteria of matching parallelism and they are a significant part of each level.

Also this chiasm has a fairly obvious centerpoint: X  Hear the word of the Lord. To the Hebrews reading this, they would have understood that the Hebrew word shema has a broader meaning than just "hear" for it also infers obedience. Possibly this would have been a stronger rendering: Hear and obey the word of the Lord.

Second Example
Notice how the keywords in this passage have a sense of parallelism but the keywords are weak:

¹ The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
² As it is written in Isaiah the prophet,

“Behold, I send my messenger before your face,
who will prepare your way,
³ the voice of one crying in the wilderness:
‘Prepare the way of the Lord,
make his paths straight,’”

⁴ John appeared, baptizing in the wilderness and proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. (Mark 1:1-4 ESV)

I suppose that a structure like this could be developed:

A	The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.  (v1)
	B	As it is written in Isaiah the prophet,  (v2a)
		C	“Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way,  (v2b)
			X	The voice of one crying in the wilderness:  (v3a)
		C′	Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight’”  (v3b)
	B′	John appeared,  (v4a)
A′	Baptizing in the wilderness and proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.  (v21a)

I hope this is not your analysis, but if it is, would you consider some insight? The words prepare your way, and Prepare the way are nearly the same in the English, so a keyword parallelism might be suspected. In this analysis, Isaiah the prophet is paired with John [the prophet] which might be a possibility.

While most English translations also render the Greek as ‘prepare’ and ‘way’, a look at the Greek indicates they are different. (Don't worry if you don't know Greek). By checking Biblehub's Interlinear Bible, we see two different words: Mark 1:2 and Mark 1:3; the word kataskeuasei is not even similar to the word hetoimasate!

Yet sometimes synonyms like kataskeuasei and hetoimasate are paired together in parallelism, so we should dig deeper: “Are the two ‘prepare … way’ statements significant to the understanding of those verses?”. I suggest that they are not but I will admit it is a bit subjective. What is insignificant to me may be very significant to you.

The bigger question is, “Does the remainder of the structure make sense?” In this case, you must know that John was also a prophet like Isaiah, for the text does not say so. But more importantly, is it theologically correct to compare the gospel of Jesus Christ (saved by faith for the forgiveness of sins) with the gospel of John the Baptist (repentance for the forgiveness of sins)? My sense is that this passage was never intended for that contrast.

To me, I think it is a long stretch to call this passage chiastic. There are too many obstacles that make the whole pattern seem reasonable. You may not agree with me, but that is my analysis: the whole chiasm should have a strong literary basis for. While the passage to me is intriguing, the center point is not emphatic and parallelisms are weak. Let's look at another example.

Third Example
The point of this Chiasm Warning is to help you select significant words rather than the less important as the basis for the chiasm. Consider this passage:

³⁴ And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”
³⁵ And some of the bystanders hearing it said, “Behold, he is calling Elijah.”
³⁶ And someone ran and filled a sponge with sour wine, put it on a reed and gave it to him to drink, saying, “Wait, let us see whether Elijah will come to take him down.”
³⁷ And Jesus uttered a loud cry and breathed his last. (Mark 15:34-37 ESV)

The problem with selecting less important words is that the resulting chiasm may make very little sense.

A	And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (v34)
	B	And some of the bystanders hearing it said, “Behold, he is calling Elijah.” (v35)
		X	And someone ran and filled a sponge with sour wine, put it on a reed and gave it to him to drink, (v36a)
	B′	“Wait, let us see whether Elijah will come to take him down.” (v36b)
A′	And Jesus uttered a loud cry and breathed his last. (v37)

When I review this structure, I sense that the words “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” have been completely lost. His loud cry is not nearly as important as his perceived abandonment by God. Also, the sponge with sour wine, a reed and a drink is important to the story of the cruxificion, but in my opinion it is not worthy of being the center point emphasis. To me, if someone presented this analysis, I would be tempted to join Jesus with a loud cry.

Fourth Example
In this passage, the repetition is apparent:

²⁸ And they said to him, “By what authority are you doing these things, or who gave you this authority to do them?”
²⁹ Jesus said to them, “I will ask you one question; answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things.
³⁰ Was the baptism of John from heaven or from man? Answer me.”
³¹ And they discussed it with one another, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say, ‘Why then did you not believe him?’
³² But shall we say, ‘From man’?” – they were afraid of the people, for they all held that John really was a prophet.
³³ So they answered Jesus, “We do not know.” And Jesus said to them, “Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things.” (Mark 11:28-33 ESV)

Considering this repetition, what are the pros and cons about this analysis?

A	And they said to him, “By what authority are you doing these things, or who gave you this authority to do them?” (v28)
	B	Jesus said to them, (v29a)
		C	“I will ask you one question; answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things. (v29b)
			D	Was the baptism of John from heaven or from man? Answer me.” (v30)
				E	And they discussed it with one another, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say, ‘Why then did you not believe him?’ (v31)
				E′	But shall we say, ‘From man’?” – they were afraid of the people, for they all held that John really was a prophet. (v32a)
			D′	For they all held that John really was a prophet. (v32b)
		C′	So they answered Jesus, “We do not know.” (v33a)
	B′	And Jesus said to them, (v33b)
A′	“Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things.” (v33c)

I encourage you to add your thoughts below.

Chiasm Hint #1 - Order of Presentation

Today I begin a new series that I am calling Chiasm Hints, pitfalls that can be easily made when analyzing the literary structure of the Bible. In our enthusiasm to identify chiasms in the Bible, it can be easy to see structures that were probably never intended. See my article What is a Chiasm? if you are already confused.

Now there are no chiastic policemen and I don't want to be considered one. However, I think that some ground rules may help us better hear what God, the One who inspired the Scriptures, intended.

Nils Lund, in his now infamous book entitled Chiasmus in the New Testament: A Study in the Form and Function of Chiastic Structures, suggested on page 31 that a chiasmus "is used in rhetoric to designate an inversion of the order of words or phrases which are repeated or subsequently referred to …" Using this general definition, he went on to explain that it is similar ideas that frame a structured pattern or theme.

I like to follow Lund's directive in my analysis of chiasms, namely that we should look for similar themes. However, I have seen some people simply use the order of presentation to help justify their analysis of a chiasm. Consider this example:

A	Abram's age  (v1a)
	B	God's first speech  (v1b-2)
		C	God's second speech  (v3-8)
			X	God's third speech  (v9-14)
		C′	God's fourth speech  (v15-18)
	B′	God's fifth speech  (v19-22)
A′	Abram's age  (v23-25)
	(Genesis 17:1-25)

The problem with this approach is that there is no consideration of the context. As many Bible teachers will say, context is key. How does God's first speech relate to His fifth? What makes the third speech so special that it may be emphatic?

It may be that the first and fifth speeches are related but this analysis does not tell us how. And what if there were six speeches – would that mean an A-B-C-D-D′-C′-B′-A′ structure? Or seven speeches – an A-B-C-D-X-D′-C′-B′-A′ structure?

As I stated earlier, order of presentation should not in itself qualify a passage as a literary structure, most particularly a chiasm. Similar themes that are revealed in the context must be considered.

Christian Non-Fiction Authors: Selecting a Bible Translation for Your Manuscript

Christian Non-Fiction Authors BEWARE:

Are you using your favorite Bible translation in your compositions without permission from the one that owns that translation? I fell into that trap – fortunately I found out before the work was published but only after countless hours of effort.

Some people wonder why I chose the New English Translation (NET) Bible for my categorization of Proverbs (A Topical Treasury of Proverbs, $19.95). That was not my preferred translation. The answer lies in the very restrictive copyrights that are in most Bibles.

If you look at the copyright for a Bible from Zondervan, Tyndale House, Thomas Nelson, or most of the other well known Bibles except the King James Version (KJV), you will see that people (including authors) are not permitted to copy an entire book of the Bible unless you have their written permission. For example, the 1984 New International Version (NIV) restricted authors to 500 verses and 25 percent of any book. The newer version of the New International Version is considerably more restrictive.

I began my first analysis of Proverbs in 2004 by naively using one of those restricted translations. I put hours and hours and hours into that study only to hit bottom: no authorization. In 2007, my pastor suggested I look at the NET Bible. After some research, I found it is a good translation, was heavily researched during the translation from Hebrew, and is totally free without copyright restrictions. Again countless hours based on a nearly fresh start and frankly a better approach – it was published in 2008.

Today we find many translations of the Bible that are available on-line and totally free. BibleGateway.com offers many translations but there are many other on-line providers. But that does not mean you may copy and use them in your manuscripts!! Authors BEWARE.

Besides the NET Bible, consider also the English Standard Version (ESV) but still look at the copyright page before proceeding. Some publishers may grant permission to you on an individual basis. If you know a publisher that is easy to work with in that way, please make a comment on this blog. Thank you.

Chiasm for Numbers 11:1-6 - Revealing the Power of Prayer

While in the desert, it must have seemed to the Lord that the Israelites specialized in complaining. They:

• complained about their lack of food (Ex 16:1-4)
• complained about their hardships (Num 11:1)
• wailed in complaint about the manna (Num 11:4)
• questioned Moses' authority (Num 12:1-2)
• grumbled against Moses and Aaron (Num 14:1-4)
• opposed Moses and Aaron in rebellion (Num 16:1-3)

Each time that the Israelites complained, they thought they had a better solution. Their criticism was aimed at Moses, yet it was really the Lord's plans that they were condemning.

The following analysis looks at the chiastic structure to understand the power of prayer that can be used against a critical spirit. A chiasm (ky'-az-um) is a writing style that is frequently found in the Bible – it organizes themes much like a sandwich: A) a piece of bread on top, B) mustard, C) a piece of meat, C') another piece of meat, B') more mustard, and finally A') another piece of bread on the bottom. Chiasms generally focus on the meat, but the bread and mustard are necessary for a complete sandwich. Some chiasms do not have a mustard layer, other chiasms have lettuce on both sides of the meat, and some have just one piece of meat. For more information on chiasms, see What is a chiasm?

The power of prayer can be seen in Numbers 11:1-6:

¹ Now the people complained about their hardships in the hearing of the LORD, and when he heard them his anger was aroused. Then fire from the LORD burned among them and consumed some of the outskirts of the camp. ² When the people cried out to Moses, he prayed to the LORD and the fire died down. ³ So that place was called Taberah, because fire from the LORD had burned among them.

⁴ The rabble with them began to crave other food, and again the Israelites started wailing and said, "If only we had meat to eat! ⁵ We remember the fish we ate in Egypt at no cost -- also the cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions and garlic. ⁶ But now we have lost our appetite; we never see anything but this manna!" (NIV).

These verses can be analyzed as a chiasm. Continuing the sandwich analogy in the chart below, the two pieces of bread are listed first, the mustard level is then listed, and then the meat is shown on the bottom level. In this way, the verses under First presentation are to be read from top to bottom, while the verses under Inversion are to be read from bottom to top:

Chiasm for Numbers 11:1-6

Level	First presentation	Inversion	Theme
A - A′	Israelites complained about their hardships (Num 11:1a)	The Israelites complained about the manna (Num 11:4-6)	Israelites complained
B - B′	Fire from the Lord burned among them (Num 11:1b)	Fire from the Lord had burned among them (Num 11:3)	Fire from the Lord burned among them
C - C′	Moses prayed to the Lord (Num 11:2a)	The Lord responded by causing the fire to die down (Num 11:2b)	Moses prayed and the fire dies down

As stated above, chiasms generally focus on the meat. Think about this: which had greater authority, the complaints from the Israelites or the fire from the Lord? Hopefully you said fire from the Lord.

Now think about this: which had greater authority, the fire from the Lord or the prayers of Moses? Again, the prayer should be the answer. Therefore, this chiasm emphasizes the authority that is available in prayer.

Thomas B. Clarke is the author of Joshua's Spiritual Warfare: Understanding the Chiasms of Joshua (Bible Discernments, 2008), available at Amazon.Com for $14.99 plus shipping and handling.