Vorkosigan

I think I have the author's model chiasm nailed. Here's the one in Mark 10:



The pattern is typical of Markan chiasms, opening and closing with geographical movement, and having the usual ABBA center. The A brackets contain movement, the B brackets oppose two miniature chiasms built around Jesus/God and last/first. The E brackets both contain messages about leaving everything to follow Jesus, while the F brackets represent another pattern often seen in Mark, where a problem is posed whose solution is expounded in the opposite bracket. Thus How can the rich enter the Kingdom? is solved by observing that with God, all things are possible. The G brackets contain a obvious miniature chiasm that integrates the chreia structure into the chiasm as a whole. The structure of the C/D brackets is flexible and may be collapsed into one bracket.

Just a few more to find here.

Michael

Peter Kirby

Hi Michael,

I am asked to do this same kind of thing in my Bible as Literature class, except the one that I did concerned the narrative of the (non)sacrifice of Isaac. (That one was a little more apparent to me in terms of its total structure than the one just diagrammed above.)

Genesis 22:1-19
A. 1-4. Abraham leaves Beersheba, to be put to the test.
B. 5. Abraham and Isaac depart from the men.
C. 6-8. Abraham says God will provide, but his son seems doomed.
D. 9-10. Abraham builds an altar and draws his knife.
E. 11-12. An angel of God intervenes.
D'. 13. Abraham sacrifices a ram instead.
C'. 14-18. Abraham says God will provide, and he is blessed with descendants.
B'. 19a. Abraham and Isaac rejoin the men.
A'. 19b. Abraham returns to Beersheba, to come to rest.

Still, a part of me feels like I'm just playing games with the text with an exercise like this.

My question is, what claim are you making, beyond that you are able to write out a schema like this? What are you saying about the Gospel of Mark, its author, and the process of composition?

best,
Peter Kirby

Vorkosigan

I think this should put paid to the idea that Mark was an ill-educated clod. Mark's gospel is very skilfully and deliberately composed. It is a full-blown literary work composed by an artist of real genius. Things happen because Mark wants them to, not because they did happen that way in real life.

It also explains many puzzling features, flashbacks, and areas where there are parenthetical explanations, doubling, repeating vocabulary, and so on. These features are due to the author's need to balance brackets.

Finding the underlying structure is important in clarifying the author's original purpose. Also, it shows that the traditional pericoping and versification is probably wrong.

The particular one above works best in the A and E-G brackets; the outer brackets are less clear. But there are several chiasms in Mark with ABBA interiors, including 6:1-6, 12:10-35, 15:20-39, and 7:24-30. Further, these ABBA interiors are often chreia or similar sayings. Here's 7:24-30, a much simpler one, whose chreia is an example of peirastic irony:

A Jesus enters a house
B a Gentile with a sick daughter begs Jesus for healing
C let the children be fed!
D It's not right to give good food to dogs
D' but even dogs under the table
C' eat the children 's crumbs
B go your own way. The child is healed
A Woman returns home, demon gone.

The center gives us an ABBA structure, just like the well-known one in Mark 2:27-8, is the sabbath made for man, or man for the sabbath? Mark is absolutely littered with such structures. They can be spotted by the repeated keywords. Mark often integrates them into the centers of his chiasms. Sometimes the ABBA pattern has an ABBA pattern sandwiched inside it. In the center of the chiasm from Mark 12:10-35, you can find the chreia alternating with a discussion on scripture:

A:...Chreia: Whose wife is she, anyway? (Setting)
B:...Jesus says you don't know the Scriptures and God's Power
B'...Jesus says the dead are raised, and cites Scriptures: "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob"?
A'...Chreia: You yammerheads! He's the God of the living, not the Dead! (response)

Note the B brackets:

B:...Jesus says you don't know the Scriptures and God's Power
B'...Jesus says the dead are raised, and cites Scriptures: "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob"?

See the ABBA pattern?*(answer below) Mark is also sandwiching ABBA patterns inside his ABBA structures. Like interlocking wheels within wheels.

PK, I love the way you turn understatement into irony. Worthy of Mark. The A, E, F, and G brackets should be pretty clear in their relationship to one another. It's the B,C, and D brackets that are not so instantly clear but even in English they do relate (the B brackets each contain parallel ABBA patterns). I wonder if the Greek has keyword patterns there that the English does not. Since I am only ten letters into the alphabet, I can't really say.

Finally, the other reason I like doing this is because, dammit, I just like solving the fucking puzzle.

Vorkosigan

*B:...Jesus says you don't know the Scriptures and God's Power
B'...Jesus says the dead are raised, and cites Scriptures: "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob"?

B... (a) Scriptures
.... (b) God's Power
B'... (b') (example of) God's Power (dead being raised)
.... (a') (example of) Scriptures (citation of Exodus)

Now say after me: "I BEEEELEEEVVVEEE!"

mirage

I particularly like the one you mentioned (Vork) regarding the Markan passion, where (amongst other things) Jesus's clothes being divided by lots is mirrored by the rending of the Temple curtain.

This sort of analysis does seem to shed a whole new light on what seemed like odd structure and boring repetition when I was exposed to it as a child. Even if there is a risk of occasionally overplaying your hand and shoe horning the text a little.

Dirac_Delta

I think your analysis is great. I read other posts you made where you presented other chiasms. I wonder if you have all chiasms you found on some website where I can read them. That would be great.

Vorkosigan

On my mark site, I have some gathered in one spot, but not all are there. See the sxcursus to chap 5

rlogan

It is a very interesting question, given the grammatical clumsiness of "Mark", if we argue that it is a sophisticated work.

I would not call the passages "genius" as Vork has. It demonstrates commitment to a style, yes, and I do not mean to disparage. But simply not to overplay it as a literary masterpiece.

I have found this a most interesting analysis by Vork though and to me it is one more bit of evidence that the original "gospel" was a literary construction as opposed to an HJ.