For many readers of the Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi 5 can prove rather challenging. Not only does this chapter contain the actualization of a curse and the apparent genesis of an outgroup, but it also states that “the Lord God did … Continued
Because twenty-first-century public discourse in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints seems to feature the language of covenant more and more often, it may be helpful to step back and reexamine the scriptural and historical backgrounds for covenant … Continued
The devastating late-nineteenth-century attack on traditional assumptions concerning the preexilic dating of the Pentateuch may have provoked the eventual explosion of twentieth-century scholarly investigation of the covenant culture of the Old Testament. Covenantal texts related to Abraham, Moses, David, and … Continued
Many Latter-day Saint youth may have had their first exposure to the Song of Solomon in seminary or on a mission. “Tear it out of your Bible,” “Staple the pages together,” or “Write ‘DO NOT READ’ on the title page … Continued
The eighth article of faith proclaims, “We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.” This statement by itself suggests that the Bible as we have it may or may not be … Continued
This chapter analyzes the use of chiasmus in eight homicide laws or narratives to illustrate the reasons for and effects of narrating homicide cases chiastically. Three homicide laws (Genesis 9:6, Leviticus 24:13–23, and Numbers 35) are laid out chiastically, as are five homicide narratives (Abimelech’s fratricide, Phinehas’s slaying of Zimri and Cozbi, Ishmael’s killing of Gedaliah, the slaying of Holofernes, and the Nephi’s slaying of Laban). Welch shows that chiasmus (1) propels logic and persuasiveness, especially in cases when a text seeks to exculpate the slayer; (2) creates order; (3) refers to supporting precedents; (4) restores equilibrium; (5) processes circumstantial evidence and presents legally compelling narratives about the facts of a case; (6) probes relevancy; (7) reinforces memory; (8) establishes intent; (9) prioritizes covenants; (10) constrains justification by limiting what can be drawn from a particular homicide case; (11) balances rights and values; (12) metes out justice; (13) creates a sense of peace, judgment, and closure.
This study examines the shared rhetorical tradition between Deuteronomy and Jeremiah, especially their uses of inclusio and chiasmus. In particular, four specific types of chiasmus are distinctive of both Deuteronomy and Jeremiah, evidencing a seventh-century BCE Judahite rhetorical tradition, namely: (1) chiasmus of speaker; (2) chiasmus in the position of completing a unit of text; (3) chiasmus where particles create semi-chiasms in the middle two cola of four-cola units; and (4) chiasmus where rhetorical questions occur in the middle of the structure. All four of these types of chiasmus from Deuteronomy and Jeremiah are also useful in studying the writings of Nephi, whose account in the Book of Mormon opens in seventh-century Judah.
Parry examines textual variants in sixteen chiastic structures in Isaiah’s text (Isaiah 2:3–5; 6:7; 6:10; 11:4; 11:8; 13:16; 14:25; 29:14; 34:5–8; 40:12; 44:21; 51:7; 53:7; 55:8–9; 56:9–12; 60:1–3). The paper’s objective is to conduct a text critical examination, with the intent of determining whether textual variants belonging to the Masoretic Text (MT) of Isaiah and the Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsaa) impact the structure or clarity of one or more of the particular chiastic elements in each example of chiasmus. With regard to the number sixteen, Parry selected them randomly out of approximately one hundred chiasms that he has identified in Isaiah. With the number sixteen, therefore, his approach presents a representative rather than a comprehensive approach. Needless to say, taking a representative approach may result in a skewed or distorted understanding of chiastic structures in Isaiah with regard to textual variants.
This chapter illustrates the richness and range of uses for chiasms by scribes in antiquity and what they can tell about the compositional history of a text. Four separate cases are examined: (1) Genesis 1 and 6; (2) Deuteronomy 11:32 and 12:1; (3) Deuteronomy 12; and (4) Deuteronomy 7:9–10. A chiasm can provide narrative complexity, such as the reversing of creation by God in the flood story. It can integrate diverse material into a coherent whole, e.g., how Deuteronomy 12:1 chiastically connects the legal codes in that chapter to the narratives in the previous chapters, allowing chapter 12 to incorporate various layers of justification for cultic centralization. A chiasm can be used in introducing theological innovations, as in the redactor’s use of chiasm in Deuteronomy 7:9–10 to rework (and reject) the Decalogue’s view that God requites sin to one’s progeny. In addition, because of the ways scribes could use chiasmus, the presence of a chiasm does not necessarily indicate a single author—it could also indicate the working of a well-trained scribe, merging the seams of disparate materials.
Contrary to the arguments of some scholars, Leviticus 20 is not simply a miscellaneous collection of legal material. Rather, the chapter is chiastic, structured according to who has responsibility to punish various offenses (humanity, God, humanity, God, humanity). Two parts of the overall chiasm are themselves chiastically structured, and the center point of the chiasm (the punishments meted out by humanity) consists of a series of binary oppositions. A common structure in biblical law, these particular binary oppositions are based on the identities of the parties involved in sexual offenses. They are presented in increasing order of their deviation from the biblical norm of sexual relations—heterosexual relations within marriage between a man and a woman. Burnside outlines the sophisticated literary structure of Leviticus 20, speculates on purposes of this structure, and offers a three-fold test for validating the presence of chiasmus. The analysis presented here satisfies that test.
