The Value of Chiasm for New

Testament Interpretation

Ronald E. Man

Chiasm, also called chiasmus, may be defined as "a stylistic

literary figure which consists of a series of two or more elements
followed by a presentation of corresponding elements in reverse
order."1 The individual elements may consist of single words,
phrases, sentences, paragraphs, or even longer sections of
material. One of the most familiar examples of chiasm is found in
Matthew 7:6:
A Do not give what is holy to dogs,
Β and do not throw your pearls before swine,
B' lest they trample them under 2their feet,
A' and turn and tear you to pieces.
By recognizing this chiastic structure one can make much better
sense of this verse than might otherwise be done; for it seems
most logical that the dogs (A) tear to pieces (A '), and the swine (B)
f 3
do the trampling (B ). Other examples of chiastic structures will
4
be given later in this article.
Talbert has shown that chiasm, as a particular literary ex­
pression of symmetrical design, was common in Semitic cultures
(as well as in ancient Greek and Latin literature).5 The use of
chiasm infused the thought- and speech-patterns of the Semitic
mind, and in this manner it found its way into the Old Testament
and then into the New Testament.6
Until this century chiasm was not widely recognized as an
important structural device in biblical literature, though a few
146
 The Value of Chiasm for New Testament Interpretation 147
7
scholars in the 18th and 19th centuries addressed this issue. In
1942 Nils Wilhelm Lund wrote Chiasmus in the New Testament
an epoch-making work in the study of New Testament chiasm.
For the first time a major, systematic treatment of the subject was
undertaken. Lund also contributed several articles on the subject
as well.8 In 1958 Jeremias published a significant article on
Pauline chiasm.9
Since these seminal studies the study of New Testament
chiasm has blossomed, until today recognition of chiastic struc-
tures is common in full-scale commentaries and other scholarly
works.10 The study of Old Testament chiasm has likewise begun
tocóme of age.11
However, all too often chiastic structures are passed off in the
scholarly literature as mere literary niceties, a structural tour de
force which serves only aesthetic ends. Too little consideration
has been given to the possible exegetical significance of such
structures in the interpretation of biblical passages. As Miesner
has stated, "theological studies which have used chiasm for
purposes of exegesis are rare."12
Actually the study of chiasm in exegesis dates back to John A.
Bengel in the 18th century, as Lund notes: "To Bengel . . .
belongs the credit of having first grasped the significance of
chiastic forms in the writings of the New Testament and of
having applied the principle to exegesis."13 In his Gnomon of the
New Testament, Bengel wrote, "Often there is the greatest use in
the employment of this figure, and it is never without some use,
viz. in perceiving the ornament, in observing the force of the
language; in understanding the true and full sense; in making
clear the sound Exegesis [sic]; and in demonstrating the true
and neat Analysis [sic] of the sacred text."14
Bengel studied chiasm in this way in his Gnomon; unfortu-
nately, few have done so since then. In recent years, though,
Gaechter in his commentary on Matthew, Bailey in his work on
the Lucan parables, and Miesner in his study on the missionary
journeys narratives in Acts have all pioneered in giving attention
to chiasm in the interpretation of their respective texts.15 Hope-
fully the following examples will give sufficient proof that the
recognition of chiastic structures in the biblical text may greatly
enrich one's study and understanding of the New Testament.
Two characteristics of chiasm help interpreters understand
the meaning of biblical passages: (1) the presence of either a
single central or of two complementary central elements in the
148 Bibliotheca Sacra — April-June 1984

structure, which generally highlight the major thrust of the pas­

sage encompassed by the chiasm; and (2) the presence of com­
plementary pairs of elements, in which each member of a pair
can elucidate the other member and together form a composite
meaning. These characteristics will be seen in the following ex­
amples of the different ways in which a study of chiasm can help
bring out the meanings of various passages.

Comparison and Contrast

As Baldwin has expressed, a chiasm "is capable of express­
16
ing exact equivalents or startling contrasts." The elements
paired off with each other in a chiastic structure may be parallel
either in a synonymous or an antithetical way, and the placing of
such elements opposite each other in the structure serves to
strengthen the comparison or the contrast.
In the chiastic structure that Miesner has laid out for the
missionary journeys narrative (Acts 12:25—21:16), two of Paul's
sermons — at Antioch in 13:14b-52 and at Miletus in 20:18-35 —
are paired off as parallel elements. In this way the circumstances
surrounding the two are compared and contrasted: "The parallel
placement of the Antioch and Miletus sermons in the chiastic
structure suggests that the church has received what Israel after
the flesh had refused. "17
Lund saw Matthew 8:19-9:34 as chiastic in form. The paral­
leled endpoints of this subsection, 8:19-22 and 9:34, relate quite
different reactions (viz., belief and unbelief) to the actions of
Jesus. "These passages set forth in striking antithesis the differ­
ent impressions made by Jesus." 18

Emphasis
Miesner has well summarized the way chiasm can highlight
the emphasis of a passage:
The position of members in a chiastic structure indicates
points of emphasis. . . . In respect to both form and sense, the rest
of the structure pivots around the center, which may be either a
single or a double unit. Thus, the exegete must attach special
importance to the center of a chiastic structure.19
Miesner also noted, "By centering the thought of a passage, the
structure shows the emphasis of the whole.*'20
Where only two pairs of elements are present in the chiastic
structure (i.e., in the form ΑΒΒΆ'), emphasis is not so likely
 The Value of Chiasm for New Testament Interpretation 149

intended by the two central elements; the main focus in such a

structure is the correspondence of each pair of elements.
Hornung h a s posited a chiastic structure for Hebrews
12:1-2:
Therefore
we, A having seated around us such a cloud of witnesses
ß setting aside every weight and every clinging sin
C with patient endurance
D let us run the race that is set before us
E keeping our eyes on Jesus the pioneer and perfecter of
the faith,
D' who for the joy that was set before him
C patiently endured a cross
B' despising shame
A' and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God.21

The single central element (E) speaks of Jesus as the believ-

er's αρχηγός ("pioneer" or "example"). As Hornung points out,
this center point changes the focus of the passage from "we" in
the first half to Jesus in the second. The second half develops the
example of J e s u s which believers are to follow: His patient endur­
ance (C), which is parallel to the patient endurance enjoined of
them in the first half (C). Thus the chiasm with its central
element emphasizes Jesus as the One who is the Model of the
patient endurance God desires from believers; they are not ex­
pected to "go it alone." 22
This writer has discovered the following chiastic structure in
Luke 1:6-25 (here given in a brief thematic outline):
A Godliness of Zacharias and Elizabeth (v. 6)
Β Elizabeth barren (v. 7)
C Zacharias' priestly service (v. 8)
D Zacharias enters the temple (v. 9)
E The people outside (v. 10)
F Angel standing (έστώς) (v. 11)
G Zacharias' fear (v. 12)
H The Annunciation (w. 13-17)
G'Zacharias'doubt (v. 18)
F' Angel who stands (παρεστηκώς) (w. 19-20)
E' The people outside (v. 21)
D' Zacharias exits from the temple (v. 22)
C' Zacharias' priestly service (v. 23)
B* Elizabeth pregnant (v. 24)
A' God's favor on Elizabeth (and Zacharias) (v. 25).
The correspondences between the paired elements should be
clear from the above outline. The outline also shows how the
150 Bibliotheca Sacra — April-June 1984

chiastic structure sets in relief the central section, which is the

Annunciation itself (w. 13-17). And of course the announcement
is the emphasis of the passage — not the godliness of Zacharias
and Elizabeth, nor even the appearance of the angel to Zacharias,
but rather the message the angel brings. For Gabriel is simply a
messenger (as άγγελος suggests) for God; this was God's mes­
sage, given to those who by their righteous lives had pleased Him.
The fact that God was speaking through the angel is particularly
significant in light of the fact that this was the first time God had
spoken to Israel in 400 years. God was speaking again to Israel;
He was again beginning to work among His people. This point is
beautifully emphasized by the chiastic structure. The point may
be obvious even without recognizing the chiasm; but the chiasm
serves to highlight and heighten the effect of this emphasis in the
minds of the readers, even on an unconscious level.
Miesner has made a good case for a chiastic structure in Acts
12:25-21:16. 23 According to his layout, the central section of this
chiasm is Paul's Areopagus sermon in 17:16-34. He makes these
comments about the emphasis given to that sermon by its posi­
tion in the chiastic structure:
The chiastic structure of the missionary journeys narrative
suggests that, of all the places on the itinerary, Athens is the most
significant intermediate point as the gospel moves to the end of the
earth. . . .
The Areopagus speech . . . is the only sermon reported by Luke
which is preached to gentiles by "the apostle to the gentiles" (except
for the brief Lystra sermon). . . . Now that Paul had preached the
word in the spiritual capital of the Greek world, he turned his face
toward the imperial capital of the Greco-Roman world. It is only
after the Athens climax that Luke noted Paul's expression of his
necessity to go to Rome, which he stated both at Ephesus (19:21),
and at Jerusalem (23:11 ).24
One can also observe a chiastic structure in John 17:1-5:
A Father, glorify the Son (v. lc)
Β The Son will glorify the Father (v. Id)
C Those given by the Father to the Son (v. 2a-c)
D Eternal life (v. 2d)
D'Eternai life (v. 3a)
C Those who know the Father and the Son (v. 3b)
B' The Son has glorified the Father (v. 4)
A' Father, glorify the Son (v. 5).
The central elements (D and D') speak of eternal life, and the
C and C elements describe those who receive it, from a divine
 The Value of Chiasm for New Testament Interpretation 151

perspective (given by the Father and the Son) and a human

perspective (they know the Father and the Son). This central
emphasis is an important observation in this first section of
Christ's high-priestly prayer, for it is only in this section that
Christ asks anything for Himself. Yet even here the emphasis is
on believers (those who have received eternal life), who are the
focus of the rest of the prayer. The center point of the chiasm
prepares for this focus in the prayer as a whole. "Being given" and
"knowing" are prominent themes in the rest of the prayer as well
(w. 6-9, 12, 22-26). The emphases of this introductory structure
in John 17 set the tone and theme of the whole chapter.

Point of a Passage
The movement of a chiastic structure may help elucidate a
point the author is making. This can be seen in Boismard's
understanding of the Johannine prologue (John 1:1-18):
A The Word with God (w. 1-2)
ß His role in creation (v. 3)
C Gift to men (w. 4-5)
D Witness of John the Baptist (w. 6-8)
E The coming of the Word into the world (w. 9-11)
F By the Incarnate Word we become children of God (w.
12-13)
E' The Incarnation (v. 14)
D' Witness of John the Baptist (v. 15)
C Gift to men (v. 16)
B' Role of re-creation (v. 17)
A' The Son in the Father (v. 18).25
According to Boismard, verses 12-13 are the center point of
this chiasm. The first half of the chiasm is characterized by
descent, the second half by ascent. Thus Christ is pictured first
as with God and descending to earth (Incarnation), and then as
returning from earth to dwell with the Father once again (Glori-
fication). Thus the movement of the entire chiasm portrays the
dynamics of Christ's First Advent and provides a fitting intro-
duction to the Gospel. The center point reveals the reason for that
Advent: that men might become children of God.26

Clarification of Meaning
In many instances the meaning of a particular statement
may be much better understood because it is part of a chiastic
152 Bibliotheca Sacra — April-June 1984

structure and is clarified by the information provided by its

parallel statement in the structure. As Miesner has explained,
"One semantic unit is understood as it is joined to the corre-
sponding one."27 Di Marco has also spoken to this issue: "Der
Chiasmus ist keine einfache künstlerische Verschönerung, son-
dern ein Schlüssel zur Bedeutung, weil die Partien sich gegen-
seitig erhellen, zueinander komplementär sind."28 Di Marco
added, "Die Architektur eines ^Abschnitts ist natürlich mit
seinem Sinn verbunden und zwar durch die Entsprechung der
einzelnen Partien: jedes Glied ist Komplement zur entsprechend-
en Partie; die Form ist eng an die Bedeutung gekoppelt."29
Talbert adds: "The architecture is certainly connected with the
meaning, for the basic thrust of each section is that which makes
it correspond to its counterpart in the chiastic scheme."30
As has already been noted in this study, a recognition of the
chiasm in Matthew 7:6 obviously contributes to the understand-
ing of what is written. Philemon 5 is another case in point;
several writers have identified the chiasm there:31
A I hear of your love,
Β and of the faith
B' which you have toward the Lord Jesus,
A* and toward all the saints.
Here of course the faith is toward Jesus and the love is toward the
saints; one can love both Jesus and the saints, but hardly can he
have faith toward both in the same way!
Lund has outlined the chiastic structure of Romans 11:33-
35 thus:
A Oh the depth of the riches,
Β And of the wisdom
C And of the knowledge of God!
D How unsearchable are His judgments
D' And unfathomable His ways!
C For who has known the mind of the Lord?
B' Or who became His counselor?
A' Or who32hath first given to Him that it might be paid back to Him
again?
This structure makes it clear that the first phrase should be read
as it is given above, and not as some versions (e.g., KJV; NASB)
have it: "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and
knowledge of God," which makes for only two distinct items of
comparison, rather than three. Following his chiastic under­
standing Lund expresses the meaning of the passage in this
 The Value of Chiasm for New Testament Interpretation 153

fashion: " T o r who hath known the mind of the Lord,' in whom
there is such a depth of knowledge? O r who hath been his
counsellor,' in whom there is such a depth of wisdom? O r who
hath first given him,' in whom there is such a depth of riches?" 33
Observing chiasms may also help in making syntactical deci­
sions. In the Romans 11 example, the parallel placement of
γνώσεως θεού and νουν κυρίου in the chiastic structure sup­
ports the judgment that θεού is a subjective genitive, since
κυρίου obviously is. 34
What is being referred to by έξουσίαν in 1 Corinthians 11:10
is a vexing exegetical problem. A solution maybe found by taking
note of the chiastic structure in 11:7-10:
A Injunction to men (v. 7a)
Β Reason for injunction to men (v. 7b)
B' Reason for injunction to women (w. 7c-9; w. 8-9 are paren­
thetical in nature; they support the assertion of v. 7c)
A' Injunction to women (v. 10).
If this understanding is correct, then εχειν έξουσίαν έπι της
κεφαλής in verse 10 is parallel to κατακαλύπτεσθαι την κεφαλήν in
verse 7, and έξουσίαν then refers to a head covering.
Chiasms can be "lopsided" in form, that is, two or more
concepts may be stated thematically in an introductory sen-
tence(s), and then the concepts may each be expanded in re­
verse order. Jeremías identifies several of these instances 35 and
speaks of them as instances "in denen die Gedankenführung
ganzer Abschnitte, ja, wie ich glaube, eines ganzen Briefes, erst
durchsichtig wird, wenn man erkennt, dass ein vorausgestelltes
Thema in chiastischer Gedankenfolge ausgeführt wird."36

Purpose of a Book
Seeing a chiastic structure may also help in communicating
a book's major purpose or theme through the emphases and
movements inherent in the structure.
Culpepper substantially agrees with Boismard's structuring
of John 1:1-18 (see chiastic diagram on p. 151), but restricts the
central element to verse 12b, "to those who0 believe in His
name." 37 This would make the focal emphasis of this introduc-
tory section suggestive of John's purpose for the entire Gospel, as
given in 20:31 : to evoke faith in Christ.
Goulder's presentation of a chiastic structure for the Lucan
journey narrative (Luke 10:25-18:18) has as its central elements
154 Bibliotheca Sacra — April-June 1984

13:10 a n d 14:1, b o t h of which deal with t h e "Rejection of Israel

38
a n d Invitation to t h e Outcasts." T h i s is a p r o m i n e n t t h e m e in
the Gospel of Luke (see 2:32; 4:16-30) a s well a s in Acts, a n d t h e
e m p h a s i s of t h i s c h i a s m highlights t h a t theme.
The "geographical c h i a s m " of Luke-Acts, a s seen in t h e fol­
lowing diagram, is intriguing.
A Galilee (Luke 4:14-9:50)
Β Journey to Jerusalem (through Samaria and Judea; Luke 9:51—
19:40)
C Jerusalem (Luke 19:41-24:49)
Ό Ascension (Luke 24:50-51)
D' Ascension (Acts 1:9-11)
C ' Jerusalem (Acts 1:12-8:1 a)
ß ' Judea and Samaria (Acts 8: lb— 11:18)
A To the ends of the earth (Acts 11:19-28:31 ).39
This s t r u c t u r e is directly related to the purpose of Luke's
two-volume work, as Miesner h a s pointed out:
The symbolic effect is to show that the redemptive events of Jesus'
ministry progressively moved toward the capital of the Jews to
whom salvation was first offered, while in the book of Acts the
opposite direction of movement takes place. As the Jews repeatedly
repudiate the good news, it is carried to the capital of the Gentiles.40

Conclusion

This article h a s attempted to present a n apologetic for the

value of chiastic studies a s a valuable aid in interpreting the New
Testament. The examples of chiasm given in t h i s article should
amply demonstrate the literary artistry of the New Testament
writers, b u t exegetes dare not be content merely to admire the
aesthetics of these s t r u c t u r e s . To the biblical a u t h o r s , artistry in
the u s e of s t r u c t u r e was not a n end in itself; it was a m e a n s
toward more effective communication of their messages. In the
case of chiasm, t h i s is accomplished by underlining the central
e m p h a s i s or clarifying correspondences in the text.

Notes
1 The word "chiasm" derives from the Greek verb χιάζω, meaning "to mark with
two lines crossing like a χ (Chi)" (Henry G. Liddell and Robert Scott, A Greek-
English Lexicon, rev. Henry Stuart James and Roderick McKenzie, 2 vols.
[Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1953], s.v. "χιάζω," 2:1991). If the two
mirrored halves of a simple chiastic structure (with the form ABB Ά ') are placed
one under the other and then lines are drawn connecting the corresponding
 The Value of Chiasm for New Testament Interpretation 155
elements, the lines form a shape resembling the capital Greek letter χ (Chi):

B-^A-

2 Capital letters and accent marks are the most commonly used system for
identifying the corresponding elements of a chiasm.
3 The translators of Today's English Version ( 1966 ed. ) recognized this chiastic
structure and reflected this understanding in their paraphrastic rendering of
Matthew 7:6: "Do not give what is holy to dogs — they will only turn and attack
you; do not throw your pearls in front of pigs — they will only trample them
underfoot."
4 Far from being a rarity in the Bible, chiasm (as studies have increasingly
shown) is widespread in the Scriptures, in prose as well as poetry, and in
narrative, didactic, and apocalyptic portions. See the compendium of examples in
Angelico di Marco, "Der Chiasmus in der Bibel," Linguistica Biblica 36 (Decem­
ber 1975):21-97; 37 (May 1976):49-68; 3 9 (1976):37-85; 44 (1979): 3-70. Also see
the Appendix to this writer's "Chiasm in the New Testament" (Th.M. thesis,
Dallas Theological Seminary, 1982), pp. 74-99.
5 Charles H. Talbert, Literary Patterns, Theological Themes, and the Genre of
Luke-Acts (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1974), pp. 67-70.
6 Nils Wilhelm Lund, Chiasmus in the New Testament (Chapel Hill, NC: Uni­
versity of North Carolina Press, 1942), pp. 23-29; Joachim Jeremías, "Chiasmus
in den Paulusbriefen," Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 49
(1958): 151-52; Paul Gaechter, "Semitic Literary Forms in the Apocalypse and
Their Import," Theological Studies 8 (1947):555-59; George Howard, "Stylistic
Inversion and the Synoptic Tradition," Journal of Biblical Literature 97
(1978):377.
7 For a fuller treatment of the history of the study of chiasm, see this writer's
"Chiasm in the New Testament."
8 "The Presence of Chiasmus in the Old Testament," American Journal of
Semitic Languages and Literatures 46 (1930): 104-26; "The Presence of Chias-
m u s in the New Testament, "Journal of Religion 10 ( 1930): 74-93; "The Influence
of Chiasmus upon the Structure of the Gospel according to Matthew," Anglican
Theological Review 13 (1931):405-33; "The Influence of Chiasmus upon the
Structure of the Gospels," Anglican Theological Review 13 (1931):27-48; "The
Literary Structure of Paul's Hymn to Love," Journal of Biblical Literature 50
(1931):266-76; "The Significance of Chiasmus for Interpretation," Crozer
Quarterly 20 (1943): 105-23.
9 "Chiasmus in den Paulusbriefen, " Zeitschriftfür die neutestamentliche Wis-
senschaft 49 (1958): 145-56.
10 See, for example, Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel according to John, 2 vols.,
The Anchor Bible (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co., 1966), pp. cxxxv-
cxxxvii, 275-76, 597, 667-78, 729, 859, 910-12; Paul Gaechter, Das Matthäus
Evangelium (Innsbruck: Tyrolia-Verlag, 1962), pp. 14-15, 8 1 , 355-56, 464-65,
468-69, 547-48, 612, 6 4 1 , 824, 826, 869, 902, 918-19, 944-45; Chiasmus in
Antiquity: Structures, Analyses, Exegesis, ed. John W. Welch (Hildesheim: Ger-
stenberg, 1981).
11 See, for example, Robert L. Alden, "Chiastic Psalms," Journal of the
Evangelical Theological Society 17 ( 1 9 7 4 ) : l l - 2 8 ; 19 (1976):191-200; 21
( 1978): 199-210; Y. T. Radday, "Le chiasme dans le récit biblique, " Les nouveaux
cahiers 38 (1974):44-55; Anthony R. Ceresko, "The Function of Chiasmus in
Hebrew Poetry," Catholic Biblical Quarterly 4 0 ( 1978): 1-10; W. Vosloo, "Balance
Structures in the Old Testament: A Brief Survey," Theologica Evangelica 12
(1979):48-60; Welch, ed., Chiasmus in Antiquity.
156 Bibliotheca Sacra — April-June 1984
12 Donald R. Miesner, "Chiasm and the Composition and Message of Paul's
Missionary Sermons" (S.T.D. thesis, Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago,
1974), p. 7.
13 Lund, Chiasmus in the New Testament, pp. 35-36. Of course Bengel was the
first in modern times; the ancients, being more attuned to the device, would have
naturally not only recognized the form (virtually instinctively), but would have
applied it (consciously or unconsciously) in the exegetical process.
14 J o h n Albert Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament trans. William Fletcher,
5vols.; 1742 (reprint, Edinburgh: T.& T.Clark, 1858, 1860), 5:399 (reprinted as
New Testament Word Studies, 2 vols. [Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1971 ]).
15 Gaechter, D a s Matthäus Evangelium; Kenneth E. Bailey, Poet and Peas-
ant: ALiterary Cultural Approach to the Parables inLuke (Grand Rapids: Wm. B.
Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1976); Kenneth E. Bailey, Through Peasant Eyes:
More Lucan Parables, Their Culture and Style (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1980); Miesner, "Chiasm and Composition"; and Donald R.
Miesner, "The Missionary Journeys Narrative: Patterns and Implications," in
Perspectives on Luke-Acts, ed. Charles H. Talbert (Danville, VA: Association of
Baptist Professors of Religion, 1978), pp. 199-214.
16 Joyce Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, The Tyndale Old Testament
Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1972), p. 8 1 .
17 Miesner, "The Missionary Journeys Narrative, "p. 213.
18 Lund, "The Influence of Chiasmus upon the Structure of the Gospel accord-
ing to Matthew," p. 4 2 1 .
19 Miesner, "Chiasm and Composition," p. 34.
2 0 Ibid., p. 45.
21 Estella Β. Hornung, "Chiasmus, Creedal Structure, and Christology in
Hebrews 12:1-2," Biblical Research 23 (1978):41.
2 2 Ibid., pp. 41-42, 45.
2 3 Miesner, "Chiasm and Composition," pp. 273-322; "The Missionary Jour­
neys Narrative," pp. 199-214.
2 4 Miesner, "Chiasm and Composition, " pp. 315-16.
25 M. -E. Boismard, Le Prologue de Saint Jean, Lectio Divina 11 (Paris: Les
Éditions du Cerf, 1953), p. 107.
26 Ibid.
27 Miesner, "Chiasm and Composition," p. 45.
28 "Chiasm is no mere artistic flourish, but rather a key to meaning because the
parts elucidate each other [and] are complementary to one another" (di Marco,
"Der Chiasmus in der Bibel," 44:55).
29 "The architecture of a section is naturally bound up with its meaning,
namely, through the correspondence of the individual parts: every element is the
complement of its corresponding element; the form is closely tied to the meaning"
(ibid., p. 56).
3 0 Charles H. Talbert, "Artistry and Theology: An Analysis of the Architecture of
J o h n 1:19-5:47," Catholic Biblical Quarterly 32 ( 1970):366.
31 Lund, "The Significance of Chiasmus for Interpretation," p. 106; Friedrich
Blass and Albert Debrunner, Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch,
14th ed., ed. Friedrich Rehkopf (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1976),
# 4 7 7 . 2 ; Miesner, "Chiasm and Composition," p. 75.
3 2 Lund, "The Significance of Chiasmus for Interpretation," p. 106.
3 3 Ibid.
3 4 Jeremias, "Chiasmus in den Paulusbriefen," pp. 150-51.
3 5 Ibid., pp. 152-56.
3 6 "The progression of thought of whole sections, even, as I believe, of an entire
book, first becomes clear when one recognizes that a previously introduced theme
is developed in a chiastic order of thought" (ibid., p. 145).
 The Value of Chiasm for New Testament Interpretation 157
37 R. Alan Culpepper, "The Pivot of John's Prologue, " New Testament Studies
27 (1980): 1,3.
38 Goulder, "The Chiastic Structure of the Lucan Journey, " in Studia Evangel-
ica, ed. F. L. Cross, 2 vols. (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1959, 1964), 2:196.
39 Adapted from Kenneth R. Wolfe, "The Chiastic Structure of Luke-Acts and
Some Implications for Worship," Southwestern Journal of Theology 22
(1980):67.
40 Miesner, "Chiasm and Composition," p. 88.
 ^ s
Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.