Literary Structure of the Old Testament

[RamistThomist]

Just picked this up today.

While its subtitle is "a commentary on Genesis-Malachi," its main value is that it provides a chiastic reading of almost every section of the OT. That is awesome.
Amazon.com: The Literary Structure of the Old Testament: A Commentary on GenesisMalachi: David A. Dorsey: Books

 

[ADKing]

I read it during seminary (OT Intro) and have found it useful more than once since--although some of the "chiasms" are a stretch there is lots in it that is helpfu.

 

[py3ak]

So is the whole OT arranged chiastically? Overall and in detail or just one of those options?

 

[RamistThomist]

not the whole OT. Specific books, shorter narratives, chapters, etc. It is not woodenly done, though.

 

[py3ak]

That's good. Sometimes it seems like chiasm is currently the fad structure, and people fall into the idea of thinking that it was the only structure the ancients knew about.

 

[RamistThomist]

That's true, but I also have my doubts about the strict outline approach. Three points, two subpoints under each, etc. I also don't think most preachers in church history used teh three points approach (I am not bashing it. I still use it).

But what's exciting about chiasm is that it does show unity in Scripture and scholars from all ends of the spectrum, in most theological traditions, are starting to employ it.

 

[py3ak]

No, I think the points, subpoints, etc., is not always an accurate reflection of the organization of the text itself, but more a way of giving structure to our communications of the text. But even that doesn't have to be so wooden as 1stly to 17thly (and in fact I think you will go crazy if you obsess over finding that sort of precise organization in every passage of Scripture, because that isn't always the internal logic).