I mapped everything from 1:14-6:13 today. No doubt some tinkering will still be required. I take no responsibility for the parable section in Mark 4, it makes not one whit of sense. I stopped at 6:13 as the execution of JBap was so long and involved, and the rules for putting it all together are not clear to me. I did make a very nice chiasm out of it that pivoted on the doublet of the KIng's promise, but the brackets don't talk to each other beautifully like Markan brackets so often do. I also took a shot at the Water Walk but it is gibberish.
All the old chiasms I made for my Commentary were wrong, though the direction was right.
I didn't do Mark 1:1-14 because I don't know how to treat Mark 1:1-3. Yet.
Here ya' go:
2 comments:
Interesting. I worked on the boat crossings in Mark 4-8 recently, particularly on the stilling of the storm (Mk 4.35-41?). One of the the things that struck me about the chiasm is that, assuming Markan priority, Matthew (ch 8 is it?) has introduced a tighter chiasm in this particular pericope.
If the chaism you suggest for Mk 4.35-41 is right, I wonder why Matthew felt the need to introduce one.
Also, the half dozen commentaries I looked at all recognized the chiastic structure in Mark, but they also came to different conclusions about what exactly that structure was. That Mark's got 'em is beyond question. Working them out seems to be another matter. Mathematical precision in reconstructing them is out of the question--a fact you've clearly already recognized over 1:1-3.
Yes, Mark's chiasms are difficult to demonstrate. I am constantly tinkering with them as I uncover and articulate new rules -- specifying rules is important to convincing others and preventing arbitrary decisions about where to put brackets.
Off to Mark 13!
Post a Comment