From: Jonathan Robie (jonathan@texcel.no)
Date: Mon Feb 16 1998 - 21:31:41 EST
I'm afraid I'm getting in way over my head, but it can't be helped... so
here goes!
At 06:26 PM 2/16/98 -0500, David L. Moore wrote:
> The structure of the poem may be seen in the coupling of the
>thoughts into pairs. The mention of God's exaltation with the reference to
>his dwelling in heaven is echoed in the wish expressed for sanctification of
>His name. "Your kingdom come" corresponds in thought to the prayer that His
>will be done on earth as it is in Heaven. "Lead us not into temptation" is
>echoed and amplified in "but deliver us from what (or whoever) is evil."
To me, the form of the poem *does* seem to be liturgical/poetic. I don't
have a background in Semitic liturgical or poetic forms, but when I recite
it out loud, it feels like it has two parts, which differ in content as
well as in form:
1. PATER hHMWN
2. hO EN TOIS OURANOIS
3. hAGIASQHTW TO ONOMA SOU
4. ELQETW hH BASILEIA SOU
5. GENHQHTW TO QELHMA SOU
6. hWS EN OURANWi
7. KAI EPI GHS
In 3, 4, and 5, I see a parallelism in sound and form in hAGIASQHTW...
ELQETW... GENHQHTW, and each of these is followed by article-noun-SOU. I
also think that 1-2 feels a lot like 6-7 in form. Also, there are two nice
sound echoes in 6-7 that aren't strictly part of the form, but add to the
poetic feel: the EN OURANWi may echo the -W sound in the three verbs of
3-4-5, and the hWS nicely echos the sound of hO in 2.
8. TON ARTON hHMWN TON EPIOUSION
9. DOS hHMIN SHMERON
10. KAI AFES hHMIN TA OFEILHMATA hHMWN
11. hWS KAI hHMEIS AFHKAMEN TOIS OFEILETAIS hHMWN
12. KAI MH EISENHGKHiS hHMAS EIS PEIRASMON
13. ALLA hRUSAI hHMAS APO TOU PONHROU
Here, we seem to be back to pairs: 8-9, 10-11, 12-13.
So to me, the overall form seems to be:
part A:
a.1 pair 1-2
a.2 triplet 3-4-5
a.3 pair 6-7
part B:
b.1 pair 8-9
b.2 pair 10-11
b.3 pair 12-13
> But the most significant effect of this way of reading the Lord's
>Prayer is its influence on our understanding of "Give us this day our daily
>bread, And forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors." For if these
>are two expressions are poetically parallel, Jesus is not only (or even
>primarily) speaking about our provision of daily physical sustenance but
>about our need for a personal daily protion of the grace of God and the
>forgiveness it brings.
As I've shown above, I think Part B has three poetically parallel lines:
TON ARTON hHMWN TON EPIOUSION / DOS hHMIN SHMERON
KAI AFES hHMIN TA OFEILHMATA hHMWN / hWS KAI hHMEIS AFHKAMEN TOIS
OFEILETAIS hHMWN
KAI MH EISENHGKHiS hHMAS EIS PEIRASMON / ALLA hRUSAI hHMAS APO TOU PONHROU
So there would be THREE parallel phrases: "Give us this day our daily
bread... And forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors... And do not
lead us EIS PEIRASMON"
Which makes me wonder about the logic behind the ordering of the triplets
in Part A and Part B. Three is such a nice number for chiasm, and there
does seem to be a chiastic feel in a1 - a3:
a1 1. PATER hHMWN
2. hO EN TOIS OURANOIS
a2 3. hAGIASQHTW TO ONOMA SOU
4. ELQETW hH BASILEIA SOU
5. GENHQHTW TO QELHMA SOU
a3 6. hWS EN OURANWi
7. KAI EPI GHS
Treating this chiastically, a1 and a3 are linked in meaning and in form:
PATER hHMWN
hO EN TOIS OURANOIS
hWS EN OURANWi
KAI EPI GHS
This analysis of the poetic structure may be an argument for seeing a
similar chiasm in b1-b3. If so, then the two phrases Jeffrey wants to see
as tightly linked may actually be emphasized as related by the chiastic
form of the prayer:
b1. TON ARTON hHMWN TON EPIOUSION
DOS hHMIN SHMERON
b2. KAI AFES hHMIN TA OFEILHMATA hHMWN
hWS KAI hHMEIS AFHKAMEN TOIS OFEILETAIS hHMWN
b3. KAI MH EISENHGKHiS hHMAS EIS PEIRASMON
ALLA hRUSAI hHMAS APO TOU PONHROU
This would explain why b2 intervenes, wiping out my previous objection. And
to me, b2 really does "feel" different from b1 and b3, so I AM inclined to
see chiasm here.
Incidentally, I also see a poetic/liturgical form in Luke's version, but a
much simpler one:
PATER, hAGIASQHTW TO ONOMA SOU
ELQETW hH BASILEIA SOU
TON ARTON hHMWN TON EPIOUSION
DIDOU hHMIN TO KAQ hHMERAN
KAI AFES hHMIN TAS AMARTIAS hHMWN,
KAI GAR AUTOI AFIOMEN PANTI OFEILONTI hHMIN
KAI MH EISENEGKHS hHMAS EIS PEIRASMON
I think we can probably see chiasm here as well, but it is not as well
developed.
Does this hold water?
Jonathan
___________________________________________________________________________
Jonathan Robie jwrobie@mindspring.com
Little Greek Home Page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/koine
Little Greek 101: http://sunsite.unc.edu/koine/greek/lessons
B-Greek Home Page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek
B-Greek Archives: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek/archives
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:07 EDT