I'm not familiar with the refs for Meyer, Alford, Hendrikson
Do they give reasons for rejecting chiasm, or comment on
the appropriateness of chiasm to NT Gk generally?
Best rgds
Steven
At 17:27 98/05/19 -0400, Mary L B Pendergraft wrote:
>At 01:39 PM 5/19/98 +0000, clayton stirling bartholomew wrote:
>>> In 1914 ATR cited Matt7:6 as an example of chiasm.
>>> Likewise TCV NCV TEV recognise an ab/ba structure.
>>> But NIV NKJV NASB RVR do not. ...on what grounds?
>>I took a look at Matt 7:6 and it did seem to have a hint of chiasm but the
>>last element in the ab/ba structure does not really correspond the the first.
>>The actions of the third and forth elements are both performed by the pigs
>>(Meyer, Alford, Hendrikson . . .).
>>
>
>I suspect that Robinson took the trampling to belong to the pigs and the
>turning-and-rending to belong to the dogs, and under that reading the
>order is chiastic.
>
>Mary