Earlier I have suggested that one of the best ways to study the Bible comes from starting at the end of a selected book, and then jumping to the beginning to see what these two remote poles have in common. This follows the thought-pattern of the actual human authors who wrote the books. And this is quite true.
Today, I would like to add a little something to enhance your already greatly-improved ability to grasp the meaning of a biblical book. Today, I intend to engage the topic of a common biblical literary device called a "chiastic structure." This sounds technical, but the point remains fairly simple. The Greek letter "Chi" (say "Ky") looks like an "X" in our alphabet. It makes the "k" sound like a hard "Ch" as in "Christmas."
Using the letter X (Chi) as a pictogram, a "chiasm" or chiasmus or chiastic structure forms a symmetrical pattern, where the lines of the poem or poetic segment in question looks as if the bottom part comprises a "mirror image" of the top part. The letter "X" you will notice does this. The top half forms a "V" and the bottom half and inverted "V."
That is by way of analogy what a chiasmus looks like. This is a device from rhetorical criticism useful for evaluating the patterns of speech or speech-writing. NT scholars have long noticed that the Bible makes effluent use of chiastic structures. Identifying these can be quite helpful, because by comparing the top section with the bottom -- point by point -- each one further illuminates the other by a kind of mirror-like extrapolation.
So imagine we have a poetic section from Philippians (2:6-11 forms a chiasmus). This is the so-called "Christ-hymn." It is actually not a hymn, but rather part of the form of sound words the apostles used to catechize church members, especially for training elders and deacons, who need be "sound in the faith."
We will start our introduction to this fascinating christological saying (literary unit) with the introductory verse which precedes it immediately. It says [with my comments in brackets like these]:
"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
Who, being in the form of God [as some thought of Caesar],
thought it not robbery [not treachery that would get one crucified] to be equal with God:
But made himself of no reputation [became a nobody],
and took upon him the form of a servant [slave], [from "form of God" to "form of slave"]
and was made in the likeness of men: [here "men" sits opposite "God" meaning "sinner"]
And being found in fashion as a [sinful] man [i.e. criminal], [fashion is "schema" = outward appearance only in this context, since it sits opposite "morphe" which is "inner nature"]
he humbled [this reverts to the original point: humility] himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
Wherefore God also [consequently, because of Christ's extreme humility] hath highly [very greatly] exalted him,
and given him a name which is above every name [Kyrios, "Lord of all heaven, earth and sea"]
That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, [Kyrios is joined with the name Iesous = The Lord Jesus, "Jesus is Lord."
of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father."
Now first we must notice that the apostle has introduced this lofty christology as a reminder of how it is we are to be humble. Humility is the point. So the first part, which ends summarily with "even the death of the cross," (i.e. a horrible, shocking, painful and humiliating death -- the worst kind of death known to the world) aims at total humility.
The rest of what follows shows the glory that results from humility. James 4:10 reminds us that "God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble." Now grace has its goal in glory (the grace of God leads to glory if appropriated as God intends). So we can neatly divide this very symmetrical poem into two "chiastic" halves. The first part shows us HOW to humble ourselves as Christ did. The second part shows the REWARD that awaits those who humble themselves before God. In the process, of course, we can learn a great deal about the Lord Jesus, which, I wish to argue, is the better part of everything.
When Martha, the worker Bee, chided her "lazy" sister Mary, who sat at the feet of Jesus listening to his teaching when there were chores to be done, Jesus politely defended Mary of Bethany, "for, said He, "she has chosen the better part, and it will not be denied her." This is the same opportunity the apostle affords us here. We are to learn of humility by learning of Jesus.
And the chiastic structure is here to help us do that. So let us begin with apostolic help to the Philippians, who, we will wish to note were all -- just like Paul -- roman citizens. This is because Philippi was a roman city-state. To be born in Philippi was to be born with the lofty privilege of Roman citizenship. Everything about this chiasm is particularly "Roman," especially the goal of the chiastic introduction, which leads inevitably to "the cross of Christ." Rome had put to death the Lord of glory, but God had raised him from the dead as the victor in the contest of wills: Caesar v. Christ. And Romans -- you will recall -- were big on victory. So is God. "There is no wisdom, no insight, no plan, which can succeed against the Lord."
So Paul -- deliberately paradoxically -- has resolved to preach Christ crucified as the way of victory -- and here is he, doing just that again. This is that "offence of the cross" of which he speaks, the very idea that crucifixion could somehow be ultimate victory was anathema in the ancient world. But Paul's kerygmatic chiasm here proclaims just that. This is apostolic catechism, not just Pauline christology. This is the Gospel summarized.
Now then, with our little bit of background, let us proceed to examine the opening line. It reads,
"Who, being in the form of God,
thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"
This part corresponds to, and is illumined by the latter part of the chiasm, which ends in:
"every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord."
About this we can say several things, all of them glorious.
First, this is a deliberate slam on the Roman empire. Here Paul invokes the idea of Jesus being (as the Roman emperors were supposed to be), "in the form of God." This is a clear rebuttal that Jesus is Kyrios (King over all kings, the ultimate authority over planet earth, and it ascribes to Jesus, whom Rome killed, just the deity which the Caesars would have for themselves.
Now Paul says "Huparchon" (Say "Hyoop ARK cone") for "being." This is not the ordinary way of expressing a simple form of "to be" in Greek. In fact, this one is a little -- deliberately -- arresting. Had I not known the Word of God was infallible, I would have said Paul has got the wrong word. He was supposed to use some form of "einai."
Why the difference? Paul here uses a word which means in context more like "subsisting," which carries the very important point that the text considers the deity of Christ an already established fact. It's a gimmee. He did not become "in the form of God" at some time in the past, but no matter how far we regress in time to consider the matter, Christ always existed as God. This contrasts sharply with the phrase "taking to Himself" the nature [morphe] of a man. The deity of Christ perpetually precedes His incarnation. Paul's verb choice tells us this, when contrasted with the other use of "morphe [n]" in context.
Second, there are many arguments as to just what Paul means here by "morphe Theou." Some claim this does not directly call Jesus "Theos" (God Himself). The Old Testament stridently denies this in favor of the deity of Christ. The chiastic structure of this passage tells us this. And so does a passage Paul has mimicked from Isaiah the prophet (Isaiah 45:23), and applied to Christ, where the OT applies it to God. Here God speaks in the first Person:
"By myself I have sworn, my mouth has uttered in all integrity a word that will not be revoked: Before me every knee will bow; by me every tongue will swear."
Recall that Jesus taught His apostles that ALL the law and the prophets speak of Him. Controversy solved. "Huparchon en morphe theou" calls Jesus "God" and the other end of the chiasmus returns to this same point, with God requiring all men to glorify Jesus as one can only glorify God Himself. This does not in any way degrade or diminish the Father, but redounds to His greater glory. The apostolic saying anticipates this objection from Jewish detractors and finishes with "to the glory of God the Father."
This shows interestingly that these sound words might have been formed in an apologetic context. I know what it looks like when one is doing apologetics, and this is it. It could simply have said, "to the glory of God." The addition "the Father" isolates the First Person of the Holy Trinity, for the Jews, being fierce monotheists, would doubtless charge that this denigrates the Father. Rather, say the apostles, the Father requires it for His own glory.
Third, we need to note the special use of the term "robbery" which Paul just a little awkwardly employs. This slightly uneasy fit helps us a good deal to recognize he intends something special by its use. Why would anyone suggest that claiming to be God, if you are not, is "robbery" rather than, say, blasphemy or idolatry. I say "awkward" because the natural association in Paul's mind with such unlawful behavior (as was the Lord falsely accused) is with the first table of the law, not the second. How comes then this (apparently) wobbly use by the apostles in their teaching?
The answer to this riddle becomes clear when we realize -- hearkening back to the goal of Part A of the chiasmus, which is crucifixion, a penalty Rome reserved for its most despicable criminals. The death penalty could be imposed - as was many various ways - in the Roman Empire. But crucifixion - torturous and prolonged PUBLIC death by asphyxiation - was reserved only for three types of persons: 1. Slaves, who were mere property 2. very violent felons 3. Rebels against Rome (treason). Now the apostles show an intimate awareness of this fact by the word choice of "robbery."
The primary point of "robbers" stems from the fact that this term was used of treasonous persons like Barabbas. It was common for "zealots" to rob and kill those favorable to Rome in order to accomplish two things, namely eliminate a few enemies, and then use the booty so acquired to fund other efforts against Rome. Robbery is not quite the point (though it is involved). The point in treason. Put differently, the denotation is "stealing stuff by violence." The connoation of this word implied "Stealing stuff by killing Romans." This point was not lost on the Philippians. Barabbas probably was a thief, but one could not crucify a man by Roman law for mere theft, unless he were a slave.
The crowd had said to pilate -- which brings us back to the use of "Kyrios" (Caesar) to describe the Lord Jesus. The opposite of this term in the Roman empire was slave. This is the Greek word "Doulos," which is found opposite the later "kyrios." Douloi -- slaves -- were the (as we say) the bottom of the barrel in Roman society. An owner could have a slave crucified for nearly any and every reason, sometimes even on a whim. Roman historian, Cornelius Tacitus recounts with revulsion the fact that a Roman slaveowner once crucifed a house slave for tasting the food on the way to bringing it from the kitchen to the guests in the garden. He was hungry.
Thus, Paul invokes two words -- "robbery" (meaning treachery) and "doulos" (slave) which together imply the necessary conclusion to which they lead -- death on a cross. Pilate was told by the crowds, "This man [treasonously] claims to be a king; and any man who makes himself a king is no friend of Caesar." Robbery means "usurpation" and "treachery."
Paul plainly says that Christ is "isa theou" -- God's equal. It would not matter in Jewish theology in which "attenuated" or slippery sense in which one "might have meant this." If the Lord Jesus were not at least what the Caesars claimed -- deity -- this was then usurpation and treachery against God. And the Bible recognizes only one Deity. The apostles knew this.
The phrase "in the form of God" sits directly opposite "in the form of a servant, "morphe theou" on the one hand, and "morphe[n] doulou" on the other. Somehow, God became a slave. This is an intolerable combination of words, and a deliberate Pauline parallel. This chiasmus was designed to shock. And it did. The man who hung on the cross was the glorious Maker of the world over which Rome claimed authority.
But this is not the conclusion of the matter. Almost overnight this slave became Kyrios -- Lord of all -- an absolute impossibility in Roman law. God accomplished the impossible in Christ, and God requires every tongue -- every citizen in His Kingdom -- to confess this. This is proof that God causes true humility to lead to impossible exaltation.
Verse 10 "of things in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth" reflects the threefold description of the earth when God created it in Genesis. The heavens above has dwellers (birds), the earth, all creeping animals and the sea - fish and other great swimmers. The Lord Jesus died to redeem all creation, of both the "clean" and "unclean" animals -- Jew and Gentile alike. This was also scandalous in the early Church, though it is difficult to visit the sense of scandal one would have experienced by this in a Jewish context upon the postmodern reader. I suppose this would amount today to something like the salvation of terrorists by the Gospel.
This was class number three -- insurgents against Rome (civilization, the rule of law).
All the elements of Part B of the chiasmus correspond to privileges and titles of the head of Rome, the Caesar. One verb appears nowhere else in the NT, which is translated "highly exalted." A better translation would be "exceedingly exalted," since the sense of the term conveyed implies there is no ceiling to this exaltation. The prefix to the word we transliterate into English as "hyper." "Hyperupsosen" entails just the opposite of "even the humiliating and abasing death of the cross." The very highest place was accomplished by God's equal through the adopting willfully of the very lowest place.
Humility's effects were reversed in the resurrection. This is a form of "Lex Talionis," which takes the form of a symmetrical literary device in order to show the reflexive nature of just what happened with the Lord Jesus, and what will happen will all those who behave likewise. This was to be a source of great encouragement to the Philippians, and is why Paul went on to affirm, "But OUR citizenship is in heaven" (where Christ sits at the Father's right hand).
How did God vindicate Christ here? The "robbery" with which the Jews had charged Christ was blasphemy, and they presented this as "usurpatious treachery" to Rome by seizing upon the kingship of Messiah -- "He claims to be a king." Of course, they knew He had claimed far more, but the word "Messiah" meant little to politically-minded Romans. But "King" means "political ruler" apart from Rome having authorized it, which Rome could only hear as "traitor."
Christ knew He was God's equal, and his ministry shows this. He openly forgave sins when it pleased Him. He performed miracles of raising the dead when it pleased Him; of calming mighty storms at a single rebuke that amounts to "calm down." The Jews for blasphemy, and Rome for treachery, had crucified Jesus, putting Him in the lowest place possible.
God reversed this in strict lex talionis fashion. He gave Christ the reputation stolen from him by the open shame of the cross. "Being found in fashion as a man" meant being displayed to all as a capital criminal (the only kind Roman law permits one to crucify) or else a common slave, the scum of the earth to Romans. These were often people Rome had defeated in war and then enslaved. They were losers (literally).
God so highly exalted Christ that he set Christ in the same place as He Himself is. God, by the prophet Isaiah had reserved for Himself by oath that every knee will bow to Him, and every tongue confess His righteousness. Now, because of Christ's absolute humility and obedience, God had said of Christ, "Yes and Him too." You will bow the knee to Jesus, Kyrios of heaven and earth. He has proved Himself My equal."
The greatness of God's goodness and glory is found supremely -- and we would never ever have dreamt this -- chiefly in His humility, not his awesome power, or even His unfathomable wisdom. God takes delight in humility of mind and spirit. "He has shown thee, O Man [not O sons of Abraham], what is good and what the Lord requires of thee: to do justice and mercy, and to walk before [God] in humility."
To do this is to be like Jesus, who is God's very own equal. We know this because He sits on one and the same throne as God. Thus, to confess Christ Jesus as supreme Lord of all heaven and earth is to glorify the Father. The only way one can explain how this glorifies God is from the fact that they are equals. What you say of the one, you say of the other.
"How can you say, Show us the Father," Jesus said. "Have I been with you so long as you do not recognize Me?"
The cross is designed by God to make this recognition impossible. But with God all things are possible. For God delights in revealing to the lowly, to people who think of themselves as no better than slaves, who know they are criminals of the worst sort by the strict judgment of God's law - for there is no difference; all have sinned and fall short of God's glory in the law (all but One) - to people who pray, "God have mercy on me, a sinner," to these he has revealed Himself in all wisdom. For such was His good pleasure.
How could you possibly see the God of heaven and earth in that bloody, beaten mess, barely recognizable as a man on the cross? Answer: you cannot. Only God can enable a man so to see Him when He has so shrewdly hidden Himself from the wise and learned.
How can you see Him clearly? "τουτο φρονειτε εν υμιν ο και εν χριστω ιησου"
["Let this same mind(set) [dwell] in you that was in Christ Jesus].
The Bible has the answer. And sometimes part of that answer comes in the form of a simple and lowly, X-shaped poem.
And it is probably written in street Greek (Koine). If you wanted to find God in the first-century, you would have needed to look among a tiny (and quite quirky) people of no significance to the Roman Empire in one of its more obscure corners. There, you would find him eating with sinners, misfits, and prostitutes. He would be found teaching shepherds and tax collectors, and helping poor widows and slaves. He would be kicked out of synagogues, chased out of town, and not well appreciated in his hometown.
He would be labeled a troublemaker, a deceiver of the people, a friend of the wicked ("sinners"), but not a friend of Caesar. This was God's equal. His chief characteristics? Wisdom, humility, charity, compassion, chastity and purity, and zeal for the word of the Lord and God's house. His house would be a house of prayer. He would be interested in the lost sheep, the wounded, hungry, sinful and needy -- the losers.
He would die of the death of losers, and the worst among men. This is what it means, "Even the death of the cross." This was God's equal. We should not be surprised to find that we learn of Him -- the better part of life -- from simple poems, simply structured, from Christians -- a people despised and (for the most part) unlearned, not wealthy, nor was their much to commend them by the standards of Roman society.
These are the ones: who seek to live as though to say, "Jesus Is Lord," whom God will raise in power. They may not be much to look at now. But neither were people on crosses. But these are the friends of God's equal. What then will become of them?
"For our conversation [citizenship] is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working [power] whereby he is able even to subdue all things [in heaven and earth] unto himself."
That is the non-chiastic part. And it is just as glorious.
Applications: Why did Paul say this to the Philippians? They had something of a disunity (not of the same mind) and disobedience problem. The answer? Greater humility.
Paul said in chapter 4:2 "I beseech Euodias, and beseech Syntyche, that they be of the same mind in the Lord." In the ancient world, some among the aristocratic women had converted to the faith in Jesus. These exercised more authority than others in their congregation, and did not always see things the same way.
At one point, Paul says the Jews who opposed his message stirred up some prominent women against them (Paul and his comrades), forcing them to leave town. Euodia and Syntyche appeared to be among the prominent women who converted to Christ. They were probably friends of Lydia, a wealthy prominent Christian woman of Thyatira who traded in very expensive "purple" clothing. Her clients were aristocrats like Euodia and Syntyche. Purple cloth was also the stuff of royalty in the ancient world.
Paul was pleading with them not to tear the Church apart by appealing to the humility of Jesus. Romans were all about "honor" and one's good name (social status was highly valued). So Euodia may have been leading many women one way, and Syntyche another. The topic was not central to the Christian faith or Paul would have addressed it directly. Instead, he appealed to the humility of Christ, and the necessity of them to be of "the same mind" on whatever their controversy was. This "mind" in Greek actually means "mindset," a way of deliberately framing your outlook self-consciously to imitate that shown by Christ.
We see this in three ways Paul applies the chiasmus just after citing it:
1. Obey me [the apostle Paul] also when I am gone just as you do when I am present
When the cat was away, apparently the mice had cheese fights.
2. "Do all things without murmurings and disputings" -- Later Paul inverts this saying more positively "Rejoice in [Glory in the Word and deeds of] the Lord always," "Be careful for [Worry about] nothing; but [instead of worrying uselessly] in every thing by prayer and supplication [prayerful petitions] with thanksgiving [for what God has already given you] let your requests be made known unto God.
Translation? Stop grumbling against each other and start praying to God for yourselves and one another instead with thanksgiving.
3. "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things."
Note the verb "Think." This still carries forward the pre-chiastic point (v. 5) about one's mindset. Paul describes here the mindset of Christ, a mind set on the things of the Holy Scriptures -- described in their various attributes. For the Word is true, honest, just, pure, lovely, etc. Paul offers one such "thing" -- sound word -- for them to think on -- Philippians 2:6-11 -- that is what He refers to, sayings like the one He just taught them, about the humility, honesty, and glory of Christ.
Paul has taught the Philippians OTHER examples of these from the catechetical "form of sound words," and bids them to dwell on these Christological favorites of the early Church.
Think (mediate or dwell upon) sayings from the Word. Why would Paul command this? Because Paul knows a secret: The Bible has the answer. My recommendation is to do just what Paul said. See if you can hunt down in the Bible other "noble, honest and true, sound words" in the New Testament, and meditate on these. Look for the chiastic structure, a kind of symmetry of ideas from top to bottom, in poetic (kind of snappy and short) lines. They will start with a high Christology in each case.
When you have found two or three, here is a really good idea. Set them side by side, and compare and contrast them with each other to get a fuller "synoptic" view of the Gospel as taught by Jesus and the apostles in the earliest years of the post-resurrection Church.
Perhaps, we will turn to that exercise next to see what we can find out about the Lord of glory, whose example and mindset we must follow.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment