Inductive and Deductive Reasoning in Chiasms

An analysis of John 6:35-48 (NIV)

Rev. Dr. Michael H. Koplitz

A definition of a chiasm (chiasmus) is:

A reversal in the order of words in two otherwise parallel phrases, as in
He went to the country, to the town went she. (dictionary.com)
When John F. Kennedy said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for
your country," he wasn't just stirring the hearts of millions of young Americans, he was also
engaging in a little-known form of wordplay called chiasmus. All it takes is a repeated statement
with two elements transposed between them. The wisdom of the ages shines in gems such as
Cicero's "It is as difficult for the good to suspect evil as it is for the evil to suspect good."
(http://www.amazon.com/Never-Let-Fool-KissYou/dp/0670878278/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=8-1&qid=1436270410C)
The modern usage of a chiasm is to draw attention to a specific point by using parallelism without
just pure repetition. From my research chiasms are not used very often in modern literature.
However, it was used heavily in ancient writings. Where did this literary form develop? According
to Dictionary.com the chiasm literary structure was developed in the ancient Greek culture.
If this is true then way is chiasmic literary forms all over the Hebrew Scriptures of the Bible? The
Hebrew scriptures were written before the introduction of the Greek culture into the Middle East.
If the chiasm literary form was developed originally by the ancient Greeks then the question arises
as to how the ancient Hebrew writings learned about it? A possible answer is the Philistines
introduced this writing style to the Hebrews. So the chiasmic form had to exist before the
Philistines left the Greek area of influence to make their way to the costal plain of modern day
Israel.
A possibility I offer is the Greek writers picked by this literary form from the peoples of the Middle
East. The conclusion here is the ancient peoples of Canaan developed chiasms and this style
spread to Greece. Since the Hebrew Scriptures were written before the Greek influence reached
the Middle East I believe this conclusion is a better hypothesis.
Thinking about chiasms in modern terms drew me to this observation. People have two ways of
reasoning. Deductive reasoning can visualize a conclusion based on very few observations then
the conclusion can be tested thereby finding additional support or in some cases the original
conclusion is incorrect. An inductive reasoning is when as many observations are gathered
together before any conclusion is offered. In this manner the individual feels assured their
conclusion is always correct (and at times the conclusion can be incorrect).
While examining chiasms in the Bible I noted the chiasms look like a combination of inductive and
deductive reasoning. The key to a chiasm in the Bible is to determine the center point God
conveying. Then from there you branch out looking at the parallel lines. Here is a basic structure
of a chiasm:
A
B
C

B
A
In this diagram C is the center point. Chiasms can go much deeper than three levels and can be
only two levels
A
B
A
Think of the structure of a chiasm this way:
Observation/fact/belief
Observation/fact/belief
Gods revelation
Observation/fact/belief
Observation/fact/belief
For the inductive thinker the chiasm offers the data available then offers the conclusion. For the
deductive thinker the chiasm offers the conclusion then the data. It is a combination of inductive
and deductive reasoning. Take a look at this chiasm. I structured the chiasm so you can see the
levels and the repetition (John 6:35-48 NIV):
35

Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry,
and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. 36 But as I told you, you have seen me and
still you do not believe.
A

37

All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I
will never drive away. 38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but
to do the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I
shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day.
B 40 For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in
him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day."41 At
this the Jews there began to grumble about him
C because he said, "I am the bread that came down from heaven."
B 42 They said, "Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother
we know? How can he now say, 'I came down from heaven'?" 43 "Stop
grumbling among yourselves," Jesus answered. 44 "No one can come
to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up
at the last day.

A 45 It is written in the Prophets: 'They will all be taught by God.' Everyone who has
heard the Father and learned from him comes to me. 46 No one has seen the
Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.
47

Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life.

The first part:

A

37

All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I
will never drive away. 38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but
to do the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I
shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day.
B 40 For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in
him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day."41 At
this the Jews there began to grumble about him
C because he said, "I am the bread that came down from heaven."

We have an inductive reason for Jesus being the bread that came down from heaven.
We have a beautiful artistic inductive process. All who come to Jesus will belong to him forever.
All who come to Jesus will be granted eternal life which will be granted at the last day. Therefore,
Jesus is the bread that came down heaven. The bread from heaven is a metaphor used
throughout the Bible symbolizes all we need to live is given to us by God.
Now for the deductive reasoning. Lets start with:
C because he said, "I am the bread that came down from heaven."
B 42 They said, "Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother
we know? How can he now say, 'I came down from heaven'?" 43 "Stop
grumbling among yourselves," Jesus answered. 44 "No one can come
to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up
at the last day.
A 45 It is written in the Prophets: 'They will all be taught by God.' Everyone who has
heard the Father and learned from him comes to me. 46 No one has seen the
Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.

Starting with the belief statement I am the bread that came down from heaven. So for the
deductive thinkers we start with a conclusion statement. Then we look for the data to support the
statement. Verse 42 tells us what verse 40 does that all who come to Jesus will be raised on the
last day.
So the chiasm starts with an inductive argument and ends with the deductive argument. This
particular passage has a parallelism in it with verse 35 and verse 47 which is the center point at
verse 41b.
Parallel 35 Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go
hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. 36 But as I told you, you have seen
me and still you do not believe.

37

All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I
will never drive away. 38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but
to do the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I
shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day.
C 40 For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in
him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day."41 At
this the Jews there began to grumble about him
D because he said, "I am the bread that came down from heaven."
C 42 They said, "Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother
we know? How can he now say, 'I came down from heaven'?" 43 "Stop
grumbling among yourselves," Jesus answered. 44 "No one can come
to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up
at the last day.

45

It is written in the Prophets: 'They will all be taught by God.' Everyone who has
heard the Father and learned from him comes to me. 46 No one has seen the
Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.

Parallel 47 Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life.
Structuring the passage in this manner preserves the idea of inductive/deductive reasoning for
chiasms. Verse 35 and verse 47 are simply parallels. Repetition can be seen in many places in
the Bible. The definition of parallelism is: the repetition of a syntactic construction in successive
sentences for rhetorical effect (dictionary.com). So verse 35 and 47 are added for rhetorical
effect. If the listener did not believe Jesus is the bread from heaven they should after reading
these verses.
In conclusion what we have here is a usage of two rhetorical forms: chiasm and parallelism. The
idea of inductive/deductive reasoning in the chiasm has been demonstrated. The emphasis the
author of Johns Gospel had to insure we know Jesus is the bread of heaven is bolstered by the
use of parallelism in combination with a chiasm.