In a chapter attempting to downplay chiasmus in the Book of Mormon, Matthew Paulson wrote:
One of the most overlooked or avoided subjects on Mormonism are chiasmus poetry. (Matthew A. Paulson, Breaking the Mormon Code: A Critique of Mormon Scholarship Regarding Classical Christian Theology and the Book of Mormon [Livermore, Calif.: WingSpan Press, 2006, 2009], 219)
This is an amazing claim, as chiasmus in the Book of Mormon is well-discussed in LDS scholarship and apologetics. As one representative example (with links to other discussions), see:
Jeff Lindsay, Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon
Mormons have claimed that the chiasmus structure was unknown at the time the Book of Mormon was written. To the contrary, scholarly religious circles knew about chiasmus almost 90 years prior to 1830 when the Book of Mormon was published. (Ibid., 225)
It is true that some LDS apologists have been over-zealous in claiming that chiasmus was unknown when Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon. However, As John Welch's has shown (see below), it was theoretically possible but very unlikely Joseph Smith could have known about chiasmus. On this see:
Elsewhere, we read the following amazing claims about chiasmus in the Book of Mormon:
However, unknown to most Mormons, there are several reasons to believe that this literary style was designed by a charlatan of the 19th century whom understood the chiasmus structure and reproduced this literary writing form . . . That there are many chiasmi in the Book of Mormon no honest person will deny. However, the fact remains that the literary structure is very pronounced and obvious, more so, than the common Bible chiasmus . . . As fantastic ass it may seem, it is not inconceivable to believe that an imaginative plagiarizer could duplicate this literary style, over and over, into a fictional story. In fact, the hard evidence leans heavily in that direction (Ibid., 219, 221, 225-6)
One cannot help but think that the Book of Mormon, for Paulson, is damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t! If it contains genuine instances of chiasmus which are better than the Bible at times, that is proof that it was made up by Joseph Smith! Imagine if he did not—he would undoubtedly take it as evidence that Joseph Smith, its author, was unimaginative in the literary department!
Furthermore, many studies have shown that the chiasmus in the Book of Mormon are genuine instances and, further, could not have been “faked” by Joseph Smith—such is rather impressive if Joseph Smith was the charlatan Paulson believes him to be. See Boyd F. Edwards and W. Farrell Edwards, Does Chiasmus Appear in the Book of Mormon by Chance? BYU Studies 43/2 (2004): pp. 103-130.
Paulson's arguments against the Book of Mormon on this issue are an utter failure.
Paulson's arguments against the Book of Mormon on this issue are an utter failure.
