In Persistent Prayer, wherein I examined the fourth parallel in the list, I stated that Talbert noted more than thirty years ago that these two parables were part of a major chiastic structure (Lk. 10:21 to 18:30) in which “the elements (parables) are balanced in chiastic fashion.” In discussing these two parables, Marshall had made the statement that the interpretation of the first parable was derived from the second that the author had linked together with the first in these words: “the parable is meant to depict the character of God by contrast with the unwilling householder. It is true that this lesson is not explicitly drawn in the text; the justification for it is to be found in the parallel parable of the unjust judge (18:1-8) in which the point is clearly made, and also in the appended teaching in 11:9-13, especially v. 13 where the comparison between men and God is clearly made.” Marshall at 462. Thus Marshall had linked the second together with the first based strictly on content. Marshall did not discuss the use of a chiastic structure to create this linkage.
Would an examination of the 11 pairs of elements (usually parables) in the chiastic pattern identified by Talbert consisting of Luke 10:21 to 18:30 confirm the intentional nature of the structure wherein the second element further elucidated the lesson of the first? How should this examination be conducted?
Gospel of Luke