The Cautions of Chiasms, with Mike Chu - Episode 071

Carey Griffel: [00:00:00] Welcome to Genesis Marks the Spot, where we raid the ivory tower of biblical theology without ransacking our faith. My name is Carey Griffel, and I welcome you back to this podcast. Today we're going to be having a continuation of a conversation that we had last time between myself and Mike Chu, and we were talking again about the Book of Job.

Now in this conversation for today, we're still touching on the idea of who the satan is in the Book of Job. But primarily, a lot of this is going to be more about the structure of the Book of Job itself. Now before we get into the conversation, I want to take just a couple of minutes to talk about some things that I usually talk about at the end of the episode. But I want to make [00:01:00] sure that you are all aware of what I'm doing outside of this particular podcast.

Okay, so here's the thing. I do have a YouTube channel, and I will be putting videos onto that YouTube channel. I also might be putting short segments of my podcast episodes onto YouTube just to make them easily shareable and things like that.

But, I do more than that on YouTube as well. I partner with two different YouTube channels. One of them is Myths, Mysteries, and Majesty. I do have a few conversations on there, and I am good friends with a lot of the other people who are on there.

The other YouTube channel that I partner with is Faith Unaltered. And on Faith Unaltered, I am going to be doing a regular segment of my own. This is called Pilgrims in a Holy Land. I actually started it back in December or January, but then I had a whole bunch of [00:02:00] really weird technical problems with streaming, and my computer, and noise, and all of these things, so I put that on hold for the moment until I could get all of that ironed out.

It is, I think, primarily ironed out. So, I have restarted that segment on Faith Unaltered, so it's not going to be on my YouTube channel, which is Genesis Marks the Spot, it's going to be on Faith Unaltered's YouTube channel. But it will be a regular segment there, and what Pilgrims in a Holy Land is, is instead of talking about biblical theology like I do here in this podcast, on there I'm going to be talking about church history, systematic theology, dogmatics, doctrine, denominations, and all kinds of things that segment to that kind of thing. So it's similar to what I'm doing here in this podcast because I'm using [00:03:00] critical thinking, I am looking at things in context, trying to see multiple sides of an issue, and that's what I want to do in church history as well.

And why did I call it Pilgrims in a Holy Land? Well, you might catch the reference to something else, but we are all pilgrims. We are all on journeys. And I'm not discounting the original Holy Land, but with Jesus and the body of Christ now encompassing the entire earth, the Holy Land is not just located in one small segment of the world. It is actually wherever we are as Christians.

Anyway, that is my thinking about it. So if you want to subscribe to these YouTube channels, that would be great. The channel Myths, Mysteries, and Majesty tackles paranormal topics, weird topics, difficult parts of the Bible, archaeology, all kinds of really [00:04:00] interesting topics, so go check that out if you're interested.

On Faith Unaltered, it is a very wide range of apologetics topics, live streams, conversations of all types of things from the Trinity to different types of theism. And it just has a really wide range of topics and views. So, check those out if you're interested. Check out my new segment on Faith Unaltered called Pilgrims in a Holy Land.

And keep an eye out for videos that I'm going to have on my own channel, Genesis Marks the Spot. One of the first I want to do is going to be a video about my note taking methods. So, if you're interested in that, make sure you tune in there and subscribe. And also, if you are a newsletter subscriber, I'm going to be putting out information about those as well there.

So, that's a really good place to find information about the times that I'm going to be on Pilgrims in the Holy [00:05:00] Land, and other stuff like that. So, thanks for letting me ramble here a little bit before I get into this conversation with Mike. But before I do that, I also want to mention the Divine Council Worldview podcast, which Mike co hosts with Dr. Ronn Johnson, as well as a few surprise others. So go check that out if you are interested in Dr. Heiser's material, in the Divine Council Worldview perspective of reading the Bible. Some of the interesting elements that are going into that podcast is some of the practical side of all of that. Which is really, really fascinating. So go check that out if you're interested.

I know I've just given you guys a lot of stuff to listen to. I hope that doesn't mean you stop listening here, but part of why I love doing a podcast is the communal aspects that go into this. One thing that's great about podcasting these days is it is a community and a lot of us [00:06:00] podcasters work together, talk together, and we are kind of this family of trying to get content out to all of you who are listening.

So, I do appreciate the support, and at the end of this episode, I am going to be talking a little bit more in depth about how you can support me as well, because a lot of you already are, and I want to say how appreciative I am of that, and I want to let you all know all of the various ways in which you can support me. You guys are a great blessing, let me just tell you that right now. So I want to tell you all thank you, and I want to go ahead and get back into this conversation that I had with Mike Chu. So, here you go, I hope you enjoy it.

Well, let's talk for just a bit about the dialogue between the friends and Job. Because you have some suggestion, for instance, in Eliphaz's vision, about this connection with ha [00:07:00] satan and, you know, so there's a suggestion in the book of Job, where we might read back the earlier chapters into what we're seeing in the dialogue between the friends and the dialogue of how Job is responding to them and things like that.

Mike Chu: Through a first reading, right, if you're reading these dialogues or listening to these dialogues for the first time, the initial set up pretty much is, you as the reader or the listener, you're sitting down and you're basically listening to a debate between four friends. You have the sufferer and you have three paragons of different versions of ancient near eastern wisdom. They will all have their own particular spin. But those three especially have a common root, which is their world view is still on the idea that the world is built on justice. You do good, you get good; you do bad, you get bad. And so you're listening to all three and then eventually you get to the fourth guy [00:08:00] Elihu and then we're all wondering, Where did you come from?

And, and, and then we're just kind of thinking, Oh, okay. So maybe that's what the book of Job is going towards, that we're going to have to eventually evaluate and decide who's right. Is it the three friends plus Elihu or is it Job? And Job is not making any real argument for a theodicy. He's actually challenging every one of these theodicies. He's pointing out all the deficiencies, all the brokenness in these theodicies. He's pointing out, like, No, that doesn't make any sense. No, I used to think that. No, that doesn't make sense either. And he keeps pushing back. He wouldn't submit to their logic and their arguments. And so you as the reader, if you're initially reading this the first time, you might be thinking, Hmm, I'm going to have to come to a decision of who is going to be right.

And then God shows up. And that's actually the big surprise of the book because every other version of the Book of Job, [00:09:00] doesn't have the God that they're complaining to or asking questions like what's going on show up. He actually shows up. And which is like such a unique thing in the in this, you know Israelite Jewish version of Job is that Yahweh actually makes time, actually comes before a creature of dust. It's like, let's talk.

And again, this comes back to what I alluded to earlier. If you're assuming that God is coming to set Job straight, like, you idiot, like, let me show you something. If you think that's God's attitude, then you're going to interpret what he says to Job very differently than if you actually consider the fact that in the Hebrew, right, Job in chapter three calls himself a gever and in my own personal translation, I called him a strong, genuine male child. And then throughout the dialogues, in the poetic dialogues, the [00:10:00] friends are picking up that he used that word of like, Who do you think you are? A Gevar? Oh, surely you're a Gevar. And they're making fun of him. And so again, if you're assuming God is coming to set Job straight, he's gonna put him in his place, then when God uses the word Gevar, you're thinking, he's saying it in the same way like the friends.

Here's my challenge. What if he's not? What if he's actually saying to Job, You said that you're a Gever, you are a Gever, and since you are a Gever, a strong, genuine man, get up here. Come to me. Let's talk. Let's chat. Let's have a face to face dialogue. You wanted one. I will give you one. Let's do it. Let's talk.

And the way that this happens is all very similar to the way that God talked with his prophets like Moses, and this is where [00:11:00] again, you know we as English readers so often are left befuddled because we don't understand how narrative dialogue occurs in Hebrew writing. Robert Alter was the one that really helped illuminate this for me, that you see in the text these indicators that one person talks and It's like a ping pong match.

It goes to the other side. What you're supposed to do with the ping pong, you're supposed to respond back. And Job sort of doesn't get the idea initially, and this occurred also before with God and Moses. God is angry about the golden calf incident. He, you know, is like, just leave me alone. Just, like, destroy the Israelites after what they had done. And you see in the actual text, these indications of like, wait, what's going on? Because normally when we have a dialogue in, in Hebrew, there's a ping pong and we're missing the [00:12:00] and that's supposed to catch your attention of like, Oh, something just went wrong here. And Job and Moses , and others throughout, you know, when you're reading the Old Testament, like these are little kind of writer clues for you to like, time for you to pay attention.

And so this thing that's going on with Joe, he realized, Oh, I need to say something. And so he says something and he doesn't know what to say of like okay. And then God was like, Oh, All right. Well, you need to be talking. You wanted me to come here to talk with you. So talk with me. And so, like, you can see it even in our English translations that God is like, Job, talk with me, say something.

And that actually indicates God wasn't coming in like hot judgment of Job. He wanted to actually have a conversation with Job. But because he is God, it's kind of hard to tone it down because he is the creator. But the fact that he's talking so boastfully, so happily about Leviathan and [00:13:00] Behemoth already is an indication he's not coming in hot.

He's coming in with like, I'm trying to answer your questions. I want you to talk with me. You asked me to come. I'm here. And if you know, coming from a divine council worldview, what blows my mind is that the Lord of the council basically brings the divine council right into this conversation with Job. And so it even feeds into the idea that Job is a prophet. Because prophets get to engage in the divine council. They get to watch, at least. They get to participate, even sometimes. Here, Job is actually now like, Hey. I want to talk with you. I am the Lord of the Council.

Carey Griffel: Oh, so that's fascinating because if the satan at first, he's part of the council, right? He's talking to God, and he's challenging God against Job. Or, God brings up Job, and then Satan challenges that. And then here at [00:14:00] the end, we have Job in that position, who is speaking to God. So, that seems very interesting, especially when you bring up the idea that Leviathan and Behemoth are also a connected to Job, like it seems like there's this whole matrix of ideas that we're missing if we're just like, oh, that's Satan and like, we're not cluing into these subtle things that there's an actual parallel between Job and the satan here.

Mike Chu: And I'm not saying that this is definitely like a slam dunk that, you know, the whole entire Divine Council is there. I am at least acknowledging, right, if I believe Yahweh is the head of the Divine Council, then, like, almost in the imagery in my mind, instead of like, Hey Job, I'm going to transport you over to my throne room and chat with me. Instead, God takes his entire throne room with him and just like, vroom, right into earth. Hey, Job, like you wanted to talk. I'm here. And it could just [00:15:00] be Yahweh and Job chatting in the throne room. Maybe it is just Yahweh appearing in some sort of form before Job. Who knows? We're not given the direct descriptions.

It's just that my own imagination. And again, this is part of what I mean. This is fun of actually just imagining where this could go.

Carey Griffel: Yeah. And we do have that council theme that's already there. It's before the poetry section, but we already have it in our mind as we're reading or listening to this. So, yeah, and the whole whirlwind imagery also, I'm going to guess that's indicative of something there as well.

Mike Chu: It's a cloud, I mentioned a cloud for a reason because that's, again, it was in my paper, but , it's just an interesting thing that is happening.

And so I would just say that, especially when we get there, maybe we should pay attention to what's happening here. And God's assessment at the end of all this, after he finishes talking with Job and Job ends the conversation, which is another sign of like. Whoa, who gets to end the conversation?

Because [00:16:00] whoever gets to end the conversation in an ancient near Eastern context, basically draws the conclusion and draws like what ultimately you should learn from this whole entire dialogue. And Job's kind of assessment in the end, if Middleton, for example, is correct in his translation, Job's assessment is I am, I am just dust. I recant that I was like so angry and whatever else cause I now realize I didn't know what I was talking about, but that the fact that Yahweh came to talk with a creature of dust, right? And then God, then again, speaks after all this with Job and he talks to the three friends and he specifically just calls out Eliphaz and says to Eliphaz and the two other friends, he's angry with them because only Job was the one that spoke rightly to God, to Yahweh. And based on even just one Hebrew word, the difference between Eliphaz and the friends [00:17:00] with Job seems to be, Job spoke to God, to, while Eliphaz and the two friends spoke about God. They speculated.

And so that really actually for me, when then you go back and do a re reading, That needs to actually then start coming into your mind of like, Okay, so I originally was wrong. I thought I was going to have to, I as the audience, was going to have to come down to Who is right? Who has the correct theodicy? Who has the correct vision about how suffering works in our world? But now that we had this whole entire thing with God, because it never resolves. There is no theodicy that's offered.

God just basically points out, these three didn't know what they were talking about. And so if we keep that in mind, we're coming back to do a re reading, because that's what you should be doing, when you're encountering scriptures, you should be re reading. That your second read through, your third read through, your, how many read throughs, that should actually start [00:18:00] influencing how trustworthy is Eliphaz?

How trustworthy are these two other friends? Really? Do I treat their words as authoritative? Do I treat their words as informative, even? Or are they actually saying stuff they don't know anything about? And personally, that's kind of where I've been landing. Because when you look at really looking at the dialogues, and this is sometimes where I sometimes get frustrated that sometimes people just gloss through and they don't realize, did you know that he actually said that to him? That this friend said this to Job?

We have Bildad near the end of these debates and dialogues with Job, outrightly just says to Job. Your ten children? They probably sinned, didn't they? That's probably why they died. But don't worry, your latter days, the good days are coming, Job. It'll be all good. But your ten children, they kind of got what they deserve. I mean, if you imagine being a parent who lost a child due to [00:19:00] like a car accident that the child was, you know, collided with, and then to have a friend tell you, Oh, your daughter, she probably wasn't paying attention. That's why she died. How would you react?

Like the poetry is supposed to to invoke emotion in you as you're reading it. And I remember reading that part without again, finally, that filter, I was able to lay down and I'm just what in the world. These are friends. These are people who supposedly knew Job for years, the way they described it, they're seen and portrayed as like they're really good friends and then Bildad says this. Like, what kind of friend says this? Like, does he know the mind of God? Does he even know what happened in the council? None of them do. So how can he say that? How can I take anything that he says as being true or reliable?

Carey Griffel: Right. Well, and there, it seems like that is kind of [00:20:00] another angle to see this "Job in the council as a prophet," kind of a thing because Job is the one speaking rightly, whereas the other friends, they never got that counsel with God. They aren't in his presence. They aren't confronted with the whirlwind and these kinds of things. And yeah.

Mike Chu: One of my, again, that's actually the same Bible teacher I mentioned once before, he one time tried to come up with a biblical teaching from one of the friends of Job and his justification was because he knows the end of the story. He knows that God's assessment of their words were, they did not speak rightly about me. But he still was trying to draw out, like, one of their sayings as though this is biblical truth that we should really, like, meditate on.

And I didn't think much about it all those years ago as a 20 something year old Christian. Because, again, I was coming still from that worldview of, oh, Satan is in chapters 1 and 2. It's, [00:21:00] it's the devil. It's the same guy from the Gospels and everything else like that. And, you know, and I trusted this teacher and I still, for the most part, do.

But I definitely disagree with him on this now. That it's like, I have become extremely suspicious of the three friends' dialogue with Job. I will ponder it. I don't think Job is right on everything, but even Job in the end admits, I didn't, I didn't know what I was talking about. I don't know everything about creation. I get it now, but he's speaking humbly from a position of limited knowledge. And he's not pretending at the end that he had omnipotence and omniscience. These three friends are trying to portray themselves as though I'm the expert, you should listen to me. And I would just say you gotta take their dialogues with a grain of salt, not even a grain of salt, I would say a salt lick of amount of salt and be careful, don't just assume that they're right.

Carey Griffel: Yeah, [00:22:00] so one of the questions I get from people when talking about this is what is the point then? How should we read Job? What is the purpose of the satan in there and all of these things? If we assume it's the satan doing things then that de emphasizes the focus on what the friends are saying and the distinction between the friends and Job, I think.

I don't know. What do you think? Do you think that focus on the satan as, like, the bad guy here, then it's going to be harder to read the dialogue of the friends and what they're saying about Job as being the counter to what God is doing and says, as opposed to Satan being the main counter to God.

Mike Chu: If I were to say what was the main point of the book of Job, I would keep right in mind that the book of Job is wisdom literature and knowing that it is [00:23:00] wisdom literature, that the majority is wisdom literature. It is not trying to make propositions. It is trying to get the reader, the listener, to think, to ponder, to meditate.

And one of its goals, one of wisdom literature's goals, is to get you as the recipient of this wisdom to remember and very hold in your heart, very dearly, the fear of the Lord, of humility, of humbly walking before our God. And that what we see in the book of Job is this reminder that just because you have maybe in your own personal life, idyllic circumstances. You have multiple children, you are looking down the line, maybe years from now, you will have multiple grandchildren running around your, maybe your whole entire family complex. If you're fortunate enough to be able to build like what people would say is a whole entire family complex, like for us here in Massachusetts, we all know about the Kennedy complex. Right. It's like, you know, like multiple generations. It's like [00:24:00] acres and acres of land security all around. Like, but this is for this family. Like they are that secure. You could, you could assume nothing can touch me. And yet what we find in the book of Job is that you cannot control other free agents. And that in the very first place really needs to keep us humble.

You know, like what happens in the Book of Job is that you have this accuser come and essentially say, I don't think Job really actually is doing all this righteous stuff because he really fears you, loves you, Yahweh. Let's test that. You cannot control that. And then also you can't control how people react. Job could not control how his three friends ultimately then looked down on him and assumed and thought man, This suffering is pretty bad. And this kind of level of suffering being so bad must mean You're a sinner, you had done something terrible,[00:25:00] or you will even one of the arguments is you will do something terrible.

It's like minority report. We know that this is something that you're going to do. And so we're just going to lock you up into stasis forever. Like what? I didn't know I was going to do this. But that's the argument that they went down this line of thinking, which if you think about it, what does that mean?

We're the righteous ones, not you. We're the ones who are wise, not you. And, what the book of Job also provides is this permission to bring angry questions and protests, not just before God, but also to such friends. You know, it's kind of funny I was telling my wife, Sophia, that is this what's happening to me, that I'm becoming like almost like the go to guy for people in my church and even sometimes on podcasts about lament and imprecation, just like, but it is a little mini passion is a little hobby horse, I guess, is something that [00:26:00] has been really has captured my heart because I have been able to really just see the beauty of, of my Lord and yesterday I did a sermon on Psalm 22. I have never heard a sermon preached on Psalm 22 on Palm Sunday, and it was my job to finish up a sermon series on prayer. And the last thing we were going to talk about was imprecation and lament. And so it just somehow landed and lined up on the schedule that it was on Palm Sunday.

So it was a little awkward for me because, like, we had all the little kids and they're waving palm branches and it's like super happy. Jesus came into Jerusalem, they, you know, Hosanna, you know, like, save us. It's all great. And then I come and it's like, we're going to talk about Psalm 22. We're going to talk about lament. We're going to talk about this very crazy Psalm, if you really look at it. And one of the things I brought up is that so often in our modern culture, we don't know how to lament. And even other scholars I brought up in [00:27:00] the talk, they brought up the same thing, that we tend in our westernized culture, rush past the hardship and suffering.

We don't want to think about it too much. We don't want to metabolize the grief. We don't want to process through the pain. And so then we encounter Psalms like Psalm 22 and we don't know what to do with it. and even older scholarship, some of the older commentaries, which is again, another, you know, like haphazard, like don't necessarily trust all the older commentaries, some of them wondered, Oh, Psalm 22, these are two different Psalms, just like, like hodgepodge together because they couldn't comprehend why is it starting off with pain? And then goes into praise, and then pain, and then back to praise. But the transitions, there is no transition. There's no gray space. It's basically white, black, white, black. And it bothers people.

And here's the suggestion. Is the psalmist, the writer of Psalm 22, acknowledging the reality that when this psalm is sung in [00:28:00] corporate worship in the temple, that there will be people who are going through pain. And there are also going to be people who are going through praise and that they are standing side by side with one another, that they are in the same place of worship, in the same moment of worship. And in many ways, having to acknowledge I may be in the best times of my life, but I am no different than this person who is going through the darkest valley of the gloomiest despair.

And that as a community, we have to remember not just those who are going through the best of times, But also those who are going through the worst because we probably all will go through the same thing too and that we are still a community Another commenter in Psalm 22, and I thought of the friends of Job; there's lines in psalm 22 where it says, , commit his way to the Lord.

And you know, they, they give this nice, auspicious theology. And [00:29:00] this commenter said, these people, we can call the theologians of glory. They think they have all the answers. They think they understand why pain happens. And that it's just a simple, like you do a, b, and c, and then you'll get d. And that when this psalm is sung, or when we read the book of Job, it's supposed to shake us out of that kind of fantasy of you are no different than your fellow human being who is going through pain and suffering.

And for me, when I read this, this increases my compassion for those who are enduring the worst of times. Because it reminds me and I have felt it and I have experienced it and I've shared about it before with you, Carey, and with the audience, I have gone through those valleys, and it has humbled me. And I know that I am not immune from those seasons of life. They will come. And just like what happened with my sister, but because of what I had gone through with my wife, with her [00:30:00] cancer and even hearing loss, unknowingly I was prepared and prepared for what was going to come this past year with my sister's passing. I was probably better equipped than I was when all those things that happened with my wife with her cancer occurred. I knew what to watch out for. I knew what to do. I knew if I was upset, I could come to God angry, even screaming and yelling. And yet he would not be upset. The Book of Job gave me that permission.

That's the beauty of the book of Job to me. It gives permission to sufferers. Bring your angry questions to God and also challenges us, do you really need to know the answer? Do you really need to know why? Do you need to know the background, the mechanisms of how all this played out? Do you? Or is it, at the rock bottom of all this, you're wondering, God, do you care? Did you see me? And God's answer to Job on [00:31:00] that question is, again, from the very moment when God calls him, you are a Gever. He is purposely drawing out a word that Job said about himself in chapter three.

That meant God was saying to him very quietly, Job, I was watching. I did know about what you were going through. I even knew you used the word Gever for yourself. And guess what? I agree. You are a Gever. These three friends of yours, they're not Gevers. You are.

Carey Griffel: Yeah, so we have these patterns that are obviously here. We have the fact that Job is poetry. And for some of us who are studying scripture a little bit more deeply, who are looking at patterns and looking at the poetry of scripture, things like that. We clue into certain types of things like chiasms, right? And other types of parallel literature and all of these things.

So [00:32:00] before we end our conversation here, I just want to touch a little bit on that kind of thing, because you've brought forward the idea that this is very strongly it's poetry. And so, A lot of us are going to say, okay, that means there's chiasms, that means that maybe the whole book is a chiasm, and for some people it's like every book of the Bible is a chiasm, and these kinds of ideas, and look, I love chiasms, I absolutely, absolutely adore chiasms, and for those who aren't familiar with this term of a chiasm, what it is, is it's kind of like a sandwich. You have something that happens or is stated at the first, you have kind of a middle portion to it, and then you have the end that reflects the first, and there's kind of this progression of things.

You can think of it as a sandwich with layers, or you can think of it as like a mountain where you're going up the mountain, and then you're at the top of the [00:33:00] mountain, that's the middle of the chiasm, and then you're going back down the mountain. And so there's parallels on each side of the chiastic structure.

That's what a chiasm is. And there are chiasms all over the place in the Hebrew Bible. So, they're fascinating, they're amazing. The midpoint of the chiasm is a point that you want to really pay attention to. But, let's talk a little bit about chiasms and the structure of Job in general. Do you see the Book of Job as a chiasm?

Mike Chu: I would say there are chiasms. every so often throughout the book of Job though the funny thing is scholars don't necessarily all agree on every one of them as a chiasm so then you gotta also kind of wonder about that but I would caution against assuming that the entire book Is a chiasm, right? Because there's so many factors that goes into it and, you know, Carey, you mentioned how, like, there are some people who think that every book in the Bible or the entire Bible is a [00:34:00] chiasm. Like this is in some sense, a result of a certain time and phase within, in some scholarship where everyone just like chiasm was the hot thing.

Everyone wanted to find it. And the thing though, is that that kind of toned down my enthusiasm about chiasms is that when I went into my poetry course, I started learning about parallelism and guess what? There's more, scholarly material from the commentaries that I have that mentions about parallelism within the book of Job, then chiasm.

In fact, actually none of the good scholarship books, including Ballantine, ever calls the structure of Job as a chiasm. Well, Mike, that doesn't prove anything, right? There will be some people who will say, It could still be a chiasm. Here's some other things that makes me concerned when people assume books like Job is an entire chiasm.

Can you read Hebrew? And it's an honest question. I'm not trying to put down people or shame them or whatever else. [00:35:00] I'm not terrific. I actually am more terrible at reading Hebrew than anything. I just like, you know, I just have enough to be dangerous. So I always have to guard myself. And, the problem though is that with chiasms, for you to know if something is really a chiasm, the best way to detect it is to actually read the text in Hebrew.

Not just read it, but actually speak it, say it out loud. Hebrew is a very oral language. That's actually part of the way that these advanced scholars can detect chiasms in poetry. Because they're actually reading the scripture out loud and feeling the pace, feeling like in hearing the sounds and the rhythms and the rhymes of it all.

And so if you're just simply reading it and you're not even speaking it out loud, you're probably going to miss something, or you may over detect something or may under detect something just because you're not even speaking it out loud. And when I say speaking, I don't mean like a grammar one and two level like me, where it's [00:36:00] like David and Hassata like, like, I'm like saying it so slowly because I'm like, Okay, I know this is supposed to make this syllable, and I know this is supposed to make this sound, and oh, I see an et, oh, I can't make a sound there, or an aleph, that doesn't, like, like, I'm constantly just trying to remember all this stuff, but fluent speakers, people who've been doing this for decades, and they're actively speaking this all the time in their own research.

Those are the kind of folks that I definitely look up to and just say like, please teach me from your mountain because I, I, like, I'm, I'm terrible right now at it.

Carey Griffel: Well, and poetry is very much strongly an oral thing. Like, if you hear somebody who , is not used to reading Shakespeare, who tries to read Shakespeare, you're going to be like, I don't, I'm not following what you're saying here. I'm not following the story because it's hard to follow when you're too focused on, you know, the pronunciation and what does this term mean? What does that term mean? But if you [00:37:00] hear somebody who's very versed in performing Shakespeare, then you're actually going to understand and follow the story very easily because they are performing it , they're showing it and presenting it in a way that has that flow, that has that rhythm, that you're understanding like the entire structure of the dialogue, all of these things. Like, so poetry is the same kind of thing. Like you can't hesitantly speak poetry and get the same impact and hear the same things as when you're hearing somebody who's fluent in that.

Mike Chu: Yeah. And here's the other, you know, one other major thing I would bring up. Most of us are Westerners. And to be honest, because we're Westerners, we're bringing again our presumption of our culture into how we read and interpret data. And one of the best articles I read about, it's kind of funny, it actually was about chiasms of how to detect them, [00:38:00] how often they're under detected, and how often they're also over detected.

And it's an article inside the Dictionary of the Old Testament, Wisdom, Poetry, and Writings. It's one of those de facto books you have to read in order to get ready to start digging into poetry works of the Bible. And so the authors who wrote this for under detecting, that's the problem. It's like, we can't speak the language as often. And so we're actually going to miss how it's sounding. And that's a big deal about determining if something is a chiasm. The ot her problem is that also under detecting is because as Westerners, we tend to think things very linearly a plus B equals C.

And sometimes, you know, certain eschatological models tend to do the same thing. They tend to read like the book of revelation as a whole entire linear story going from beginning to end. And it just has to progress this way [00:39:00] versus more of an ancient Near Eastern context. They are thinking in concentric circles.

They're thinking in a concentric pattern. they're nesting with each other. They may be actually more like a tiramisu layers down with each other. And so you like, there's that factor that we have to, contend with. So there's that problem. The over detection at times can happen because we may be so enthusiastic about finding a chiasm that we make one up without even knowing that we are making it up.

And some of the ways we know that you can detect that that's happening is when you look at even how these chiasms are broken out, is it just really lopsided, for example, there's like a, like five chapters on one end of the chiasm and there's like two on the other end. like sure there's a hinge point, but it's not really balanced, is it?

It's, it's really just like spinning and you just, it's going to break. So you got that problem. And so [00:40:00] like, and also even just how they're broken down, do they honor the way that the poetry is structured? if you're breakage in a chiasm happens while you're in technically the middle of a poetry piece and there's all this other poetry stuff that the writer intended to do. And you're slicing it right there, then you're, what you're actually ending up is you're breaking the original poetic pattern, which doesn't honor what the writer intended. And so then again, we're imposing upon the text a structure that was never meant to sustain.

So those are my concerns, my cautionaries about assuming things about like chiasms and in reality , this type of stuff is also not necessarily agreed upon across the board, even with people who are experts in Old Testament Hebrew poetry, Robert Alter, I think he's like, he's one of the best. But, there are others who came [00:41:00] before him, and who are currently also living right now, who would disagree with him. They have different words, and different ways of breaking down the Hebrew poetry, and they don't agree either!

So when we approach this, we have to just have an open handed approach of like, Oh, you know what? Who knows? Like, in the end, like, this could be all wrong. And so don't land so hard and assume this is a chiasm and I'm going to run with this and put all my eggs in this one basket because if it doesn't turn out to be correct, then you're coming up with interpretations that especially in something like the Book of Job that's talking about suffering and then you're teaching it to people who are going through seasons of suffering.

We may inevitably be doing harm to them through teaching that is actually not coming from the text. And I am very concerned about that kind of thing. I don't want to have people in my church be hurt by [00:42:00] an interpretation that I came up with because I made a wrong assumption.

Carey Griffel: Yeah, that's totally the case. And well, the problem with chiasm is that it relies on this, you know, parallelism between different parts of the section and It goes to the middle and all of this, but the thing is, we also have things like inclusios. We have things like parallelism. We just have echoes and allusions all over the place. So you might be taking an inclusio, you might be taking parallelism, you might be taking just an allusion or something that is doing this kind of a thing

And using that to defend a chiastic structure, whereas the chiastic structure isn't actually there, it's just parallelism, or it's just an illusion, or it's just an echo, or it's just something that's different than a chiasm, [00:43:00] right? So You know, there's this tendency for people to take chiasm as the be all, end all, and like the epitome of Hebrew poetry. Whereas that, it might not be the case. Maybe some authors use chiasms more than other authors do. maybe there are a lot of chiasms. So, not to discount this as a form of study that we can do. But when you get something that ends up being really popular and everybody's latching onto this idea, then you're going to get these ideas that are popping up way more prevalently than they actually should.

Mike Chu: And I would say, you know, if, one wants to really try to find a chiasm, then, you know, look at the original texts and also be careful to not just look at just the root or the root the lemma basically is like the, what the word by itself would look like because once you're dealing with actual sentences, sometimes the consonants [00:44:00] and vowel sounds change.

And so even that itself can affect if something really is a chiasm or not. And so just, you know, when you find it and there is some good scholarly evidence to point out that, and if you can't read the text itself, you know, then just take that with a grain of salt. Take that as it is. Because, you know, hopefully it is correct.

But be careful. And, you know, I just say it because, yeah, chiasms were just so popular a while ago. And I am not convinced that it is everywhere, to be honest.

Carey Griffel: Yeah. Well, a lot of times people think of a chiasm as connecting to the concepts or the imagery, and that can certainly be the case, but it's going to be much more solid if you're going to have the linguistic connections, if you're going to have the repeating words and phrases and sounds and things like that.

Mike Chu: Exactly.

Carey Griffel: Yeah. So for the book of Job, where we have part of it as narrative and the [00:45:00] rest of it as very solidly poetry, just that in and of itself should make us go, Oh, is this a chiastic structure or should we see this as something else?

Mike Chu: We have to be careful that the chiasm is not necessarily going to really lean too much into a certain interpretations. And I think when people make things such as a whole entire book is a chiasm. It's almost as though you're trying to say, this is what the whole entire book is about. And when you do that about wisdom literature, I think that you might end up oversimplifying an entire book. And so we have to be careful about that. Because then, you know, you might dismiss other really important pieces that are in there that the author is actually wanting to do to you, of actually wanting to like, get you to think about. And you're just ignoring it because, well, it doesn't fit in my thinking about a chiasm.

Carey Griffel: Yeah. The idea of the chiasm is the midpoint is the main [00:46:00] point.

And to be quite honest with you, a lot of times when we're reading scripture, it's the end. They still have that buildup and the conclusion and the end point that is actually the point of what The author is writing about. So again, the chiastic structures can be very useful and sometimes there are points where it really does hit on, this is something very strong that the author is trying to point out or that the reader is going to be taking away.

But if you're focusing on chiasms to the point that you're not realizing that the end is actually a really important point of the Book of Job, then.

Mike Chu: For another example, like another known , poetry technique in Hebrew that people like to bring up is like Psalm one 19 and how every stanza, every word at the beginning of each sentence in each stanza is actually a letter from the Hebrew alphabet.[00:47:00]

So like the first stanza you will find the first word of each sentence starts with the letter aleph. But here's the problem, you will never notice that in English. Can you imagine trying to start off each sentence in English with the letter A and just somehow making that work? And then some people, you know, they make it as though like, oh, this Psalm 119 is all about the law And so it's the law from A to Z and you know It's like a really quippy line that just makes me go like, oh my gosh, am I sucking on a lollipop?

What I would say is that this is actually a technique for memorization if I'm memorizing the scriptures How can I be able to memorize this writer technique would be I'll start off each word with the same letter So then you know, okay, which stanza am I in what part am I in? Oh, I'm in bet and so then it helps your memory and then you can recite it because you start picking up that pattern.

It [00:48:00] isn't necessarily that they're trying to make a theological statement of the law from A to Z. I mean, it, it might be, but that honestly just feels too quippy. and well, to 21st century.

Carey Griffel: Yeah. Well, we are so divorced from that oral context of memorization that sometimes that's really important, especially when you're teaching your young people and all of these things.

And I think it is the case that if we think that things like parallel structure and chiastic structure are kind of embedded in a way that you're thinking, because if you're an oral society, you're going to structure things in a way that's going to be easier for you to remember the order of things, and not leave points out.

And so if you're kind of used to thinking in these kinds of structures, then a lot of your writing is going to reflect that sheerly by accident. It's not like, [00:49:00] They've formulated this for particular theological reasons, necessarily, as you said, but it might just be the case that it's there because this was used in a liturgy or this was used in a particular teaching for the synagogues or, you know, the equivalent of the synagogues, you know, and that kind of thing.

Like there are parts of the text that are so old that We have, from ancient times, that, editors have put some of this together and so some of that is going to be reflective in our final text. It's not that the final text necessarily has the exact same points as all of the original writing, necessarily, because it might have had some point for teaching or some other thing.

Whereas what we need to focus on is our final canonical versions of these books. And so sometimes these chiastic structures, they're not even going to play any part into the [00:50:00] theology and themes and ideas of the final writers. They just are going to be reflective of these past ways of thinking. And we might not even know why they had them structured like that.

Mike Chu: Yeah, I mean, that's what I mean. It's like, there's just too many possible little problems that that's why I'm Uncomfortable with it, right? Because there will be some people who will point out. Hey, these dialogues with Job's friends Doesn't feel very balanced and actually they aren't like if you're following this pattern you're expecting something and then it's like wait We're missing it You get to the end and it almost feels like, Oh, they're so close.

It's like watching like a pole vault person running down the line and it's good form and everything. And then they're all the way up in the air and then they're about to clear. Oops. The ankle hit the bar and you're just like, Oh. And that's kind of how it feels sometimes. Like when I look at this, it's like, wow, this seems so beautiful and so structured.

And it's like, wait, what in the world happened at the end here? And, and then, you know, that's why also people point out about Elihu. It was like, where did [00:51:00] this guy come from? He isn't mentioned at all in the dialogues or even the setup. Was he always there? Right. and this is, you know, I think sometimes, you know, like with Elihu, sometimes folks who are very from The Bible is inerrant and inspired and it has to be exactly this way of how I think inerrancy and inspiration and infallibility has to play out that then, you know, they get very defensive when, questions are asked like, where was Elihu?

Oh, he was always there. It's like, but where in the text does it say? It doesn't say it, but he was just always there. It's like, how do you know? You know, like, you know for me, I am willing to play with just like, you know, this is poetry. The author can do what he wants. And he can edit it the way he wants. He's not beholden to a 21st century linear way of thinking. We actually need to submit to his ancient near Eastern way of thinking if we want to better comprehend what is he doing to us as the audience, what is he trying to do to us as the audience? So that's, that's why at [00:52:00] times like gotta be careful. And we can't just put too much stock into one way of looking at it just because There's so many other little factors that just can break every theory down.

Carey Griffel: Yeah. So the caution here would be when you're studying chiasms and you come across people who kind of formulate it, you know, ask yourself, how can we find those parallel Hebrew phrases and words?

And can we look at it in the original Hebrew at least to kind of see it more than just conceptual ideas? And actually looking into the language, which that's hard to do, but you know, with the prevalence of interlinears and so many online options for study, we can actually do that a lot more than we could ever have done that in the past before.

So yeah, that would be my challenge is don't take somebody's chiastic structure as given just because it looks pretty in [00:53:00] concept.

Mike Chu: Especially if it kind of causes you to lose focus on what is the Book of Job talking about? Well, it's wisdom literature. So what is wisdom literature supposed to do to you? And if you don't even know the answer to that, then that might be like, you should start there first before getting fascinated with a structure.

Carey Griffel: Yeah, genre matters. It matters a lot. Well, I guess we will go ahead and wrap up here. Is there anything you'd like to say at the end or anything you wanted to add to what we've already said?

Mike Chu: well, if anything, I hope it's okay if I plug a little bit about like I've joined the ranks of podcasters now, apparently. So as I am now part of the divine council worldview podcast with Dr. Ronn Johnson, I mentioned a little earlier and we have been doing a whole entire work through of going through the book of Genesis and the way that Ronn likes to call it is to test drive ideas. So, we're not necessarily saying, as we're going through each of these chapters and going through the book of Genesis, that we [00:54:00] completely agree with this, and also please, Please hear me out. Ronn and I are not necessarily going to agree with each other.

Actually. I know we are not going to be agreeing with each other once we get to certain passages, I'm bracing myself and like, you know, he is the scholar. I guess I am also a scholar technically, but I'm an MDiv scholar versus he's like a full on PhD scholar. So like, I know my place. But at the same time, I'm so grateful that he's willing to actually have dialogue and conversation with me and that we can play around with the ideas and you know, I know maybe some people might be concerned when I use the word play I guess that's kind of the best way I would say it. I'm not saying play as in like maliciousness, but to really just, yeah, test drive the ideas. How does it feel? Does it work with the other pieces of scripture and, you know, it, just broadens your understanding and your horizons to see the texts and especially since we're trying to figure out what was the original context, how the original [00:55:00] audience is trying to understood does in some sense, you have to play an experiment with ideas. And so that's what we've been doing. I mean, recently, the most recent episode that just got released is just us talking about Genesis three and asking the question about what is the seed of the woman.

And so I have my own convictions about what that is and also my approach of how I would teach that and Ronn has is. And so it was a good conversation of just going back and forth of you know, we're not angry with each other, but we're understanding where each other is coming from. And I think that's always the goal of when you're doing good scholarship and good work and research you are respectful and able to understand the other person's perspective, though you may not agree with the conclusion.

Carey Griffel: Perfect. And honestly, I would definitely put it the way that you just did as well. And that's kind of what I want to do here too. And so when I get dialogue from other people and maybe some pushback on some of the things that I say [00:56:00] in my episodes, that's absolutely fine.

I love that kind of interaction. I love the pushback. I love people throwing in other ideas and saying, Well, maybe let's look at it this way, because that's where growth happens, like, this whole idea and conversation about Job and seeing Satan here, that has actually happened in my own interpretation of this book.

As I talk to people, and as people push back on this idea and on that idea, then I get kind of a more full picture, or I get to see it in a different presentation. It doesn't mean I have to agree, it doesn't mean I have to necessarily change my idea, It doesn't mean that my idea is necessarily right and their idea is wrong. Like I want to see all of these things come together. I want to see as much information and these ideas piled on top of one another, which is what you have to do in order to build a solid case for anything. So I love it. I'm so excited for the Divine Council Worldview podcast. [00:57:00] And if you guys haven't checked that out, please do so. There is amazing dialogue happening in that and much more to come in the future.

Mike Chu: Thank you, Carey. Appreciate it.

Carey Griffel: Thanks, Mike. All right. Well, that is it for this episode. And as always, I want to thank you for listening. Thank you guys for sharing the episodes, for rating the podcast, for contacting me in various ways and for various purposes that you do, either to give me feedback for the episodes, or to ask me questions, or to submit Q& A questions, hint, hint, or to give me ideas for new topics for entire episodes. I really appreciate all of those things that you guys do. Now, before I end, I want to talk a little bit about the specific things about supporting me, because there's a few things that I've been thinking about this week in regards to that.

For one thing, I don't [00:58:00] mention enough about prayers and how I really appreciate it when you guys do pray for me, because I think that that is a really, really big thing that the body of Christ does together and it has a massive impact, so thank you guys for all of your prayers. And as I said, thank you for sharing the episodes, for rating the podcast, for listening.

Because if you're not aware, all of those things impact the algorithms. And the algorithms can do things like make sure that my episodes pop up in your feed. Or, my episodes or my podcast as a whole might get suggested to other people who are interested in this kind of thing. It just helps the visibility of things, and unfortunately, we just live in a world that is driven by algorithm.

And when we impact things in certain ways, like liking things, subscribing, being [00:59:00] involved in different ways, talking about it, algorithms pick those things up. So every time you do something like that, it actually impacts things. Now, sometimes there's only so much you can do for algorithms because, as most of us I think are quite aware, conservative people, religious people, people who are talking about faith and other things, they don't tend to get all of the impact that other types of subjects do.

So, that is kind of another reason why the algorithms matter. Because when you are actually actively engaging in any way, whether you're listening to an episode, or rating it, or mentioning it on social media, algorithms actually pick things like that up. It's crazy, I don't know, it's bizarre, it's like magic.

But this is how things work these days. Now, of course, companies can choose [01:00:00] to suppress certain things, which is really unfortunate that this happens. And sometimes even with all of the active engagement, Things still might not get out as much as we'd like them to, but we can't entirely control all of that because algorithms aren't simply neutral.

They are controlled by the powers that be in various ways, whether that is YouTube, Google, Facebook, whatever. But, nonetheless, this is why it's important to get it out on different places, and this is also why I do a podcast, because a podcast is spread out. It's not like a YouTube channel, which is entirely beholden to YouTube, and YouTube can choose to suppress your content. Facebook can choose to suppress your content. Just because you're a member of a group, doesn't mean that you're going to be shown posts from that group. [01:01:00] But the more that you engage in the content, within a space in some way, the more likely that will be showing up for you.

Now, a lot of you probably just go directly to things because you already know what you want to listen to. So you're not beholden to the algorithm popping it up in your feed or whatever else. But just keep in mind that that is a thing that matters. Matters to a lot of people, and it matters to a lot of the reach of what I'm doing and what other people are doing, too. So, that's partly why I ask you to subscribe, to listen, to rate things, because all of that kind of stuff matters.

So, I don't know, a lot of you probably are already aware of that. Some of you might not be, because this is like a mystical, magical realm of existence that we didn't have 20 years ago. So, it's a crazy thing.

Now, since I'm talking [01:02:00] about all this other stuff, I also want to mention financial support. Because A lot of people I talk to, they don't really know why I need financial support, or what I'm going to do with it, or why it could benefit anything. So I do want to talk a bit about that. I don't want to belabor the point in every episode, but I want to kind of lay it out here for you. Just so you're aware.

So just like the algorithm stuff, a lot of you might not be super familiar with how this kind of stuff works. Maybe you hear words like monetization, and things like that, and we tend to think that that means something or maybe it's something mystical again, that we don't understand. And, to some degree, it's kind of true, because there's a lot of ways that people who are producing content can be monetized.

Like, for YouTube, you can get monetized after you have a certain number of [01:03:00] subscribers. You can't be monetized before then. But once you have a certain number of subscribers, then each video can be monetized. And that just means that you're getting money from the ads that show up when people are watching your videos.

You're not having control over what those ads are. They just are going to be chosen by YouTube. But when YouTube shows an ad, then that channel is going to get some money from that. Now, it's not a whole lot, to be honest with you. You have to have a really, really big, big channel in order to really make much money that way.

So anyway, a lot of times monetization is about ad revenue. Now, in some places you can't really choose whether or not ads are there, but I'm not making money off of any ads. And that's not really the direction I want to go, because I don't want to make you listen to ads. Now, there might be some [01:04:00] exception in the future if somebody wants to sponsor me and it's a product I think you really are going to want, and like, and enjoy, and it's going to benefit you, but that would be a really high standard.

Okay, so another way that you can earn money is by merchandise, and books, and products, and things like that. And I am working on getting stuff like that out, like you're going to get something back for what you're paying me for, right? So , that's helping my content and you're also getting something physical or perhaps digital in return.

Another way is by doing consulting work. And this is a thing that I've done before. Now, I'm happy to just field your questions, but if you want in depth, really, like, personal meetups and things like that where we go really deep into a particular topic that you need help with, then that might be something that [01:05:00] is a little bit beyond just answering some questions.

And then finally, there's the root of pure donation, right? So, either through Patreon, or PayPal, or getting me a donation in some other form, and I'll be honest with you, this is one of the best ways you can financially support me. Whether it's a one time donation, whether it's a small or larger donation every month, like even if you give me a small donation, if I have a whole bunch of people giving me a small donation, That adds up.

Now, what do I use it for? Well, for one thing, I do have podcast bills. So, doing this is a financial cost every month. I have a host to pay. I have a website to pay. I have editing software to pay. I have some other things like that. Then on top of that, I have resources to buy so that I can be up to date on things or review things or get the best [01:06:00] content to help answer questions or to address a topic.

I want you to know that I love doing this and no matter what kind of income I'm getting in, as long as I am capable of doing this, I will do this. So, I don't want anyone to feel obligated in any way, But if it's on your heart, and you want to help me out, and you can bless me with a little bit, I really, really appreciate it.

The other thing is, if I can get to a state where I am able to pass off some of the stuff that I do for the podcast, like the editing time and some of the other things that I do, If I can actually pass that off to somebody else, that would free me up in really, really big ways to do more content for people in some form.

I could also up my production value in a lot of ways. I could do more YouTube videos, things like that. I don't [01:07:00] know what all I could do. If there is something that you think that I could bless you with, I would love to be able to do that more.

But also like from my perspective, if I am getting content from another person that I highly value, then I want that person's time to be compensated. It's harder for me to say that my time should be compensated. That's hard for me to ask for that, but it is true that this podcast takes a lot of my time. Like it is a full time job, basically, and I love it. And I'm not gonna not do it. But I really appreciate those of you who are in position to help me out. Because I don't think everyone should be in position to help me out. And this is why I don't want to put my content behind a paywall. Or, you know, do like something like bonus episodes where you have to pay in order to hear the bonus episodes. [01:08:00] I would like the information out for everyone. So if you are helping me with that, then you're also helping other people along the way, if that makes any kind of sense.

Anyway, that's harder for me to say for myself than it is for me to say that other people should also get that. But, you know, it's hypocritical for me to say that other people should get it. if I also don't deserve it. So that's kind of just my putting out my own thoughts and perspectives and my own philosophy on all of that.

My heart is for more and more people to be able to learn and to have access to the most amazing things that scholars are learning. And, you know, new ideas, new thoughts, new critical thinking, new ways of understanding our place in the world and how we can live that out. I am really passionate about helping people do that. And I just want that content [01:09:00] out there for people.

So again, when I say thank you for all that you do to help that in ways that are financial, or not financial. I really do mean it. I really do mean it from the bottom of my heart that I appreciate you guys and that I consider this to be more a community. And so I just really appreciate that engagement because then it becomes a community. Because I can't do a community by myself. I need you guys to, you know, participate in some way.

All right, I hope you guys forgive me if this was all just a little bit much for you because it's kind of not really related to the topic at hand today. But I figured it was time I really just spelled a lot of that out and kind of showed you where the chips lie and what I think about all of that. Now, I do know that a lot of places who do Patreon also produce content for their patrons in order to kind of give back [01:10:00] for that donation, and that is something I really am trying to work on doing, but at the same time, there's only so much time I have in order to kind of figure that out.

So, here's my thing, if you are a financial donor and you would like to see some sort of compensation, like you have an idea, please, please let me know what that might look like or what that might be. One thing I want to do, and that I'm going to start doing if you guys are interested in participating for my financial backers, is to do regular monthly meetups, or perhaps twice a month.

Meetups online where we can get together, hang out, talk, maybe do Bible studies, maybe talk about books. Whatever you guys want to do is great. And once I find a place to actually do stickers and things that I'm satisfied with the quality of that, then of course my financial supporters can get things like stickers and [01:11:00] bookmarks and things like that.

So if you prefer one type of product over another, then let me know. And if there's like membership tiers, like, I don't know. I, I just haven't been able to figure these things out by myself. So if you guys have input, feel free to let me know what that is.

The other thing I do do is actual art. Like, I do painting and sketching and drawing and things like that. If that's something that you enjoy and you are a supporter, then by all means, raise your hand and say, I would like some original art because I would absolutely send you some. I'm just not gonna do that for everyone because not everyone appreciates it, and that's fine.

But if you do, let me know, because I would love to send you a painting, or a sketch, or a card, or something like that. I absolutely would love to do that. So do not feel shy to let me know about [01:12:00] that. Another thing I am doing is I'm working on homemade sketchbooks. I love making homemade sketchbooks, but I can't use them all.

Like, I'll make them, and then I have too many that I can't use. So anyone who's interested in, like, a blank journal, you can look forward to seeing some of the things I do for that as well. I will probably be making some specifically in order to use as giveaways.

But anyway, I have rambled about this long enough. I appreciate your patience with that. Like I said, I'm not gonna do this very much, but I did want to take some time to really just lay all of that out so you know what's going on there. And I really appreciate you guys. If you've stuck around this long in the episode, even with all of my rambling, thank you, and I wish you all a blessed week, and we will see you later.