Researchers Uncover ‘Death Sandwich’ in Biblical Book of Genesis

That's the intriguing title of this article -- which is talking about a literary device and not an actual sandwich.

Using a free online analytics tool dubbed “Search Visualizer” that transforms text queries into color-coded visual charts, researchers at Keele University in the U.K. and Amridge University in the U.S. have reportedly discovered an ancient literary trick in the Judeo-Christian Bible’s famous foundational book. That trick, known as inclusio or “bracketing,” involves placing similar material at the beginning and end of something; in Genesis’ cases, the writers appear to have enclosed a midsection thematically dominated by “death” with intro and outro passages devoted to “life.”

Modern writers use techniques such as this to foreshadow things in a book, and poets often use it to "frame" the text of a poem with an internal image that contrasts with the outer (beginning and end) image.

Wikipedia has a rather interesting article on this (ignore the first part -- they're not talking about the grammar, but rather the literary device) which talks further about some of the complex literary devices found in the Bible. These undoubtedly varied with translations (from, say, Hebrew to Aramaic.) This kind of expression was something in the culture of the Hebrew people, for Rabbinical literature (the midrashes and other texts) are full of this -- and to some extent, some of the folktales ("rabbi tales") reflect this as well.

Also mentioned in passing is the chiasmus, which might
(or might not) be findable using the text tools mentioned at the first part of that article. I haven't played with them so I'm not sure how powerful they are. One should, of course, only examine them in the native language -- an inclusio found in English might not really be present in the original Greek or Hebrew or Latin.

Anyway... fun read, and I really did like the idea of the "death sandwich" -- what a fun description!

so this is like a philo thing, huh?

here is a chiamus ...

A... "But many that are first
B... shall be last;
B1... and the last
A1... shall be first."

Jesus (Bible: Matthew 19:30.)

now what am i supposed to do with it?

[26] And Jesus beholding, said to them: With men this is impossible: but with God all things are possible.
[27] Then Peter answering, said to him: Behold we have left all things, and have followed thee: what therefore shall we have?
[28] And Jesus said to them: Amen, I say to you, that you, who have followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit on the seat of his majesty, you also shall sit on twelve seats judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
[29] And every one that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting.
[30] And many that are first, shall be last: and the last shall be first.

i added this for refrence (Douay-Rheims Bible).

Originally posted by tinhattribunal
so this is like a philo thing, huh?

here is a chiamus ...

A... "But many that are first
B... shall be last;
B1... and the last
A1... shall be first."

Exactly so!

The purpose is to highlight the text. In those days, very few read, so speaking and writing styles like this made the references/ideas more memorable to the listener.

To me it reads like a code, and relies on most people ignoring it and the ones that don't they try to catch in a net to develop.

I went to the article, then the Science Daily article and read them to try to see if they targeted certain passages. To me it said the whole book of Genesis was sort of a sandwich with death only appearing in the middle. That may be the case, but could they be overanalyzing this? Everyone wants to feel that what they are working on is important.

You could almost place the entire Bible into this category if you read it from beginning to end. Genesis is perfection and everything was good, good, good. Then we have the fall into sin, death, an apocalyptic flood that kills all but a select few. Revelation is the inverse of this. We have apocalyptic death and destruction followed by Christ's return and a restoration to good, good, good.

Is this a literary style, coincidence, or an exact plan? Of course it could just be that things work out that way. The human existence is polarized and divided into life and death. If you look at life as being one of two possibilities it's not a huge stretch for the odds to work out that you have life-death-life. With only two choices it could happen quite easily.

If one wishes to have a look at the "death sandwich" for themselves, then
1. go to searchvisualiser.com
2. from the leftmost dropdown box, select "sample texts"
3. a new "choose texts..." appears just to the right of it, which opens up a small window that lets you select genesis.
4. Where it says "enter up to 5 keywords", you can use the words: life death

Now when you select "Search" it will create a tall box with little boxes.
The red ones are "life" and the green ones (in the middle of the text) are "death"

Its actually not that impressive.

A more accurate description would be ...
Life gets spoken about on many occasions all the way through Genesis, but there is one part in the middle that happens to mention death.

How do you sandwich "in the beginning...." and darn, I was thinking food when I saw the title.

This methodology is followed in all the Prophetic Books of the Old Testament, the basis is the creation of life and covenent and the blessings bestowed, followed by the various back slidings, whoremongery and wrongdoings of the people and the dread consequences therof, and then the promise of future redemption and fulness of life.


It's essentialy a legal based formula, the establishment of Divine Law, the crimes and the punishment, the rehabilitation of offenders.

Originally posted by tinhattribunal
so this is like a philo thing, huh?

here is a chiamus ...

A... "But many that are first
B... shall be last;
B1... and the last
A1... shall be first."

Jesus (Bible: Matthew 19:30.)

First last, last first...I used to see these statements as pointless and irritating...they are part of the reason I gave up on the bible as its full of nonsense like this...But...then I saw similar statements are made in zen Buddhism.
The one hand clapping etc...

I then understood these statements are designed to mess with your head, because you try and try to figure them out, what they mean, but eventually a deeper meaning appears. This is zen enlightenment.

Because the meaning of these statements is that there is nothing to understand.

but if the bible stated "there is nothing to understand" people would be angry and upset...and that's because people have a certain concept of nothingness..that is a negative thing..empty and bleak...but if you wake up to what nothingness can be then you understand it isn't negative and bleak..that empty is actually full.

Remember according to the big bang theory everything in the universe...came from nothing.

Originally posted by dbates
Is this a literary style, coincidence, or an exact plan?

I believe that it's planned literary style, based on cultural preferences. I don't know if you watch foreign films, but if you do, you will notice after awhile that other cultures tell stories differently. Kurosawa, for instance, structured his films ("Yojimbo", for example) differently than Serglione (who retold "Yojimbo" as "A Few Dollars More.")

In a storytelling "gig" (as another example -- I'm an oral storyteller) you use a specific structure to pick your tales: Haha-Aha-Amen. That means you grab them with something funny, tell them a story about something new, and leave them with a thoughtful and uplifting end story.

Here is a better, more detailed report.

Gee, the "illiterate, nomadic sheep-herders" used a sophisticated writing style on par with contemporaries. Hmmm, who'd a thunk it!

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by tinhattribunal


add; to an above poster... can you now figure out what is meant by 'one hand clapping'?

If you contemplate on it, what sound does one hand clapping make...no sound...no clap. No hand.
But what does that bring to the table..nothing.
To have an idea in your head about what nothing is...is still just another idea. The idea is still something.
In zen, the name of the game is to have no idea in your head...absolute zero.
this is zen. The non thinking mind.
When you get there you know what nothing is...but now you only think you know what nothing is.
there is an infinite difference between thinking you know and knowing.

The Gateless gate
Do Not Think Good, Do Not Think Not-Good
It Is Not Mind, It Is Not Buddha, It Is Not Things
Not The Wind, Not The Flag
Learning Is Not The Path

I take it that your not being serious anyway but seeing as you mentioned it.

reply to post by TheBlackHat

i actually am being very serious about the proper translation of the bible.
unfortunatly, the writers of it were possibly very wise in that they knew that by using hidden sexually suggestive meanings that the task of unraveling the truth would be easy to derail because of the beliefs that the bible promotes, in the endtimes, would create a sexually repressive enviorment.

it would make it very hard to take that seriously.

as far as how this relates to zen-bhuddhism, i was only suggesting. i really havn't studied it.

reply to post by Byrd

Hi Byrd,

Very interesting stuff indeed,

A few years ago, we used to have a Univerity of California channel on the local cable system, and I got to see a lecture by a professor of Hebrew studies.
The subject of the lecture was early Hebrew/Jewish history, and a good portion was on the literary origins of the the book of genesis.
The professor was say that if read in Hebrew, the oldest version of genesis shows show distinct "hands", that is to say the two distinct people at two separate times wrote the book of genesis. I believe that falls into lime with how your source breaks up the book, the same person wrote the beginning and ewnd, while some one else wrotee the middle.
I wish I'd been able to sees the while lecture and had recorded it as if was very very informative.
One jewel of info he brought up was that it wasn't until the covenant of Moses, could a Hebrew be called a Jew, and that the Hebrew people remained ploytheistic until well after the construction of the Jerusalem temple, in fact a temple to Baal was built at the same time
The other good part was the discussion on the sociological foundation to some of the rules of Judaism,
some, like the covenant of Moses, are rules by which a large group of people,living in a harsh environment with limited resources, must follow in order for the group to function on a civil level.
The taboos about pork and shellfish have real world roots, certain shellfish are toxic at certain times of year and pork is hard to cook properly with limited supplies of hot burning fuel.
One he couldn't come up with a reason for was the ban on wearing linen and wool at the same time, it was mentioned that it might go back to an ethnic difference among early Hebrew people, nomadic herdsmen vs settled agricultural people.

Hi, first post. I used to have a copy of the emphasized bible, with annotations to show major and minor emphasis on words and phrases, because there is a musical as well as literary language, being orally transmitted.

I am just saying, there is the story arc, but there is a layer of musical composition built in to the telling. Kind of like any Middle Eastern music, not one person starting, and ending, with someone else filling in the middle, just various instruments filling in a musical structure. Now, that is common across many expressions in various cultures, even has a fractal quality, in sound, and pictures, and such.

Now, if you could add in all the environmental ambience, that would be some kind of story, maybe not so lost in translation.

Try just reading it a few times.

That is all I can say.

Are you talking about this....?

reply to post by Byrd


The wonderful shape of dramatic form; something has to be lost, so that it can be won back. This is the foundation of making a reader/viewer identify with and care about the protagonist.

All good books & scripts have their moment at the end of the first act when the protagonist has to takes a bite of the apple.