The Bible’s poetry can seem so strange and foreign, until you realize how to follow their train of thought. Then you can see why so many of them are among the most moving and beautiful poems in the history of the world.

The trick is to learn to read them as poems and not simply as random collections of inspiring sentiments. Why is it encouraging to be assured that you will regularly traverse the valley of death (Ps 23:4)? Because you have a divine shepherd (Ps 23:1-4) who is a lavish host (Ps 23:5-6).

So how do we go about observing the structure of a biblical poem? How do we distinguish the stanzas or sections?

Stanzas

The primary structuring device in a biblical poem is the stanza. A stanza is sort of like a paragraph in prose texts; it’s a collection of lines or sentences into a coherent unit of thought. So when seeking the structure of a poem, the first and primary goal is to divide the poem into stanzas.

Many modern Bible editions help immensely, since they put a blank space between stanzas for you. The main challenge is to figure out from the text whether your Bible’s editors are right.

For example, in Proverbs 3:13-35, every translation seems to have a different idea of where the thought-divisions occur. Though most treat Prov 3:13 as the start of a unit, the LEB includes verses 11-12 with the first stanza. There is some diversity as to whether to treat Prov 3:19-20 as its own unit or as part of what follows. Also, the ESV sees Prov 3:27 as the end of the stanza that begins with Prov 3:21, but nearly every other version considers Prov 3:27 as the start of a new stanza.

How do we decide who is right? A few tools will help us make such a decision.

Refrains

The first and simplest structuring device in Hebrew poetry is the refrain. A refrain is a line or sentence that repeats at regular intervals to mark off units of thought.

Here are some examples of refrains:

• “Restore us, O God, let your face shine that we may be saved” (Ps 80: 3, 7, 19) divides Psalm 80 into three stanzas.
• “The Lord of hosts is with us; the God of Jacob is our fortress” (Ps 46:7, 11) divides Psalm 46 into two stanzas.
• “Why are you cast down… Hope in God” (Ps 42:5, 11; Ps 43:5) divides Psalm 42-43 into three stanzas.
• “For all this his anger has not turned away” (Is 9:12, 17, 21; Is 10:4) divides Isaiah 9:8-10:4 into four stanzas.
• “Yet you did not return to me” (Amos 4:6, 8, 9, 10, 11) divides Amos 4:6-12 into six stanzas.

Inclusio

An inclusio is a word or phrase that occurs at the beginning and end of a passage. It is similar to a refrain, except that it occurs specifically at beginning and end, like bookends on a library shelf.

• Some psalms use an inclusio at the beginning and end of the entire poem (e.g. Psalms 8, 103, 113, 118). That encompassing inclusio may help us to grasp the poem’s main idea, but it doesn’t help us break the poem down into subdivided stanzas or units of thought.
• Other times, an inclusio marks off a stanza or unit of thought for us. For example:
  • “wisdom and instruction” repeated in Prov 1:2, 7—showing us that those verses all fit together as a unit of thought.
  • “gazelle or young stag on the mountains” bookends the poetic stanza in Song 2:8-17.

Metaphor Shifts

Often, a poet shifts gears in his thought when he shifts from one overriding metaphor to another.

• In Psalm 23, there is a shift from the larger metaphor of shepherd (Ps 23:1-4) to the metaphor of host (Ps 23:5-6).
• In Psalm 71, the poet seeks refuge in God (Ps 71:1-6), proves that enemies aren’t so scary (Ps 71:7-15), remembers God’s work in the past (Ps 71:16-18), and employs the past to provide hope for the future (Ps 71:19-24). The shifts in these metaphorical phases of life outline the poem’s train of thought.
• In Isaiah 5, the metaphor of the vineyard dominates Is 5:1-7. Then the threat of curse (Is 5:8-23) turns into the metaphor of fire (Is 5:24-25), before the chapter concludes with the metaphor of signal or alarm (Is 5:26-30).

Grammar Shifts

Sometimes, the changes from stanza to stanza are evident through shifts in the grammar.

• There could be shifts in subject, as in Psalm 24: God (1-2), God’s people (3-6), God together with his people (7-10).
• There could be shifts in pronouns or audience, as in Psalm 29: speaking to heavenly beings (1-2), speaking about Yahweh’s voice (3-9), speaking about Yahweh’s enthronement (10-11).

Conclusion

To draw defensible conclusions regarding a poem’s main point, we must be able to identify the poem’s units of thought. Then we can show how each of those units builds a case and contributes to the main idea. The trick is that we can’t simply go with what “feels right.” We ought to have observable clues within the text that mark the divisions for us. Refrains, incusios, and shifts in metaphor may be among such observable evidence.

Back to Proverbs 3

So where does that leave us on the question of Proverbs 3:13-35? How do these tools help us identify the stanzas (see the chart above)?

Prov 3:13-18 has the inclusio of both “blessing” and the concept of finding or laying hold of wisdom. Prov 3:21-26 has an inclusio of “keeping” or being “kept.” That whole section of Prov 3:13-26 thus has a unified metaphor of finding and keeping wisdom. At the center of that section is a brief description of how Yahweh built wisdom right into the fabric of the universe at the moment of creation (Prov 3:19-20). This explains why it “works” that finding and keeping wisdom will result in great blessing.

Prov 3:27-28 has two prohibitions against “withholding good.” Prov 3:29-30 has two prohibitions against “planning evil.” The chapter ends (Prov 3:32-35) with a grammatical shift to four assurances (parallel to the four prohibitions) that Yahweh neither plans evil nor withholds good from the right people at the right time. In between those two four-verse chunks is a warning not to envy violent men (Prov 3:31)—those who constantly plan evil and withhold good from others when it suits them. So the entire section (Prov 3:27-35) sticks together under the larger metaphor of humanitarian dealings (love your neighbor as yourself).

So in the end, I agree with both the NET and the NIV (though the CSB is not far off). The NET is correct that there are two main units of thought. The NIV is correct that each of those main units has three subsections. We’d be greatly helped if there were a clear way to represent both the main stanzas and their subdivisions in the way our Bibles lay out the text.