tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19743569559835464982024-03-05T04:58:35.067-08:00Rhetoric and the NTA blog for the exploration of the New Testament through rhetorical criticismKeith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.comBlogger97125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-61698714885844114732011-04-01T11:19:00.000-07:002011-04-01T11:19:29.747-07:00The Friday FigureThis week's Friday Figure comes from the book of Acts. The figure is one of my favorites and is that of <i>litotes</i>. <br />
<br />
<i>Litotes (Deminutio)</i> (figure of thought, <i>Rhet. Her. </i>4.38.50): The figure in which we say that by nature, fortune, or diligence, we or our clients possess some exceptional advantage, and, in order to avoid the impression of arrogant display, we moderate and soften the statement of it; e.g., “This, men of the jury, I have the right to say—that by our labor and diligence I have contrived to be no laggard in the mastery of military science.” (Use of “no laggard” instead of saying that he was “the best.”).<br />
<br />
When Paul is arrested in Acts 21, he uses this figure when describing himself.<br />
<blockquote>Acts 21:39 εἶπεν δὲ ὁ Παῦλος· ἐγὼ ἄνθρωπος μέν εἰμι Ἰουδαῖος, Ταρσεὺς τῆς Κιλικίας, οὐκ ἀσήμου πόλεως πολίτης· δέομαι δέ σου, ἐπίτρεψόν μοι λαλῆσαι πρὸς τὸν λαόν. </blockquote> Now, look at the NRSV translation: <br />
<blockquote>Acts 21:39 Paul replied, “I am a Jew, from Tarsus in Cilicia, a citizen of an important city; I beg you, let me speak to the people.” </blockquote> The NRSV translates οὐκ ἀσήμου πόλεως πολίτης as "a citizen of an important city" and the sense is correct, but they have totally missed the importance of the figure of speech <i>litotes</i> and therefore the power of the words. Literally, this phrase should be translated, "a citizen of a not insignificant city." The effect is that of a double negative, essentially a positive. Paul is claiming that his home town, Tarsus, was indeed important. But, by using the figure <i>litotes, </i>Luke highlights the importance of Paul's city, the upstanding nature of Paul himself. The fact that this figure is used draws more attention to the credentials of Paul than if no figure had been used.Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-91579565372534943582011-03-25T13:35:00.000-07:002011-03-25T13:35:27.716-07:00The Friday FigureThis week's Friday Figure comes from John chapter 3. This was the reading this last week in church. It is the conversation that Nicodemus has with Jesus about being "born again," "Born from on high."<br />
<br />
I want to focus on John 3:8. It reads:<br />
<blockquote>τὸ πνεῦμα ὅπου θέλει πνεῖ καὶ τὴν φωνὴν αὐτοῦ ἀκούεις, ἀλλ᾿ οὐκ οἶδας πόθεν ἔρχεται καὶ ποῦ ὑπάγει· οὕτως ἐστὶν πᾶς ὁ γεγεννημένος ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος. </blockquote><blockquote><i>to pneuma hopou thelei pnei kai ten phonen autou akoueis, all'ouk oidas pothen erchetai kai pou upagei: houtos estin pas ho gegennemenos ek tou pneumatos </i></blockquote><blockquote>The wind blows where it chooses, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.” </blockquote>I have included the Greek, a transliteration of the Greek, and the NRSV translation. The NRSV translation is OK, but it misses some nuances in the Greek.<br />
<br />
The first thing to notice is the twofold repetition of the Greek word πνεῦμα (<i>pneuma</i>), and the use of the verb πνεῖ (<i>pnei</i>), which comes from the same root. The word has three common meanings: wind, breath, and spirit. The NRSV has chosen to translate the first instance of this word as wind, the verb as blow, and the second noun as spirit, and I think that the NRSV is correct to do so, yet, this obviously misses the wordplay in Greek. This wordplay is called by a couple of different names in Greek: <i>paronomasia, antanaclasis, eponodos. </i>Each of these figures means using the same or a similar word in close proximity with different meanings. In this case, the first instance means wind, and the second instance means spirit. <br />
<br />
In order to capture this figure, English would have to have the same wordplay, which it does not. If one wanted to try and carry the figure over, they could translate the verse with the same meaning for each word as follows:<br />
<br />
The spirit spirits where it wills, and you hear its sound, but you do not know from where it comes and where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the spirit.<br />
<br />
The second figure at use here is that of <i>personification</i>, in which something that is inanimate is given a human trait. In this case, I think the NRSV misses out. What they translate as "sound" is actually the Greek word φωνήν (<i>phonen</i>), which is most naturally translated "voice." Now, <i>phone</i> can carry the meaning "sound," but its most common use is that of voice. In this case, I think the more poetic translation would be voice, especially since John seems to be playing on the multiple meanings of <i>pneuma</i> as both an animate subject and inanimate force. <br />
<br />
Either way, this is a wonderful piece of language and unfortunately English just does not have the same richness in this instance.Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-80400652292117907102011-03-23T06:07:00.000-07:002011-03-23T06:07:06.649-07:00The Rhetoric of PunctuationPunctuation marks, those seemingly insignificant jots and tittles in our language, are often overlooked. In usual discourse, we do not really need a period, or question mark to let us know what is going on in a sentence. But, before you completely overlook them, take a gander at the following two letters. Punctuation indeed can make all the difference in the world.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><span style="font-family: Calibri,Verdana,Helvetica,Arial;"><span style="font-size: 11pt;">Dear John:<br />
<br />
I want a man who knows what love is all about. You are generous, kind, thoughtful. People who are not like you admit to being useless and inferior. You have ruined me for other men. I yearn for you. I have no feelings whatsoever when we're apart. I can be forever happy --will you let me be yours?<br />
<br />
Gloria<br />
<br />
***********************************<br />
<br />
Dear John:<br />
<br />
I want a man who knows what love is . All about you are generous, kind, thoughtful people, who are not like you. Admit to being useless and inferior. You have ruined me. For other men, I yearn. For you, I have no feelings whatsoever. When we're apart, I can be forever happy. Will you let me be?<br />
<br />
yours, <br />
Gloria</span></span> </blockquote><br />
(HT Roy Williams at Monday Morning Memo <a href="http://www.mondaymorningmemo.com/page/pogach">http://www.mondaymorningmemo.com/page/pogach </a>via my wife <a href="http://brookereich.blogspot.com/">brookereich.blogspot.com</a>)<br />
<br />
Now, considering that Old and New Testament manuscripts did not have any punctuation at all, and that these have been added later by editors, are there places in the Bible that could carry different meanings if the punctuation marks are rearranged? <br />
<br />
This also made me think about the rhetorical task of delivery in the ancient world. When we speak, we communicate punctuation through our tone of voice, pauses, etc. Check out the following example of a teleprompter gag which also illustrates the importance of punctuation.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/bRlRTG5KPlY" title="YouTube video player" width="480"></iframe>Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-43562671381882036562011-03-18T12:55:00.000-07:002011-03-18T12:55:32.270-07:00νόμος or lawνόμος or law is the 14th and final in the list of ancient <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/10/progymnasmata.html"><i>progymnasmata</i></a>. The exercise on law has to do with refuting or confirming laws that are either already in effect or laws that are proposed in the assembly. This last preliminary exercise seems especially suited to students who would have gone on to professional rhetorical training, the primary aim of which would have been to speak in the law courts of Greece and Rome.<br />
<br />
Through this exercise, students would continue their practice of <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/12/and-refutation-and-confirmation.html"><i>confirmation</i></a> and <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/12/and-refutation-and-confirmation.html"><i>refutation</i></a> that had already begun in earlier exercises.<br />
<br />
According to Theon, one may refute laws according to the following <i>topoi</i>: what is "unclear, impossible, unnecessary, contradictory, unjust, unworthy, inexpedient, shameful." (Theon 129, Kennedy). According to Hermogenes, the topics by which to refute or confirm a law are: "clarity, justice, legality, advantage, possibility, appropriateness." (Hermogenes 27, Kennedy).<br />
<br />
In Mark 10 there is a discussion of the law concerning divorce. The setup is as follows:<br />
<blockquote>Some Pharisees came, and to test him they asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” He answered them, “What did Moses command you?” They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her.” (Mark 10:2-4). </blockquote>Now, in what follows, Jesus will refute this law of writing a certificate of divorce, and he will do so using a number of the topics listed above. Jesus responds thus:<br />
<blockquote>But Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote this commandment for you. But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” (Mark 10:5-9). </blockquote>It was because hardness of heart that Moses wrote this provision of the law, but that does not conform to the Law of God. Therefore, Jesus refutes this provision of the Law based on several different fronts. It could be seen as truly "illegal" based upon God's law. It could be seen as "shameful" based upon the shame of having a hard heart. It could be seen as "inappropriate" based upon its failure to conform with the perfect plan of God.<br />
<br />
Practice in confirmation and refutation of laws was of great importance for the biblical writers, and the <i>progymnasmata</i> would have instructed Greek students in performing such tasks.Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-22282963803568045242011-03-17T14:44:00.000-07:002011-03-17T14:44:32.648-07:00θέσις or thesis<i>Thesis</i> is the 13th exercise in the ancient <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/10/progymnasmata.html"><i>progymnasmata</i></a> and deals with arguments. According to Theon, <i>thesis</i> "is a verbal inquiry admitting controversy without specifying any persons and circumstance; for example, whether one should marry, whether one should have children, whether the gods exist." (Theon 120, Kennedy).<br />
<br />
Thesis differs from <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/12/and-topic-and-commonplace.html"><i>topos</i></a> in that a <i>topos </i>is a stock argument about which there is great agreement. <i>Thesis </i>on the other hand is a proposition about which there is disagreement. Theon says that one can get the subject of a <i>thesis</i> from a <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/12/or-maxim.html"><i>maxim</i></a>, proverb, <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/11/blog-post.html"><i>chreia</i></a>, or another useful saying. <br />
<br />
After coming up with the <i>thesis</i> itself, the student would attempt to either confirm or refute the <i>thesis.</i> One can confirm or refute according to a number of <i>topoi</i>, such as, is the thesis possible, necessary, beneficial, pleasant, praiseworthy, etc. <br />
<br />
In Luke chapter 20, the Lukan Jesus engages in the refutation of a <i>thesis</i> using the <i>topos</i> of possibility.<br />
<br />
In 20:41, Jesus asks: “How can they say that the Messiah is David’s son? The <i>thesis</i> presupposed here is that the Messiah is said to be the Son of David.<br />
<br />
Jesus then goes on to refute even the possibility of this claim from the <i>topos</i> of impossibility as follows:<br />
<blockquote>For David himself says in the book of Psalms,<br />
‘The Lord said to my Lord,<br />
“Sit at my right hand, <br />
until I make your enemies your footstool.” ’<br />
David thus calls him Lord; so how can he be his son?” (Luke 20:42-44).</blockquote>Jesus has claimed that it is impossible for David to call his son "Lord." Here Luke has engaged in the simple preliminary exercise of <i>thesis</i> and has used it to great effect in his Gospel.Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-55837404072730764812011-02-23T08:20:00.001-08:002011-02-23T08:20:26.683-08:00Page Proofs!I just received my page proofs via email for my upcoming publication: <i>Figuring Jesus: The Power of Rhetorical Figures of Speech in the Gospel of Luke, </i>(Biblical Interpretation Series 107, Leiden: Brill, 2011). It has an ISBN # and everything. I feel like it is a real book now that it has an ISBN. Now to proofing and indexing, woo hoo!Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-3194200007624341682011-02-04T09:35:00.000-08:002011-02-04T09:35:15.431-08:00The Friday FigureThis week's Friday Figure comes from the first letter of John. There are actually several figures at play here.<br />
<blockquote>1John 2:12 I am writing to you, little children,<br />
because your sins are forgiven on account of his name.<br />
1John 2:13 I am writing to you, fathers,<br />
because you know him who is from the beginning.<br />
I am writing to you, young people,<br />
because you have conquered the evil one. <br />
1John 2:14 I write to you, children,<br />
because you know the Father.<br />
I write to you, fathers,<br />
because you know him who is from the beginning.<br />
I write to you, young people,<br />
because you are strong<br />
and the word of God abides in you,<br />
and you have overcome the evil one. </blockquote>The first figure to notice is <i>distributio</i>. According to the <i>Rhetorica ad Herennium, distributio "</i>occurs when certain specified roles are assigned among a number of things or persons." Ps-Cicero then gives this example:<br />
<blockquote>“The Senate’s function is to assist the state with counsel; the magistracy’s is to execute, by diligent activity, the Senate’s will; the people’s to chose and support it by its votes the best measures and the most suitable men.” (Ps-Cicero, <i>Rhet. Her. </i>IV.xxxv.47). </blockquote>While the things that John writes are note strictly "roles" as set out by Ps-Cicero, they are attributes of these three different classes: Fathers, young people, and children. John separates these classes to say something specific about each one.<br />
<br />
The second figure to notice is <i>pleonasm</i>, which is the repetition of the same thought in different words (Quintilian, <i>Inst. Or. </i>9.3.45-46). John addresses each of the three groups twice, varying his thoughts and words only slightly, but essentially repeating the same material. <br />
<br />
The third figure to notice is <i>anaphora, </i>or the repetition of the same word as the first word in successive clauses (Quintilian, <i>Inst. Or. </i>9.3.30). Here we get two three fold repetitions, I write, I write, I write (γράφω, γράφω, γράφω), and I wrote, I wrote, I wrote (ἔγραψα, ἔγραψα, ἔγραψα). Notice even the variation of tense here, which once again uses the figure of <i>pleonasm.</i>Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-71268097515530059222011-02-01T12:24:00.000-08:002011-02-01T12:24:49.909-08:00ἔκφρασις or descriptionἔκφρασις (<i>ekphrasis</i>) or description is 12th on the list of the ancient <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/10/progymnasmata.html"><i>progymnasmata</i></a>. According to Theon, <i>ekphrasis </i>is,<br />
<blockquote>"descriptive language, bringing what is portrayed clearly before the sight." (Theon 118, Kennedy).</blockquote>Theon goes on to state that there are <i>ekphrases </i>of persons, events, places, and periods of time. Virtues of <i>ekphrasis </i>are clarity and vividness according to Hermogenes (Hermogenes 23, Kennedy).<br />
<br />
A good example of <i>ekphrasis </i>from the gospels would be the description of the transfiguration of Jesus. Take Matthew's account:<br />
<blockquote>Matt. 17:2 καὶ μετεμορφώθη ἔμπροσθεν αὐτῶν, καὶ ἔλαμψεν τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ ὡς ὁ ἥλιος, τὰ δὲ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο λευκὰ ὡς τὸ φῶς. </blockquote><blockquote>And he was transformed before them, and his face shone forth as the sun, and his clothes became white as light."</blockquote>This description, or <i>ekphrasis </i>by Matthew follows both of Hermogenes' virtues of <i>ekphrasis. </i>His description is clear and vivid. To accomplish this vividness, Matthew uses two<i> similes</i>: face shone forth <i>as the sun</i>, and his clothes became <i>white as light.</i>Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-5745164041206007562011-01-23T15:10:00.000-08:002011-01-23T15:10:34.673-08:00Rhetoric For SundaysPeriodically on my blog I comment on church marquees. I find them hilarious, but also endlessly frustrating in the banality of their messages, and sometimes in the fact that they often communicate messages that are harmful to Christianity in general. Here is the latest that I saw on my way to church this morning.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhHw6Ku34fU5o1-I2Q7VQSGx4JAld2dRXEGDxBsITHc1mmT-Uz4R_HwSGYHTOOWHo5RFJe4MGFUTAeTXIu1c7M3MGICbm1O7jj_DjnQyPDWguXT5-4fUv386qaAOoWuKxdfwVfGAi_DxUb1/s1600/Church+Marquee5.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhHw6Ku34fU5o1-I2Q7VQSGx4JAld2dRXEGDxBsITHc1mmT-Uz4R_HwSGYHTOOWHo5RFJe4MGFUTAeTXIu1c7M3MGICbm1O7jj_DjnQyPDWguXT5-4fUv386qaAOoWuKxdfwVfGAi_DxUb1/s400/Church+Marquee5.JPG" width="400" /></a></div><br />
I mean really, do we really want to communicate that whatever comes in the afterlife is to be compared with a decent retirement package? <br />
<br />
And even more, this emphasizes the common evangelical misunderstanding that what really matters in this life is getting souls into heaven. This life, what Jesus preached most about is of little meaning, only saving souls, getting them their "fire insurance," or in this case, their "retirement benefits." That is what really matters, right?Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-55166789864749972022011-01-12T14:28:00.000-08:002011-01-12T14:28:38.834-08:00ηθοποιία, προσωποποιία or characterization and personificationηθοποιία/προσωποποιία is the eleventh of the classical <i><a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/10/progymnasmata.html">progymnasmata</a> </i>and is the exercise of characterization, or more specifically, for creating a fictional speech for a character.<br />
<br />
Theon defines <i>prosopopoiia </i>as,<br />
<blockquote>"the introduction of a person to whom words are attributed that are suitable to the speaker and have an indisputable application to the subject discussed." (Theon 115, Kennedy). </blockquote>Key here are the two qualifications, namely that this speech should be "suitable to the speaker," and that the speech "have an indisputable application to the subject."<br />
<br />
Theon then gives several examples, from very general to very specific. For example, "What words would a man say to his life when leaving on a journey? Or a general to his soldiers in a time of danger?" Or, more specifically, "What words would Cyrus say when marching against the Massagetae?" <br />
<br />
As you can see, one can create a variety of persons and situations and then create a speech to be given by that person on that occasion. <br />
<br />
The Greek historian Thucydides, recording the way in which he reconstructed historical speeches, admitted that he took some liberties, and essentially recreated the speeches according to the rules laid out by the preliminary exercise of <i>prosopopoiia. </i>Thus, even in Greek History, it was acceptable to take some liberties in recreating historical speeches. Thucydides writes:<br />
<blockquote>And as for things that they each said by way of argument, either when they were about to go to war or when they were already at war, it was difficult to carry the precise details of the things that were said word for word in one’s memory. This was the case both for me, where I heard them myself, and for those who reported them to me from various sources; <i>but they have been rendered in the way it seemed to me likely that each speaker would indeed have said what was needed concerning the present circumstances on each occasion</i>, while sticking as closely as possible to the general ideas behind what was actually said. (<i>Emphasis in bold is mine. </i>Thucydides, <i>Hist</i>. 1.22.1-2).</blockquote>There are many speeches in the New Testament. Many have speculated about the speeches in Acts and to what degree Luke was reporting the actual speech, or rather, engaging in <i>prosopopoiia</i>, creating a speech in line with the character of the speaker and in line with the needs of the situation. <br />
<br />
One good example of <i>prosopopoiia</i> in the gospels comes from Jesus' parable of the rich fool. Jesus creates a speech for this rich fool, as the rich fool actually has a conversation with himself. Here is the relevant section from Luke 12:<br />
<blockquote>Luke 12:17 And he thought to himself, ‘What should I do, for I have no place to store my crops?’ <br />
Luke 12:18 Then he said, ‘I will do this: I will pull down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. <br />
Luke 12:19 And I will say to my soul, ‘Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; relax, eat, drink, be merry.’ </blockquote> Creating this speech in character creates a liveliness to the parable. The implied question behind this parable for which the Lukan Jesus creates a speech is, "what would a rich man say if he had a surplus crop." Then comes this speech where the rich fool has a conversation with himself. Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-31195315543901402062011-01-11T14:35:00.000-08:002011-01-11T14:35:21.355-08:00Political RhetoricIt has been a banner week for the word rhetoric. If one listens to the news or browses news stories on the internet, it seems that rhetoric is the buzz word of the day. All of this in the aftermath of the tragic shooting in Arizona, apparently directed at congress woman Gabrielle Giffords, but hitting 18 other people in the process, killing 6 so far. In the wake of this horrific tragedy, the rhetoric is flying.<br />
<br />
From the left, there are accusations that this shooting was promoted by right wing inflammatory rhetoric. From the right, there are defenses against these accusations, and accusations of equally inflammatory rhetoric from the left. <br />
<br />
From a Google news search for "rhetoric," here are a sampling of of the headlines: <br />
<br />
<h1><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/zev-yaroslavsky/a-time-to-cool-the-rhetor_b_807639.html" id="title_permalink" title="Permalink">A Time to Cool the Rhetoric</a></span></h1><h1><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/01/11/leahy.security/"><span style="font-size: small;">Leahy: 'Seething rhetoric' has gone too far</span></a></h1><h1><a href="http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/01/11/Polls-Shooting-spree-not-due-to-rhetoric/UPI-26431294773972/"><span style="font-size: small;">Polls: Shooting spree not due to rhetoric</span></a></h1><h1><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://themoderatevoice.com/97856/extremist-rhetoric-violence-and-american-history/">Extremist Rhetoric, Violence, and American History </a></span></h1><h1><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">Maybe we should stop with the rhetoric for a moment and actually find out why Loughner went on this rampage. Let the rhetorical jets cool, don't turn this tragedy into a political battleground, at least not until we know more about what happened and why it happened. Once that is established, and the truth be made known, then by all means, let the rhetoric fly in defense of the truth, but out of common decency, let's let those who have lost loved ones grieve, and those still fighting for their lives, actually have some peace. </span> </span></h1><h1><span style="font-size: small;"> </span></h1><h1> </h1><h1> </h1><h1> </h1>Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-59945349219413929312011-01-10T08:53:00.000-08:002011-01-10T08:53:44.305-08:00σύγκρισις or comparisonσύγκρισις is the 10th of the ancient <i><a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/10/progymnasmata.html">progymnasmata</a> </i>and is the exercise in comparison. Theon writes:<br />
<blockquote>"Syncrisis is the language setting the better or worse side by side. There are syncrises both of persons and things." (Theon, 112, Kennedy). </blockquote>As with the exercises of <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/12/or-encomium.html">encomium</a> and <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2011/01/or-invective.html">invective</a>, the topic lists derived from those exercises are also used for syncrisis. For example, there are external goods such as place of birth, occurrences at birth, nurture, upbringing, education. Goods of the body (health, strength, etc.). Then there are internal goods such as goods of the mind (intellect, wisdom), virtues (justice, bravery). Then there are actions and deeds (to which I would also add speech). Finally, there is the manner of death and what happened after death. Whereas with encomium and invective, the student merely listed the goods or ills of a single person or thing. With syncrisis, the student compares two subjects with regard to these topics.<br />
<br />
Syncrisis can take many forms, comparing good with good (double encomium), good with bad (encomium/invective), and bad with bad (double invective). One can also come to a number of conclusions. For example, with a double encomium, one could find the two equally good, or might praise both, but find one slightly better. Likewise, with a double invective, one might find the subjects equally bad, or that one is slightly more diabolical than the other.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/08/syncrisis-in-stephen-episode.html">I have dealt elsewhere with syncrisis in the Stephen episode in Acts 6-8</a>. Another example of syncrisis can be found in the book of Hebrews. In chapter 3, the author of Hebrews compares Jesus to Moses as follows:<br />
<blockquote>Heb. 3:3 Yet Jesus is worthy of more glory than Moses, just as the builder of a house has more honor than the house itself. <br />
Heb. 3:4 (For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God.) <br />
Heb. 3:5 Now Moses was faithful in all God’s house as a servant, to testify to the things that would be spoken later. <br />
Heb. 3:6 Christ, however, was faithful over God’s house as a son, and we are his house if we hold firm the confidence and the pride that belong to hope. </blockquote>Here, the author of Hebrews engages in a syncrisis between these two biblical figures, Jesus and Moses. The comparison is a double encomium in that Moses is not found to be bad. No, indeed, Moses was a faithful servant over God's house. Yet, even though Moses is good, Jesus is better, not as a "servant" over God's house, but as a "Son." Thus, the author of Hebrews has composed a double encomium syncrisis finding both subjects laudable, but finding Jesus superior as a Son. Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-2964391670387332272011-01-07T15:09:00.000-08:002011-01-07T15:09:21.071-08:00Lucidity, Brevity, and BarthI, like many others (see <a href="http://www.jrdkirk.com/karl-barth-reading/">http://www.jrdkirk.com/karl-barth-reading/</a> for others synchroblogging Barth's CD) will be blogging through Barth's Church Dogmatics over the next several years. Thanks to Dr. Kirk for instigating this activity. <br />
<br />
I will be blogging on Barth mostly on my other blog (<a href="http://keithreich.blogspot.com/">keithreich.blogspot.com</a>), but periodically I will point out something with rhetorical implications here. <br />
<br />
Charles Talbert, one of my mentors at Baylor, often cited Calvin in his call for "lucid brevity" in writing. This concept of lucid brevity is one that Talbert has mastered well and that I seek to emulate. Calvin called for <i>brevitas et facilitas, </i>yet he was not the first to do so. Lucidity (clarity) was one of the four <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/09/rhetorical-task-of-style.html">virtues of style</a> called for by the classical rhetoricians, and <i>brevitas</i> was a figure of speech that conveyed dignity upon speech. <br />
<br />
While Barth might be the theological descendant of Calvin, he unfortunately did not inherit his virtues of lucidity and brevity. Barth is anything but brief, and struggles to find lucidity. I envy the mind of Barth, but wish that his style were more in line with the virtues of clarity and brevity.<br />
<br />
I call to mind what my native German speaking friend in seminary said to me when he claimed that he preferred to read Barth in English (his second language) because it made more sense.Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-54744766411445713002011-01-07T09:15:00.000-08:002011-01-07T09:15:44.572-08:00The Friday FigureThis week's Friday Figure comes from Paul's first letter to the Corinthians. The figure (or more precisely, trope) used is that of <i>metaphor</i>. <i>Metaphor's </i>are indispensable to a good communicator as they bring life and poignancy to language.<br />
<blockquote>1Cor. 3:1 And so, brothers and sisters, I could not speak to you as spiritual people, but rather as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ. <br />
1Cor. 3:2 I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not ready for solid food. Even now you are still not ready,</blockquote>By using the <i>metaphor</i> of milk as opposed to solid food, Paul brings the abstract concept of his teaching down to the every day life of his hearers. He has brought in this <i>metaphor</i>, perhaps also a use of <i>hyperbole</i>, to drive home to his listeners their foolishness and infantile behavior.Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-83151698567204550272011-01-07T08:36:00.000-08:002011-01-07T08:36:05.875-08:00More Church Marquee HumorI have posted a few times about how church marquees often carry messages that the church would not want to communicate. As a whole, I think church marquee messages are usually banal and ridiculous, but sometimes the humor that they carry are worth every penny. See my posts<a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/12/rhetoric-wars-church-marquees.html"> here</a>, <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/11/rhetoric-for-sundays.html">here</a>, <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/09/rhetoric-for-sundays_19.html">here</a>, and <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/09/rhetoric-for-sundays_12.html">here</a> for more church signage humor.<br />
<br />
In these two church signs (<a href="http://scotteriology.wordpress.com/2011/01/07/cynical-adult-church-signage-supervision-needed/">HT to Scotteriology</a>), the humor comes from the figure of speech <i>paronomasia</i>, which is essentially a pun or play on words. I will leave it up to you to figure out the play on words. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgoL327gqTbzUUdqTiIIL7GiI3V_Lf2OyXLoJGY5WGTrAuOJCPFRS_vEcG5tiYwAXGgH2461LZTDeJJAqVrVBePe0gsvuzOJ4JY_u8AhC84LWhVgtfbd0rZyybQNu-99rF-hhSvXTrjIRrX/s1600/ooops-sign-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="295" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgoL327gqTbzUUdqTiIIL7GiI3V_Lf2OyXLoJGY5WGTrAuOJCPFRS_vEcG5tiYwAXGgH2461LZTDeJJAqVrVBePe0gsvuzOJ4JY_u8AhC84LWhVgtfbd0rZyybQNu-99rF-hhSvXTrjIRrX/s400/ooops-sign-1.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhI-shaydKqMQ8_vhJtJLCQ8uVfzpFjnxh6k71cmr-RXP_XkwUATd4-8HGgC4HMkvMDSXOJ0cgF8ZFQvEiJqASxw8pF538yynXzsHjtKn0GuBVzvQiPFk7pcBYcVHKynCr42JN7kr3DFVSo/s1600/ooops-sign-2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhI-shaydKqMQ8_vhJtJLCQ8uVfzpFjnxh6k71cmr-RXP_XkwUATd4-8HGgC4HMkvMDSXOJ0cgF8ZFQvEiJqASxw8pF538yynXzsHjtKn0GuBVzvQiPFk7pcBYcVHKynCr42JN7kr3DFVSo/s400/ooops-sign-2.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-79428829246962037132011-01-06T13:44:00.000-08:002011-01-06T13:44:38.062-08:00ψόγος or invectiveψόγος (<i>psogos</i>) or invective is the ninth of the ancient <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/10/progymnasmata.html"><i>progymnasmata</i></a> and is linked with its opposite, <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/12/or-encomium.html">encomium</a>. If encomium<i> </i>is "an exposition of the good qualities of a person or thing." (Hermogenes, 14, Kennedy), then invective is an exposition of the negative qualities of a person or thing. Theon says that "these are the sources of praise (encomium), and we shall derive blame (invective) from the opposites." (Theon, 112, Kennedy). <br />
<br />
The sources that Theon was talking about were the list of "topics" used for encomium: external goods such as place of birth, occurrences at birth, nurture, upbringing, education. Goods of the body (health, strength, etc.). Then there are internal goods such as goods of the mind (intellect, wisdom), virtues (justice, bravery). Then there are actions and deeds (to which I would also add speech). Finally, there is the manner of death and what happened after death. Therefore, while in encomium one would look for "goods" according to these topics, with invective<i> </i>one would look for negative traits according to these topics.<br />
<br />
A good example of invective comes from Revelation and the numerous charges against "Babylon." It is largely agreed that "Babylon" in the context of Revelation is code for "Rome." Thus, in Revelation we get a nice invective against Rome. Here is an example from Revelation chapter 18.<br />
<blockquote>Rev. 18:2 He called out with a mighty voice,<br />
“Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great!<br />
It has become a dwelling place of demons,<br />
a haunt of every foul and hateful bird,<br />
a haunt of every foul and hateful beast. <br />
Rev. 18:3 For all the nations have drunk<br />
of the wine of the wrath of her fornication,<br />
and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her,<br />
and the merchants of the earth have grown rich from the power of her luxury.” <br />
Rev. 18:4 Then I heard another voice from heaven saying,<br />
“Come out of her, my people,<br />
so that you do not take part in her sins,<br />
and so that you do not share<br />
in her plagues; <br />
Rev. 18:5 for her sins are heaped high as heaven,<br />
and God has remembered her iniquities. <br />
Rev. 18:6 Render to her as she herself has rendered,<br />
and repay her double for her deeds;<br />
mix a double draught for her in the cup she mixed. <br />
Rev. 18:7 As she glorified herself and lived luxuriously,<br />
so give her a like measure of torment and grief.<br />
Since in her heart she says,<br />
‘I rule as a queen;<br />
I am no widow,<br />
and I will never see grief,’ <br />
Rev. 18:8 therefore her plagues will come in a single day—<br />
pestilence and mourning and famine—<br />
and she will be burned with fire;<br />
for mighty is the Lord God who judges her.” </blockquote> Among the many things that the author of Revelation has to say about Rome in this invective are that Rome is a dwelling place of demons and foul beasts, that the city/empire has committed fornication, that it has lived pridefully and has engaged in luxurious (and dishonest) financial policy. All of these would fall under the topics of "deeds" in the list of topics given by Theon and the other progymnasmatists. Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-119028377458103232011-01-05T14:21:00.001-08:002011-01-05T14:21:46.280-08:00Holiday WhirlwindIt has been a crazy few weeks. On the 17th of December Brooke and I left for Colorado and the odometer on my car read: 95580. When we finally ended our holiday tour on Monday, my odometer read 98881. Two weeks, 3,301 miles, three states, multiple beds, and Brooke and I are ready to finally be home for a while. For a while it seemed like we were living out of our car.<br />
<br />
It was a great holiday time for us. We first went to Colorado for about a week and visited both of my parents. We got to spend some great time with both sides of the family, spending our nights in my Mother's cabin in outside of Drake, Colorado. It was gorgeous. The weather was perfect, but not very Christmas-like. No snow to speak of. Just balmy Colorado winter days allowing for safe driving and gorgeous mountain views.<br />
<br />
Then it was back to Waco for a short hiatus while Brooke worked two and a half days. Then on Wed. December 29th it was off to Houston for the Texas Bowl featuring Baylor vs. Illinois (ughh, no comment). Then, up early in the morning for a trip down to Brooke's family's ranch for New Years. It was a great time in South Texas, 90 degree days, watching the wildlife. I saw many white tail deer, some javelinas, and a gorgeous bobcat.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiWTjtf5e4ix491LY8ftEFdF6s5nIfoqhaQ-bK8UzAyqlMJqHQCVN52EU32a-5C2-TA-uZIl5MpiZsxdi8a4dHyNPu0RShyphenhyphenxcS5fUTRnyhzgEOXLYar72AOaIiitGfzGHdZNA3RlyzBu_0/s1600/New-Years-Schwarz-Ranch_0051.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="214" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiWTjtf5e4ix491LY8ftEFdF6s5nIfoqhaQ-bK8UzAyqlMJqHQCVN52EU32a-5C2-TA-uZIl5MpiZsxdi8a4dHyNPu0RShyphenhyphenxcS5fUTRnyhzgEOXLYar72AOaIiitGfzGHdZNA3RlyzBu_0/s320/New-Years-Schwarz-Ranch_0051.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
We ended the trip with a wonderful evening in the historical Gruene Mansion Inn in Gruene, TX on the Guadalupe River. It was a nice end to a whirlwind couple of weeks.<br />
<br />
Now, back in Waco, gearing up for the Spring semester. I can't wait to get back to teaching, and blogging.<br />
<br />
Happy New YearKeith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-50137909641776011692010-12-28T14:56:00.000-08:002010-12-28T14:56:24.463-08:00ἐνκομίον or encomiumἐνκομίον (<i>enkomion</i>) or encomium is the eighth of the ancient <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/10/progymnasmata.html"><i>progymnasmata</i></a> and is, according to Hermogenes,<br />
<blockquote>"an exposition of the good qualities of a person or thing." (Hermogenes, 14, Kennedy). </blockquote>This is a very broad definition, but an encomium is merely a speech of praise about a person. The <i>progymnasmatists</i> expand greatly on this topic, providing several areas or topics one can use to praise a person. For example, there are external goods such as place of birth, occurrences at birth, nurture, upbringing, education. Goods of the body (health, strength, etc.). Then there are internal goods such as goods of the mind (intellect, wisdom), virtues (justice, bravery). Then there are actions and deeds (to which I would also add speech). Finally, there is the manner of death and what happened after death. The student, taking these topics, can pick and choose from them which would be most flattering to his or her subject.<br />
<br />
About manner of birth, Hermogenes says,<br />
<blockquote>"You will mention also any marvelous occurrences at birth, for example, from dreams or signs or things like that." (Hermogenes, 15, Kennedy).</blockquote> Reading the birth narratives of Jesus in the gospels of Matthew and Luke read like an encomium of Jesus. Especially in regard to Hermogenes' last comment, the birth of Jesus was surrounded by numerous "dreams or signs or things like that." From Matthew, Jesus birth is preceded by a miraculous star in heaven. Dreams are given to Joseph. The baby is born of a virgin. From Luke's gospel, angels appear, visions are given to Mary. The baby is born of a virgin. All of these things are commonplaces for the birth of an important individual.<br />
<br />
The genealogies also function as part of the encomium. In both Matthew and Luke, Jesus is given a royal lineage with many impressive figures. <br />
<br />
We get nothing from Matthew about Jesus' nurture upbringing, or education. But, in Luke, we get one scene that pertains to Jesus' education. There is the short episode in Luke chapter two about Jesus in the Temple at the age of 12. We are told that those who heard Jesus speak "were amazed at his understanding and his answers." (Luke 2:47). This verse serves to fill in the education portion of the encomium of Jesus. It does not give the means of Jesus' education, but the outcome, namely that Jesus at the age of 12 was able to amaze the experts in the Temple.<br />
<br />
The rest of the gospels fill out the encomium, dealing with Jesus' actions, deeds, and speech, finally ending with his death and what happened after his death.Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-72788255208900931502010-12-24T14:26:00.000-08:002010-12-24T14:26:24.042-08:00The Friday FigureThis week's Friday Figure is a two for one and comes from the Gospel of Luke:<br />
<blockquote>Luke 6:46 Τί δέ με καλεῖτε· κύριε κύριε, καὶ οὐ ποιεῖτε ἃ λέγω; </blockquote><blockquote><i>Ti de me kaleite: kyrie kyrie, kai ou poieite ha lego</i></blockquote><blockquote>Why do you call me Lord Lord and do not do what I say? </blockquote>This verse contains two figures. The first is with the repetition of Lord (<i>kyrie</i>) twice in a row which forms the figure <i>epanalepsis. Epanalepsis </i>is usually used for emphasis or to heighten the emotional appeal. The second figure is that this verse, unlike Matthew's parallel material (Mt. 7:21) is a <i>rhetorical question. </i>By using the <i>rhetorical question, </i>Luke draws the audience into his argument as participants. Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-24008555738026975502010-12-20T13:38:00.000-08:002010-12-20T13:38:22.613-08:00Inception and the Rhetorical Question<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh6F4HA2Y_j4poqx5GlWQJZS4C-jIErEqzZibcAEzeLtDcRco8hk1UxkSDpvpKLsNahFLpAfvWChzbqF6wTdCmYnHV7P5gXWXCDml3430BbQ0RgqlFlq52gDzPr_SlTTYF6_OECVEtWVZan/s1600/inception_photo0.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="187" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh6F4HA2Y_j4poqx5GlWQJZS4C-jIErEqzZibcAEzeLtDcRco8hk1UxkSDpvpKLsNahFLpAfvWChzbqF6wTdCmYnHV7P5gXWXCDml3430BbQ0RgqlFlq52gDzPr_SlTTYF6_OECVEtWVZan/s320/inception_photo0.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>One of the best movies of the year, imho, is <i>Inception. </i>The remarkably creative, mind bending, surreal story of dream invasion and manipulation, is, at its heart, a story about persuasion. The story is about implanting an idea in someone's head so that they take it on as their own, so that they own the idea, believe in the idea, and act on the idea. <br />
<br />
This got me thinking about how the rhetorical figure of speech <i>rhetorical question</i> aims at much the same goal. The cleverly worded <i>rhetorical question</i> is a question that needs no answer, that only has one answer. Yet, the effect on an audience of a <i>rhetorical question</i> comes in actually answering the question, of giving one's own answer, of owning the answer. Therefore, through <i>rhetorical question, </i>the speaker makes his or her idea that of the audience.<br />
<br />
Take for example the Lukan Jesus' exchange with the synagogue leader in Luke chapter 13. On the Sabbath Jesus has just cured the "bent" woman after her 18 years of suffering. Here is the exchange:<br />
<blockquote>Luke 13:14 But the leader of the synagogue, indignant because Jesus had cured on the sabbath, kept saying to the crowd, “There are six days on which work ought to be done; come on those days and be cured, and not on the sabbath day.” <br />
Luke 13:15 But the Lord answered him and said, “You hypocrites! Does not each of you on the sabbath untie his ox or his donkey from the manger, and lead it away to give it water? <br />
Luke 13:16 And ought not this woman, a daughter of Abraham whom Satan bound for eighteen long years, be set free from this bondage on the sabbath day?” <br />
Luke 13:17 When he said this, all his opponents were put to shame; and the entire crowd was rejoicing at all the wonderful things that he was doing. </blockquote>The Synagogue leader makes this an issue of law. Jesus makes it an issue of compassion. Jesus does not directly respond to his opponents accusation. Instead, he takes his position, that it is right to heal on the Sabbath, and crafts two <i>rhetorical questions. </i>To both questions, there is only one answer. Yes, those listening will have compassion on their donkeys on the Sabbath, and Yes, this woman ought to be set free on the Sabbath. Yet, instead of just stating his idea, Jesus places his view in the form of the <i>rhetorical question </i>so that his idea now becomes that of the audience. They supply the answer to the question. They now own the answer. They are now convinced. Luke's narration of the response of Jesus' opponents is telling: the audience has now owned Jesus' view and thus put Jesus' opponents to shame. Jesus, through <i>rhetorical question</i> has implanted this idea in the minds of the audience and they have made it their own. Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-3927950906308924352010-12-17T12:04:00.000-08:002010-12-17T12:04:33.078-08:00The Friday FigureI have been derelict in my duty, not posting a Friday Figure in a few weeks. But here is this week's Friday Figure, from Matthew's gospel.<br />
<blockquote>Matt. 7:2 ἐν ᾧ γὰρ κρίματι κρίνετε κριθήσεσθε, καὶ ἐν ᾧ μέτρῳ μετρεῖτε μετρηθήσεται ὑμῖν.</blockquote><blockquote><i>en ho gar krimati krinete krithesesthe, kai en ho metro metreite metrethesetai humin</i> </blockquote><blockquote>for with the judgment you judge, you will be judged, and with the measure you measure out it will be measured to you. </blockquote> This verse has two examples of the figure <i>paronomasia, </i>which the <i>Rhetorica ad Herennium </i>defines as:<br />
<blockquote>"The figure in which by modification of sound or a change in letters, there is a close resemblance between verb or noun, so that similar words mean dissimilar things" (Ps-Cicero, <i>Rhet. Her, </i>4.21.29-4.23.32). </blockquote>I have tried to translate this verse to keep some of the figure. In this case, the words that are similar are the three words dealing with judgment and the three words dealing with measurement. In English, even trying to keep the figure does not quite replicate the Greek language. In the Greek, all three words that are similar come in direct succession with no intervening words. This makes for a nice ornamental effect that is unfortunately impossible to reproduce in translation. Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-45637457526627863212010-12-12T13:24:00.000-08:002010-12-12T13:24:36.165-08:00Rhetoric Wars: Church MarqueesIn general I dislike church marquees. I think that most of the messages on church marquees are so banal that that they should be left off altogether. Then my attention was drawn to the following use of church marquees: start a battle of words and wits with a cross town church. If done right, like here, I love it. <a href="http://www.patheos.com/community/jesuscreed/2010/12/03/church-sign-wars/#more-11342">HT</a> to Scott McKnight at Jesus Creed. <br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhA02vpULWUvCBV-ASqRHHEy6SxVbrJjrvpK5F0tE7zgbSHQM6LSFge_6Tr-5kSrQzs99il6poBSi4TNS2WMJLFE2Mxv0DFFmw-86LJdmfRxV1BB3yd3J93AWQTeBh_jKEBMCD1fNGE165b/s1600/Marquis1.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhA02vpULWUvCBV-ASqRHHEy6SxVbrJjrvpK5F0tE7zgbSHQM6LSFge_6Tr-5kSrQzs99il6poBSi4TNS2WMJLFE2Mxv0DFFmw-86LJdmfRxV1BB3yd3J93AWQTeBh_jKEBMCD1fNGE165b/s640/Marquis1.jpg" width="425" /></a> <br />
</div>Round 1: Draw, two unprovable claims<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9OWBVmLFipzS1pJBtLrfpCYGxqTY6PNdzAM_WMva2bupaYCnHSls99vGCBexM-7wEM5iel5fOdOXM3VVkSCfFb5JhH2VD4T8yd5fQ_9IfUJDbnFFQWicVrHeeCLztYT9uRh4TYqV8kXaM/s1600/Marquis2.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9OWBVmLFipzS1pJBtLrfpCYGxqTY6PNdzAM_WMva2bupaYCnHSls99vGCBexM-7wEM5iel5fOdOXM3VVkSCfFb5JhH2VD4T8yd5fQ_9IfUJDbnFFQWicVrHeeCLztYT9uRh4TYqV8kXaM/s640/Marquis2.jpg" width="434" /></a></div> Round 2: Our lady of the Martyrs, unsubstantiated claim and premature attempt to stop debated by the Presbyterians.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVsCeErC6dzYbmFwD8b3d5xiLKsvwsOuNLxsz_9LD-mhdHHAALEPfDVNBcGLnhcdLDykuJQpRVBMOA-q9TAADfchLGe9Yc4U53lElWxeWbHSIetUDqSXGcZGevjuwYYcZdodZtWLyXNUzF/s1600/Marquis3.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVsCeErC6dzYbmFwD8b3d5xiLKsvwsOuNLxsz_9LD-mhdHHAALEPfDVNBcGLnhcdLDykuJQpRVBMOA-q9TAADfchLGe9Yc4U53lElWxeWbHSIetUDqSXGcZGevjuwYYcZdodZtWLyXNUzF/s640/Marquis3.jpg" width="442" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhVsCeErC6dzYbmFwD8b3d5xiLKsvwsOuNLxsz_9LD-mhdHHAALEPfDVNBcGLnhcdLDykuJQpRVBMOA-q9TAADfchLGe9Yc4U53lElWxeWbHSIetUDqSXGcZGevjuwYYcZdodZtWLyXNUzF/s1600/Marquis3.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><br />
</a></div>Round 3: Our Lady of Martyrs: levity, Presbyterians, too caught up on this "soul" thing.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirESL6NO-U36BTlXAuGztckoAwnD3FdSgYF2_SfvglMyOseaP0-R5T0jFkIQnKAXeWqCPIbuz4dmPPctHiDfrlb86EUpvvrltltDfWssvOy3RWDbYlBFy8j6GnEP-vyhMFVNl7pNkQU9Ie/s1600/Marquis4.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirESL6NO-U36BTlXAuGztckoAwnD3FdSgYF2_SfvglMyOseaP0-R5T0jFkIQnKAXeWqCPIbuz4dmPPctHiDfrlb86EUpvvrltltDfWssvOy3RWDbYlBFy8j6GnEP-vyhMFVNl7pNkQU9Ie/s640/Marquis4.jpg" width="414" /></a></div>Round 4: Our Lady of Martyrs: Levity, Presbyterians, What?<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiw35vRmehCgB3bLiV7QDFRrCE3B5s8ORFmNXn6tOqd16EmL7p0rVfVA0_ph3UkAfI2G1vQD9R7tkGF9UmhTIk5iTC6qT1xFHOuSw8rmaSIUKYtFh1cXSV8Q4h0IGEgcIS1conMluF8h8sD/s1600/Marquis5.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="267" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiw35vRmehCgB3bLiV7QDFRrCE3B5s8ORFmNXn6tOqd16EmL7p0rVfVA0_ph3UkAfI2G1vQD9R7tkGF9UmhTIk5iTC6qT1xFHOuSw8rmaSIUKYtFh1cXSV8Q4h0IGEgcIS1conMluF8h8sD/s400/Marquis5.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>Round 5: Our lady of Martyrs: How do you come back from that> At least the Catholics still have a sense of humor.Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-32959983742298039752010-12-09T14:04:00.000-08:002010-12-09T14:04:00.478-08:00τοπός and κοινός τοπός, topic and commonplaceSeventh in the list of ancient <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/10/progymnasmata.html"><i>progymnasmata</i></a> was the exercise of τοπός (<i>topos</i>, topic) or κοινός τοπός (<i>koinos topos, </i>commonplace." <i>Topos</i> literally means place, and a commonplace, in practice is a fount of stock arguments. Theon says the following:<br />
<blockquote>"It is called a <i>topos</i> because starting from it as a 'place' we easily find arguments." (Theon, 106, Kennedy). </blockquote>Theon gives examples of commonplaces of good and bad men. For example, bad commonplaces for people are "tyrant, traitor, murderer, profligate," and for good people, "tyrannicide, hero, lawgiver."<br />
<br />
Once one has established a commonplace, one can elaborate it in several ways, through comparison, past events, future events. Theon gives an example of a comparison between a temple robber and a thief. He writes:<br />
<blockquote>"If the thief is punished for taking men's money, how much more will this man be punished for looting the possession of the gods?" (Theon, 108, Kennedy). </blockquote> In many ways then, the commonplace is a way of labeling someone or something, and then using stock arguments that are common to that type of person or thing.<br />
<br />
There are several good examples of the commonplace in the New Testament. The following example comes from I Peter, where the author gives a commonplace, i.e., Gentiles, and then lists deeds common to Gentiles:<br />
<blockquote>1Pet. 4:3 You have already spent enough time in doing what the Gentiles like to do, living in licentiousness, passions, drunkenness, revels, carousing, and lawless idolatry.</blockquote>Once the label "Gentile" is used, it opens up an entire list of stock arguments against Gentiles. Thus, the commonplace is a starting place from which to draw arguments. Notice, that commonplaces are always general, and they border on the stereotypical, but are nonetheless useful for finding arguments. Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-50509439246241270782010-12-08T09:25:00.000-08:002010-12-08T09:25:50.460-08:00ἀνασκευή and κατασκευή, refutation and confirmationἀνασκευή (<i>anaskeue, </i>refutation), and κατασκευή (<i>kataskeue, </i>confirmation) are the fifth and sixth in the list of the ancient <a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/10/progymnasmata.html"><i>progymnasmata</i></a>. These two exercises consist of arguments for or against some argument, narrative, fable, maxim, etc. In teaching students to refute an argument, the exercise draws on stock arguments, or <i>topoi </i>(topics). These are the unclear, implausible, impossible, inconsistent, inappropriate, or not beneficial. To confirm an argument, narrative, fable, maxim, etc., one should use the opposites.<br />
<br />
A good example of a refutation from the inconsistent comes in Luke 20:41-44. Jesus is apparently responding to a certain conception of the Messiah as the Son of David. In what I believe is an attempt to confuse his opponents, Jesus refutes the concept of the Messiah as the son of David by pointing out inconsistencies in his opponents narrative.<br />
<blockquote>Luke 20:41 Then he said to them, “How can they say that the Messiah is David’s son? <br />
Luke 20:42 For David himself says in the book of Psalms,<br />
‘The Lord said to my Lord,<br />
“Sit at my right hand, <br />
Luke 20:43 until I make your enemies your footstool.” ’ <br />
Luke 20:44 David thus calls him Lord; so how can he be his son?” </blockquote> In this case the refutation lies in the inconsistency of David calling his son Lord. Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1974356955983546498.post-23551570700817433412010-12-01T12:35:00.000-08:002010-12-01T12:35:44.100-08:00γνώμη or maximThe Greek γνώμη (<i>gnome</i>) or <i>maxim</i> is the fourth exercise in the list of the classical <i><a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/10/progymnasmata.html">progymnasmata</a>. </i>Theon does not treat <i>maxim</i> as a separate exercise but discusses it along with the exercise on <i><a href="http://rhetoricandthent.blogspot.com/2010/11/blog-post.html">chreia</a>.</i> Nicolaus the Sophist defines <i>maxim </i>as follows:<br />
<blockquote>"<i>Maxim</i> is a general statement, giving some counsel and advice for something useful in life." (Nicolaus 25, Kennedy). </blockquote><i>Maxim</i> is also a figure of speech and is defined by the author of the <i>Rhetorica ad Herennium </i>as,<br />
<blockquote>"A saying drawn from life which shows concisely either what happens or ought to happen in life." (Ps-Cicero, <i>Rhet. Her. </i>4.17.24).</blockquote><i>Maxims </i>are therefore usually short sayings giving some advice. They differ from <i>chreia</i> in two ways: 1) they are always sayings whereas <i>chreias </i>can be either sayings or actions, and 2) <i>Maxims</i> are usually anonymous whereas <i>chreias</i> are always attributed to a specific person. <br />
<br />
There is obviously a significant amount of overlap between <i>chreias</i> and <i>maxims, </i>and the distinctions do not seem to be overly important except for classification purposes. This is especially true because all of the exercises used for <i>chreias </i>are also suggested for <i>maxims. </i>Thus, with a <i>maxim, </i>one can expand or contract, elaborate, confirm, refute, and repeat with slightly different language.<br />
<br />
If we hold to the strict definitions given by the progymnasmatists, all of the sayings of Jesus are <i>chreias </i>and not strictly speaking <i>maxims. </i>Yet, if one is going by the lists of figures of speech, <i>maxim </i>seems to be the proper figure for the sayings of Jesus.<br />
<br />
Several good examples of <i>maxims </i>come in the Sermon on the Mount with the <i>antitheses </i>of Jesus where he says, "You have heard it said... but I say to you." In each case Jesus gives a saying that was common, usually from the Old Testament, but he does not give a specific attribution. In one case, the text is not from the OT:<br />
<blockquote>Matt. 5:43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ </blockquote>In these cases Jesus cites some commonly held saying in the form of a <i>maxim</i> only to refute it with his own<i> chreia</i>.Keith Reichhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10679244684706964812noreply@blogger.com0