2 Corinthians 11:22: Historical context, rhetoric, and ethnicity
In this article historical criticism, rhetorical criticism and ethnicity theory are combined to interpret Paul’s boasting about his ethnicity in 2 Corinthians 11:22. Partition theory helps to establish the historical/social context that 2 Corinthians 10-13 is a fragment of the “tearful letter,” whic...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | Afrikaans |
Published: |
AOSIS
2008-01-01
|
Series: | HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies |
Online Access: | https://hts.org.za/index.php/hts/article/view/57 |
id |
doaj-57fb3706eed14f50a74d845790abea75 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-57fb3706eed14f50a74d845790abea752020-11-25T00:34:21ZafrAOSISHTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 0259-94222072-80502008-01-0164281984310.4102/hts.v64i2.57532 Corinthians 11:22: Historical context, rhetoric, and ethnicityDennis Duling0Canisius College, Buffalo (USA)In this article historical criticism, rhetorical criticism and ethnicity theory are combined to interpret Paul’s boasting about his ethnicity in 2 Corinthians 11:22. Partition theory helps to establish the historical/social context that 2 Corinthians 10-13 is a fragment of the “tearful letter,” which represented the low point (high conflict) of Paul’s relations with the Corinthians. Rhetoric – the theatrical “Fool’s Speech,” which contains irony, self-praise, and comparison – helps to understand Paul’s boastful argumentation in his selfdefence; and ethnicity theory helps to interpret Paul’s construction of his ethnic identity. Paul boasted of his ethnicity by taking up rhetorical comparison and self-praise. But he did so in the so-called “Fool’s Speech”, which is full of irony: his ethnic heritage was part of his argument that he was equal to that of his opponents, but – here is the chief irony – his ethnicity “in the flesh” ultimately meant nothing to him.https://hts.org.za/index.php/hts/article/view/57 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
Afrikaans |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Dennis Duling |
spellingShingle |
Dennis Duling 2 Corinthians 11:22: Historical context, rhetoric, and ethnicity HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies |
author_facet |
Dennis Duling |
author_sort |
Dennis Duling |
title |
2 Corinthians 11:22: Historical context, rhetoric, and ethnicity |
title_short |
2 Corinthians 11:22: Historical context, rhetoric, and ethnicity |
title_full |
2 Corinthians 11:22: Historical context, rhetoric, and ethnicity |
title_fullStr |
2 Corinthians 11:22: Historical context, rhetoric, and ethnicity |
title_full_unstemmed |
2 Corinthians 11:22: Historical context, rhetoric, and ethnicity |
title_sort |
2 corinthians 11:22: historical context, rhetoric, and ethnicity |
publisher |
AOSIS |
series |
HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies |
issn |
0259-9422 2072-8050 |
publishDate |
2008-01-01 |
description |
In this article historical criticism, rhetorical criticism and ethnicity theory are combined to interpret Paul’s boasting about his ethnicity in 2 Corinthians 11:22. Partition theory helps to establish the historical/social context that 2 Corinthians 10-13 is a fragment of the “tearful letter,” which represented the low point (high conflict) of Paul’s relations with the Corinthians. Rhetoric – the theatrical “Fool’s Speech,” which contains irony, self-praise, and comparison – helps to understand Paul’s boastful argumentation in his selfdefence; and ethnicity theory helps to interpret Paul’s construction of his ethnic identity. Paul boasted of his ethnicity by taking up rhetorical comparison and self-praise. But he did so in the so-called “Fool’s Speech”, which is full of irony: his ethnic heritage was part of his argument that he was equal to that of his opponents, but – here is the chief irony – his ethnicity “in the flesh” ultimately meant nothing to him. |
url |
https://hts.org.za/index.php/hts/article/view/57 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT dennisduling 2corinthians1122historicalcontextrhetoricandethnicity |
_version_ |
1725313967626125312 |