Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: II Corinthians

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "David Amador" <TheVoidBoy AT sprynet.com>
  • To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: II Corinthians
  • Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 15:32:19 -0700


Mark,

Thank you for your intriguing references.

One of the questions rhetorical criticism must face is its functionality
with respect to historical issues, even issues such as the identification of
genre. It does not surprise me that others have culled ancient rhetorical
treatises and texts and found evidence in support of partition theories,
and, really, the question of partition is not my interest. My focus is in
trying to understand how the letter works as it stands in the canonical
text.

I 'assume' integrity only because I have no good reason not to. Not yet,
anyway. Now, this puts me in diametrical opposition to a majority of
historical (even scholars of ancient rhetoric), since they 'assume'
partition and work out the reasons for it. Even scholars of ancient
rhetoric, who often build upon the foundations of historical critics (HD
Betz is one example).

Instead, if critics can find reasons that address my concerns about the
questionable assumptions they make regarding communicative and rhetorical
dynamics, I would love to hear what they have to say. I am open to being
convinced, even persuaded!

I will read your suggested book with great interest.

-David Amador
Santa Rosa, CA






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page