Article #57 1 Verbum et Ecclesia , dispositio Original Research probatio with the Verbum et EcclesiaVerbum et dispositio and represents in 1:11–17. They differ,They narratio1:11–17. in (page number not for citation purposes) an analysis of the rhetoric of the text perspective that differs from the typical 1:1–9 . Mitchell (1991:xi) . endsMitchell her (1991:xi) probatio iscussion among New Testament scholars, who base ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION in 1:10, followed by the by followed propositio1:10, in orinthians dispositio of the letter and its rhetorical genre. As to the 1 C in , which leads to the to whichleads ,

Vol. 30 No. 2 PageVol. 1 of 6 exordium RHETORICAL A TEXT-CENTRED FROM ANALYSIS PERSPECTIVE approach of researchers, who tend to force ancient rhetorical categories on the letter. The analysis The letter. the on categories rhetorical ancient force to tend who researchers, of approach is done in terms of what is called a summarised, ‘grounded followed by theoretical a approach’. description of This the approach rhetorical situation is of the briefly letter and a analysis systematic of these nine verses. It will be argued that rhetorical strategy, these constructed verses from the are text an itself and integral aimed part at persuading of the Paul’s Corinthians to accept his authority as apostle and to follow his instructions in realising their new life in Christ. The conclusion is that a text-centred approach with its focus on the functional aspects of the text provides a better understanding of Paul’s rhetorical strategy than a typical aspects of the text. with its focus on the formal rhetorical analysis, In this article, 1 Corinthians 1:1–9 is analysed from a A text-centred approach is exactly what it says: It involves that focuses primarily upon identifying and describing the rhetorical strategiesinstead of frommaking the textthe textitself fit into apreselected rhetorical model. Scholars opting forregard better it thisto let the approach text for itself’ ‘speak orto ‘trust in the text and in its internal logic’ (Meynet Tolmie’s (2005) 1998:177). proposal represents one way of describing the persuasive lettersforce from of suchPaul’s a perspective. It has proved fruitful in analysing otherused to describeletters persuasion of in Paul the firstand ninewillverses Corinthians.of 1 be Since it is impossible to explanation analyse of the approach that he used a in analysing the text letter to the Galatians. in His purpose a is not to prescribe totally a fixed but toprovide methodology, a general guideline objective for analysis. After constructing way, Tolmie (2005:27–30) achievewantsintheletterto gives Paul therhetoricaloutlinethebroadwhat thatis,situationcontext, of or an 1 Corinthians has been the subject of much d their analyses upon the Greco-Roman rhetorical tradition.they Although differ they with use regardthe same to tradition, the andSchrage WitheringtonMitchell (1991) agree (1991), (1995) that the thanksgiving in 1:4–9 forms a rhetorical conclusionthe of deliberative argument while in 15:58 Witherington There is extends also to 16:12. it consensusno as to the closing the of letter. With regard to the rhetorical genre of 1 Corinthians, scholars generally accept that of it is an deliberativeexample rhetoric (Mitchell 1991; Schüssler-Fiorenza 1987; Witherington Kennedy, however, is of 1995). the The opinion classicistthat the genre of 1 Corinthiansdeliberative, is although best understood it containsas ‘largely some judicial passages’ who (1984:87). Wuellner again, relies (1979:177–188) on Perelman and Olbrecht-Tyteca’s redefinitionCorinthians of is epideictic. The thevariety of epideicticthese interpretations genre, casts serious argues doubtjustification on theapplying for categories thattheoreticalof classical letters.rhetoric Paul’s to 1 An interesting feature of rhetorical analyses of 1 Corinthians is the chapterstendency to analysein individualthe letter, arguing that each a of specificthem displays rhetorical the genre.traditional Examples include the12–14 and analyses those of Smit of of (1993:211–230) Bünker Corinthians1 (1984:59–72), Shaw (1995) 15. andBünker, for Watson example, of argues (1993:231–249) 1 that 1 CorinthiansCorinthians 15 is judicialas a whilepiece Watson of anddeliberative Shaw rhetoric. regard It is it probably assumed that these speecheschapters incould be 1 analysedCorinthians as while the letter as a rhetorical whole could also categories.be analysed Porter in terms (1997:554) is of the same correctdifficult determine, to in farso inas they reveal profitable the ofuse ancient rhetoricalcategories asserting in the that the interpretation these of value chapters. of such analyses is As a result of these and other concerns (such as the mixing of epistolaryNew Testament scholarsand rhetoricalstarted categories), analysing letters Paul’s without using ancient rhetorical categories. They began tomodern apply rhetorical theories, or they analysed the arguments in a letter in terms text-centreda of approach, wherebythe letter itself serves asstarting-point analysis.for Examples of thelatter are the analyses andGalatians of Corinthians,1 RomansAnderson of (1999) 1–11 1–5:12, as on Galatians.well and (2005) as Tolmie the Kern works of (1998) Thepurpose this of article proposalpersuasionstudy tois Corinthians in1 in terms Tolmie’s of 1:1–9 thesenineverses.rhetoricalanalysisanalysis.summarised,anproposal of forHiswill be by followed I hope to thatprove a text-centred approach, aimed reconstructingat rhetorical Paul’s strategy from bettertheitself,textprovidesa understanding hisrhetoric of than using ancient rhetorical categories from outside. however, withhowever, regard to the demarcation of the ersuasion P 1 ee: OpenJournals New Testament at: This article is available ve.v30i2.57 6 pages. DOI: 10.4102/ et Ecclesia Art. 30(2), #57, Corinthians Verbum 1:1–9’, ‘Persuasion in 1 Department, University of the Free South State, Africa Correspondence to: Andries Snyman H. e-mail: [email protected] Postal address: Posbus 28304, Danhof, South Africa9310, Keywords: persuasion; Corinthians; grounded theoretical rhetoricalapproach; Paul’s strategy; Testament New hermeneutics Dates: Snyman, 2009, A.H., How to cite this article: Published: 04 Sept. 2009 Accepted: June 10 2009 © 2009. The© 2009. Authors. Licens Publishing. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License. http://www.ve.org.za Received: 22 Mar. 2009 Affiliation: 1 Author: Andries Snyman H. http://www.ve.org.za Original Research Snyman

as a whole, he formulates his ‘minimal theoretical framework’, of the Corinthians, Paul was not well qualified in terms of consisting of the following aspects: pneumatic competence. The apostle must somehow have learnt • The identification of the dominant rhetorical strategy in this and in order to convince them to accept his interpretation, a particular section by answering two questions: ‘How he had to argue why they should follow his instructions and can one describe Paul’s primary rhetorical objective in not those of the other missionaries. In the process of persuasion, this section?’, and ‘How does he attempt to achieve this Paul presented himself as the sole founder and father of the objective?’ church in Corinth who must be obeyed and not as one apostle • The analysis of the section by focusing on the types of among others. argument Paul uses and why they are effective or by describing the manner in which he argues to persuade his Whether one accepts this specific reconstruction or not, the audience. Exegetical issues are discussed, especially when broad picture remains the same: The letter is dominated there is not agreement on the meaning of a specific phrase by Paul’s attempt to persuade the Corinthians to accept his or expression of rhetorical significance. authority as apostle (including the truth of his message) and to • The identification of the rhetorical techniques Paul uses to follow his instructions in realising their new life in Christ. He enhance the impact of his communication. is not addressing a single subject but a wide variety of issues, • A description of the way in which the argument in the letter using a variety of arguments and persuasive techniques. To as a whole has been organised. Of course, this aspect can examine these in the first nine verses of the letter is the aim of only be addressed once the analysis of the whole letter has this paper. been completed. (See Tolmie 2005:122–123 for his description of the argument in Galatians.). ANALYSIS OF 1 CORINTHIANS 1:1–9 Introduction RHETORICAL CONTEXT Two issues need attention before analysing Paul’s persuasive The rhetorical situation or context in which Paul wrote this strategy in these nine verses: letter might be conceived as follows: • Scholars who follow Betz in his approach to rhetorical analysis define 1:1–3 as the epistolary prescript and ‘Those of Chloe’ in 1:11 supplied him with oral information 1:4–9 as the exordium of the letter (Mitchell 1991:192– about the situation in Corinth. Most probably they also 197; Witherington 1995:78–94). The primary aim of the presented him with the letter referred to in 7:1 (Schüssler- exordium was to prepare the audience psychologically for Fiorenza 1987:395). From these two sources Paul learnt, first the speaker and his case. As Lausberg (1960:180) puts it, of all, about the divisions and partnership in Corinth, which ‘Ziel des exordiums ist es, die Sympathie des Richters (oder im had implications for his apostolic authority. It is unlikely that a weiteren Sinn: des Publikums) für den (parteimässig vertretenen) group of anti-Pauline agitators were causing these problems, as Redegegenstand zu gewinnen.’ Marshall (1987:23–27) argues. The difficulties were essentially • In line with this definition, Watson (1988:62) highlights internal and resulted in divisions among the Corinthians three functions of the exordium: ‘…to obtain audience themselves (Pogoloff 1992:237; Schüssler-Fiorenza 1987:397–398; attention, receptivity and goodwill’. The major drawback in Witherington 1995:74). Fee (1988:6) also agrees that the church describing 1 Corinthians 1:4–9 as exordium is that it leads was experiencing internal strife but argues convincingly that to a degradation of the argumentative value of this part

Article #57 the greater problem was the division between Paul as the of the letter. The exordium (and narratio) cannot merely be founder of the church and some influential teachers who were regarded as ‘preparatory’ for the ‘real’ arguments in the

Verbum et EcclesiaVerbum et leading the Corinthians in an anti-Pauline direction. For Paul probatio, as Tolmie (2005:46–47) points out in his analysis of this greater conflict presents a crisis over his apostolic authority Galatians. He distinguishes between the theological content as well as the truth of his message. Exegetes agree that the key of Paul’s arguments and their persuasive value. Even if the issue between Paul and his audience was what it meant to be arguments at the beginning of a letter may appear less pneumatikos. The Corinthians made glossolalia the basic criterion ‘theological’ in nature, it does not imply that they should of spirituality while their interest in sophia and gnosis gave them be viewed as inferior or less persuasive than the ones used special wisdom and superior knowledge. All of this is opposed later on in the letter. On the contrary: It might just be that to both Paul and his gospel and results in boasting and false Paul preferred to use his best arguments first! confidence, which needs to be addressed. • In this analysis 1 Corinthians 1:1–9 has been demarcated by rhetorical considerations from the text itself. It consists Secondly, 1 Corinthians was written in response to certain of three sections. The first three verses are separated from practical issues raised in the letter Paul received from them. verses 4–7a by the verb eu jcaristw ` in verse 4, indicating a The major issues that needed to be settled were marriage and shift in Paul’s rhetorical strategy. In 1:7b–9 he moves from sexuality (5–7), meat sacrificed to idols (8:1–11:1), worship (11:2– thanksgiving to an eschatological perspective, which has an 14:40), resurrection (15:12–37) and the collection for the saints important function in his persuasive strategy. In 1:10 there is another shift when he starts appealing (parakalw) ` to his (16:1–4). In response to these issues as well as to the oral reports audience in the light of the divisions among them. Thus, the of Chloe’s people, Paul addresses various – mainly behavioural three sections in 1:1–9 are verses 1–3, 4–7a and 7b–9. – concerns in the letter. • How should one describe the rhetorical strategy in each of these sections? In 1:1–3 Paul is emphasising the divine In her much-quoted article Rhetorical situation and historical origin of his apostleship and the Corinthians’ calling as reconstruction in 1 Corinthians, Schüssler-Fiorenza (1987:397–398) ‘church of God, sanctified in Christ Jesus’. The dominant describes the rhetorical situation as follows: The Corinthians strategy in this section could thus be described as ‘adapting had debates as to how their new life in Christ could be realised the salutation to emphasise his and their divine calling’. in the midst of a society rooted in divisions between Greek and In the second section (1:4–7a) he thanks God for the Jew, slave and free, man and woman, etc. These debates dealt Corinthians themselves and for the gifts they have received. with issues such as ‘no longer male and female’ and marriage The strategy in the third section, dealing with eschatology, relationships. In the light of competing interpretations and could be described as ‘assuring the Corinthians of their practices they decided to write to different missionaries future glory, thereby persuading them to use their gifts (including Paul) for their advice, since some of the interpretations correctly’ (1:7b–9). most likely originated in different theological views held by these missionaries. This consultation process did not mean that The rest of the article will be devoted to a verse-by-verse they would accept such advice without judgement in terms of analysis of the way in which Paul tries to persuade his audience their own pneumatic self-understanding. According to some to his point of view.

2 Verbum et Ecclesia Vol. 30 No. 2 Page 2 of 6 http://www.ve.org.za (page number not for citation purposes) Article #57 3 Verbum et Ecclesia (1 Cor 1:2). Cor (1 (Fee 1988:33) (Fee 1988:33) ) to be holy. The ) to be holy. Original Research Verbum et EcclesiaVerbum et Cristw ` / jIhsou ` is klhtoi `~ e jn with (page number not for citation purposes) a Jgia means vzw ‘to cause someone a {gio~ means ‘possessing certain essentially divine in Corinth seem to have struck an independentanstruck havepneumatikoi seem to Corinth in kurivou hJmw `n jIhsou ` CristouhJmw ` e panti; jn `n)’. to vpw /, au jtw `n kai; The course, both from Paul and therefore churches…. also So from Paul the starts rest of by the giving remind them that themtheir own calling to be a God’s people belongs to gentle nudge to a much larger picture. The following church‘the church as qualificationthe theof issuesdescription. Firstly, are rhetorically of God’. As Thiselton significant (2000:73–74) points out, the functionthisqualification in address to is at outset of the of one problems the this among the Corinthians: The wealthy church or to people does who manifest not certain belongspiritual gifts. to churchThe belongs to God, the to everyone whom is accountable. Secondly, they are described as ‘sanctified in ChristJesus and called to be holy’. The verb to have the quality of holiness – to make holy’ (Louw & 1988:745) Nida and the prepositioninstrumental, referring to the accomplishes work ‘in Christ’ of (Conzelmann salvation Similarly, God1975:21). which God or Christ is the subject of their calling ( adjective qualitiesin contrast istowhat human’ 1988:745). (Louw Nida & divineargumentanargumentonbased istype usedhereThe of involvement. This type of argument is highly effective frequentlyand usedis in as 1:1–9 well as in otherPaul’s letters. Here it is used to emphasise the plays human-divinesuch an important role in opposition,the rest of the whichletter. As such it prepares the audience for what is coming and enables them to understand at the outset their responsibility as people of God. They must bear the character of the One who has called them to be his people. The third issue pertains to the phrase ‘together with alleverywhere those who call on the name of our theirLord Jesus Christ Lord – and ours’. The interpreters.Isto be it connected syntaxto the immediately preceding poses some ‘called problemsto be holy’ or to for ‘the church of God in Corinth’ or even tothe senders and Paul Sosthenes Feediscusses in verse 1? the possibilities and concludes that the point is quite clear: Fee’s conclusion is supported by Paul’s argumentation and 14:36). in 11:16; remainder the of the letter (4:17; As such the it phrase associates has the two thereby Corinthiansstrengthening important their relationship and functions. withfocusing on their all Firstly, The‘togetherness’. Corinthians have a share the with all the saints other churches, who ‘call on the name of our Lord strengthens apostolic Jesus authority Paul’s in the sense Christ’. that what he Secondly, it is saying to them, he is saying to alllarge thegroup of churches.people standingThere is behind a him and for – whom as apostlehe – is responsible. He is the apostle of the universal church, as the prepositional phrase e panti; jn to vpw / indicates. According to Schüssler-Fiorenza (1987:398), authority Paul of claims Christ and the that of argument other breaks churches down. whenever I his am of his the opposite other opinion. letters As in (especially Philippians) Galatians he is but using this also authority Romansas one arguments of and his in strongest order to persuade his view. The audienceaudience must first to of all his be persuaded pointof who he of is before they can attention pay This to what he has to say. is why he uses this argumentation the at very beginning the of letter. The salutation is concluded by the traditional and‘grace peace to you from God our Father and used the in Lordother Paul’s letters. Jesus The Christ’, inclusive ‘our’ alsois used to bind Paul to his audience and to create between a them. common understanding . at theat end Vol. 30 No. 2 PageVol. 3 of 6 Pau `lo~ kai; Swsqe v v vnh~ oJ to; o [noma tou ` ) and almost certainly Pau `lo~ klhto;~ a jpo vstolo~ a jpo vstolo~ Cristou ` jIhsou, ` th / ` e jkklhsiva / tou ` qeou ` th / ` ( dia ; qelh vmato~ qeou ` or bed as , to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and klhto v~ an argument based on divine authorisation hJgiasme vnoi~ e jn Cristw / ` jIhsou `, klhtoi `~ ) is also changed to and ‘grace peace to you’ and , together with all those everywhere who call on the name ) . Paul stresses two aspects in describing himself. The cai `rein ou [sh / e jn Korivnqw /) called to be holy ( a Jgivoi~ of our Lord Jesus Christ – their Lord and ours ( to theto church of God in Corinth is the case with the senders, the extensive description of the or both (see Barrett Conzelmann 1979:30–31). and Fee (1975:20) agree that includes it both (1988:29) ideas. This interpretation is supported by the placement of a jdelfo v~ ‘calledfirst is to be apostle he that is an of ChristThe use Jesus’. salutationtheimplieshisinthatapostleshipthese words was of suchan important issue that usedhe the very first opportunity in the letter to address Corinthians,the it and betweenPaul tensions – the Galatians. Given as is the case in the who letter are to the questioning his apostleship, an Paul apostle asserts commissioned that by he the is Lord emphasises Himself.the origin of Secondly, his apostleship he with the addition ‘by the will There has of God’. been some discussion as to whether the addition qualifies Cristou ` jIhsou ` dia ; qelh vmato~ qeou ` and The designation of the senders The two senders are descri In the opening section of his letters Paul usually three employs the traditional elements of but sender, receiver describes and the greetings (Schnider sender(s) & and Stenger The 1987:4–24). receiver(s) greeting in letter of ( a more traditional detail 1 Corinthians 1:1–3: Adapting the emphasise salutation his and their divine calling to Christianised (White 1984:1730–1756). Although Paul the followstraditional pattern,the to particular adapts it he occasion of the letter in order to strengthen his overall rhetorical strategy 2005:31). (Tolmie The description of the receivers As receiversdirectedis towardsthesituation in Corinth. letterThe is addressed of of the description in an emphatic position. The addition bases his apostleship eternal in God’s plan. An examination apostleship of Paul’s that 1:1 forcefulway a emphasisein to reveals is addition that the primary aimis completely dependent of on theGod. The type of argumentcould used be defined as It is assumed that in order one to should be have been an called apostle by of God. The Jesus argument importance perspective– from Christ, Paul’s – is clear of from the fact this that he uses the at it very beginning the of letter. Paul is joined by a coworker described as ‘Sosthenes, the/our brother’. Conzelmann and (1975:20) Thiselton (2000:69–70) are necessaryspeculatehisrelationnot istoon opinion it thethat of to sincethe Sosthenesthe name was of Actswidely used.18:17, Barretton the (1979:31), other hand, thinks that he is probably the Sosthenes and well-known of Acts to 18:17 the Corinthians. mentioningfor reason a been have shouldthere that is point The designationtheas ‘my/ well This ascosender. fact a his nameas our brother’ suggests that Barrett is most correct. probably Sosthenes of namethethatpurposeImportantourfact the isfor is added after descriptionPaul’s of himself as someone ‘called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of ThisGod’. word order differs, for example, from Philippians 1:1 ( Timo vqeo~ dou `loiexcludes Sosthenes from being an Cristouapostle as well. Its ` primary function jIhsou is ` to emphasise against Paul’s his apostolic coworker. The authority Corinthians as realised have would this aswell over asthe most fact thatis inclusive: the it ‘our’ certainly includes the Christian whole community in Corinth. http://www.ve.org.za Persuasion inCorinthians 1 1:1–9 Original Research Snyman

In addition to ‘inclusive language’, the following rhetorical more fully in the body of the letter (O’Brien 1977:107–137). This techniques have been identified in 1:1–3: is also the case in 1:4–8, as will become clear in the analysis • Repetition of ‘God’ and ‘Christ Jesus/Jesus Christ’ in all below. three verses, emphasising the divine involvement that characterises the section. The basis of Paul’s thanksgiving is God’s ‘grace given you in ca vri~ carivsmata • Paranomasia with hJgiasme vnoi~ / a Jgivoi~ and pa `sin / Christ Jesus’. The term is associated with pantiv in 1:2 creates links between key items, thereby and refers to concrete expressions of God’s gracious activity in effectively highlighting them. the Corinthians (Fee 1988:37). Such a concrete understanding • Furthermore, the description of the receivers as of grace is supported by verses 5–7, in which manifestations hJgiasme vnoi~ / a Jgivoi~ emphasises their privileged status, of certain gifts are referred to – manifestations that the thus bestowing honour upon them. Genade (2007:184) Corinthians prize very highly and boast about. As indicated carivsmata calls this technique honorific referencing or classification, above, Paul does not develop the issue of the at any here used to build a relationship between Paul and his length here but merely refers to it. The reference, however, is audience. important from a rhetorical perspective. Paul stresses the fact • he placement of au jtw `n kai; hJmw `n at the end of 1:2 that the grace (and gifts) they received were given to them by emphasises the ‘togetherness’ of all the saints ‘who call on God. As such it represents another argument based on divine the name of our Lord Jesus Christ’. involvement. Precisely because these gifts were given by God, the Corinthians had no reason for boasting. Thus, Paul is To conclude: Paul’s rhetorical strategy in 1:1–3 can be described arguing from the beginning of his letter, trying to persuade his as ‘adapting the salutation to emphasise his and their divine audience to share his point of view by stopping their boasting calling’. He begins by describing himself as one ‘called to over things they have received and starting to focus on God, be an apostle of Christ Jesus’, thereby using the very first who gave them these gifts. opportunity in the letter to address the issue of his apostleship. His apostleship is further strengthened by an argument based In verse 5 Paul continues with the same argument by explaining on divine authorisation, while the word order in 1:1 also serves that the Corinthians have been enriched (e jploutivsqhte) in to highlight his apostolic authority. every respect. Scholars differ as to the meaning of o {ti at the beginning of the verse. Does it mean ‘because’ or ‘that’ and The description of the receivers is also aimed at addressing the should it be linked to eu jcaristw ` or to th ` / doqeivsh / u Jmi `n situation in Corinth. Of the various ways in which Paul adapts e jn Cristw ` / jIhsou? ` Barrett (1979:36) favours the meaning the receiver element, two are of special significance. Firstly, ‘because’ on the basis of parallels in Greek letter forms. the argument based on divine involvement, used to emphasise Conzelmann (1975:25) also prefers ‘because’ and links it to the human-divine opposition and to enable the Corinthians to eu jcaristw ` (‘I thank God…because’). Grosheide (1957:39) and understand their responsibility as God’s holy people. Secondly, Thiselton (2000:90), on the other hand, are of the opinion that the phrase ‘together with all those everywhere who call on the o {ti is explicative, indicating that what follows modifies verse name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours’, which serves 4. As such it could be translated ‘in that’, which renders the to associate the Corinthians with all other churches, thereby translation, ‘I thank my God…on the ground of his grace given highlighting Paul’s apostleship of the universal church. to you in Christ Jesus, in that…’ (or ‘I mean…’). The structure of the sentence in the original justifies such an interpretation.

Article #57 Rhetorical techniques enhancing Paul’s communication in 1:1–3 include repetition of names, paranomasia, honorific referencing Thus, verses 5–7 spell out in more detail the meaning of

Verbum et EcclesiaVerbum et and the placement of au jtw `n kai; hJmw `n at the end of 1:2. the grace given to the Corinthians in Christ Jesus: They were enriched in Christ in every respect. The gifts are to be 1 Corinthians 1:4–7a: Thanking God for the understood as manifestations of God’s grace. This argument of Corinthians and their gifts divine involvement once again serves to focus their attention on God and away from the gifts per se – the gifts as source of This section is demarcated by a shift in Paul’s persuasive their boasting. strategy. Verses 4–7a deal with the grace and gifts given to the Corinthians while verses 7b–9 refer to the final consummation The two gifts mentioned explicitly in 1:5, namely lo vgo~ and at the coming of Christ. It is a shift from the past to the present/ gnw `si~, should be interpreted in this context. Whatever their future, from thanksgiving to a strong affirmation, from the specific meaning, they are given by God for the edification graces they have received to what God will do for them ‘on the of the church and are not something human about which day of our Lord Jesus Christ’. Thus, although 1:4–8 is a single the Corinthians could boast. This issue will be developed sentence in the original, the second part of verse 7 paves the at length later on in the letter (chapters 12–14). For now Paul way for the affirmation in verses 8–9 and will be discussed in merely mentions it and expresses his thanks to God for the the next section. gifts, thereby trying to persuade his audience to do the same Verses 4–8 read as follows: by focusing on God. I thank my God always for you on the ground of his grace (e jpi; th ` / As is the case with o {ti at the beginning of 1:5, the conjunction ca vriti tou ` qeou) ` , given to you in Christ Jesus (th ` / doqeivsh / kaqw v~ in 1:6 creates problems for interpreters. Conzelmann u Jmi `n e jn Cristw ` / jIhsou) ` , in that (o {ti) in him you have been (1975:27) proposes the translation ‘for indeed’, while O’Brien enriched (e jploutivsqhte) in every respect (e jn pantiv) – in all (1977:120) and Thiselton (2000:94) see it as introducing a causal your speaking and in all your knowledge (e jn panti; lo vgw / kai; clause, explaining the reason for their richness of spiritual pa vsh / gnw vsei) – just as (kaqw v~) our testimony about Christ was gifts. Grosheide (1957:40) and Fee (1988:40), again, argue for confirmed( ejbebaiwvqh) in you so that you fall short in no gift (e jn the ordinary comparative sense of kaqw v~ (‘just as/even as’). mhdeni; carivsmati), while you wait for the revealing of our Lord Fee finds support for his interpretation in 1 Thessalonians Jesus Christ. 1:5 where Paul asserts that his gospel came with power, the (1 Cor 4–8) Holy Spirit and deep conviction and then adds the reminder Considerable research has been done on the Pauline kaqw;~ oi [date oiJ `oi e jgenh vqhmen (e jn) u Jmi `n di j u Jma `~ (‘just as thanksgivings. Thiselton (2000:85–87) discusses four stages of you yourselves know how we lived among you for your sake’). research, ending with O’Brien’s work Introductory thanksgivings Here in 1 Corinthians 1:6 it suggests that the gifts are the in the letters of Paul (1977). A shared characteristic of Paul’s evidence that Paul’s testimony about Christ was confirmed in thanksgivings and the Greek epistolary literature was to the Corinthians. express thanks for some aspects that would then be developed

4 Verbum et Ecclesia Vol. 30 No. 2 Page 4 of 6 http://www.ve.org.za (page number not for citation purposes) Article #57 5 Verbum et Ecclesia ) therevelation) Original Research Verbum et EcclesiaVerbum et e jpitele vsei in Phil not 1:6), (page number not for citation purposes) ajpekdecome vnou~ o kai; }~ bebaiw (left vsei untranslated , it , makesit better sense to translate the o [~ kaiv in , Conzelmann 1975:28 and the NIV) supports tou ` kurivou hJmw `n jIhsou ` Cristou ` is repeated e jklhvqhte) into the fellowship of His Son Jesus o [~ at the beginning of verse 8. Is it God or Jesus , which expressescertaintywhichConzelmann a , (as 1975:28 inter alia ejbebaiwvqh in 1:6, where the verb was used for the first by, by, this interpretation. To begin and end verse 8 translation with ‘Jesus Christ Jesus will Christ also confirm renders you the to so thatthe you end, will be blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus certaina toand statementawkwardis extenta Such Christ’. senseless.Thus, although Jesus Christ is grammatically the only antecedent of passage as ‘God will confirmyou…on the dayof our Lord Jesus Christ’. Thetype argument of that dominates Corinthians1 is 1:1–9 an argument based involvement.on HereGod’s in Paul 1:8 is using onceit again to good effect. God is also the subject of time, while the The clause at the end of verses 8 7, and 9 in servesan emphatic to position. highlight It that everything Corinthians God is in/through done Jesus Christ. is doing for the The inclusive ‘we’ in all the clauses to bind quoted Paul to above his audience, servesthereby achieving a common understanding between them. 2. againonce is Paul now, to strategypersuasive up hislinewith In using an argument of divine involvement in to1:8 redirect the Corinthians’ attention from themselves to their God, who assures future glory. The confirm them to apostlethe end, as is clear is from the future confident indicative bebaiw that vsei God will argue that the Corinthians had an (based ‘overrealised eschatology’ on the spiritualthe gift gifts of tongues), which they repressed had of their eager received, Christ’s expectation especially coming Therefore, Paul finds (Barrettit necessary1957:43). to remind them that 1979:39; Fee 1988:43; the Grosheide present is still incomplete and that all awaitingChristians the revelation the of Lord. are still Which interpretation is to be preferred? Probably one, the mainly second due to the Corinthians’ aim experience thegifts rhetorical of pompousPaul’s allowsbe them to Therefore, spoken. been context already has word of final the theif as letter. The is to deflate this pomposity, withoutawakening terror (Barrett The linguistic1979:39). context of the phrase also supports this spiritualgiftanyas/ interpretation:lack Corinthians not The do whilepart (praes theyfor wait of the Lord. By adding this note Paul is trying to persuade the Corinthians by reminding them Christ thatis yet to thecome and that finalthe gifts have revelationto lightbe this of used eschatological of in event. the The second issue of rhetorical significance is the antecedent of the relative Christ? Grammatically it could only be Jesus Christ at the end of verse This7. interpretation is preferred by Barrett and (1979:39) Godet while (1957:58) Conzelmann option,first the of Groenewaldfavour in (1975:28), are (1957:43) Grosheide and (1967:22) namely God. Schrageand Thiselton(1991:121) leave (2000:101) the matter open and translates the relative with ‘He’. mind my theTo antecedent o of is God, for two reasons: [~ 1. argues correctly, with reference to a wish. The argument of God’s summary involvement statement of is verse 9: ‘God is finally faithful, by whom used you were called in ( the Christ, our Lord.’ God is the only author and guarantee of the Corinthians’ existence, both in terms of their calling and their future glory. Rhetorical techniques used to enhance Paul’s communicationin this section are the following: • • by ), ), o kai; }~ Vol. 30 No. 2 PageVol. 5 of 6 paranomasia (1 Cor 1:7–8) Cor (1 e jn au jtw ` / in ) the revelation ) Paul’s witness pisto;~oJ qeo;~ pa vsh / in 1:5 is used into into fellowship with His ) ejbebaiwvqh paranomasiahighlightkeynotes ajpekdecome vnou~ ( e jklh vqhte (1:4) (1:4) is repeated with w {ste u Jma `~ mh ; u Jsterei `sqai e jn mhdeni; o the end, so that you will be blamelessthebe onwill you that end,so the o e jn pantiv (twice) and (1:4), (1:4), e jn Cristw ` / jIhsou ` pa vntote bebaiwu vsei Jmat `~) day of our Lorddayour JesusofChrist. God faithfulis ( …while …while you are waiting for of our Lord Jesus Christ; He will (God) also confirm you ( whom you have been called ( son Jesus Christ, our Lord. aul shifts his persuasive strategy from thanksgiving to an P assurance future of glory when he writes, 1 Corinthians 1:7b–9: Assuring the Corinthians of their future glory, thereby persuading them to use their gifts correctly Fee’s Fee’s well-motivated interpretation is to be of preferredO’Brien, Thiselton to and others. that If correct, it means that testimony Christconfirmed to Corinthians Paul’s God among the by giving them the spiritual gifts in The1:5. true proclamation of Christ was confirmed in their own experiencegifts they received. by way of the issuesTwo are of rhetorical significance in1:6. The first isuse the of an argument based argument on own is experience. very powerful This and type persuasive, not prone of since to people doubt their are own experience. They no other option tobut actually agree. This is exactly what achieves Paul have in 1:6: He bases his Corinthians, argument which on they now earlier cannot deny. experiencesThese experiencesallelsetheir above experienceinclude gifts of the of received,they the which proves the truth his of message. Secondly, the one who confirmsto ( Christ among argument the of divine Corinthiansinvolvement also serves to was guaranteetruth the God of Paul’s gospel: Himself. They have beenstrongtwo This arguments of HimselfGod way them.by Thus, gave enriched by the gifts Paul is trying to persuade his audience as testimony to Christ.to the truth of his With the result clause carivsmati in Paul brings1:7a his thanksgiving to positively stateda been hasclose. what Thenegatively repeats merely clause in verse 5 (Conzelmann 1975:27). that Thethe gifts grace of are indispensable repetitionas part the of Christian emphasises life;withoutthese gifts theCorinthians failfulfilwouldto their calling. In addition to the repetition just mentioned, the prepositional clause Two Two issues are rhetorically first significant relates in to this revelationourJesus theLordChrist’.What of is the function this of section. phrase The ‘while you eschatological note at the end of areverse 7? Groenewald (1967:22) waiting foris of the opinion that the the Corinthians had a sound expectation of Christ’s return – unlike many other churches – as a result of which they were using their gifts correctly and with diligence. Thus, the function of the note is to encourage them to continue in the same vein. The majority of commentators, however, as supportive rhetorical techniquecompleteness what is of said. to stress the totality or describedbe could rhetorical1:4–7a strategyThein conclude: To Arguments Corinthiansgifts’. their theand for ‘thanking God as based on divine involvement are used to good effect 1:5 (in 1:4, Corinthians’argumentthewhilethe of experience own1:6) and the leaves audience within other no 1:6 optionacceptto the but testimonytruth to Christ. Paul’s of repetitiontechniquesand The of in the argumentation. 1:5 1:5 to emphasise Christ’s instrumental role, while with http://www.ve.org.za Persuasion inCorinthians 1 1:1–9 Original Research Snyman

• Pisto v~ is placed first in 1:9 to emphasise this characteristic Marshall, P., 1987, ‘Enmity in Corinth’, Wissenschaftliche of God. Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.23, J.C.B. Mohr, • The clause pisto;~ oJ qeo v~ is not linked to the previous Tübingen. sentence (asyndeton), indicating that Paul is shifting to a Meynet, R., 1998, Rhetorical analysis: An introduction to biblical new (summative) statement in verse 9. rhetoric, Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield. To conclude: Paul’s persuasive strategy in 1:7b–9 could be Mitchell, M., 1991, Paul and the rhetoric of reconciliation: An described as ‘assuring the Corinthians of their future glory, exegetical investigation of the language and composition of 1 thereby persuading them to use their gifts correctly’. The Corinthians, Mohr-Siebeck, Tübingen. phrase ‘while you wait for the revealing of our Lord Jesus O’Brien, P.T., 1974, ‘Thanksgiving and the Gospel in Paul’, New Christ’ (1:7b) serves to deflate their pomposity and to persuade Testament Studies 21(1), 144–155. them to view their gifts from an eschatological perspective. The Pogoloff, S.M., 1992, Logos and sophia: ‘The rhetorical situation of 1 assurance itself is based on an argument of divine involvement Corinthians, Scholars Press, Atlanta. (1:8) while God is also the sole author of their calling and future Porter, S.E., 1997, ‘Paul of Tarsus and his letters’, in S.E. Porter glory (1:9). (ed.), Handbook of classical rhetoric in the Hellenistic period 330 BC–AD 400, pp. 532–585, Brill, Leiden. Rhetorical techniques in this section include repetition, Schnider, F. & Stenger, W., 1987, Studien zum neutestamentlichen inclusive language, placement of words and asyndeton. Briefformular, New Testament Studies 12, EJ Brill, Leiden. Schrage, W., 1991, Der erste Brief an die Korinther, 1 Teilband, EKKNT 7/1, Benzinger, Zürich. CONCLUSION Schüssler-Fiorenza, E., 1987, ‘Rhetorical situation and historical The aim of this article was to prove that Paul’s persuasive reconstruction in 1 Corinthians’, New Testament Studies 33, strategy in 1 Corinthians 1:1–9 can be reconstructed from the 386–403. text itself, without using rhetorical categories from outside. Shaw, I., 1995, Paul’s rhetoric in 1 Corinthians 15: An analysis I hope to have proved that these introductory nine verses are utilizing the theories of classical rhetoric, Mellen, Lewiston. not only preparatory for the ‘real’ arguments in the so-called Smit, J., 1993, ‘Argument and genre of 1 Corinthians 12–14’, probatio but are already an integral part of Paul’s argumentation in S.E. Porter & T.H. Olbricht (eds.), Rhetoric and the New in the letter. Testament, JSNT Supplement Series 90, pp. 211–230, Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield. 1 Corinthians 1:1–9 is demarcated by rhetorical considerations Thiselton, A.C., 2000, ‘The first epistle to the Corinthians: A and divided into three sections: 1:1–3; 1:4–7a and 1:7b–9. In commentary on the Greek text’, Nederduits Gereformeerde analysing them, the focus was on the way Paul argues, on the Teologiese Tydskrif, WB Eerdmans Publishing Company, types of arguments he uses and on the rhetorical techniques Grand Rapids. that could enhance the impact of his communication. Examples Tolmie, D.F., 2005, ‘Persuading the Galatians: A text-centred of arguments based on divine authorisation, on divine rhetorical analysis of a Pauline letter’, Wissenschaftliche involvement (which dominate all three sections) and one based Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament II 90. on own experience have been identified, while supportive Watson, D.F., 1988, ‘A rhetorical analysis of Philippians and its techniques such as repetition, paranomasia, inclusive language, implications for the unity question’, Novum Testamentum 30, the placement of words, honorific referencing and asyndeton 57–88.

Article #57 all contribute to the impact of his communication and serve to Watson, D.F., 1993, ‘Paul’s rhetorical strategy in 1 Corinthians persuade Paul’s audience to his point of view. 15’, in S.E. Porter & T.H. Olbricht (eds.), Rhetoric and the

Verbum et EcclesiaVerbum et New Testament, Journal for the Study of the New Testament REFERENCES Supplement Series 90, pp. 231–249, Sheffield Academic Anderson, R.D., 1999, ‘Ancient rhetorical theory and Paul’, Press, Sheffield. Catholic Biblical Quarterly 18. White, J.L., 1984, ‘New Testament epistolary literature in the Barrett, C.K., 1979, A commentary on the first epistle to the framework of ancient epistolography’, Aufsteig und Nedergang Corinthians, 2nd edn., Black, London. der römischen Welt 25(2), 1730–1756. Bünker, M., 1984, ‘Briefformular und rhetorische Disposition Witherington, B., 1995, Conflict and community in Corinth: A im 1 Korintherbrief’, Gestalt Theory 28. socio-rhetorical commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians, Eerdmans, Conzelmann, H., 1975, 1 Corinthians: A commentary on the first Grand Rapids. epistle to the Corinthians, Fortress Press, Philadelphia. Wuellner, W., 1979, ‘Greek rhetoric and Pauline argumentation Fee, G.D., 1988, The first epistle to the Corinthians, Eerdmans, in early Christian literature and the classical intellectual Grand Rapids. tradition, in Honorem Robert Grant’, Theologie Historique 53, Genade, A.A., 2007, ‘A text-centred rhetorical analysis of Paul’s 177–188. letter to Titus’, PhD dissertation, University of the Free State. Godet, F., 1957, Commentary on the first epistle to the Corinthians, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids. Groenewald, E.P., 1967, Die eerste brief aan die Korinthiërs, NG Kerk Uitgewers, Cape Town. Grosheide, F.W., 1957, De eerste brief aan de Kerk te Korinthe, N.V. Uitgeversmaatschappij J.H. Kok, Kampen. Kennedy, G.A., 1984, New Testament interpretation through rhetorical criticism, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill. Kern, P.H., 1998, Rhetoric and Galatians: Assessing an approach to Paul’s epistle, SNTS.MS101, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Lausberg, H., 1960, Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik, Max Hueber, München. Louw, J.P. & Nida, E.A., 1988, Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament based on semantic domains, UBS, New York.

6 Verbum et Ecclesia Vol. 30 No. 2 Page 6 of 6 http://www.ve.org.za (page number not for citation purposes)