Periodical Reviews -- By: Anonymous

Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 151:601 (Jan 1994)
Article: Periodical Reviews
Author: Anonymous


Periodical Reviews

“The Rhetoric of Hebrews: Paradigm for Preaching,” Victor C. Pfitzner, Lutheran Theological Journal 27 (1993): 3-12.

Rhetorical approaches to the Scriptures have surfaced in recent years to the benefit of exegetes. As with most hermeneutical methods, however, the rhetorical has yielded studies that vary in depth and quality. Pfitzner’s piece may add to the understanding of the rhetorical method, but it provides little depth and debatable quality.

First, Pfitzner’s tools fail to advance beyond the Neo-Aristotelian. He identifies figures of speech employed in Hebrews, classifies the epistle according to Aristotle’s “judicial, deliberative, epideictic” categories of speaking, and follows the classical “ethos, pathos, logos” divisions of argument. Though these-time tested tools provide insight into the text of Hebrews, many more analytical instruments are available to today’s rhetorical exegetes.

Second, Pfitzner’s thesis all but defies identification. Early in the article he seems to take the following as his thesis: “How something is said is just as important as what is said” (p. 3). This axiom promises some reference to the rhetoric of Marshall McLuhan or perhaps Kenneth Burke, two modern rhetoricians. Later on, however, Pfitzner articulates an apparently different conclusion. He argues that “the rhetorical form…should not be confused with the final message itself. The medium is not the message!” (p. 9). If the reader is not sufficiently confused at this point, the last two paragraphs summarize what seems to be a third completely different thesis, that Hebrews is not a polemic against Judaism, but rather an encouragement not to seek refuge from persecution back in the synagogue (pp. 11-12). Pfitzner apparently changed his thesis from that of rhetorical strategies employed in Hebrews to that of the rhetorical situation of the epistle. Both topics are worthy of exploration and necessary for a comprehensive rhetorical analysis, but their presentation here is a little confusing.

Third, whereas Pfitzner classifies Hebrews as epideictic oratory (p. 4), some of his conclusions seem to support a deliberative classification. His arguments that the epistle “is an extremely passionate, pastoral appeal for bold confession and constancy of faith, directed to a community in danger of lapsing under the threat of persecution” (p. 7), and

that “the passionate appeal of Hebrews to hold on to what is superior surely suggests the temptation to move back to the old” (p. 10), and that the readers’ seeking “refuge back in the synagogue would be a natural temptation, even if some small surrender of the uniquene...

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()