Abstract
It is argued that rhetorical criticism is increasingly recognized as a method of interpretation of biblical literature. From the discussion in this article it becomes clear that there are different perspectives of rhetorical criticism just as there are different theories of rhetoric. It is argued that contemporary critics need to develop an interdisciplinary method of rhetorical criticism in order to answer questions about the potential effectiveness of a rhetorical act. It is concluded that the rhetorical critic needs a combination of "old" methods in order to answer new questions.
Highlights
IntroductionWhen interpretations of the New Testament are studied – especially the use of rhetorical criticism for New Testament interpretation, it becomes clear that confusion exists about the concepts “rhetoric”, “rhetorical theory” and “rhetorical criticism”
Burke’s book (1950) deals with the question where rhetorical criticism is taking us. Wuellner (1987:462) answers this question with: “it takes us to interdisciplinary studies ... approaches all literature”.When interpretations of the New Testament are studied – especially the use of rhetorical criticism for New Testament interpretation, it becomes clear that confusion exists about the concepts “rhetoric”, “rhetorical theory” and “rhetorical criticism”
Thuren (1990:43) for example, in discussing the nature of rhetorical criticism, states that “rhetorics seeks to study what is the purpose of any discourse ...”
Summary
When interpretations of the New Testament are studied – especially the use of rhetorical criticism for New Testament interpretation, it becomes clear that confusion exists about the concepts “rhetoric”, “rhetorical theory” and “rhetorical criticism”. Thuren (1990:43) for example, in discussing the nature of rhetorical criticism, states that “rhetorics seeks to study what is the purpose of any discourse ...”. Continues that “rhetorics analyzes the means utilized in a text ...” (Thuren, 1990:43). He describes rhetorics as “a method of practical criticism”, when he discusses modern conceptions of rhetorics (Thuren, 1990:52). These quotations serve to demonstrate the confusion in this regard. To avoid any misunderstanding in this article, I will first distinguish between the following concepts: In die Skriflig 34(2) 2000:253-274
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
