Comparison, Self-Praise and Irony: Paul's Boasting and the Conventions of Hellenistic Rhetoric

Abstract

Since the publication of E. A. Judge's ‘Paul's Boasting in relation to Contemporary Professional Practice’, and more especially since the appearance of H. D. Betz's Der Apostel Paulus und die sokratische Tradition, scholarly attention to Paul's ‘boasting’ in 2 Corinthians 10–12 has focussed on the question of literary form.

A Tale of Two Riots: The synkrisis of the Temples of Ephesus and Jerusalem in Acts 19–23

“… 6. All of the parallels examined in Clark 2001 are between people or groups of people. This extends beyond Luke/Acts research, as Stanton 1992: 77-84 (John the Baptist and Jesus in Matthew) and Forbes 1986 (Paul and his opponents) illustrate. …”

Ethnomedical Anthropology and Paul's “Thorn” (2 Corinthians 12:7)

“…The term exoutheneω carries this meaning in the Pauline literature (Rom 14:3, 10; 1 Cor 1:28; 6:4; 16:11; 1 Thess 5:20), and, interestingly enough, in 2 Corinthians 10:10, where it is used to describe Paul's inability as a speaker, exoutheneω occurs in close juxtaposition with “weak bodily presence” (tou sωmatos asthenēs). Paul's opponents charge, “On the one hand, the epistles are weighty and strong, but on the other hand his presence of body weak and his speech despisable.” According to a number of scholars, such invective against Paul in 2 Corinthians 10:10 conforms to physiognomic conventions of what a “weak bodily presence” would have signified in the ancient Mediterranean—weakness or deficiency in character , with all of the attendant gendered implications (Plummer 1915: 282–83; Bultmann 1985: 190; Schmithals 1971: 176–77; Betz 1972; Hock 1980: 59–60; Black 1984: 135–38; Forbes 1986; Marshall 1987: 317–40; Lüsdemann 1989: 83–86; Harrill 2006)—and Paul chose to quote this invective because it served a rhetorical aim of overturning physiognomic reliance on outward signifiers.…”

“…Furthermore, while hardships endured by a philosopher or teacher were understood to be evidence of the truth of their philosophy or teaching (Fredrickson 2003: 174–175), the controlling motif of Paul's boast is not the virtue or quality of his behavior/reason under hardship, but rather the hardship and humiliation itself. Physical illness is one of the last things a person would normally want to parade before a physiognomic-conscious audience such as the Corinthians, and yet for Paul it indicates his true apostolic status (Forbes 1986). Indeed, “So far is Paul removing himself from the conventional attitudes of his opponents that, when ‘forced’ to boast, he will do so only ironically, in order to satirize precisely those kinds of achievements of which his opponents were most proud” (Fredrickson 2003: 175).…”

Honour and Righteousness in Romans

“…R. Bultmann understood this word to represent the human sin, an expression of human pride over against God.27 However, it is helpful to see this term within the cultural context of competition for honour. 28 Boasting was a much-used rhetorical convention, one which Paul also used himself in 2 Corinthians, although in a mocking way to criticize its use by his opponents. Within rhetorical convention boasting was linked with comparison, which could result in praise or blame.…”