Traditions as Rhetorical Proof: Pauline Argumentation in 1 Corinthians

Abstract: Previous historical critical research has studied the pre-history of the traditions found in Paul's letters. This study investigates the rhetorical function of these confessions, acclamations and liturgical formulae in Paul's argumentation. The starting point for the investigation is the assumption that the Corinthians have received and believed the traditions, transmitted by Paul, when they were initiated into the Christian group. These traditions thus provide a route to the premises of the audience in the argumentation. This study of Paul's argumentation, with its emphasis on the inventio, uses rhetorical criticism based on classical rhetoric as an analytical tool. This study gives a new perspective on the Pauline argumentation. Several new reconstructions of the rhetorical situations, especially regarding the role of women in the church, are made, due to the identification of the rhetorical strategy as the insinuatio. This rhetorical strategy leads to a new reading of the text as a coherent argumentation which makes partition theories unnecessary. The emerging consensus in New Testament scholarship that Paul had some rhetorical training, receives further support when Paul's rhetoric is compared to contemporary rhetorical praxis, especially as seen in his use of the chreia-elaboration pattern, which was taught as a basic exercise in the progymnasmata. A theological implication is that a study of Paul's use of key individual traditions, is at the same time a study of the interplay between the center of Paul's theology and its application to a specific church's issues.