What is rhetorical criticism?

Answer

Rhetorical criticism is a method of examining words to understand the author’s techniques and their impact on the intended audience. Rhetoric pertains to the art of persuasive writing or speaking. In this context, criticism refers to “analysis” rather than “disapproval.” When applying rhetorical criticism to the Bible, individuals aim to uncover the writer’s motivations, use of rhetorical devices, and cultural background to interpret the text more accurately. This approach focuses on literary forms, patterns, and how they enhance specific ideas, concentrating solely on the written text without discussing alterations or previous versions.

Rhetoric, as a discipline, focuses on how specific words and their arrangements are perceived by an audience. Information can be presented in various ways to different effects. Speakers or writers can utilize rhetoric to convey information through shock or reassurance, downplay an issue, or capture attention. Instead of assuming that a text can only be comprehended through a surface-level, “plain reading,” rhetorical criticism acknowledges that writers employ techniques like exaggeration, symbolism, wordplay, poetry, parallelism, repetition, connotation, and more to convey meaning.

Undoubtedly, rhetorical criticism considers a broad perspective of the writer’s intent. More specific approaches to rhetorical criticism delve into narrower concerns. Ideological criticism focuses on the core concepts of a text and how the writer utilizes the audience’s response to those ideas. Narrative criticism interprets the meaning of specific words and phrases within the writer’s story—as integral parts of a whole. Generic criticism examines words within specific categories, such as wisdom literature or prophecy, and interprets them accordingly.

Proper use of rhetorical criticism is essential in gaining a deeper understanding of texts and appreciating the deliberate techniques employed by writers.Criticism helps to explain biblical statements that are easy to misunderstand if taken out of context. A good example of this is Jesus’ remark about “hating” one’s family «If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. », (Luke 14:26). In terms of pure rhetoric, this is an example of hyperbole, or deliberate exaggeration. Modern people use hyperbole when saying things like “I’ve told you a million times” or “this suitcase weighs a ton.” In context, people who hear such remarks don’t interpret them with wooden literalism. They get the point. In ancient writing, comparisons were often framed in black-and-white terms for the sake of clarity, leading to frequent use of hyperbole.

Furthermore, rhetorical criticism also looks at the culture and vocabulary of the speaker and the original audience. This is sometimes called socio-rhetorical criticism. The “hatred” referenced by Jesus in the above example was not interpreted in His culture exactly as the English word hate is today. Jesus’ point and the words He used refer more to preference or lack of preference. This can also be seen in statements such as Romans 9:13, which uses similar phrasing to describe God’s choice between Jacob and Esau.

Generic criticism, which looks at the overall “type” of the text, can also be useful for the student of the Bible. For example, Paul’s letters of Galatians and Romans follow the pattern of judicial arguments, as used in his era. In other words, large portions of those texts are written as if by a lawyer presenting arguments before a judge. That perspective is useful when seeking to interpret Paul’s meaning.

As with any method, rhetorical criticism can have drawbacks. Meaningful rhetorical criticism requires a grasp of the original languages and cultures involved. That is well beyond the ability of a typical Bible student.Student. Some rhetorical techniques are evident even in translation, such as Jesus’ statements on cutting off one’s hands to avoid sin «And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. », (Matthew 5:30) or questions posed solely to highlight an obvious answer «Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shown you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? », (John 10:32). Nevertheless, a superficial reading of any specific English translation can result in misinterpretation of certain passages.

It is essential to bear in mind that techniques convey meaning, but they are not the meaning of the text itself. For example, we may readily identify symbolism or hyperbole in a statement, but that does not imply we can disregard that statement entirely. It might be symbolic, but it still holds significance. Taken to the extreme, almost anything could be dismissed simply by asserting that the writer or speaker was being sarcastic. Perhaps they were, but is there any basis to assume so in that particular instance? In general terms, rhetorical criticism focuses on techniques: the “how” rather than the “what.” This indicates that it is not an absolute gauge of meaning. Narrative criticism, a branch of rhetorical criticism, is somewhat more effective in elucidating meaning, as it deals more with major themes and concepts than with mere literary structures.

Fortunately, the limitations of rhetorical criticism are counterbalanced by the essence of the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19-20). Christ’s primary directive to the church was not “go and print Bibles.” His instruction was to engage in discipleship. The bond between a more seasoned Christian and a lAn experienced individual provides context and comprehension in Bible study (Acts 8:29-31).