Review of D. Kremendahl. Die Botschaft der Form. Zum Verhältnis von antiker Epistolographie und Rhetorik im Galaterbrief (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus, 46)
Forskningsoutput: Tidskriftsbidrag › Recension av bok/film/utställning etc.
Standard
Review of D. Kremendahl. Die Botschaft der Form. Zum Verhältnis von antiker Epistolographie und Rhetorik im Galaterbrief (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus, 46). / Übelacker, Walter.
I: Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift, Vol. 79, Nr. 1, 2003, s. 52-53.Forskningsoutput: Tidskriftsbidrag › Recension av bok/film/utställning etc.
Harvard
APA
CBE
MLA
Vancouver
Author
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Review of D. Kremendahl. Die Botschaft der Form. Zum Verhältnis von antiker Epistolographie und Rhetorik im Galaterbrief (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus, 46)
AU - Übelacker, Walter
N1 - Reviewed Work(s): Die Botschaft der Form. Zum Verhältnis von antiker Epistolographie und Rhetorik im Galaterbrief (Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus, 46) (by D. Kremendahl)
PY - 2003
Y1 - 2003
N2 - This dissertation handles the question of the rhetorical formula, the genre and the rhetorical disposition of Galatians. There is also an excellent summary with further perspectives. The title of the book already gives a glimpse of the main result, namely that the form has more bearing on the message than usually acknowledged. Here it is the question of the epistolographical form which often is treated with unfairness in rhetorical analyses. The thesis of K. is more balanced arguing that epistolography and rhetoric have to be combined for a proper understanding of Galatians as a whole. It is no problem to agree to this point. It is however unsatisfying that K. underestimates the paraenesis in Gal 5:7-6:18 as some kind of specifying addition. In rhetorical argumentation the main result or the main point often occurs at the end. It is therefore a shortcoming that K. never defines the term ”paraenesis”, which I consider as some kind of exhortation to act in a certain way and which therefore Galatians should be characterized as deliberative rhetoric. K. denies this characterization of Galatians.
AB - This dissertation handles the question of the rhetorical formula, the genre and the rhetorical disposition of Galatians. There is also an excellent summary with further perspectives. The title of the book already gives a glimpse of the main result, namely that the form has more bearing on the message than usually acknowledged. Here it is the question of the epistolographical form which often is treated with unfairness in rhetorical analyses. The thesis of K. is more balanced arguing that epistolography and rhetoric have to be combined for a proper understanding of Galatians as a whole. It is no problem to agree to this point. It is however unsatisfying that K. underestimates the paraenesis in Gal 5:7-6:18 as some kind of specifying addition. In rhetorical argumentation the main result or the main point often occurs at the end. It is therefore a shortcoming that K. never defines the term ”paraenesis”, which I consider as some kind of exhortation to act in a certain way and which therefore Galatians should be characterized as deliberative rhetoric. K. denies this characterization of Galatians.
KW - genre
KW - Epistolography
KW - Galatians
KW - Rhetoric
KW - rhetorical structure
M3 - Review (Book/Film/Exhibition/etc.)
VL - 79
SP - 52
EP - 53
JO - Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift
JF - Svensk Teologisk Kvartalskrift
SN - 0039-6761
IS - 1
ER -