Comments on: Paul not Lucid http://www.deepbiblestudy.net/?p=841 Applying the participatory Bible study method to Bible passages. Wed, 01 Sep 2010 14:56:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: J. K. Gayle http://www.deepbiblestudy.net/?p=841&cpage=1#comment-76639 J. K. Gayle Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:08:50 +0000 http://www.deepbiblestudy.net/?p=841#comment-76639 Thanks for the link (and the warning that my writing is usually 'mystifying' to many but sometimes can be more effective). Thank you even more for keying in on how supposed certainty about what Paul (or any writer) means is often rooted in a reader's arrogance. In rhetoric studies, there is acknowledgment that some writers are intentionally or, at times, unintentionally obscure. Jesus was not really a writer, but his rhetoric (i.e., his speech and his teaching) is not always easy to get. Likewise, Paul. Similarly, rhetors of various parts of Asia tend to use this sort of communication mode. It's not to frustrate the reader or speaker, I think, but to get at profound issues that straightforward logic often misses. I like your points here on translation. Hope more of us get that, especially as related to Bible translation. Thanks for the link (and the warning that my writing is usually ‘mystifying’ to many but sometimes can be more effective). Thank you even more for keying in on how supposed certainty about what Paul (or any writer) means is often rooted in a reader’s arrogance.

In rhetoric studies, there is acknowledgment that some writers are intentionally or, at times, unintentionally obscure. Jesus was not really a writer, but his rhetoric (i.e., his speech and his teaching) is not always easy to get. Likewise, Paul. Similarly, rhetors of various parts of Asia tend to use this sort of communication mode. It’s not to frustrate the reader or speaker, I think, but to get at profound issues that straightforward logic often misses.

I like your points here on translation. Hope more of us get that, especially as related to Bible translation.

]]>