A safer Ontario means more police and prosecutors making sure my car doesn't get stolen. It means building new jails to keep criminals behind bars. And it means there's no need to worry when I play at the park. We're making every corner of Ontario safer to make all of Ontario safer.
That's how we protect Ontario. For all of us. Learn how at ontario.ca. Pay for by the Government of Ontario.
It's springtime, which means that Princeton University Press is having its annual 50% off spring sale. From May 4th through June 9th, you can get 50% off nearly every single print, ebook and audio book from Princeton University Press. Just go to press.prinston.edu to get 50% off incredible books like Disneyland and the Rise of Automation. And beyond belief, how evidence shows what really works.
There's so many fantastic books you can get an incredible deal on. Go to press.prinston.edu and use the code spring50. That's sp-r-i-n-g-50 at press.prinston.edu. This sale only lasts for a month, so go and get some books.
Welcome to the new books network. Have you ever wondered why Paul leaves the Resurrection discussion in 1 Corinthians 15 for the end of the letter? Have you pondered how 1 Corinthians 15 functions as the climax to 1 Corinthians? What precisely is Paul's rhetorical strategy in 1 Corinthians?
To do this, we speak with Timothy Christian, whose recent book answers those questions by exploring in sinuatio. The Grego-Roman rhetorical convention used to address prejudiced or controversial topics like Resurrection at the end of a discourse. You're listening to new books in biblical studies, a channel of a new books network. I'm your host, Michael Morales.
Dorothy J. Christian is adjunct professor of Christian Studies in Philosophy at Asbury University and Associate Pastor of Wesley UMC in Kenton, Illinois. Tim, welcome to new books in biblical studies. It's great to be here.
Tim, tell us about yourself. Yeah, so I'll start with my family a little bit. I'm a father of four kids and my wife and I. We've been married for 14 years.
We're high school sweetheart. She's a licensed clinical social worker and has her own private practice. And so that's what we do and we manage a big house full of kids and that's fun. For work, I'm the Associate Pastor at Wesley United Methodist Church in Kenton, Illinois.
And I have over 10 years of pastoral ministry experience. Been a youth pastor, been a worship pastor, lead pastor, associate pastor, pretty much done it all. And so that's what I'm doing right now. In terms of my educational journey, I have three degrees from Asbury institutions, but my undergrad journey actually began at Western Illinois University.
So I'm a musician and so I started out college studying jazz studies. And so I double majored in jazz trumpet and jazz bass. I play a lot of instruments. So after a year there, I thought I'd call to ministry or to study ministry in school.
So I transferred to Greenville College, study pastoral ministry there for a couple years. And then my wife and I got married. We had a long distance relationship. She was at Asbury University or college back then.
And so we got married and I transferred there. So I had my senior year in super senior year at Asbury University and ended up majoring in Bible and theology. And just hopped right across the street to Asbury Theological Seminary. It's a great fit.
I did my master of divinity there. I knew that I was going to go on to do doctoral work. So I just focused everything that I did as much as I could in Greek and New Testament studies. And then ended up staying there for my PhD as well.
I started with Ben Whitterington III and Craig Keener as well, who were just colossal giants in the fields of New Testament studies. So I took all their classes and wrote my dissertation under Dr. Whitterington and graduated in 2019. So that's a little bit about me.
Now the subtitle of your book is First Corinthians 15 as Incinuatio. Would you explain the concept of Incinuatio for our listeners? Sure. So Incinuatio is the Latin technical term for the rhetorical device known as the indirect opening to a speech or sometimes called a subtle introduction.
And so there were two types of introductions that orders could use in a speech. They could be directed up front. They called that the Principium or they could be indirect or subtle. And that would be Incinuatio.
The direct approach says at the beginning of the speech, what the speech is going to be about in a very straightforward manner and just sets the course and the order just identifies. Here's the issue and that I'm going to speak to. That's the Principium. But the other type of exordium or introduction is called Incinuatio.
It doesn't exactly stay front where the order is going with the speech. And the reason most often is because there's some sort of prejudice that is present that does not allow the speaker to be upfront about where he might be going with the speech. Now the prejudice could come from three different things. It could be prejudice against the speaker himself or herself.
Maybe the audience doesn't trust the speaker. Maybe they don't like the speaker. And so, and so there could be prejudice in that way. Maybe they might have to be in direct a little bit and not come out swinging, so to speak.
There could be prejudice against the speech itself. Maybe the audience knows that the speaker is going to talk way too long. So they're not going to be willing to listen for a long time. Maybe it's going to be too short or maybe afterwards the speaker didn't talk long enough.
And so they could be prejudiced against that. Maybe the speaker talks in a different style than what the audience wants. And so there could be prejudice in that way. And then the third way is that there could be prejudice against the subject matter, just what the order is going to be talking about.
And so in the case of first Corinthians, a large majority of the Christians there are Gentile Christians and Gentiles are prejudice against the notion of dead corpses being resurrected out of their graves. And so, you know, I like to call it a zombie apocalypse for a modern day, you know, equivalence, but Greeks and Romans, they were predisposed against the Jewish notion of resurrection. And so what's Paul going to do about that? Is he going to be up front and unduly offend the Corinthians at the beginning of his letter by bringing up such a disputed notion?
Or is he going to merely hint at it up front and later throw down the gauntlet and you'll just have to read the book to find out what I think about that. And so you'll probably figure that out for yourself. But Encinio Ateo is where an order or a writer, because rhetoric in ancient world as today was for both speaking and for writing, but it's where an order indirectly and subtly at the beginning of the speech, hence the main issue or problem in which they plan to address much later in their discourse after they've established rapport with the audience, sometimes they even butter them up a little bit and prepare them for it. And after they've said everything else that they need to say before they finally throw down the gauntlet and address the main issue or the main problem directly at the end of the speech.
And so, and Cinio Ateo as being an indirect approach, it's not completely devoid of being direct and to the point, but it's about arrangement. Where are you going to be direct? Are you going to be direct up front or later? And so in my research, I've shown that or discovered that Greeks actually, because there's a different flavor between Greek rhetoric and Roman rhetoric.
The Greeks actually didn't use in Cinio Ateo all that much. They actually didn't have a full blown theory of this rhetorical technique. And why is that? Well, I think it's a cultural thing.
Greeks tended to be so upfront in your face about everything in the ancient world. Their culture didn't beat around the bush. They just they just jumped right to it. This is what I'm going to talk about.
Even if there was prejudice there, they'd be like, I'm going to just address the prejudice. But Romans, on the other hand, they were much more suave. They would butter butter you up first before knocking you down. And so in Cinio Ateo, then kind of is a Roman rhetorical development that we see in the history of rhetoric.
And so in Cinio Ateo, in fact, is direct. It's just direct at the end of the speech, though it's indirect at the beginning of the speech, if that makes sense. And so oftentimes when that issue finally comes up at the end of the speech, it's oftentimes a refutatio, which is the technical term for a refutation where you refute the audience's prejudice, or maybe if you're your opponent, you're speaking opponent, you know, if you're in court or something has already won over the audience, you have to refute, you know, what their points. And so oftentimes when that insinuated topic at the beginning becomes revealed at the end, oftentimes it'll function as a refutatio refutation, refuting the prejudice against whatever it was, whether it's against the speaker, against the speech itself or against the subject matter.
So in short, in Cinio Ateo, it's the rhetorical tactic used to address prejudice and not further exacerbate a heated situation. And instead delicately walk the line without creating any further undo offense. And there are lots of speeches in Greek and Roman literature that employ and Cinio Ateo, my book documents, several, and there are also several in the New Testament as well, just to give a couple examples. Stephen's speech and act seven.
And he takes this when he's addressing the Jewish leaders, you know, before they stone him and he becomes the first martyr of the church. Stephen's almost entirety of his speech is buttering up his listeners. He recounts the whole history of Israel to say, see look, I'm in line with all of you, we agree on this. And then finally the last few lines he's like, oh yeah, by the way, and you murdered Jesus, who is Lord of all.
And that's when they pick up stones of stone and then finally he says, you know, I see Jesus standing at the right hand of God and that's, that's the final most offensive thing that that's that so Stephen speech is an example of in Cinio Ateo. And then Paul's areaopagus speech when he's an Athens and act 17. It's a pretty short speech. It's definitely a summary of what Paul presented their Athens, but you know, he butters them up.
He's like, I see that you have this, you know, statue to the unknown God, you know, instead of just coming right out and saying, Hey, you're a bunch of eye dollars. You know, he builds that connection with them. And then finally at the end, the last thing he talks about is how is why he doesn't act well. Yeah, well, he says he mentions the resurrection and the coming judgment.
And so, you know, after after that, pretty pretty much the Athenians are like, well, that's really interesting. We don't really agree, but we'd like to hear more. And so that's where that's another example where Paul uses in Cinio Ateo. The last one that I'll mention is that many scholars have argued that Paul uses in Cinio Ateo in Romans chapters nine through 11.
The first eight chapters of Romans in general Paul is pretty much recounting what Christians everywhere believe in a general sense. The the proper city or the main argument of Romans is that the that the gospel is first for the Jew and then for the Greek Romans one 16 and 17 righteousness of God revealed first for the Jew then for the Greek. And there are times in Romans one through eight where, you know, Paul kind of addresses the Jews and says, Hey, you know, you think you're right with God, you're not and then with the Gentiles. Oh, you think you're right.
So he levels the playing ground, but then the major issue that social issue that Paul has to address is the the Roman Gentile Christians, ethnocentrism. They think, Oh, God's abandoned his first chosen people. And so we're the real people of God. And so they think they're thinking so highly of themselves.
But Paul waits eight chapters before, you know, most scholars would say that the majority of the Christians in Rome were Gentile Christians in it. And so he waits eight long chapters before he finally throws down the gauntlet says, Hey, God hasn't forsaken his first chosen people. And if he did, he could forsake you too. You know, like, what's what's the stopping so no all Israel will be saved and God has worked out this, you know, crazy irony here for when the Jews, you know, rejected the gospel.
Well, then it went to the Gentiles and then that's going to provoke the Jews later on to come to cry. Well, so anyway, so that's another example of in Cinewatu. So tell us where you see the exordium and probatio aspects and Paul's for slob to the Corinthians. Sure.
Yeah. So, you know, the exordium proper would be first Corinthians chapter one versus four through nine. And here, here Paul really lays out and rhetorical scholars would probably call this a divisio or a partitio as well. It's where you divide out all the things that you're going to talk about in your introduction in your exordium.
And so, so he says, Paul says in verse five, in every way you've been enriched in him in speech. And then chapters one through four, Paul kind of corrects the Corinthians pursuit of philosophical eloquence and speech. And in those first four chapters, then again, in verse one five, you've been enriched in knowledge of every kind. And so chapters eight, nine and ten really deal with knowledge, you know, knowledge puffs up love builds up.
You know, you know, some of you know that idols are no idols at all. But you're using your knowledge to harm your brothers and sisters in Christ. You know, you're not living out love. And so there's that that comes up.
One seven, Paul says, you're not lacking in any spiritual gift. And that's, you know, we got three long chapters, chapters 12, 13 to 14 on spiritual gifts, where, you know, Paul again addresses a problem that they're having with that. And then, and then Paul does not, and this is the insinuatio that I'm arguing for. And verses seven and eight, he says, he doesn't say resurrection, because he doesn't want to say resurrection right up front.
He says, but instead of uses eschatological and time language coming of second coming of Christ language, as you wait for the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ, he will also strengthen you to the end so that you may be blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. So I think that right there is the insinuating, because then later in chapter 15, he talks about the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ, the second coming the end, the day of our Lord Jesus Christ, which he identifies as, as, you know, something that happens then is the resurrection. He identifies there. And so, so that would be the exordium proper verses four through nine.
The first three verses could be counted in that, but it's, it's more of like the epistolary opening, you know, identifying the sender and the rest of the world. And so, the first verse, the sender and the recipients and whatnot, but verse 10, one 10 is often seen as the propisitio, or the, the thesis of the whole letter. And so, first Corinthians, one 10, just pulling it up here real quick. One 10 says, I appeal to you brothers in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that all of you agree with one another, so that there may be no divisions among you, and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought and now Margaret Mitchell is, is the scholar who has identified this as a rhetorical scholar.
She did her dissertation in the late 80s or the 90s has written the definitive work on first Corinthians being a unified letter. She got rid of the partition theories and the big thing. Well, from from German scholars who were saying, Oh, this is many letters combined. And so she she argues that all the first Corinthians is centered in this theme of unity and Paul bringing unity among division.
And we have the propatio as you talked about the probatio or the proof the main arguments that are going to support this thesis would, and I, I basically see it from first Corinthians one 11, all the way through to chapter 16 verse 12. Some will like actually Margaret Mitchell argues that it ends in 1557 and that 1558, the last verse of chapter 15, she argues that that last verses the peri or the conclusion for the whole, the whole letter. I think that chapter 15, the whole versus one through 58 are the final probatio, if you will, the big major end with a bang. Verse 16 one through 12, I think are kind of like falling action.
He talks about the Jerusalem collection and a few other little minor things and then verse 13 of chapter 16, 16, 13 kind of summarizes and condenses many of the themes that have been already at play in the letter. And so says beyond your guard stand firm in the faith and you know the faith being the cross and now you know he's talking about the resurrection of Christ. And then of course we strong do everything in love, you know love was this key theme all throughout so I think I think verses 13 and 14 a chapter 16 really give us that final peri or emotional appeal in a conclusion form. So those those would be the main parts one thing that I would if you're reading a commentary on a rhetorical commentary, like Ben Witherington's has a rhetorical commentary basically I think on yeah now he has the commentary on the whole New Testament.
But if you if you read one of those sometimes and in others as well because there's more than just his sometimes folks will just talk about probatio in general just just just I'd say make a mental note there are two types of probatio. There's confirmatio where you confirm your thesis and then the other part the other kind of proof or argument is a refutatio or refutation so sometimes you might see confirmatio or or probatio and they're kind of used interchangeably but really confirming your thesis and arguing against the thesis of your opponent. So that's that's a little minor detail that I like to just throw out there for folks because it can be confusing all these Latin terms that you know maybe you don't know all that much about so that's a little nuance. Tim would you explain for us now how chapter 15 functions as the climax to first Corinthians.
Sure yeah like actually my original title of my dissertation because this is my dissertation reworked and published with for braille but my original title was Paul in the rhetoric of in Cine Watio and then my subtitle was how first Corinthians 15 functions rhetorically as the climax of front of the things but that's a really long subtitle so I mean my two main questions that I go after in this book that I was just I was just so curious about and drove my research was how does chapter 15 function as the climax and why and it wasn't just question I had Calvin asked this John Chrysostom asked this or at least tried to answer it you know way back in the three and four hundreds. This has been a perennial question for a long time why does Paul leave this big long discussion of resurrection for the end. And so when I learned about in Cine Watio I went oh you know what I think that's what Paul is doing I think that makes sense you know you start and you end with your strongest arguments and you usually end with your strongest argument. And so I think in Cine Watio brings it to a climax in a very short stated way but most scholars today I found in my research most scholars do in fact say yes chapter 15 is the climax because you might be able to do that.
So I think that the climax is the climax because you might be saying well is it the climax you know Rudolph Boltmann in the early 1900s he thought that chapter 13 was the climax because it's talking about love. And then before that a lot of German scholarship said there is no climax because this is multiple letters combined so they couldn't be there's no unified argument at all it's just a laundry list of issues that Paul addresses from multiple letters so but most scholars today in fact say that chapter 15 is the climax. The problem that I found in my research was that not very many scholars then explained how it's how it is and there were a few that did or did in a brief way. I call them the major proponents therefore of them Carl Bart in his book The Resurrection of the Dead wrote in well it was anyways he wrote in 1933 and just showed how show he argued that the red thread of the whole letter was was the resurrection issue.
And he did it in a really interesting theological way and I can't you know I won't get to the details there but then Margaret Mitchell she sides with bar but she only she has a different axe to grind and so she doesn't spend a whole lot of time going into how chapter 15 is the climax she just kind of notes it and spends about you know 10 to 12 pages on it instead of you know this whole work of mine which is all about this and then in T Wright in his the resurrection of the Son of God he gives a very very long thorough explanation and ties the eschatology in the whole letter. He says something like squeeze this letter at any point and resurrection comes oozing out or maybe it's eschatology comes oozing out because and I just love that quote so he takes a theological theme and and shows how eschatology builds to a climax to chapter 15. And then there's and then there's Matthew Malcolm is the fourth and final major proponent as I call him he sees there being an inclusive of the you know probatio basically chapters one through 15 he says Paul starts with the cross and chapters one through four and he he just talks about how you need to live cruciform lives and then chapter 15 ends we're talking about the resurrection of Christ and resurrection of believers and that all of the ethical issues that all addresses in between in chapters five through 14 basically they find their meaning in living out the cross and and trusting God who raises the dead and so so he really takes this kind of theological framework that Paul uses and and shows how it climates so that's those are the four proponents major proponents now what I do then is I agree with Mitchell I think most of 1 Corinthians is about divisions and unity and my nuances chapter 15 is the perhaps and probably the most divisive resurrection is perhaps the most divisive issue that he has to address Jews themselves didn't even agree on resurrection Sadducees didn't believe in resurrection Pharisees did did and but then you've got all these Greeks in here too that don't so there's it's I see it as the most divisive issue and so if you take it from that standpoint I line with NT right that it's climaxing the eschatology Paul has one little place and you can do this within sinuatio where you kind of salt and pepper and hint at what you're going to be getting at verse the only mention of resurrection outside of chapter 15 is is 614 says and God raised the Lord and he'll also raise us by his power and then he moves on to whatever he says so it's like that's the one explicit mention of resurrection outside of chapter 15 the rest is I think he's he's building up by just framing everything with the eschaton and the end time and so and then I just in sinuatio itself is a rhetorical device it is itself has climax built in to it and so that's what I identify Paul doing in first Corinthians he's using in sinuatio he's in direct about resurrection at the beginning of the letter and the exordium and instead just talks generally about eschatology in the return of Christ but later finally in chapter 15 he's finally reveals what he's been waiting to say for so long throughout the first 14 chapters he couldn't bring it up earlier because they were too prejudiced against it but he still has to address it and he does he just does it at the end and so I'm identifying Paul using in sinuatio as the climax function you know or feature in chapter 15 he waits until the end to bring up the most controversial prejudice topic yet and that's most central to getting the Corinthians back on track with God and back on track with each other as well and and I'd also I'd also just say you know it's theological there's a theological way that it climaxes as well because of all these ethical and communal problems that they have I think all of them find their solution in a theology of the cross and the resurrection they're failing to live out the cross they're failing to love you know the chapter 13 living out this love for one another laying down their lives or each other living out the cross and I think it's because they have a lack of belief in resurrection they don't believe in a God who will raise them up if they lay down their lives for one another and so that's that's a big answer to how I think it finds us climax in chapter 15 I'll say you're working on these days too I've got a few things in the works right now my big project is I'm working on an introductory guide to doing rhetorical criticism and now there's there's all different I mean it's a spectrum in and of itself I use the historical approach where you start with the Greek and Roman rhetoric of the day and time of the New Testament and from there you compare and contrast to see if those Greco Roman rhetorical devices are present in the New Testament and so that's where I start from that's the approach of my book and so so I'm working on just a guide to the primary sources I did this throughout I had to kind of just teach myself because there's nothing really out there that's like oh well here's rhetoric in Homer here's rhetoric in Demosthenes here's here's a guide to all of Cicero's speeches and so that's that's pretty much what I'm doing all the notes and everything that I took during my doctoral work I'm putting it together and I've got a lot more to put into it but it's basically a guide to the primary rhetorical sources that that students or scholars if they want to do this kind of research here's a starting point and so just figuring it out on your own which is kind of what I did so I'm working on that I've also got an intermediate New Testament Greek textbook that I'm working on I taught Greek for a number of years and I yeah so I'm working on a second year book for second year students that I think that I think will be really helpful there's a lot of great first year Greek books out there but when you get into second year it's just like you pull this resource and that and I'm just trying to pull it all into one and that's got vocab and that's got translation and that's got syntax and so I'm working on that a shorter project I've got right now much shorter is I'm writing a syntactical grammatical commentary on the Greek text of Jude little little tiny letter but but it's it's not simple Greek so that's that's what I'm working on right now Tim it's been great talking with you thank you for being on the show and all the best thanks for having me Michael friends you've been listening to new books and biblical studies a channel of the new books network until next time goodbye