This paper explores the Demetrian-like humor rhetoric in the barbed commentary and the disparate dicta found in Luke 16:14-18. In an effort to understand the rhetorical thrust of these peculiarly placed dicta, especially the puzzling inclusion of the divorce dictum, it is important to situate the dicta within their broader Luke-Acts rhetorical context and within the concentric composition of Luke 16:1-31. Essential to the Lukan context is Jesus’ dual status, in particular his status as prophet and divine messianic king. Through the lens of humor rhetoric, we will explore how Luke uses a collection of disparate dicta in order to produce prophetic barbs and Demetrian-like punches.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
G.A. Kennedy, New Testament Interpretation through Rhetorical Criticism (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, 1984), pp. 98, 107-108. See also Demetrius, Eloc; this work has been attributed to Demetrius of Phaleron, but the authorship of this work remains uncertain.
See B.J. Malina, “Wealth and Poverty in the New Testament and Its World,” Interp 61:4 (1987), pp. 357-67.
Plautus, Poen. 3.5; Pseud. 1.2; Cicero, De. or. 2.248; Terence, Eun. 30; Ulpian, Dig. 18.1.29; Apuleius, Metam. 8.15.
Demetrius, Eloc. 292-94. Demetrius uses the rhetorical term σχῆμα, which refers to the act of circumventing explicit speech.
Demetrius, Eloc. 241-2. The admonition to make friends of unjust wealth so that one might end up in eternal tents produces a forceful charm (Eloc. 131).
Demetrius, Eloc. 248-49. This pseudo-advice conveys force through the use of the imperative verb and through the placement of the most striking words (i.e. eternal tents) at the end of the dictum.
Demetrius, Eloc. 219. The Greek letter delta (δ) in the first century carries a “th” sound.
Demetrius, Eloc. 170. Demetrius speaks of shrewd people who make use of laughter during feasts and symposia to ridicule those who are too inclined to a life of luxury. The Lukan Jesus assumes the role of a shrewd person, who uses derision to reprimand guests at a dinner (Luke 7:36-50; 11:37-54; and 14:1-24). For more information, see T. Bednarz, “Symposiac Humor in Luke 14:1-24,” in D.L. Balch and J.T. Lamoreaux (eds.), Finding a Woman’s Place (Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock, 2011), pp. 151-70.
Ibid., 260. Whether or not the humor event was a historical event or literary construction, an ancient hearer would have known this effect and understood its implications.
Demetrius, Eloc. P. 282. The force of the saying comes from the use of the hyperbolic reference (“everyone”), allegory (the depiction of the Kingdom of God as a fortified structure), and innuendo (the lack of identity regarding those who are forcing themselves into the Kingdom of God). Notably, Luke’s rendition of this dictum differs from Matthew’s version (cf. 11:12). Matthew emphasizes violence and makes it clear that violence is the intended meaning (βιάζεται, βιαστής, and ἁρπάζω). Luke use of βιάζεται is metaphoric and probably conveys both enthusiasm and violence. It connotes violence in the sense that enthusiasm for the Kingdom of God has replaced enthusiasm for the law. The Lukan Jesus proceeds to clarify that enthusiasm for the law must not cease. The law must not be shoved aside.
Manuscripts like the Vaticanus (B), P75, א, and L do not supply ψιχίον in 16:21. The Alexandrius and Byzantine witnesses do have ψιχίον. A textual analysis suggests that the copyists added the expression of τῶν ψιχίων from Matt. 15:27 (B. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament [New York: United Bible Societies, 3rd edn, 1975], p. 141). The assonance of ἀπὸ τῶν ψιχίων τῶν πιπτόντων is indicative of Lukan elegance.
Bailey, Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes, p. 382. Bailey notes that the rich person wore fine linen (βύσσος), which in Hebrew refers to quality Egyptian cotton used for the best underwear (v. 19). Bailey explains the humor in the rich person’s exhibition of wealth, which seemingly extended to his fine quality underwear. See also Marshall, The Gospel of Luke, p. 635. For humor in this parable, see Crossan, In Parables, pp. 66-68; and Jónsson, Humour and Irony in the New Testament, pp. 125-27.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 405 | 47 | 4 |
| Full Text Views | 43 | 7 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 68 | 16 | 2 |
This paper explores the Demetrian-like humor rhetoric in the barbed commentary and the disparate dicta found in Luke 16:14-18. In an effort to understand the rhetorical thrust of these peculiarly placed dicta, especially the puzzling inclusion of the divorce dictum, it is important to situate the dicta within their broader Luke-Acts rhetorical context and within the concentric composition of Luke 16:1-31. Essential to the Lukan context is Jesus’ dual status, in particular his status as prophet and divine messianic king. Through the lens of humor rhetoric, we will explore how Luke uses a collection of disparate dicta in order to produce prophetic barbs and Demetrian-like punches.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 405 | 47 | 4 |
| Full Text Views | 43 | 7 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 68 | 16 | 2 |