Is Hebrews 5:11-6:20 Really a Disgression?
This study challenges the view that Heb 5:11-6:20 is a “digression”—a view so widely held as to be a near consensus in scholarship today, and a view that renders the controversial materials of chapter six tangential to the central purposes of the speech. The study gives consideration to ancient rhet...
| Authors: | ; |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Brill
2015
|
| In: |
Novum Testamentum
Year: 2015, Volume: 57, Issue: 3, Pages: 295-310 |
| Further subjects: | B
Hebrews
rhetoric
digression
digressio
epideictic
deliberative
|
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | Non-electronic
|
| Summary: | This study challenges the view that Heb 5:11-6:20 is a “digression”—a view so widely held as to be a near consensus in scholarship today, and a view that renders the controversial materials of chapter six tangential to the central purposes of the speech. The study gives consideration to ancient rhetorical theory concerning digressio, surveying the major handbooks that discuss the figure. On the basis of this survey, the study argues that only Heb 5:11-14 displays the essential characteristics of digressio. Moreover, in its position and function, this digressio actually points to the controversial materials of chapter six as central to the speech’s cause. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1568-5365 |
| Contains: | In: Novum Testamentum
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/15685365-12341483 |