Eloquence in a Cloud

 "1 Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,

 2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;"

                 -Hebrews 12: 1-2

Metonymy

It is argued that there is a hint of metonymy displayed through this biblical reference in the fact that something or someone is referenced through their attributes. In this reference, Jesus is called the "author" or the "finisher of our faith". He is clearly recognized as Jesus but if you take away the first part of the sentence and it reads "looking unto the author and finisher of our faith", this would be a clear example of perfect metonymy. He would be mentioned without even mentioning His name. 

Synecdoche

Some may even argue that there is an example of synecdoche in this scripture. "A cloud of witnesses" could initially be interpreted as a reference to all of the angels in the heavens looking down upon us to try to persuade us to set aside our sins. With that being said, a cloud of witnesses is really alluding to a much bigger group than what it appears at first sight. This would be exemplary of a synecdoche.  

Strong and of a Good Courage

Have not I commanded thee? 

Be strong and of a good courage;

be not afraid, neither be though dismayed:

for the Lord thy God is with thee withersoever thou goest.

Joshua 1:9                              

 

Erotema: The rhetorical question. To affirm or deny a point strongly by asking it as a question.*

This scripture opens with a rhetorical question. Today, we use rhetorical questions to state something that is common knowledge. By opening this scripture in this way, he is inviting the command to be strong and courageous to become something we just know. 

Similarity/ Difference: That topic of invention which invites us to consider how something compares and contrasts with others. *

This scripture eloquently defines strength and courage by stating what wouldn't be considered strong and courageous. By doing this, the reader is held responsible for figuring out how to fulfill this command by inferring the opposites of "fear" and "dismay".

Affirmatio:  A general figure of emphasis that describes when one states something as though it had been in dispute or in answer to a question, though it has not been.*

This could be a misinterpretation on my part, but when I read this verse, I read the last line as a clarification of who the Lord is, and felt affirmation of something I already knew to be true. He is your God. This has a very authoritative feel to it and generates quite a different feeling from the rhetorical question that opened. To me, this use of affirmatio was a much gentler way of calling someone to remembrance of things they should already know. 

*All definitions gotten from silva rhetorica*

Have a Heart

First, read without the distractions of markings:
Ezekiel 36:26
"A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh."

Next, focus on the markings:
"A new heart also will I give you, 
and a new spirit will I put within you: 
and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, 
and I will give you an heart of flesh."

Polysyndeton: Employing many conjunctions between clauses, often slowing the tempo or rhythm.

• In this scripture, the repetition of the conjunction "and" adds emphasis to each successive clause. Each clause is saying pretty much the same thing, as well, so the clauses build on each other to underline this heart metaphor. "I am surely going to purify your soul and make you my people," is the message we receive (in the context of the rest of Ezekiel 36).

Antimetabole: Repetition of words, in successive clauses, in reverse grammatical order.

• The antimetabole in this scripture compliments and yet minimizes the effects of the polysyndeton. The switched order of "will I" to "I will" creates a sort of climax in the middle of the scripture, at the colon of the second phrase, making the last two lines the "falling action." 
• The last line repeats what was said in the first line ("A new heart will I give you" / "I will give you an heart"). In this way, this scripture could also function as chiasmus  (repetition of ideas in inverted order). Again, this repeats and emphasizes the idea given in the first line.

Epistrophe: Ending a series of lines, phrases, clauses, or sentences with the same word or words.

• I didn't realize until I split the scripture into its marked and separate lines that this was being used. The repetition of "you" at the end of the first two lines, then "flesh" at the end of the last two, increases the feeling of antimetabole. It also brings focus to the Lord's audience (the House of Israel) and creates an interesting contrast between the flesh of the stony heart and the heart of flesh that the Lord is giving.

The use of these rhetorical devices play really well with the metaphor of the Lord giving us a "new heart." The scriptures are packed full of this stuff, and I never realized!

*Definitions are all from Silva Rhetoricae.

Eloquence and Punishment

Proverbs 13:24 reads, "He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes." 

Ellipsis

A proper time-out can do a world of good.

While reading through the verse, one thing of note that I saw was the ellipsis in "his son" and "him."  Perhaps this was scrutinized a bit too much, but choosing to use the word "him" instead of something a little more clarifying does in fact make the phrasing seem a bit different.  Adding to this is the fact that the verse begins with a "He," but this refers to the father and not "his son."  Maybe I stretched this nuance further than it was supposed to be, or misused terminology, but the subtlety did stick out to me. 

Paradox

A tad more obvious than the last instance of rhetoric was the paradox contained in sparing the rod, or punishment, which demonstrated hatred for another, yet chastening (with or without a "rod") displayed an act of love.  When one thinks of loving another, it is usually not in terms of abuse or punishment, physical or otherwise.  Even so, the verse still holds true.  Abstaining from punishing a child in the wrong does lead one to think that is the loving thing to do, but is not allowing the child to persist in their error far worse than correcting them?  Does a parent truly love their child if they give absolute freedom, without even the slightest chastisement?  Obviously, there are different extents that warrant different levels of punishment or tolerance, but I do believe that there is a point when the parent needs to step in and moderate for the benefit of their child's growth.  As evinced in these words that I just shared, the power of the paradox is a potent choice of style in that it spurs thought in the audience.  Handing over the excitement directly to the audience so that they can experiment themselves truly ups the rhetorical value of (probably) most any given case.  

Eloquence and Isaiah: Parallelism, Synonymia, and Repetition in Isaiah 53:5

            Isaiah 53:5 states, “But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.”  

Parallelism

             I noticed chiefly here that the majority of eloquence, beauty and pleasing manner of the verse occurred through parallelism.  I noticed through the parallelism that the structure goes for the first two clauses, “He was helping verb for our plural noun.”  Thus we have a classic clausal parallelism in two adjacent clauses. 

Synonymia             

Furthermore, we see synonymia, which is the use of several synonyms together to amplify or explain a given subject or term.  In this verse we understand that wounded and bruised, transgressions and iniquities, and chastisement and stripes are basically synonymous in this context.  The use of synonymia adds emotional force, repeating the horrible and amazing truth that the Savior was hurt for our sins.  Furthermore, it adds a type of intelligence to the verse.  It would be much simpler to say simple that Jesus died to forgive our sins, but by adding various synonyms for hurt, sins, and chastisement, we are compelled twice to analyze the meaning behind the words in a more intellectual manner than a more simple construction would yield.

Repetition

Repetition is the final stylistic idea that I thought was a major part of this verse that added to its eloquence.  Its anaphora (if we ignore the “but” at the beginning of the verse) of “he was” adds emphasis on Jesus and is pleasing and musical to the ear.  There is a certain rhythm overall to this verse and the repetition throughout of “he” throughout the verse adds a consistency and rhythm to the verse.  Clearly, Isaiah was aiming not only to instruct in this verse but to please through eloquence.  This verse is most definitely Middle Style.

Assignment: Analyzing Biblical Eloquence

My students have been reading St. Augustine's On Christian Doctrine. Augustine discusses and analyzes the eloquence of scripture. We will do the same. Here is their assignment (for Friday, November 14 or Saturday, November 15, 2014):

Find an eloquent or poetic passage from the Bible which you comment on rhetorically. Look for passages that are appealing not because of their content or doctrinal importance necessarily, but because of their pleasing expression. The passage you choose should be paraphrased and/or quoted and briefly analyzed.

In essence, I'm asking you to do something similar to what Augustine models in Books III and IV when he observes and analyzes scriptural eloquence. For another example of him doing this, read ahead to Book IV Chapter 7 (pp. 77, paragraph 11). Be sure that you both identify one or two rhetorical elements and then discuss their significance -- why the rhetorical elements are needed for the author or speaker to make his or her point, or why knowing these rhetorical aspects improves our ability to understand that passage, or what the function or effect is of this form of expression. The passage you analyze need not be long. See the example below as a guide.