Search Results (2)

In contemporary New Testament studies, the question of whether Paul employed Greco-Roman rhetoric in his writings and preaching remains contentious. A prominent critic of Paul’s rhetorical usage is Duane Litfin, whose works, St. Paul’s Theology of Proclamation: 1 Corinthians 1–4 and Greco-Roman Rhetoric (1994) and Paul’s Theology of Preaching: The Apostle’s Challenge to the Art of Persuasion in Ancient Corinth (2015), argue that Paul outright rejected rhetoric in favor of a straightforward proclamation of the gospel. Litfin asserts that Paul viewed himself as a herald rather than a rhetorician, that his preaching was devoid of rhetorical adornment, and that 1 Corinthians 1:18–2:5 represents a universal theology of preaching. Litfin further suggests that Paul did not employ rhetoric in his Acts sermons, thereby aligning his epistolary and Acts portrayals of Paul. This article critically evaluates Litfin’s position by addressing five key issues. First, it challenges Litfin’s claim that Paul rejected rhetoric generally, arguing instead that Paul likely repudiated sophistic rhetoric or ornate styles rather than rhetoric per se. Second, it disputes Litfin’s dichotomy between heralds and orators, contending that Paul, identified as an apostle rather than a herald, was not bound by such a false binary. Third, it critiques Litfin’s assumption that 1 Corinthians 1–4 serves as Paul’s comprehensive theology of preaching, arguing instead that the passage is context-specific and not indicative of a universal preaching methodology. Fourth, it rejects Litfin’s view of 1 Corinthians as an apology for Paul’s ministry and style, suggesting instead that it addresses Corinthian divisions and promotes unity. Lastly, the article refutes Litfin’s claim that Paul did not use rhetoric in Acts, highlighting that the rhetorical nature of Acts’ speeches suggests otherwise. Ultimately, this article argues that Paul did not categorically reject rhetoric but utilized it in various forms to effectively communicate the gospel. Full article

One of the important topics that many STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) students learn at the tertiary level is differential equations (DEs). Previous studies have explored students’ perceptions of engaging in puzzle tasks in STEM courses; however, no study has explored lecturers’ and students’ perceptions toward using sophism and paradox tasks in teaching mathematics courses, including DEs. This study explores DEs lecturers’ and undergraduate engineering students’ perceptions of using sophism and paradox tasks in the teaching and learning of DEs. The perceptions of 17 lecturers and 134 undergraduate engineering students of sophism and paradox tasks were explored using a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. The findings showed that more than 50% of lecturers and students perceived that sophism and paradox tasks are enjoyable and entertaining activities which improve students’ mathematical understanding and problem-solving skills, and enhance thinking skills. The findings suggest that sophism and paradox tasks can be used along with routine problems in teaching DEs to provide good opportunities for students to participate more effectively in classroom discussions and motivate them to learn DEs. Full article