In what sense is Paul’s boasting language “rhetorical”? Following the seminal essays of E. A. Judge (1968) and Christopher Forbes (1986), the standard line on Pauline boasting is that he boasts to beat his opponents at their own game and, simultaneously, to reengineer the very concept of honor itself. In this view, Paul’s boasting is rhetorical inasmuch as it conforms to the standards of self-praise (periautologia) inherent to the Greco-Roman rhetorical tradition and participates in the Apostle’s epistolary strategy.
Recently (in 2013 and 2024), Ryan S. Schellenberg has challenged this reading with the claim that Paul simply boasts. If such boasting is to be called rhetorical at all, it is a “performative rhetoric,” wherein Paul comes to grips with his own conflicted identity, writing himself into being, as much for his own emotional sustenance as for other, pastoral reasons.
This paper proposes “rhetorical framing” as a concept that incoporates the best elements both alternatives. The concept of framing has been well-developed by scholars in the fields of psychology, journalism and mass communication, and the study of social movements, and is related to the everyday occurrence of presenting issues in particular terms that they might be understood in particular ways. Though they vary widely, such studies agree that issues “take on their meaning by being embedded in a frame or story line that organizes them and gives them coherence” (Gamson 1989). Rhetorical framing occurs when an author presents an issue in terms that evoke a culturally-embedded concept or storyline that then serves a heuristic purpose in the reception of the discourse (Kuypers 2010; Van Gorp 2010).
The concept of boasting is ripe to be used as a frame. Myriad ancient sources, both Jewish and Greco-Roman, designate people or groups as boasting to draw attention to their motives and the shaky or sound foundations of their confidence. Furthermore, the cultural repertoire included a narratival understanding of the relationship between boasting and judgment, that divine judgment would silence the boast of oppressors even as it established the boast of the suffering righteous.
Paul repeatedly presents issues in terms of boasting that are not in and of themselves boasting issues: the conflict in Galatia (Gal 6:11-18), Corinthian factionalism (1 Cor 1-4), his relationship to the Corinthians and the “superapostles’ (2 Cor 1:14; 5:12; 10:1–13:10), and the relative standing of Jews and Gentiles in light of the Gospel (Romans). Within the frame of reference of boasting, Paul evalutes issues, assigns motives to actors, predicts outcomes, and recommends courses of action. Thus, rhetorical framing is an apt description of his use of boasting language.
The proposed view tells against Schellenberg’s rejection of the consensus, for it affirms that Paul uses boasting language rhetorically in the sense of intentionality and the furthering his epistolary aims. However, it also corrects the majority position, for the frame of reference Paul evokes cannot be reduced to ancient discussions of periautologia.