Debates in the New Testament World—Acts 4:8

The practice of debating was a key component of Greco-Roman culture in the NT world. It was mainly an oral culture—as were most societies before the invention of the printing press—with public lectures and performances being the primary form of public communication.

Classical education greatly valued the art of performance in debating, with the most highly educated receiving specialized training in this field. The orator (rhetor), a celebrated figure in ancient society, was someone who could sway others through persuasive speech and rhetoric (rhetorike), whether in private conversation or public proclamation. Sometimes such rhetoric would be preserved in written form.

Effective speech and argumentation during a debate was a useful tool in law, politics, social ceremonies, and religion throughout the Roman empire. However, the use of such skills could become dangerous, especially if employed for the wrong reasons. As Cicero (106–43 BC) noted, it was best if skilled orators and debaters also manifested the best human qualities, leading their audience to live for the sake of others and thus to develop the best possible human society.

We can summarize the distinctive features of the Latin and Greek forms of oratory as follows:

• Latin: Strongly emphasizing form, the Romans employed a remarkable range of stylistics and continuously appealed to the listeners’ emotions. The Romans regarded communication as a way to demonstrate “intellectual superiority” or eloquence.
• Greek: While placing a strong emphasis on the content of the message itself, the Greeks utilized specific argumentation strategies, such as appealing to common sense. They viewed communication as a skill to persuade and gain influence.

Some Jews, as well as some of the apostles, were well-versed in rhetorical techniques. The apostle Paul had received such training in his rabbinical studies. Even though Talmudic sources originated after NT times, they can offer clues to some Jewish practices during apostolic times. The roles of the Talmudic rabbis as public orators, teachers, and jurists parallel that of Roman orators.

Rabbinic literature adopted and adapted various aspects of the classical Greco-Roman rhetorical tradition, as demonstrated in the Talmudic habit of arguing both sides of hypothetical cases, the various Midrashic hermeneutical methods, and the structure of synagogue sermons. But that does not mean that they copied Greek or Roman rhetoric in all its aspects. Jewish debaters resisted the extreme epistemological relativism of rhetoric as is evident in their restraint on theoretical argumentation, their depiction of rabbinic and divine court procedure, and their commitment to the biblical prophetic tradition. We can see some of these aspects also in the NT, specifically in the book of Acts.

The book of Acts depicts two kinds of debate and rhetoric. The first appears in the rhetorical strategy of the author himself and the second in the content of the book. In fact, about30 percent of Acts consists of debates, dialogues, monologues, sermons, and other types of oral presentations. It is a far higher percentage of speech material than we find in other ancient narratives.

Altogether, the book contains about 24 speeches: eight from Peter, nine from Paul, one from Stephen, one from James, and a few from others. Even those who deny the historicity of Acts, recognize that its speeches uses familiar strategies found in known historical events, such as Roman legal debates. Much if not all of the NT was written initially for oral delivery and also incorporates some rhetorical strategies.

Watson, The Rhetoric ofThe New Testament: A Bibliographic Survey (Tools for Biblical Study).

Hidary, Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash.