Review of Biblical Literature has posted a review of Mika Hietanen, Paul’s Argumentation in Galatians: A Pragma-Dialectical Analysis of Galatians 3:1-5:12. (Library of New Testament Studies: European Studies on Christian Origins). London: T&T Clark International, 2007. 0567031276, 9780567031273.
Johan S. Vos reviews this book in three pages and finds it a helpful contribution but criticises Hietanen for not following “the rules for a dialogical discussion” and for not being “more open to the existing alternative views.”
In this book Hietanen criticises the current approaches to rhetorical investigation in Galatians because there was no standard classical rhetorical paradigm. There is no question that biblical scholars have come up with radically varied results when defining Galatians according to rhetorical models. Several years ago I compared the rhetorical divisions and labels of Betz, Brinsmead, Smit, Kennedy, Hester, Hall, Vouga, Mack, Bachmann, Russell, and Witherington. The differences between the various paradigms are quite noticeable. For example, the number of divisions range from four (Kennedy, Hall, Russell) to ten (Hester). Even those who agree on the number of sections do not agree on how to label them. There is no question that there needs to be a reexamination of the role that rhetorical patterns played in Paul’s composition of Galatians but from what Vos says Hietanen’s pragma-dialectical approach does not seem to have created the definitive study on this subject.