{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03289817232375979, 'fraction_numerical': 0.018276762402088774, 'mean_word_length': 4.931888544891641, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Book Review: Hermeneutical Inquiry 1: The Interpretation of Texts; 2: The Interpretation of Existence

wrote, is less successful. The emphasis on ancient rhetoric, its structures and devices, is an interesting and necessary adjunct to understanding Paul. Unfortunately, T. has not provided enough information on ancient rhetoric itself, or how it functions in Paul's letters, to help an untrained reader evaluate what he is saying about its place in the Corinthian correspondence. Attention is called to the rhetorical features of Paul's writing style throughout the commentary. This is helpful for getting a sense of Paul's writing style, but in some cases the attempt to fit sections of the letters into particular rhetorical patterns may be confusing for the reader unfamiliar with ancient rhetorical technique. The discussion of 1 Cor 11:2-16 offers an example. At first this text is identified as part of a larger ABA' unit, chapters 11-14. Then it is treated under its own ABAy pattern made up of 11:3-10 (A), 11:11-12 (J3), and 11:13-15 (A'). The first component, 11:3-10, is discussed in detail, showing a further abca'b'c' structure. But the remaining two sections are treated without any mention of structure. Some explanation of why the structure of the first element is more significant than that of the next two would have helped. For the unskilled reader, merely calling attention to rhetorical devices, without providing basic information about them and how they function in the Corinthian correspondence, may impede a clear understanding of Paul's purpose. Trying to integrate the literary and theological issues of the Corinthian correspondence in a commentary of this length is a challenging task. Despite the difficulties writing this kind of commentary presents, T. has done an admirable job in helping his reader to grasp what was at stake in the conversations between Paul and the Corinthians.