In Athens, in 399 BC, a man was martyred for serving God. His name was Socrates. Athens was a democracy at the time, and the similarities between Athens and 21st Century "First World" culture are undeniable. In a system where the vote of the populace confers power, rhetoric and persuasion are critical tools. Today, we live in a rhetoric-inundated culture. Nearly everything we see and hear is intended to persuade. Today, we vote with our dollars, our involvement, and our political voice. The same was true in Ancient Athens.

Today, just like in the ancient world, we consider it a point of pride not to be taken in by other's words. To simply survive in this culture that hammers us with persuasion every moment of our waking days, we must learn not to be affected (or at least to pretend that we aren't) by advertising, speeches, writing, etc.

In this respect, our culture, and the church, is quite definitely Greco-Roman. In fact, there is a word, in Attic Greek, which carries strong connotations of both convincing and deluding. Psuchagogeo means to lead or attract, beguile or delude. Primarily, it means to lead souls to hell. We carry this concept deep within us, even today. Awareness of the dark side of rhetoric is especially prevalent among Christians; who, to be faithful to the call of Christ, simply must turn off the dominant culture's insistent voice.

Our leeriness of rhetoric is a healthy reaction to a world that is always selling something. The advertising world is aware of the average consumer's increasing defenses against their messages, and they change tactics accordingly. The church, however, is still using outdated methods to try to reach a jaded world.

Likewise, in Ancient Athens, people spent their entire lives studying the art of rhetoric. To gain the skill of convincing others was to ensure your own worldly success. This system created an entire subculture of "wise" men, who could teach you how to persuade anyone of anything. Using the methods these teachers passed to their students, one could gain wealth, influence, and most importantly, a reputation for wisdom. In a system governed by the vote of the majority, a man's high reputation in the eyes of his fellow citizens is priceless. Likewise, to lose one's standing in others' eyes is devastating. In such a world, anyone who reveals the insincerity of those in power is dangerous.

Socrates spent his life doing just that. The integrity that characterized not only his speech, but his way of life, served as a foil to the posing of his contemporaries. When defending himself against the charge of "corrupting the minds of the young," Socrates addressed his nonconformity.

"I have never lived an ordinary quiet life. I did not care for the things that most people care about—making money, having a comfortable home, high military or civil rank, and all other activities, political appointments, secret societies, party organizations, which go on in our city." (21)

Don't we want to be this subversive? To reach and change those who cannot otherwise be reached? It was the selfless determination with which Socrates served God that made him influential. Socrates gave up everything but his call, and the world has never forgotten him. When placed on trial, and facing a death sentence, Socrates said:

"...I owe a greater obedience to God than to you, and so long as I draw breath and have my faculties, I shall never stop practicing philosophy and exhorting you and elucidating the truth for everyone that I meet. I shall go on saying, in my usual way, 'my very good friend.... Are you not ashamed that you give your attention to acquiring as much money as possible, and similarly with reputation and honor, and give no attention or thought to truth and understanding and the perfection of your soul?'... I spend all my time going about trying to persuade you, young and old, to make your first and chief concern not for your bodies, not for your possessions, but for the highest welfare of your soul, proclaiming as I go, Wealth does not bring goodness, but goodness brings wealth and every other blessing, both to the individual and to the state."

Today, I believe that Socrates still has things to teach us. Jesus said that his followers would be despised, persecuted, and dragged into court. This image is a far cry from the slick, polished, rich, religious professionals of today. The church has sold out to the culture. In doing so, we have lost our voice. Our leaders carry the same credentials as the world.

I remember getting a piece of junk mail for pastors about a year ago. The organization that sent it was trying to sell me a book club membership, I believe. Included in my membership, I could receive all of my sermons, pre-written. The panel of religious professionals writing the sermons was impressive. Their list of credentials and educational institutions impeccable. Their suits dandruff-free. Their faces old, white, and male. Socrates would have destroyed them. They are the "wise" men of today. It is their goal to teach us all how to be "right," so we can get to heaven, too.

I am not saying that I know more than these men, who are doing the best that they know how. Rather, I am comfortable knowing less. I am struck by the distance between what Christ did and looked like to his world, and these impressive human edifices.

The sermons produced by these men, and thousands like them, are not reaching the lost. Even the people in our churches are not living out the things they hear every Sunday. Rather, they enjoy their weekly entertainment, and then go live their lives like anyone else. Anyone who actually takes all of that seriously is often seen as gullible.

In a rhetoric-inundated culture, the defenses of the people filter out the words of the "wise," who have capitulated to the powers of our culture and governments. We are not changed by your flowery phrases, and logical arguments. We are not changed by your degrees. We long for someone real.

Where is the Socrates of this day? Who will give up home, reputation, and his very life, to serve God? This is the person I can hear. Socrates was a dangerous man, because he revealed the hypocrisy of those in power. He realized that their "wisdom" was actually self-delusion. They were unaware of their own ignorance. On his quest, Socrates realized that his own wisdom rested entirely in his understanding of what he did not know. "...I do not think that I know what I do not know." The church would do well to start there. Let's get a whole lot less concerned with what we "know" and more concerned with living the gospel.

I think the author makes some great points and the respondents so far are skirting around the real issues. Of course we all use some degree of rhetoric when stating a position or making an argument. But the author is not really attacking rhetoric so much as challenging those of us who use it as an excuse for avoiding costly discipleship and the responsibility of 'knowing means doing'. Our claims that our grasp on the Truth is contingent and subsequently we are unable to commit to action is most often an excuse for our fear of resisting the idols of the dominant culture (e.g. education, employment, acquisition, mobility, individualism, materialism, etc.).
--Manu ( manu at ora dot org dot nz ) on 6/6/2004; 11:51:12 PM

Jesus never asked them to write It down.

Go to the source: Semantics.
--Peter James ( wordpress at knowingart dot com ) on 5/28/2004; 10:38:57 PM

Mr. Evans has some valid points, e.g. influence of dominant culture and Jesus as a subversive. However, I would need a few issues answered before I would quit my job and hit the streets:

1) There is not a single path to subverting the dominant paradigm: The Zealots were contemporaries of Jesus and were very interested in subverting the dominant (Roman) paradigm. Jesus, on the other hand, was at worst indifferent to the Roman state and, at best, respectful of it by paying taxes! Does this make the Zealots the real subversives? I think not. Clearly, discernment and understanding are required if we are to not merely replance one false paradigm with another.

2) In addition to the popular culture that Mr. Evans critiques, there is also a religious culture, not so prominent in the Northwest where I live, but in the "Bible belt" there is a prominent culture associated with church-going. There are many other flavors of Christian culture out there. I think these cultures are also candidates for subversion.

What frightens me about being a subversive is sticking my neck out to tear down the lies out there when my own grasp of the truth is tenuous at best.
--Jeremy Smith ( brigjer92 at aol dot com ) on 5/24/2004; 2:56:21 PM

Do not be too quick to condemn rhetoric -- your entire post is an example of rhetoric. You are attempting to use words to change the way others think. The people you indict in your post were the Sophists who styled themselves as sellers of wisdom. Socrates rejected them. I would recommend a read through Gorgias and Phaedras, two startlingly different accounts of Socrates encountering, and engaging in, rhetoric.

Paul used many standard rhetorical devices when brought before Agrippa, and also as he stood on Mars Hill. Living life and speaking effectively are not at odds with one another. You should not be indicting rhetoric, but hypocrites.

Oh, and by the way, I teach rhetoric :-)
--Marc ( marc-newman at cox dot net ) on 5/9/2004; 12:27:26 AM