The DOI matches its Crossref record; none of the 5 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Biblical Rhetoric as Illustrated by Judah's Speech in Genesis 44.18–34
Open accessAbstract
Although persuasive speech takes an important place in the biblical corpus, the method for analyzing persuasive texts remains underdeveloped. What distinguishes this literary genre is the way it acts upon the pragmatic speech situation: while narration transfers the audience to a far-away reality, and poetry creates its own world, rhetoric interacts directly with the situation at hand. Important tools of analysis are provided by ancient Greco-Roman theories of rhetoric in which this distinctive characteristic is central. Yet biblical rhetoric is rather different from its classical counterpart. In this article Judah's speech in Gen. 44.18–34 is first analysed according to the rules of classical rhetoric. The approach throws light on the inner working of the text, but at the same time it indicates a few features for which the classical theory is unable to account. The most important of these are explored and compared to similar features in other persuasive texts in the Bible.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Jan Joosten reads Judah’s speech in Genesis 44:18–34 as a test case for biblical rhetoric, arguing that classical rhetorical categories illuminate its persuasive design while biblical oratory also has distinctive features absent from Greco-Roman theory. The speech follows the classical judicial structure and relies heavily on pathos, omission, and the introduction of a “significant third,” especially the father Jacob.
Key findings
- Judah’s speech matches the classical four-part judicial speech: exordium (v. 18), narratio (vv. 19–29), confirmatio (vv. 30–32), and peroratio (vv. 33–34), with the latter two marked in Hebrew by “and now.”
- Judah’s strategy is not to prove Benjamin innocent or invoke mitigating circumstances, but to plead the judge’s clemency; his arguments are chiefly pathos-based, stressing the father’s old age, Benjamin’s youth, and past family catastrophe.
- The speech exhibits “eloquent reticence”: Judah omits the crime, the hostile first visit, the imprisonment of Simeon, the long interval between visits, and any explicit appeal to compassion or mercy. Josephus’ later version in *Antiquities* II 140–154 adds explicit appeals to pity, underscoring what the biblical version leaves implicit.
- Biblical rhetoric also introduces a “significant third” to create affinity—here, the father Jacob—and shows a complex relation to truth: Judah’s narratio is largely fictional in factual detail, yet the speech is oriented toward a deeper truth, and Joseph is persuaded about Judah rather than about Benjamin.
Methods
- The paper performs a rhetorical analysis of Genesis 44:18–34 using classical rhetoric’s categories: stasis, inventio, dispositio, elocutio, ethos, pathos, and non-artistic arguments.
- It compares Judah’s speech with other biblical persuasive speeches (e.g., the captain of fifty in 2 Kgs 1:13–14, Abigail in 1 Sam 25, Bathsheba in 1 Kgs 1:17–21, David in 2 Sam 2:5–7) and with Josephus’ rewriting in *Antiquities*.
- No quantitative sample or statistical analysis is used; the study is a textual and comparative rhetorical reading of a single biblical speech within its narrative framework.
Limitations
- The paper states that no method has been developed to approach biblical oratory as such, and that classical rhetoric is prescriptive while the scholarly approach is descriptive.
- It states that classical theory cannot account for all features of Judah’s speech, and that biblical texts are hard to date; the Joseph story is argued to come from the monarchic period, hundreds of years before Aristotle.
- It states that Judah’s speech is not a transcript of a real address but an imaginary, artistic product of the Joseph story author, and that the present study is limited to Judah’s viewpoint.
- Evident from the text: the analysis is a single test case, not a systematic survey, and the comparison with Josephus is illustrative rather than exhaustive.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
42 Own interpretation · 20 Own result · 11 No basis given · 4 Sources not found
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All terms connected to this notion: the nouns compassion, mercy, pity, grace, goodwill, as well as their cognate verbs, are completely lacking.”
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If this is so, it is surprising that the entire speech does not contain any explicit appeal to the minister's compassion.”
hedgedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Somewhat surprisingly, Judah's speech has exactly the structure prescribed by the classical authors.”
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“it is striking to observe that no method has been developed to approach biblical oratory as such.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites König
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Alonso Schökel
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Three characteristics of Judah's speech will be pointed out that are more or less alien to classical rhetoric, but typical of biblical oratory.”
plainstates an associationSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“It seems that Josephus correctly understood that Judah's entire speech was based on a plea for mercy.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ant.II 140-154
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A comparison of Judah's speech with other persuasive speeches shows that the biblical authors had their own rhetoric.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“confirms our earlier postulate about the usefulness of classical rhetoric in the study of persuasive speech in the Bible.”
plainstates a causeSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Judah exploits the cooperative principle in order to realize his rhetorical objective.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Classical theory cannot account for all features of Judah's speech, however.”
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Biblical rhetoric tends to mix these two categories together: persuasion is based not on the presentation of the orator on the one hand and the sensitivities of the audience, on the other hand, but on the relationship between the two parties.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At the same time, in all these passages the principle we have discovered is also at work: by omitting a central issue from the speech, the orator invites the audience to cooperate in the process of persuasion.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 62
- It may state two separate claims as one. 19
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When Judah speaks of their earlier visit of the brothers, he takes care to present it as a pleasant encounter”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“-In verses 30-32, Judah argues, on the basis of the reported facts, that it would be right to let Benjamin go, and to take him instead as a slave.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Judah also skips over the long period between the two visits.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The brothers only return to Egypt when all the food they brought home is consumed.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Josephus' version of the speech is longer than the biblical one, and it contains a number of additional arguments.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Josephus' Antiquities
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Some of its persuasive techniques find no parallel in Greek or Latin texts.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Judah's speech, the relational aspect is prominent.”
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“-Finally, in verses 33 and 34, Judah wraps up his speech.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The precision is expressed not only in the right choice of words and the correct grammar of the sentences, but also in the courtly style by which Judah addresses the Egyptian”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All this underscores what is lacking in the biblical version of the speech: why does Judah's speech in Genesis not contain any explicit reference to the good heart of the minister, to the clemency the brothers are hoping for, to the pity one should show towards a father?”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In keeping with his goal, which is to arouse the minister's compassion, Judah avoids to underscore any negative event that happened between the minister and the brothers.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In traditional Jewish interpretation it is often supposed that the brothers do know the identity of the minister, but this is contrary to what is stated expressly in Gen 42:8, 23.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the narratio, where Judah recounts the earlier visit and the intermezzo in Canaan, his diction is very factual.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The style of Judah's speech, too, conforms to the demands of classical rhetoric: it is precise, clear, and adorned.”
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In light of the importance of clarity in classical rhetoric, one can only be struck by the fact that Judah omits a number of important points from his speech.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In a defence of his brother who is accused by an Egyptian official, Judah introduces a third party who at first sight has nothing to do with the issue under discussion.”
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In many other instances, biblical heroes omit important points from their speeches, or even the central request on which their entire speech is oriented.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the argumentative section, the confirmatio, he uses a more figurative style”
plainstates an associationSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is exactly what Judah does: he repeats over and over again that Benjamin is young, that his father is old, that breaking the connection between them will result in catastrophe, of the kind which already befell the family before.”
plainstates a causeSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus he glosses over the hostile atmosphere of the first visit: he mentions neither the accusation of spying, nor the imprisonment of Simeon.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Judah skips entirely over the crime of which Benjamin is accused.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A result the paper states — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“-In verses 19 to 29, Judah reminds the minister of the earlier visit and tells him what happened in Canaan between the two visits.This is a typical narratio.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Rhetoric in the narrow sense of the word, the exercise of speech for persuasion, is not defined by style or structure alone.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The objective cannot be to show that Benjamin is innocent, nor to invoke mitigating circumstances.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“His speech is judicial in nature, but of a very specific genre.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Persuasive speech takes an important place in the Hebrew Bible.It is, alongside narrative and poetry, one of the principal genres of biblical texts.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In general it may be said that the speeches incorporated into the biblical narrations, although they are not real, are realistic.They imitate true speech.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The speech in Genesis 44:18-34 is an imaginary, artistic product of the author of the Joseph story, not a transcript of a real address.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even if it is not a real speech, however, we may expect it to be similar to a real speech.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: The speech in Genesis 44:18-34 is an imaginary, artistic product of the author of the Joseph story, not a transcript of a real address.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“He bases his request to liberate Benjamin, and to take him himself in his place as slave, not on Benjamin's innocence, nor on the fact that he is a minor, but exclusively on the goodness of the judge's heart.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“What distinguishes persuasive speech from all other literary genres is its relation to the speech situation.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Speeches recorded in the prophetical books often come without any indication as to the real circumstances in which they were originally pronounced.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The point at issue for Judah is to obtain from the minister that Benjamin should be allowed to go home.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both these strategies would be without hope.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Lack of information on the historical context makes it very difficult to understand many prophetic oracles, or even completely impossible.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Classical rhetoric prescribes three distinct steps in the production of a successful speech: finding the right arguments, arranging them in an efficient way, and elaborating the style.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All three steps flow from the stasis, the definition of the point at issue.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Judah repeats several times that their father is old; that Benjamin is a young boy; some catastrophe already happened in the family: these details are designed to arouse the compassion of the minister.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is, however, a body of knowledge that can be helpful in developing such a method, namely, classical rhetoric.”
plainstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: The use of speech to obtain results in the real world is universally human.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But persuasive speech is entirely directed toward influencing the situation in which it takes place.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The essence of oratory is not situated in the discourse, but in reality.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Instead Judah chooses the one line of argument that is open to him: he pleads what we would call the clemency of the court.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nonetheless, the systematic analysis of the means of persuasion proposed in the classical sources may be expected to throw light on biblical rhetoric.”
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The use of speech to obtain results in the real world is universally human.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In line with the strategy he has selected, Judah chooses his arguments particularly in the area of what is called pathos in classical rhetoric: the manipulation of the feelings of his audience.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The agreement of Judah's speech with the classical scheme merely indicates that human speech has universal characteristics.”
hedgedstates a causeSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Joseph story came into being during the monarchic period, hundreds of years before Aristotle.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“He has decided, it seems, that there is no way to make the crime appear less grievous, and therefore prefers not to mention it at all.”
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In creating this picture of the earlier visit, Judah tries to return the minister to a similarly solicitous et of mind.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is preferable for Judah to do all that is in his power to move the Egyptian man to compassion, without revealing what he wants to achieve.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: An Egyptian judge would not feel compassion toward a Hebrew thief, so Judah's plea for mercy has little basis in reality.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Neither Judah, nor the author of the book of Genesis could have known the classical theory of rhetoric.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The Joseph story came into being during the monarchic period, hundreds of years before Aristotle.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In reality, a lot of time must have gone by between the two visits.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A statement the paper makes itself — it cites no source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, some requests are better expressed indirectly.”
plainstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If Judah had articulated his claim, the minister might have realized that the plea for mercy was out of place.”
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: An Egyptian judge would not feel compassion toward a Hebrew thief, so Judah's plea for mercy has little basis in reality.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If Judah had proposed to the minister to pardon Benjamin and to let him go, the minister would have adopted an objective attitude towards the proposal.”
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: People more easily embrace an idea they themselves discover than an idea suggested to them by someone else.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The goal of the plea is to awaken the minister's compassion so that he will agree to let Benjamin go and take Judah in his place.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the contrary, it may reflect a rather sophisticated aspect of Judah's rhetorical strategy.”
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perhaps it is natural that he should keep silent about things that couldn't contribute to his persuasive strategy.”
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nevertheless, the essential nature of Judah's plea is well preserved in the later paraphrase.”
boostedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Admittedly, Judah has some other arguments, such as his vow to his father to bring Benjamin back to him.But the additional arguments hardly lay any weight in the scales.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In classical rhetoric, a judicial speech should have four parts: an introduction (exordium), a narration of the facts (narratio), a demonstration (confirmatio), and a conclusion (peroratio).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This insistence on the father has no legal value: the fact that Benjamin has a father who loves him could in no way justify his crime.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Moreover, being well versed in classical rhetoric, he felt that an explicit appeal was lacking, and decided to supply it in his rewritten version.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ant.II 140-154
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a causeSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But in fact it would be more correct to observe that Judah first of all seeks to develop some sort of affinity with the Egyptian minister.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In classical rhetoric it is recommended to devote part of the conclusion to a recapitulation of the facts (peroratio in rebus) and part to an appeal to the feelings of the audience (peroratio in affectibus).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The omission of these elements from the speech is daring, because the minister knows everything that happened full well.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Judah's silence on these points does not indicate a lack of eloquence.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“But if, instead, Judah succeeds in engendering in the minister's heart, so to speak, the idea that it would be right not to judge the Hebrew boy according to the strictest standards, this idea will be much more attractive and acceptable to him.”
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Rests on an assumption: People more easily embrace an idea they themselves discover than an idea suggested to them by someone else.
The paper relies on this without support.
The speech in Genesis 44:18-34 is an imaginary, artistic product of the author of the Joseph story, not a transcript of a real address.
“Of course, the words we read in Genesis 44:18-34 are not the transcript of a real address.The speech is imaginary, the artistic product of the author of the Joseph story.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The Joseph story came into being during the monarchic period, hundreds of years before Aristotle.
“Although biblical texts are hard to date, there are good reasons to submit that the Joseph story came into being during the monarchic period, hundreds of years before Aristotle.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The use of speech to obtain results in the real world is universally human.
“The use of speech to obtain results in the real world is not limited to ancient Greece and Rome: it is universally human.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The audience of the biblical narrative are supposed to be able to relate to the heroes of the narrative as their own ancestors.
“The audience are supposed to be able to relate to the heroes of the narrative, who are represented as their own ancestors.”
The paper relies on this without support.
An Egyptian judge would not feel compassion toward a Hebrew thief, so Judah's plea for mercy has little basis in reality.
“Remember that Judah's plea has little basis in reality: why should an Egyptian judge feel compassion toward a Hebrew thief?”
The paper relies on this without support.
People more easily embrace an idea they themselves discover than an idea suggested to them by someone else.
“As is well known people more easily embrace an idea they themselves discover than an idea suggested to them by someone else.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In classical rhetoric, neither the central claim nor the arguments need to be true; they only need to be persuasive.
“Neither the central claim, nor the arguments need to be true, they only need to be persuasive.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In classical rhetoric, a good speech is a persuasive speech.
“In classical rhetoric, a good speech is a persuasive speech.”
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Persuasive Power of Hedges: Insights from TED Talks
Jovic, M., Kurtishi, I., & AlAfnan, M. A. (2023) · World Journal of English Language · doi:10.5430/wjel.v13n5p200 · Cited by 17
Asnawi, A. R., Aziz, H., & Haris, A. M. (2022) · Jurnal Studi Ilmu-ilmu Al-Qur an dan Hadis · doi:10.14421/qh.2022.2301-03 · Cited by 12
Persuasive speech in multi-professional change facilitation meetings
Komulainen, H., Mertaniemi, E., Lunkka, N., Jansson, N., Meriläinen, M. H., Wiik, H. T., & Suhonen, M. (2019) · Journal of Health Organization and Management · doi:10.1108/jhom-12-2018-0366 · Cited by 9
Exploring a retrospective narrative in Genesis 45:1–15
Odo, D. O. (2021) · HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies · doi:10.4102/hts.v77i4.6921 · Cited by 2
The Double Use of the Locution ועתה as a Rhetorical Device in the Discourses of the Old Testament
Rzepka, B. (2022) · Verbum Vitae · doi:10.31743/vv.13615 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Joosten, J.
- Affiliations
- Christ Church, St Aldates, Oxford OX1 1DP
- Corresponding author
- Joosten, Jan
- ORCID
- Joosten, Jan
- Venue
- Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-09
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 15-30
- ISSN
- 0309-0892 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-6728
- OpenAlex
- W2520935610
- Semantic Scholar
- cf8e37fe1ce58ea2021640dd34d448546e780505
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 4.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- ora.ox.ac.uk
- Locations
- Journal for the Study of the Old Testament (publishedVersion)
- Oxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford) (submittedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion)
- Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
- Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Linguistics and Discourse Analysis
- Social Sciences › Communication › Rhetoric and Communication Studies
- Keywords
- biblical rhetoric, persuasive speech, Joseph and his brothers, Greco-Roman rhetoric, narrative and poetry
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
