Pindel, Roman2022-12-122022-12-122003Polonia Sacra, 2003, R. 7 (25), Nr 12 (56), s. 295-307.1428-5673http://theo-logos.pl/xmlui/handle/123456789/2106The paper includes a rhetorical analysis of pericope (Ads 24) in a form of rhetorical criticism. The point of reference for a formal and content analysis is the preceding accusation made by Tertullos. Paul's defence speech aptly takes up the accusations levelled at him and dismisses them in a way proper for a judicial defence. The case status (an offence against the unity of religion and an attempt to defile the Temple) was checked by Paul through conjecture, definition, qualifying and competence analysis. Besides EXORDIUM, which includes captatio benevokntiae (24, 10b), Paul's defence includes NARRATIO (24, 11-12), PROPOSITIO (24,12), PROBATIO, which consists of a double REPUTATO (24, 14-16 and 17-19) and PERORATO (24, 20-21). The whole argumentation is coherent and put into effect in accordance with partes and adequate in relation to the auditorium (Roman governor). These are verbal figures in the first place and a few tropes that can be detected in the defence. Apart from its formal and rhetorical correctness, Paul's defence does not bring an appropriate result, which would be his release. An official cause for the case adjournment was the absence of a tribune (who, nonetheless, is not going to bring anything into the case). That is why in the following verses the author of the narration reveals the reason for the governor's partial conduct towards Paul: a hope for a bribe and a wish to make himself liked by the Jews.plAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Polandhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/pl/BibliaPismo ŚwięteNowy TestamentDzieje ApostolskieDz 24retorykaperykopaanalizaPaweł apostołprzemówieniaBibleNew TestamentActs of the ApostlesrhetoricanalysisPaul the ApostlespeechesapostlesapostołowieArticle