[Greek] διατρίβω (diatribō), [Latin] conferentes, [French] rester: to rub hard, to rub away, to spend time, to stay, to continue, to tarry, to remain, to abide, to pass time, to wear away, to make a path, to rub off of; Jn.3:22, Act.12:19, Act.14:3, Act. 14:28, Act.15:35, Act.16:12, Act.20:6, Act. 25:6, Act. 25:14
Paul uses a diatribe, a Greco-Roman rhetorical device, to engage in dialogue with fictitious Jewish opponents.
Background Information:
Classical Greek culture: This term refers to a diatribe, a rhetorical method of teaching and exhortation, in ancient Greek philosophical schools. This was a Socratic method used when a teacher uses questions and answers to lead the student from error to truth. This rhetorical style was used by traveling philosophers who brought philosophy to the masses. Cynic and Stoic philosophers utilized the diatribe as a form of preaching. Diatribe uses amplification, personification, maxims, brief sayings, comparisons, historical examples, irony, sarcasm, and paradox. Originally, this rhetorical form did not take on a negative sense. This rhetorical method involved extensive reflection (spending time), discourse, and dialog with someone. Essentially, one “wears away” the subject matter until the matter is completely examined. This involves spending time and influencing (“rubbing others”) in such a discussion. Depending on the circumstances and the individuals, such discussions could create the potential for friction.
New Testament: Paul often taught his various congregations in a manner reminiscent of a philosophical school teacher. Paul often uses rhetorical questions, dialogue techniques, argumentation, hypothetical objections, and false conclusions. In a sense, Paul spending (rubbing) time with and instructing (influencing) Timothy and Barnabus in an apprentice relationship, are aspects of a diatribe. Paul actually employs the Hellenistic rhetorical device of diatribe in his letters. In the 1st Letter to the Corinthians, Paul undermines the Corinthians’ indifferent views on sexual morality. In the Letter to the Romans, Paul uses a fictitious Jewish opponent to demonstrate the importance of justification.
Scripture:
“After this, Jesus and His disciples went into the region of Judea, where He spent some time with them baptizing.” Jn.3:22
The disciples are spending time with or abiding in Jesus’ presence. In a sense, Jesus is setting an example (rubbing them in the best possible way) for the disciples.
“So Paul and Barnabus stayed for a considerable period in Iconium, speaking out boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the Word about His grace by granting signs and wonders to occur through their hands.” Acts 14:3
Pau and Barnabus remained for a while in Iconium. They both converted Jews and Greeks and angered disbelieving Jews.
Conclusion:
Diatribe, conference, rest
It was quite interesting to see how this term changed over time to a negative sense. The early Classical use of diatribe was primarily used for spending time, reflecting, and as a rhetorical method. This was used quite frequently by philosophers. It was many years later that a diatribe becomes a forceful or bitter attack against someone or something. Everyone has heard of the expression “rubbing someone the wrong way.” Supposedly, this origin comes from petting a cat. Cats like to be petted from head to tail. Petting the cat from to tail to head annoys or angers the cat.
I think this idea goes much deeper than that. Perhaps, this goes back to its historical meaning, when someone encounters one another. When someone influences another person, that person’s ideas/values “rub off’ on that person. I can imagine that this could occur in both a positive (Jesus) and a negative sense (arguments). In a very bad situation, this “rubbing” can result in irritation, friction, and frayed nerves. Hence, “rubbing someone the wrong way” happens when you irritate that person.