Paul's Flattery Essay

Distinguished as one of the greatest reflective thinkers of all time, Plato was the innovator of many written philosophical dialogues. Accompanied by his teacher, Socrates and his most notorious disciple, Aristotle, Plato set the groundworks of Western philosophy and science amid dialogues such as Apology, Euthyphro, Republic and Laws. These dialogues provided some of the earliest handlings of political inquiries from a philosophical viewpoint. In the Euthyphro, Plato composes a dialogue that transpires in 399 BC, weeks before the hearing of Socrates, for which Socrates and Euthyphro try to determine an absolute meaning for the word “piety” also known as holiness. To enable the comprehension of the dialogue, this essay will restate the dialogue’s key claims through differentiating between the dialogue Euthyphro, which begins by probing for the definition of the good (a matter of epistemology) and the dilemma presented by Socrates within the dialogue (a matter of ontology). Furthermore, through recapitulating Euthyphros’ various endeavors in defining piety, the essay will contend that Plato utilizes diairesis in the dialogue (definition by division) to elucidate the nature of good. On this basis, the dialogue will exemplify the two conflicting views of religion made by both characters.

In William Shakespeare's tragedy, Julius Caesar, flattery plays a very important role and is a tool that is used several times within the play and appears to work when trying to persuade people more often than not. The instances where flattery is particularly visible are when Cassius uses flattery with Brutus, Decius flatters Caesar, and Antony uses flattery with Brutus.

It goes unquestioned that a spectrum of values is a solid foundation for any man to build on. One’s values are both an influence of the present surrounding and reflection of one’s character. However, when those values start portraying themselves as binary opposites under comparison, it can undermine the credentials of that man. Contradictions, for the most part, give little value to a man's word; What man would be taken into respect or believed if he is not at consensus with his own ideas? These are questions that can be explored in the trial and life of Socrates, as recorded by Plato. Socrates makes both literal and indirect statements that either contradict an earlier statement or shows him under an undesired light.

One of my friends is a public speaker and old business associate of mine laid out the guidelines to being a professional. (2

In this particular passage, the speaker offers both day and night flattery, in hopes of finding rest. The flattery aligns day and night, and creates images by contrasting both of them. The simple contrast of the day as light and the night as dark calls into attention other contrasts such as the day is freckled with clouds, while the night is beautiful even when stars fade. These small details create vivid images that help the speaker continue the idea of connecting day and night. Therefore, these vivid details enhance the overall poem by revealing the speaker’s desperation to achieve rest. Being haunted by the thoughts and memories of a lover can be described in many different ways, but this particular sonnet gives the reader the idea

preaching. Plato in writing about this said that if a man was guilty of performing private rites he

After writing his initial letter to the Corinthians and proclaiming his loyal love for the congregation (Harris, 2014). By the time the Apostle Paul wrote 2nd Corinthians his relationship with the Christians in Corinth had dramatically changed and significantly deteriorated based upon the incursion of superlative and sham apostles into the Corinthian congregation. After rising to prominence within the Corinthian congregation of Christians, the superlative and sham apostles openly questioned the Apostle Paul’s qualifications to lead the church, his integrity, and impugned his credibility as an apostle by noting he refused to accept payment for the services he performed for the church.

Paul was on his missionary work that spanned throughout Europe, in Acts 17 Paul delivery three very powerful speeches. His third speech was delivered to the Pagans. The events that surround his famous speech and the words themselves are “the most outstanding example of intercultural evangelistic witness in the New Testament .” Paul has been regarded by scholars as a masterful mission practitioner and in this text we see him at the “height of his powers” .

Paul’s rude, aggressive and irresponsible nature show how he is ugly. His rudeness towards the people who try to help him discourage further help from those people. His aggressiveness can and will prevent Paul. His stubborn nature tires the people who nonstop help him. Paul’s negative characteristics shape everyone's present and future who are involved with him. Small easy to fix character traits could ruin someone's life.

I chose the word “to boast” here because it encompasses the full extent of what Paul is trying to say. To use the

Paul and Silas were in the cities of Thessalonica and Beroea proclaiming the gospel of Christ. Their message focused on the Messiah, his suffering, and him being raised from the dead. There were some agitators, the Jews (possibly from Rome), who became jealous and set up an uproar in the city. Although these individuals believed in God, they did not agree with Paul’s interpretation so he had to depart these cities. Paul knew how to defend the gospel of Christ by arguing and providing the scriptures, and declaring the good news about Jesus. Paul’s declaration was from pure motives, but the agitators were not eager to agree with his stance.

Paul relates to some opponents as “superlative apostles” who invaded the congregation with accusations about Paul’s teaching, as they quickly gained influence over the church in Corinth. Specifically, the apostles worked to sabotage the Corinthian’s belief in Paul’s teachings and trust in his personal righteousness. The deceitful acts were performed by the apostles because Paul refused to be compensated for his apostolic services, and they disputed his qualifications as a Christian leader (Harris, 2014, p.349). As a result, Paul writes an emotional and somewhat heartless defense of his apostolic supremacy. Boldly, Paul responds by conveying that his apostolic qualifications are attributed to him being known as the mystic and to his mystical

developed?? Acts 18:4 tells that ?every Sabbath [Paul] would argue in the synagogue and would try to convince the Jews and Greeks.?? This statement indicates that Paul was initially concerned about ministering to the Jewish community.? As a converted Pharisee, it is understandable why Paul would have a certain interest in those whom are active in his former religion.? But eventually, he was faced with opposition from Jewish leaders, and he declared that ?from now on [he] will go to the Gentiles? (verse 6).? Regardless of the audience, Paul?s message was still the same: he ?did not come proclaiming the mystery God?in lofty words or wisdom.? [He] decided to know nothing?except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified? (I Cor. 1:1-2).? This is again reiterated in 2 Cor. 1:19; it is obvious that Paul?s primary concern during his time in Corinth was the basic proclamation of the gospel in order to gain converts (Furnish 232).

“Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: “People of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: To an unknown God.SO you are ignorant of the very thing you worship and this is what I am going to proclaim to you.”

We hear of the orator’s special strength - to rouse men’s hearts to anger, hatred, and indignation (Cicero, Orator I 12,53), a not dissimilar goal to that of the dramatist. We find that a speaker’s job is to ensure that the feelings of his audience are affected just the way he wants them to be (19, 87). His Five Tasks of the orator (and to keep within the dignity of the theme) (Cicero, Orator I 38, 142-44) given in a following paragraph, are suitable instructions for any playwright or actor. Even at the beginning of On the Orator Cicero has one of his characters observe approvingly of the benefits to be gained from the less serious art on regulation of expression, voice and movement of body. Cicero has his character Antonius make an observation that the chief distinction between an actor speaking and an orator is that the actor has more leeway. He is excused if he has