An Analysis of Their Origins, Relationship, and Message
Chapter One: Survey and Assessment of Scholarship 9
Chapter One Survey and Assessment of Scholarship Introduction It was the Heidelberg theologian Martin Dibelius who narrowed the field of texts which belong to the now technical term, Haustafel. Haustafel no longer denoted the catechetical teaching derived from a conglomeration of NT hor- tatory texts, but was seen as a type of literary/traditional stratum which could be found within the larger New Testament text. Those biblical texts desig- nated by Dibelius as Haustafeln were Col. 3:18–4:1; Eph. 5:22–6:9; 1Pet. 2:18–3:7; Tit. 2:1–10; and 1 Tim. 2:8–15; 6:1–2.1 His student, Karl Weid- inger, was to follow this list in his 1928 monograph.2 Weidinger’s Hausta- feln proved to be a definitive work on the subject, demarcating for New Tes- tament scholarship those texts which formally belong under the broad Haustafel rubric. Their conclusions were eventually challenged, however, as the Dibelius-Weidinger proofs (Stoic duty lists) were shown3 to be too loosely related in form, mode of address, subject and content to constitute a single, recognisable source which might be considered as the pre-Christian HT Vorlage. The perceived limitations of the Dibelius-Weidinger theory and its proposed texts have introduced a number of positive developments in HT research, particularly the identification and limitation of HT texts. On the one hand, scholars suggested more refined categories to describe the HT form; the Pastoral Epistles, for instance, were omitted from the list due to their gen- eral nature and lack of structure,...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.