An Analysis of Their Origins, Relationship, and Message
Conclusion We began our study by asking “What’s in a name?”, with the observation that the New Testament household codes, having been identified as a cohe- sive parenetic unit, had received treatment as a discrete literary phenomenon within their larger letter contexts. The scholarly scrutiny devoted to the HT form has led to the demarcation of the household code as a genre, evidencing a number of characteristics unique to its New Testament expression. A sur- vey of form-critical investigations regarding its provenance and adoption as Christian parenesis illustrated the remarkable diversity of opinion regarding the HT’s original form and function. The location of this traditional Urtafel, however, whether conceived as Christian catechism, Jewish tradition or Hel- lenistic economic theory, was shown to be unanimous: it lies somewhere outside of the composition and concerns of the New Testament text. The HT, then, as we find it in Colossian and Ephesians, has been regarded as a pro- fane or lightly christianised import; any connection to the style and theologi- cal concerns of the larger letter has been assumed to be insignificant. The resultant isolation from its New Testament context has led, inadvertently, to the disenfranchisement of the HT as a vehicle of genuine Christian ethics. Without diminishing the importance of form-critical findings, this result is quite likely due, in part, to the methodological limitations of diachronic analysis. In concert with the tendency of form-critical studies to isolate the HT from its context, the nature of the admonitions present further difficulty. The HT...
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.