O'Donoghue MTh_Thesis-FinalCopy.pdf - South African Theological ...

appealing. He seems to at times acknowledge this and at times not. He groups themajor thought units of the SOM by way of scholarly consensus, including 6:19-34,but allows for “innovation” in the sub division of the major thought units of the SOM.So, while for example he breaks down 6:19-24 into three parts, the three parts canvary in structural outline (as will be seen below).Further, his approach seems to follows the natural argument of the text. Forexample, by allowing for some innovation in the sub units and not enforcing a stricttriad formula he can acknowledge a prohibition in part one of his first sub unit, without having to “find” another prohibition in part two of the first sub unit.For Talbert (2006:120) the division of the text looks as follows; Matthew 6:19-34 canbe divided into two “sub-units” made up of 6:19-24 and 6:24-34. These sub-units are“controlled” by the two negative commands found in 6:19 and 6:25. Matthew 6:19contains the negative command to not lay up treasure on earth and 6:25 contains thecommand not to worry command.Each of these sub units breaks down further into three parts each, seen as follows(Talbert 2006:121):Sub-Unit One of 6:19-24 can be seen to break down as follows (Talbert 2006:121):a) Part One – “The Two Treasures”– 6:19-21• A prohibition is found in 6:19 to not to lay up treasures on earth.• A command is found in 6:20 to lay up treasures in heaven.• A reason is found in 6:21 in that one’s heart will be where their treasure is.b) Part Two –“The Two eyes” – 6:22-23• An assertion is found in 22a in Jesus stating the eye is the lamp of the body.• An inference is found in 22b and 23a saying that if the eye is good then thebody will be full of light and conversely if bad will be full of darkness.• A conclusion is found in 23b, in Jesus saying that if the light in you isdarkness then how great is that darkness.c) Part Three – “The Two Masters” – 6:2434