KJC Korea
Journal Central

This essay suggests a way to fill up a gap between the exegesis of the Bible and preaching, recognizing that it is the important task of today's biblical studies. Building the bridge between Academism(professionalism) and Journalism(popularity) requires a leading attitude of biblical studies scholars first. This essay focuses on Ecclesiastes 9 and finds the meaning and messages of this chapter. I hope this analysis -the theological exegesis of Eccl. 9 and the message from it- to be useful for many preachers to preach it in their churches. First, Eccl. 9:1-6 concerns the life in the face of death. The latter part of verse 1a "the righteous and the wise and what they do are in God's hands" and verse 4 are quotation from the speech of Koheleth's contemporaries. Koheleth refutes the quotation(v 1a, 4) that the expectation of hope after the death of the righteous and the wise(cause and effect). Koheleth turns his eyes from uncertainties after the death to the reality before the death. Second, Eccl. 9:7-10 states the life on this earth. This paragraph is the broadest part extended by the motif 'Carpe-diem.' The food< >of verse 7 and the word "already"< > that appears only in Ecclesiastes are related to Genesis 3:19. This verse implies that God already enjoyed and received to eat food and drink wine. This means that enjoying life is the original intention of Creator. Koheleth insists that the true faithful life is to enjoy the gifts given from God in God. Third, Eccl. 9:11-12 makes clear that human beings stand before the suddenly coming death. "time"< >of verse 11 is the appropriate time (expected event), "chance"< > indicates the accidental time (unexpected event). Verse 12 represents, by showing the picture of the fish in a net, that human beings stand before the death. Last, Eccl. 9:13-18 deals with the limits of the wisdom. The aphorism(격언), in verse 17-18a, that praises the wisdom is a quotation. The content of verse 14-15 introduces a certain historical event but it is not possible and important to identify the event. The important thing is the intention of the statement. Now, Koheleth draws a line at the overrated wisdom. This means that the wisdom also has the limitation.

Hos 12 ist das wohl interessanteste Kapitel des Hoseabuches, da hier Anspielungen auf die Jakobtradition vorliegen. Besonders interessant ist vor allem, weil sich die in Kap. 12 berkommene Jakobtradition einerseits weitgehend mit der entsprechenden Jakobtradition von Genesis ber hrt und andererseits doch wieder stark von ihr abweicht. Unklar ist aber, in welchem Umfang Hosea auf vorliegende Tradition bekannt war, ob er noch andere Traditionen verwandt hat oder nicht, und wie weite er Partie der 'kanonischen' Jakobgeschichte kannt, Es ist auch umstritten, ob er eine negative oder positive Deutung Jakobs vorlegte. Die starke Divergenz der Hoseainterpretationen ist nicht nur in traditionsgeschichtlicher Frage begr ndet, sondern auch in den textlichen Schwierigkeiten des 12. Kapitels. Wegen ihrer Undeutlichkeit und der K rze ihrer Formulierung sind die Anspielungen auf Jakobtradition schwer zu beurteilen. Hoseas Jakobgeschichte ist deutlich anders von Genesis-Jakoberz hlung strukturiert. Hosea stellt der Bethel-Erz hlung (12: 5b-7) die Erz hlung vom Kampf Jakobs mit Gott/dem Engel (12: 4b-5a) voran und die beiden Geschichten am Anfang und am H hepunkt des Lebens Jakobs zusammen, die sich auf die Namengebung Jakob und Israel beziehen. Die Betheloffenbarung und -verheissung ist bei Hosea Gottesantwort auf die weinende und flehende Handlung des streitlustigen, aber von Gott besiegten Jakobs. Zugleich wird die Verheissung wesentlich modifiziert und auf die Umkehr des Volkes Israel angestellt. Hosea verbindet ferner, mit Hilfe vom Namen Israel, die Episode von Jakobs Frucht nach Aram und seinem Dienst um Frau mit dem Exodusgeschehen. Dabei kontrastiert die Handlung Jakobs, der die Flucht nach Aram ergreift, hart mit der Handlung Gottes, der Israel aus gypten herauff hrt. Mit einem Wort verwendet Hosea die Geschichte des Erzvaters Jakob als Spiegel der schuldigen Versagens und zugleich des (schon verpassten, auf die Zukunft verschobenen) Umkehrens.

This article tries to prove continuity of the divine name YHWH in both Old Testament and New Testament. At first, one may ask if the tetragrammaton appears in New Testament. If so, does it make connection between both Testaments? LXX translates the name as ' ' as in Jewish tradition, while 'the LORD' comes from a Hebrew word 'adonai.' However, it is not obvious that the Greek ' ' was regarded as a divine name for the native Greek speakers. Thus, other copies of Greek version tried to transliterate the tetragrammaton into such as , I , Ia , and often transcribes and instead of and respectively. And went gradually standardized. The Book of Revelation explains the divine name in different ways. It is noted that the Johannine Literature implies hebrew traditions more than any other books of NT does. In particular, the God's names of Rev. 1:8 are so implicative and various. John the Apostle tried to reflect hebrew common terms and theological ideas in order to overcome the crisis of the Johannine community. The problem is that the Greek translation of Hebrew Scripture was not good enough for Greek community to communicate. Hence, John the Apostle attempted to choose an idiomatic expression for YHWH in Greek philosophical term and to put an actual content in Hebrew theological concept at the same time. In OT the name is alleged as 'ineffable' one. Even though it is hard to reconstruct the divine designation, it will be 'yahu' which means 'O He!' Rev 1:8 attempts to connect ineffable one with Greek terms and thoughts in light of Hebrew tradition. A point of difference is as follows: the name comes from the third person of the verb , while in the Johannine literature is a first person form.

The centralization of cult was a movement that abolished all the local shrines to leave only one place Jerusalem as a cultic center. Ahas' Judah in the 8th century BCE was vassal to Assyria. It was militarily subordinate and religiously too to Assyria, so Judah was in total crisis that called for theological and cultic reform to liberate itself. There have been lots of misunderstandings about the centralization of cult. It was taken as a mean to abolish the idols in the local shrines, which was an unpolitical understanding. Or, it was understood as a part of centralization of power as any sociological understanding could indicate. Above all, it has been mistaken as fictional with no historical evidence (i.e., ex eventa record). Hezekiah brought together all the people in defence of Assyrian assail. He attempted a religious reform in cult to blow up resistance spirit against Assyria in the mind of the people. By centralizing cult he wanted to bring about unity of all the people. In a way the centralization of cult made oneness and belongingness in terms of politics. The centralization is attested in Deut 12:13-14; 18:1-8; 2Kgs 23:8-9; and etc. As for an archeological evidence the excavation at Tel Beersheba attests that stones used for alters were reapplied for a newer building. Unity and harmony of a nation would not be archived being forced by rulers. It would be possibly made only by spontaneous act of the people. Abandoning the local shrines to centralize cultic place only in Jerusalem would not have made possible by the needs of the time or forcing power, but by sacrifice of rulers admitting the priests of the local shrines. Cultic centralization could be accomplished not by the will to collect power but by self-sacrifice of rulers who willingly seek for egalitarian community.