Korean | English

pISSN : 1229-0521

2020 KCI Impact Factor : 0.52
Home > Explore Content > All Issues > Article List

2011, Vol.17, No.2

  • 1.

    The Warning of the Seventh Plague(Ex 9: 13-21) Reconsidered

    장석정 | 2011, 17(2) | pp.12~32 | number of Cited : 4
    Abstract PDF
    This study is to analyze the so-called “Hail Plague,” the 7th plague among 10 plagues described in Exodus. Because the text of the plague narrative is fairly long, I divide the whole text into two sections (9: 13-21 and 9: 22-35). In this paper the first part of the text is analyzed and critically annotated. The 7th plague is to destroy the people, animals and vegetables out in the field. Those who are inside would not be harmed by this plague. Pharaoh's courtiers had two options: bringing their servants and animals into the houses or leaving them out in the field. If all the servants were brought into the houses, there would not be a human victims by the plague. Therefore, the main target of this plague had to be those vegetables and trees which could not be moved inside. Unlike the previous plagues, it was possible for the Egyptians to avoid the hail plague if they believed in the words of YHWH spoken by Moses. The inevitable question focuses on the reason why YHWH gave those courtiers options to be exempted from the plague. Certainly the number of death would be reduced if some of the courtiers listened to Moses' warning. In conclusion, the main target of the 7th plague seems to be anything alive in the field. It means all the living beings in the land would be dead by the severe hailstorm as long as they are in the field. In the first half of the hail plague text, the overarching conceptuality is the land which is the space of death. The warning of the 7th plague(9: 13-21) is definitely highlighting this undeniable emphasis throughout the text.
  • 2.

    An Interpretation for the Meaning and Role of the Episode of the Wood-gatherer on Sabbath: A study of Redaction Criticism and Structural Criticism on Numbers 15: 32-36.

    김진명 | 2011, 17(2) | pp.33~53 | number of Cited : 3
    Abstract PDF
    What is the meaning and role of the episode of the wood-gatherer on Sabbath in Numbers 15: 32-36? Some scholars proposed to see Num 15: 32-36 in the connected context of the catastrophic events in Num 13-14(Tzvi Novick, A. Leveen, D. T. Olson). It signals the continuity of God's relationship with Israel of the wilderness; By insisting that the Sabbath-breaker be punished, God asserts the continuity of this relationship. But Num 15: 32-36 has its own meaning and role in the context of chapter 15. This study tried to show that 15: 32-36 is connected with 15: 30-31. Num 15: 30-31 introduced the law for the punishment of intented sin. The connected verses 32-36 role as a concrete precedent for the law of death penalty. These contents are proved by Reduction Criticism. Structural Criticism showed the surface structure (life and death, obedience and disobedience) and the deep structure (God as the law-giver and the judge of the intended sin / the intended sin of a wood gatherer is a guilt against God) in Num 15: 30-36. Comparing MT and LXX of Num 15: 32-36 shows that the plural form of the sabbath in LXX is different from the singular form of the sabbath in MT. These elements in LXX also show that the nuance of the intended breaking of the sabbatical law is repeated in the sabbaths. The combination of the diachronic method and the synchronic method for Num 15:32-36 can be perceived as a co-assistant method to interpret the text.
  • 3.

    A Study of the Reception History of Shema(Deut 6: 4-9)

    Eunwoo Lee | 2011, 17(2) | pp.54~83 | number of Cited : 1
    Abstract PDF
    The reception theory advanced by Jauss proposes the sublation of the established dominant author-text centered formal-aesthetic literary research method and suggests a new way of research focused on reader-oriented reading and receiving literary works. Traditional literary approaches - whether they be foramlist, new critical, or Marxist-have tended to focus on ‘writer’ and ‘text.’ The audience for whom the literature was destined plays a limited role. Thus, reception theory tries to change the direction of literary research climate from existing author-text based study into reader oriented literary understanding. Literature and its reading are products of society at particular historical moments. Over the course of history, a discourse concerning the meaning and significance of a text grows, develops, and evolves. To properly understand the meaning and significance of a text at any particular historical moment, we have to understand its place in a continually evolving discourse of reception. A text must be studied in the perspective of reception history which have interpreted it. The purpose of this study is to explore the reception history of shema which has played an important role in the tradition of Judaism and Cristianity for ages until now. There has been long controversy on the time setting and the range of the text. This article pursues the reception history of Shema in the history of Israel and Christian community. For this purpose, the writer interprets shema in connection with vassal treaty of neo-Assyrian empire in ancient Old Testament Period, and studies the understanding of shema in the Septuagint, in the synoptic Gospel, in the Pauline letters, in the Rabinic Judaism, of ancient church fathers, and of Protestant reformers.
  • 4.

    The Judicial Reform of Jehoshaphat

    소형근 | 2011, 17(2) | pp.86~104 | number of Cited : 5
    Abstract PDF
    Seit der kritischen Untersuchung von Wellhausen über die Justizreform des Josaphat in 2 Ch 19,5-11 haben verschiedene Alttestamentler über dieses Thema gearbeitet. Knierim hat versucht, den Text von Ex 18,13-26 als Ätiologie der Justizreform zu versthen. Dieses These Knierims, dass Ex 18,13-26 die Justizreform des Josaphat im Blick habe, wird neuerdings von Graupner abgelehnt, weil V 21b und V 25b in Ex 18,13-26 jünger als die Gliederung in Tausendschaften usw. in Dt 1 seien und es für 2 Ch 19,5-11 nicht um die Rechtsprechung der Heerbannführer gehe, sondern um die Einsetzung der Richter in allen festen Städten Judas und Jerusalem. Albright und Weinfeld haben versucht, die historische Möglichkeit der Justizreform des Josaphat durch die altorientalischen Hintergründe zu beweisen. Jedoch finden sich keine Belege des Alten Testaments über die Einsetzung und Tätigkeit der offiziellen Richter von Seiten der Zentralregierung in 10.-8. Jh. v. Chr. außer 2 Ch 19,5-11. Trotzdem is es einleuchtend, dass das Gericht im Tor auch im 8. Jh. vielleicht durch die nichtstaatliche Institution gehalten wurde (Jes 29,21; Am 5,10. 12.15), aber niemand weiß, wer im 8. Jh. im Tor gerichtet hat. Ferner hat Crüsemann durch seine Arbeit (Die Tora[1992]) versucht, 2 Ch 19,5-11 nicht als die chronistische Arbeit in der nachexilischen Zeit, sondern als die chronistische Sonderheit, d.h. die ältere Überlieferung zu erkennen. Aber die mangelnde Historizität der Justizrefom des Josaphat hat sich durch die einigen Belege bestätigt. Die selbstständige Rechtsprechung der םינהכ wie 2 Ch 19,8.11 erwähnt, ist im 9. Jh. im Alten Testament nicht vorgegeben, stattdessen war die hauptsächliche Tätigkeit der Priester auf die kultische Rechtsprechung, die Lehrfunktion des Gerichts und die Lehre der הרות beschränkt (Mi 3,11; Jes 2,3; Hos 4,4ff.; Dt 31,9; Ez 44,23; 2 Ch 17,8-9). Zudem waren die Leviten in der Alten Testament als die Richter vor der exilischen Zeit nicht tätig. Außerdem ist die Rechtsprechung der םיטפש, die von der Zentralregierung eingesetzt wurden, erst im 7. Jh. im Alten Testament belegt, und der דיגנ in 2 Ch 19,11 ist anachronistisch. Der דיגנ war ein König in der Zeit von Josaphat.
  • 5.

    Did Only One ‘Ark of God’ Exist?

    정중호 | 2011, 17(2) | pp.105~122 | number of Cited : 2
    Abstract PDF
    This project has shown the existence of not only one, but several ‘arks of God’. These include the ark of the wilderness tradition, which traveled from Shilo to Philistine and finally Kirjathjearim; the ark transported from Baale-judah to Jerusalem by King David; the ark Saul ordered the priest Ahijah to bring; and the ark of God owned by the tribe of Dan. In particular, we find the existence of several different arks of God highly probable given the religious context of the period. Key to the existence of multiple arks is the interchangeability of the terms ‘ark of God’ and ‘eboth’. We find evidence in the Old Testament where ‘eboth’ has been substituted for other arks of God(1 Sam 14: 18). The ark which Saul ordered to bring on the battlefield, the ark which the priest Ahijah bore back was not from Kirjathjearim but appears to be the ark of the sanctuary of Nob. This is due to the fact that the priest of the sanctuary of Nob was, like the priest Ahijah, of the Elide Priests. It appears that Abiathar took this ark of God when he went to David in escaping. Also, the ark of God in the sanctuary of the tribe of Dan appears to be connected to the Mahaneh-Dan of Kirjathjearim, where the tribe of Dan encamped. Mahaneh-Dan appears to be a sanctuary rather than an area, one of several sanctuaries in Kirjathjearim. Also, the ark of the tribe of Dan also appears related to the ark of God in the sanctuary of Micah in the mountains of Ephraim.
  • 6.

    Yahweh's Consort?

    강승일 | 2011, 17(2) | pp.123~144 | number of Cited : 11
    Abstract PDF
    One of the most remarkable discoveries in the field of biblical archaeology and iconography in recent years is arguably the much-debated inscription found at Kuntillet Ajrud. Having had an enormous impact on our understanding of the folk religion of ancient Israel, this inscription has been the center of attention of western biblical scholarship. Surprisingly enough, however, it has rarely been discussed in the society of Korean biblicists. This essay critically reviews various scholarly opinions about the "Yahweh and his Asherah" inscription. In so doing, it also introduces Professor McCarter's hypostasis theory and provides more examples of hypostases in the Bible and Jewish literature, e.g. the Deuteronomistic name theology, the god Bethel and other deities attested in the Elephatine papyri, the wisdom in Proverbs, the Glory of Yahweh in the book of Ezekiel, Yahweh's voice and righteousness, Shekinah and Memra in the Targums, and finally the Logos in the Gospel of John. A major abstacle to see “his A(a)sherah” in the inscription as a goddess is the fact that proper nouns do not take pronominal suffixes in Northwest Semitic languages. The present author, however, presents, along with Amarna examples, Hos 2: 16 as an exception to this grammatical rule. Even if the expression “Yahweh and his Asherah” is irregular from a grammatical viewpoint, one may point out that the inscription is more like graffiti than a sophisticated literary product. So a little grammatical problem won't be a serious issue. Therefore, it would not be presumptuous to say that the most likely interpretation of the Kuntillet Ajrud inscription is to see the two cow-like figures as Yahweh and his consort Asherah the goddess.
  • 7.

    The Purpose of Haggai in light of ‘Revelation,’ ANE's Temple Rebuilding Ideology

    신우철 | 2011, 17(2) | pp.145~164 | number of Cited : 3
    Abstract PDF
    The research problem concerns the ideological background of the temple rebuilding records between Ancient Near East and Ancient Israel in light of god’s revelation. Both regions have left numerous temple rebuilding records; among others, three major building inscriptions as for Neo Babylonia contemporaneously during the 6th century BCE (Nabopolassar’s, Nebucahadnezzar II’s, and Nabonidus’) and Gudea cylinders (A&B) as for the ancient Mesopotamia in the 3rd Millennium; in ancient Israel there were so-called 2nd temple reconstruction records in OT, especially the Book of Haggai will be dealt with for this research. The significant ideological relationship is expected to shed a new light to some interpretational aspects of Haggai, widely presumed to be one of the major historiographical sources in Ancient Israel. Especially the following questions are put in order in regards to Haggai: first, who was the primary incipient of Haggai’s message; second, who would be the legitimate temple rebuilder of the Jerusalem temple in the Persian period, third and last, what was the purpose of book of Haggai in connection with the aforementioned questions. The research showed that a king was the ultimate recipient of a revelation in regard to projected temple rebuilding in Ancient Near East as well as in Israel. It is by no means a surprise considering the long standing tradition in terms of divine-king ideology in this civilization. This in turn points to the strong indication that a would-be recipient of YHWH’s message to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem should be none other than the person of Zerubbabel, then Persia-appointed governor over Judah and Jerusalem. This conclusion has much to do with the purpose of book of Haggai itself. Haggai will be the only book in OT which illustrates that the rebuilt temple in the Persian-period Judah was the temple of YHWH, not the temple of a Persian god. YHWH had revealed his intention to build his temple in Jerusalem to his sole deputy on earth, the prospective carrier of kingship in Judah. Haggai successfully ushers in a new phase of history in Ancient Israel by officially declaring cessation from the past; his people and the nation at large are once again set to enter into a new relationship with YHWH. Haggai is diplomatically skillful in that his aspiration for a restored Davidic dynasty is described in somewhat sophisticated prophetic oracles towards the nations as well as towards Zerubbabel.