KJC Korea
Journal Central

The God in the Old Testament is violent. As a result, the texts of the Old Testament were significantly influenced by a theological system that embraced the concept of theodicy. This paper aims to explore the theological framework of angelology, which expanded to provide further protection for Yahweh. Specifically, it focuses on the angelology found in apocalyptic literature that emerged after the Exile, serving as a defence mechanism for the monotheistic faith in Yahweh. And it seeks to support this argument by analysing the main passages of the heavenly council in the Old Testament. Apocalyptic literature presents an expanded role for celestial beings, along with a postponed eschaton, allowing Yahweh to be shielded from the criticism and resentment of his people in various ways. Notably, these characteristics found in apocalyptic texts contribute to the theological system known as theodicy. The key passages of the heavenly council in the Old Testament, such as 1 Kings 22:19-23, Isaiah 6, Job 1&2, Psalm 82, Zechariah 3, and Daniel 7:9-14, consistently tackle the problem of evil and prominently feature divine beings, providing evidence of the close relationship between expanded angelology and theodicy. Interestingly, due to the monotheistic belief system, celestial beings that were suppressed unexpectedly assume prominent positions and engage in activities within the heavenly council texts. Simultaneously, they are portrayed as responsible for violence and evil. This contrasts with the monotheistic belief in Yahweh, who governs both light and darkness, offering a means to escape direct accountability for violence and evil. The apocalyptic literature that emerged after the period of captivity, marked by national disasters, and the composition of the heavenly council texts, influenced by personal and societal suffering, share a common problem - the crisis of monotheistic faith in Yahweh.   Ultimately, the ancient Israelite monotheistic religious system, facing instability, gradually incorporated elements of polytheism to provide stability amidst the crisis. Other divine beings served as protective shields, safeguarding Yahweh from fierce criticism.

Nathan's deeds recorded in the books of Samuel and Kings are twofold. In the scene where he declares a covenant with David (2 Sam. 7) or rebukes David in relation to Bathsheba (2 Sam. 12), Nathan is portrayed as a prophet, strengthening or checking the royal authority. On the other hand, in the process of Solomon ascending the throne after David, Nathan is mentioned most often as a prophet, but there is no hint that his words and actions originated from Yahweh (1 Kings 1). The historian does not directly evaluate Nathan's words and actions, but from a macro perspective, he recorded the fact that the history after Solomon's reign led to the division and destruction of the kingdom. By recording all the light and darkness of the character Nathan, the historian did not simply state the historical fact, but tried to express his intention through the historiography. As recorded in historiography, in the gloomy reality of the fall of the nation and the rule of Babylon, historian tried to face up to the people and events of the past that made reality, and to tell what to discard and what to choose for the perpetuity of the covenant.

Die Analyse der Berichte über die Könige Manasse und Josia in 2. Chr. kann Erkenntnisse über den Autor der Chronik und seine Intention ermöglichen. Es ist Forschungskonsens, dass das die Urteile über diese zwei Könige im chronistischen und deuteronomistischen Geschichtswerk in Widerspruch zueinander stehen. Diese konträre Beurteilung eröffnet uns jedoch einen Zugang, um die jeweilige Perspektive und das Interesse der Autoren zu erschließen. Die Chronisten interpretieren Manasse aus einer „konsequenzialistischen Perspektive“, indem sie die Geschichte rekonstruieren, die bereits stattgefunden hat (descriptio ex eventu). Manasse ist der bösartigste König, aber zugleich derjenige, der am längsten regiert hat. Im Deuteronomium wird der „Gehorsam gegenüber dem Gesetz“ häufig mit „Langlebigkeit“ in Verbindung gebracht, was ihn aus konsequenzialistischer Perspektive zu einer positiv zu verstehenden Figur machen würde. Manasse wird aber nicht deswegen zu einer vorbildhaften Figur, da auch die Chronik all seine Vergehen darstellt. Zum Vorbild wird er jedoch durch seine durch das assyrische Exil angestoßene Umkehr zu JHWH, die ihn in der chronistischen Darstellung zu einem konsequenten Vertreter der Kultreinheit werden lässt. Dies wiederum macht ihn gewissermaßen zum Prototypen für die zurückkehrende Gemeinschaft der in Babylon Exilierten. Josia stellen die Geschichtsschreiber der Chronik hingegen als Gegenbild zu Manasse dar. Nach 2. Kön 23,25 war er ein Mann nach dem Herzen Jahwes und wurde für seinen strikten Gehorsam gegenüber der Tora gelobt. Doch obwohl er der vorbildlichste aller Könige war, warf sein plötzlicher Tod viele Fragen auf. Konfrontiert mit der Frage: „Warum ist der treue Josia getötet werden?“, nimmt der Chronikautor eine Neubewertung Josias vor, deren Ausgangspunkt folgerichtig ist, da er von seinem vorzeitigen Tod weiß. Der Historiker fällt ein negatives Urteil, indem er im Gegensatz zur deuteronomistischen Tradition von ihm berichtet, dass er „nicht auf das Wort, das aus dem Mund Gottes kam, gehört habe“. Außerdem können wir in der Beurteilung Josias durch die Chronisten einen „Prozess der Kanonisierung“ beobachten. Im Gegensatz zum Buch der Könige, das die mosaische Tora in den Mittelpunkt seiner Reformen gestellt hat, betonen die Chronisten die „Gebote und Vorschriften Davids“. Die Kanonisierung geschah nicht in einem „Augenblick“, sondern über einen „langen Zeitraum“ hinweg. Der Prophet Jeremia wird zum Beispiel in der deuteronomistischen Überlieferung gar nicht erwähnt, aber in den Chronikbüchern wird vorausgesetzt, dass Jeremia als Prophet Gottes anerkannt war. Es ist eine historische Tatsache, dass sich die Chronisten auf den Bericht der deuteronomistischen Überlieferung gestützt haben, aber sie folgen ihm dennoch nicht in ihren Urteilen über die Vergangenheit, da sie sich nicht an deren Theologie orientieren. Das Ziel der Chronisten ist es nicht, eine vergangene Epoche als solche zu beschreiben, denn vielmehr ist es ihr Ziel, anhand historischer Quellen Antworten auf die Fragen der eigenen Gegenwart zu finden. Daher müssen wir die „Erzählzeit“, in der die Chronisten zu verorten sind, erforschen, um ihre Intention angemessen zu erfassen.

Since the work of Wellhausen, scholarly inquiries into the origins of the Levites in Ancient Israel have, to a large extent, sidestepped the issue of Levite tribalization. This oversight can be attributed to the prevailing assumption that the Levites and the tribe of Levi were interchangeable concepts. Although a majority of scholars, with a few exceptions among European researchers, have concurred that Josiah's reform significantly heightened the role of the Levites, this essay presents a distinct perspective while remaining in agreement. At the core of this essay lies the proposition that the Levites functioned as cultic functionaries—comprising both priests and aides—since the earliest epochs of Ancient Israel's history. This assertion draws support from three indirect lines of evidence. First, the consistent utilization of cultic facilities from Late Bronze Age city-states within Iron Age sites implies an enduring tradition of worship. Second, the intertwined veneration of El and Yahweh suggests the participation of discrete priestly groups at diverse sacred locations during the monarchy. Third, the presence of abecedaries serves as a testament to scribal activities spanning from the Late Bronze Age to Iron I. R. B. Coote underscores the intricate connection between the concept of a tribe and the existence of a state. Any tribe's nomenclature and activities would invariably find documentation within a state framework. Consequently, without the presence of a state, the notion of a tribe would remain elusive. In light of these considerations, this essay postulates that the opportune moment to formally establish the tribe of Levi—despite its historical service as cultic functionaries—was during Josiah's transformative reform in 622 BCE. The triumph of this reform pivoted on the active collaboration and involvement of the Levites within local sanctuaries. Thus, the implementation of this reform emerges as a pivotal juncture, embodying the seminal inception of the tribe of Levi within the annals of ancient Israel's rich history.

This paper examines Jonah’s prophecy and his activities as being described in the Books of Jonah and Kings. Jonah’s prophecy recorded in the Book of Jonah is very short. The format of this short prophecy is similar to that of the ancient Mari prophecies. A Mari prophecy consists of a short prophecy and longer narratives that provides more context for the prophecy. This structure of the Mari prophecy suggests that the literary form of the book of Jonah is not the result of later editing, but rather preserves the original form of ancient Hebrew prophecy. Jonah pronounces judgment on the people of Nineveh. The people of Nineveh, however, take Jonah’s prophecy as an omen of future misfortune, so they don coarse sackcloth and declare a fast to avoid it. Their behavior seems to be part of a shroud ritual to ward off bad omens. As a result, Jonah is able to warn the people of Nineveh and save them from the coming judgment. Jonah’s deliverance is more clearly seen during the reign of Jeroboam, recorded in the book of Kings. Jeroboam was a wicked king, but Jonah proclaims a positive prophecy of territorial restoration. Like the prophets of Neo-Assyria, he functions as a royal prophet concerned with the welfare of the king and the stability of the kingdom.

The purpose of this article is to explain that the regulation of cult centralization(Dtn 12) no longer plays a key role in the postexilic texts of historical books. For this purpose, this study examines the postexilic texts relating to cult-places (1 Kings 13; 2 Kings 23,16-20; 17,24-41; 2 Chr 13,4-12; Josh 8,30-35). To begin with, the themes of the texts are revealed, while investigating on which grounds the cult places are criticized. Next, it expounds how the tradition of the Deuteronomistic History in which the regulation of cult centralization plays a key role is interpreted in the Persian eras in Israel. 1 Kings 13 criticizes the cult in Bethel on the basis of the prohibitions of God and the regulations about the priest. With this text, 2 Kings 23,16-20 strengthens the deuteronomistic tradtion about the Josianic reform which fulfilled the cult centralization. 2 Chr 13,4-12 criticizes the cult in Bethel on the basis of the illegal appointment and delegation of the priest. 2 Kings 17,24-41 makes illegal a specific cult-place in Samaria, namely the YHWH-Tempel on Mt. Gerizim. Also, Josh 8,30-35 aims to delegitimize the YHWH-Tempel on Mt. Gerizim. According to the deuteronomistic tradition, the only legal cult-place for YHWH ist the tempel of Jerusalem and the regulation of cult centralization was fulfilled in virtue of the Josianic cult-reform. From the Judean pont of view which was based on this tradition the YHWH-Tempel on Mt. Gerizim could not have been accepted. Thus the tempel on Mt. Gerizim which was in competition with the tempel of Jerusalem is described with Bamoth, but is under fire on the basis of the First Commandment and the regulations about the appointment of the priest. Israel in the Persian period upholds and reinterprets the tradition of the Deuteronomistic History in regard to the Bamoth-cult.

This study reconstructs the entire structure of Psalm 22 with a chiastic structure, and then derives the understanding of God of the suffering person and eschatological hope from it. With this point of view, Psalm 22 is regarded as a psalm of the poor, and the date of writing is presumed to be after the captivity. Diagnosing the theological significance of pleading the enemy of the poor in Psalm 22 is to suggest a way out for those suffering from poverty and to claim it. The poet (the poor) expresses the pain inflicted by enemies in the petition for enemies as “the limit of human experience” through animal metaphors. This means the great fear that befalls the poet, who has become helpless from the unbearable exploitation and plunder of his enemies. The poet accuses this, and at the same time exposes circumstances such as his own death as the result of God's desertion, then pleads with God (v. 16). However, the poet does not despair and bury himself in the realistic situation neglected due to poverty, but reaches a deep insight into God's salvation, which 'our ancestors' trusted. And when he fills the gap with trust in God, his lament turns into petition. At the peak of such petition he experiences a Stimmungsumschwung. The Stimmungsumschwung experienced by the poet is the hope gained by exposing the unbearable pain of poverty. In Psalm 22, the poet is promised a way to overcome the physical pain of poverty and escape from the tyranny of the enemies who are defined as those who rob the poor of their lives. Suffering from poverty, he is finally promised an end to that hunger (v. 27, above, 21) "Eat and be full," that is, the end of hunger, promised to those suffering from poverty in the frame of the style of 'reversal of the atmosphere', makes them praise. The promise and praise of “eat and be full” of the poor, which was born as the theology of the poor after the captivity (Armentheologie), further expands to cosmic eschatological hope after verses 28-29. Here, God's salvation for the poor is the eschatological hope that signifies God's universal reign. The realization of God's universal rule is accomplished by God alone. God's reign encompasses both space and time.

Numbers 15:1-16 deals with the new laws concerning the grain offering and drink offering accompaining animal sacrifices. The text is the response of God to the rebellion of Israelites in Numbers 13 and 14. On the other hand, it prepares and interprets the tragic incident of rebellion casued by Korah and his company(Numbers 16). Numbers 13 is the unfaithful report given by the representatives of the 12 tribes of Israel after spying out the land of Cannan. Numbers 14 is the narratives of Israel’s resentment toward God who led them into the wilderness and God’s judgement against them. But it also shows the arrogance of Israelites as they went up to occupy the land of Canaan again. Later priestly editors emphasized the failure of Israel at the conquest of Canann in Numbers 13-14 and tried to prepare the treason by Korah while at the same time asking its readers to question why Israel failed. The editor attempts to provide the answer in Numbers 15 and 16. Namely, Israel’s future depends on their observance of sacrficial laws(the grain offering, the drink offering, the offering by fire, the free-will offering) which God had instructed them to observe. Priestly writer implies that Israel was put to the judgement for their disobedience in the wilderness but their obedience in the land of Canaan will guarantee hope. Therefore, the text shows that the sacrificial laws to YHWH is the regulations of life. The text puts an emphasis on the importance of Israel’s constant faith in God’s plan to give the land of Canaan to them. Numbers 15:2, “...When you enter the land where you are to live, which I am giving you” presupposes the nature Israel’s sins that were committed in the past. At the same time, through God’s requesting them again to obeserve God’s laws, the observance of the laws is confirmed as the only condition to inherit the land of Canaan. Therefore, the core message of the text is that the natives and the foreigners(rGE) must equally observe the sacrificial laws. And together with the foreigners sojourning in the land of Canaan, Israelites must offer the fruits, wine and oil produced in that land to YHWH.

This study suggests that Genesis 22 should be read from the perspective of the Abrahamic family narrative (Gen. 11:10-25:18). This chapter is divided into two parts (vv. 1-19 and vv. 20-24). Most readers have read the first part as “The Test of God”, “The Faith of Abraham”, and “The Sacrifice of Isaac.” Despite being a test of God, however, the development of the story of having to dedicate a son obtained in old age by the covenant is difficult to interpret from an ethical and an moral point of view. Above all, the way it proceeds in the absence of Abraham's wife, Sarah, raises curiosity right up to the end of the first part. In order to solve this structurally, the literary position of Genesis 22 in the Abrahamic family narrative can be understood as a chiastic pattern (ABCDEE′D′C′B′A′) or mirror imaging according to five themes (genealogy-selection-protection-selection-genealogy). Genesis 22 cannot be read separately from first part (vv. 1-19) and the second part (vv. 20-24). While the first part is centered on Abraham’s faith and Isaac’s sacrifice, the second part heralds the dawn of the next generation of patriarchs through the brith of Rebekah. When this chapter is re-read according to the storytelling technique, it can be seen as the composition of “Abraham and Isaac’s burnt offering and Nahor and Rebekah’s genealogical narrative.” In particular, the beginning (requiring life), the crisis (the urgency of life), and the ending (being givin life) have a common denominator under the theme of “life”, and the first and last parts show the appearance of the inclusio. Genesis 22, therefore, occupies a prelude to the Primary Narrative (Genesis~2Kings) as a precursor to the end of the first generation in the patriarchal narrative of Genesis to the next, and as a mata-narrative of the rise and fall of Israel in the Old Testament.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the composition and message of Ezekiel 8-19 from the perspective of the people's case and Yahweh's answer. To this end, Ezekiel 8-19 was divided into four paragraphs (Ezekiel 8-11; 12-14; 15-17; 18-19), and the content, structure, and expression of each paragraph were analyzed. Looking at the structure and message of Ezekiel 8-19, all the paragraphs place the questions (complaints and doubts) related to the people where necessary, and they take the structure of Yahweh answering these questions. However, Yahweh's answer is given in the form of a long message of judgment and a short message of restoration. In particular, the answer that was not fully answered in the former is supplemented in the latter. The pairing of the judgment and restoration messages constitutes Yahweh's answer to the people's questions. In this respect, the message of restoration shown in Ezekiel 8-19 can be seen as original, not added later. Looking at each paragraph in detail, Ezekiel 8-11 answers the complaints of the people ("The Lord has not seen us, and the Lord has forsaken this land") using the vision and Jerusalem judgment motif. The message of judgment highlights the sins of the people who committed abominable acts, and the message of restoration highlights Yahweh's love and concern for the people. Ezekiel 12-14 uses symbolic actions and apocalyptic motifs to answer the people's doubts ("What about your proverb, the days are delayed and all visions will pass away"), and Ezekiel 15-17 uses parables and covenant-breaking motifs to answer a rhetorical question ("Son of man, what is the vine better than all trees ... it is only fuel to be thrown into the fire"), and Ezekiel 18-19 uses Lamentations and the righteous-wicked motif to answer the doubts of the people (“The way of the Lord is not fair”). However, unusually, all the messages of restoration mentioned in the last three paragraphs highlight Yahweh's love and interest. The answer is that Yahweh is not indifferent to the people. Yahweh's answer to the complaints of the people mentioned in the first paragraph continues. In this respect, the message of Ezekiel 8-19 can be seen as Yahweh's answer to the complaints of the people.

The purpose of this study is to utilize Algirdas J. Greimas’ "semiotic model" as a research methodology, and to analyze and demonstrate religious and archetypal deep structure by comparing Abraham’s offering of Isaac(Gen. 22:1-19) in the book of Genesis with the folk-tale of Son-Soon Mae-A, which is similar in its literary structure and contents to Genesis 22. The story of human sacrifice is based on the actual practice of human sacrifice and is widely passed down not only in the Old Testament, but also in Korea, Japan, China, Europe, and other countries. The worldview behind human sacrifices has its original essence in believing that sacrifices become the source of existence through death and promote the return to the primitive state of chaos. It is to acquire and continue its existence in the primitive chaos state among the interactions of “chaos” and “order” in the beginning. The story of human sacrifice fundamentally has its meaning and function in the circulation and promotion of existence, even if various “modifications” exist. However, the mythical archetypes derived from the custom of human sacrifice changed over time toward the act of respecting human life and replacing it with other offerings. In Genesis 22, a “ram” replaces Isaac, and a “stone bell” in the folk-tale of Son-Soon Mae-A serves, in a modified form, as a replacement for Son-Soon’s child. In Genesis 22 and the folk-tale of Son-Soon Mae-A, the interaction between "sacrifice" and "rescue" constitutes a deep structure of meaning system. In both stories, sacrifice to kill children is an important motif, but as a result, the child to be sacrificed is not sacrificed, and the protagonist’s faith and filial piety stop the sacrifice, highlighting ethical issues.

This essay reads the Book of Hosea with keywords such as gender fluidity, gender reversal, the construction of femininity and masculinity, stigma and stigma effects, overflowing love, healing and salvation beyond stigma, shame, and wounds. In particular, we read the book from a queer-feminist perspective, focusing on three topics as below. First, in the metaphors of Hosea we observe that all characters, including Hosea, Yahweh, Gomer, and Israel, are fluid in gender norms and roles of masculinity and femininity. Yahweh and Israel in particular are often described in gender reversal metaphors for men and women. Hosea and Gormer are described as violating manhood and womanhood, respectively. This essay uses anthropologists’ researches and queer criticism to demonstrate that characters violate the norms of masculinity and femininity and show broad gender expressions. Second, we interpret the characters in fresh ways by connecting sociologists’ discussions on stigma with construction of masculinity and femininity. Gomer is branded “promiscuous” because she pursues sexual and economic autonomy. Pointing out that the brand is a profile that patriarchal culture puts on women, we observe that behind this stigma there are not only the stigma on male characters as "unmanly men," but also the stigma effect on them. Third, this essay argues that the metaphors of gender fluidity and gender reversal function as media of healing and salvation messages to overcome stigma, shame, and wounds in the Book of Hosea. Yahweh’s images move from a husband in the beginning of the Book to the images of women such as mother, female bear and lioness in the later part of the Book and head to the climax of proclaiming the message of salvation (Chapter 14). We see that Yahweh, who loves more than the disobedient Israel, has overflowing love that willingly takes shame and stigma. In fact, this overflowing love is actually characteristics of all of the main characters and a key message of the Book of Hosea. As such, Hosea’s metaphors and messages proclaim the love and healing of an expansive and inclusive God beyond the norms and heteronormativity of who to love and how much to love.