Contextual Reflection. Given this paper’s argument up to this point, Kim’s reception of םרח in Deuteronomic texts is not considered within the aspect of its ancient Near Eastern relationship, the context of the Deuteronomistic literature, and multiple layers of conquest narratives. This way of thinking, however, has been very popular in the Korean 140 Xxx, “The Bible and War,” 55ff. Given broad and detailed research, which is mentioned and proposed in the previous sections in this paper, one should acknowledge that Kim’s premise and argument is based on incorrect and insufficient information about the exact context of biblical םרח. 141 Xxx, “The Bible and War,” 60ff. Xxx reveals his misunderstanding about the New Testament verses. Church since the early 1970s. After 2006, the first nuclear weapon testing in North Korea, this way of interpretation has generally remained, accusing the North Korean government and their insane nuclear policies. Still, many Christians are exposed to these kinds of sermons every Sunday, and moreover, they are willing to show their agreement with this way of reception of the theme of םרח. This case reflects a very specific situation in South Korea. At some points, it shares similarities with the error of Xxxxxx Xxxxxx: using force to conquer the adversary, the Amalekites or the heretics, reading the ḥēremic texts literally.142 The South Korean context, however, is overtly different from the context of colonialism in America or Australia. First, the conflicts are not finished yet; and second, the power balance and tension between the North and the South is very taut. Interpreting םרח, like Xxx, in the South Korean context, will not stop at just “justification” of conquest, but will even lead to international combats and nuclear devastation, causing not only agony for the conquered people, but also suffering worldwide. For this case, the Korean Church must be more responsible in their interpretation of the biblical םרח. If Korean Christians are viewing the North Korean people as the Canaanites who deserve to be conquered in times of conflicts and while preparing for actual warfare based on the םרח text and the conquest narratives, the consequence of this naïve interpretation may be irrevocable. Bearing on this first case, this paper proceeds to the second example of םרח in the Korean war context: viewing the םרח texts and conquest narratives as a source of Korean military tactics. 142 See § V. B. 1.
Contextual Reflection. In the history of reception of םרח, Kang’s subject—tactical lessons from the conquest narrative—is a very distinctive topic solely belonging to the South Korean context. Now, this work carefully suggests the reason why a social demand for Kang’s interpretation from the Korean Army has emerged. First, since the Armistice between the North and South has been very long, the situation seems like the end of the war, not a ceasefire. Currently, soldiers belonging to the Korean Army are increasing, and the headquarters and government are ceaselessly finding ways to keep tension in the system 146 Kang, “The Military Leader and Leadership in the Old Testament,” 125, 126, 175, 176. 147 Kang, “The Military Leader and Leadership in the Old Testament,” 144–150. As I mentioned, Kang is one of the pioneers who suggested a historical-critical, archeological, contextual reading of םרח (See n. 35). 148 Kang, “The Military Leader and Leadership in the Old Testament,” 154–155. and to develop personal ability and commanders’ leadership. Second, in this situation, the major religious associations in the army, such as Military Evangelical Association of Korea, requires a series of leadership education programs for Christian soldiers and commanders.149 Kang’s interpretation of םרח and the conquest narratives in his article merged the concept of war in the Christian Bible and the need for a necessary interpretation for those who are working in the army. It generated a very specific and integrated form of reception: tactical usages of ḥēremic texts. Up to this point, this thesis has carefully argued against literal interpretations and simplistic reception of םרח and the conquest narratives. Through listening to the multifaceted voices of reception history of םרח, this work calls attention to the direct approach to םרח without a concern for the ancient Near Eastern parallels, the religious and reforming feature of the Deuteronomistic literature, some differences between the commandments in Deuteronomy 7 and 20, and its application in the following conquest narratives, and also the important archeological discoveries of the 20th century. Both its problematic outward look and further multilayered aspects of the text itself have generated various cases of reception, sometimes, very problematic and questionable, but sometimes inspiring. In the case of Kang, however, although he acknowledged the religious aspect of the ḥēremic passages and their context, it is still problematic to direct...
Contextual Reflection. The reason this thesis introduces the “circling” Bong-Eun Sa is this “circling” ceremony conducted by Korean Christians has been considered one of the other ways of reception of םרח in the Korean Church. There are two specific structures in the ceremony revealing the color of םרח: First, according to the interviews of the circling members, the only purpose for their actions was calling for “destruction” of idolatrous building, statues, and places to the image of the divine warrior. Second, the form—not just hermeneutical speeches—of their actions was imported from the ḥēremic conquest narrative in Xxxxxx 6: the aspect of circling. In his newspaper column, Xxxxx-Xx Song claimed, “Incorrect reading of the command and practices of םרח makes this ‘circling’ possible,” and added, “This is not the fault of each individual member, but the fault of the instructions of the whole Korean Church about the passage, which causes this extreme understanding of biblical םרח.”161 The “circling” Bong-Eun Sa reveals another distinctive and problematic facet of the reception of םרח. This aspect is different from Xxx and Xxxx’x application. The action of “circling” paradoxically shows several stages of reception prevalent in the Korean Church, which is how these Korean recipients were able to understand biblical םרח in this way. First, their actions were primarily based on a popular understanding of םרח as a symbol of spiritual war. Second, according to Origen’s interpretation and Xxxxxx Xxxxxx’x review, this spiritual war indicates believer’s inner conflicts, and its purpose is “to unite the believer of Xxxxxx…the spiritual aspect was the key to the 161 See scholar’s columns in major Christian Newspapers which were written by Xxxxxxx Xxx and Byongju Song. xxxx://xxx.xxxxxxxx.xx/news/articleView.html?idxno=2193; xxxx://xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xx.xx/news/243180 Christian life.”162 Their actions, however, ignored what “spiritual war—in believers’ inside” means exactly in the reception history of םרח. Third, the members of the “circling” misunderstood the social and religious aspects of what the historical contexts of םרח carefully deliver: Josiah’s reformation, using the ANE war concept of םרח to reform and unite the community, reestablishing pious Yahwism as a tool of unification against inner religious corruptions and impending Neo-Assyrian threats. They appropriated “religious impurity” in ancient Israel into today’s context without concern for any biblical contexts and interpretat...
Contextual Reflection. One of the most distinctive cultures of the Korean Church is the phenomena of “Megachurch.”167 Onnuri Church, where the Xxx. Xxx is serving, is also one of the biggest megachurches in South Korea. Each megachurch usually has more than five thousand church members and offers “24/7/365” services, including: official worship, early morning prayer meeting (usually at 5 A.M.), Bible study sessions, volunteer activities in the local area and worldwide, supporting missionaries, and numerous pastoral counseling and pastoral visitations. There has been much research about why a lot of megachurches have developed in South Korea, and the answers are diverse: the collectivistic culture of Korean people, rapid growth of Protestant Christianity and the quantity of the church within a short period, favoritism of Korean people toward systematized and franchised “brand,” or geographical aspect; over 30% of people live in 165 Cho, “Distinguish the Object of Battle.” 166 Cf., Origen, Homilies on Xxxxxx, 34; Xxxxxx, Violence in Scripture, 101–102. 167 A “Megachurch” in South Korea is a protestant church which has more than 1,000 attendees in Sunday services. Over 40 to 50 percent of Korean Christians (about three million laypeople) are attending megachurches. The biggest, Yoido Full Gospel Church, announced they have 780,000 in attendance, including “sub-chapels.” These wealthy and powerful megachurches have even established official franchised churches. one city, Seoul. Cho’s interpretation and reception of םרח should be understood in this cultural background. For Cho, the purpose of his comment about removing “unnecessary and superfluous elements within our ministry and church system,”168 was to call large and systematized churches to a self-examination process. It can also appeal to religious reformation in the Korean Church community. In recent decades, the Korean Church— not only megachurches, but also mid-size churches—has suffered from financial corruption, sexual intemperance, and privatization of church. This corruption of the largest religious community, which is supposed to be separated from secular desires, has generated huge public resentment. Cho’s concern reflects this socio-religious aspect in South Korea. Given the reformation of Xxxx Xxxxxxxx and Xxxxxx, who solely sought to build and reform the community by understanding and applying םרח to resist both inner religious corruption of idolatry and outer threats from the Neo-Assyrian Empire, Cho’s reception in ...
