Redaction criticism (the water baptism of Jesus)

Redaction criticism seeks to answer why the author (the evangelist) changed the source material. To do so, readers must find changed parts. For example, in the baptism of Jesus, Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source and edited it, respectively. The changes or differences in Matthew and Luke reflect their community issues or theological perspectives. In other words, Matthew and Luke are not mere collectors of the source but redactors or theologians who are concerned with their communities.

Why does Matthew explain the need for Jesus' water baptism? What is going on with this community of Matthew? What kind of theology does Matthew advocate?

There are at least two plausible concerns or questions raised by some members of the Matthean community:

1) Why does Jesus need the water baptism by John since his baptism is for the forgiveness of sins?

2) Is Jesus's authority lower than John's since he was baptized by John?

   

Jesus's explanation is simple. His baptism is necessary for fulfilling the righteousness (of God), which is a prevalent theme in Matthew, not to mention the Hebrew Bible. Baptism means a surrender to God, a new start for his public ministry, and his commitment to advocating the justice of God. Otherwise, his baptism is neither about the forgiveness of sins nor about a matter of authority or ranking.   

The long conversational style of the Matthean baptism story is consistent with the didactical style of Matthew’s Gospel, composed of plenty of teaching materials such as the Sermon on the Mount and parables of Jesus.  

When it comes to Luke, why does Luke emphasize people's presence at Jesus's baptism and prayer of Jesus? Indeed, the Gospel of Luke as a whole is imbued with this theme of the down-to-earth ministry perspective along with the importance of prayer. Why did Luke omit baptism details from Mark? It would be hard to know. Perhaps, one plausibility is that in Luke's mind, those details are considered not crucial to the gentile audiences.  

Definition of Research in Humanities

"Research means digging into subjects deep and wide, connecting them with today's world, and thinking together about the future that is yet to unfold. Good or bad, all research projects involve certain levels of ideology. What we need is not so much objectivity as responsibility." (Yung Suk Kim, PhD)

Jesus and Confucius: "Human-centered thinking"

I am amazed at the great thinkers' concise, easy-to-understand expressions of truth. I find the examples in Jesus and Confucius, who lived at different times and in different cultural contexts. Both expressed the importance of human-centeredness with chiasmus.

Jesus: "The Sabbath was made for humankind and not humankind for the Sabbath" (Mark 2:27).

Τὸ σάββατον διὰ τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐγένετο, καὶ οὐχ ὁ ἄνθρωπος διὰ τὸ σάββατον·

Confucius: "The person widens the way; it is not the way that widens the person" (Analects 14:35).

人能弘道、非道弘人

Confucius and Francis Bacon: Inductive reasoning

Analects 14:35

下學而上達。知我者、其天乎。
"Study from below and reach the top. Who knows me except for Heaven?" (trans. by Yung Suk Kim).

See also Analects 15:29

人能弘道、非道弘人
"The person widens the way; it is not the way that widens the person" (trans. by Yung Suk Kim).

Confucius's point is each person must begin with oneself, studying and reasoning from everyday life. This idea evokes Francis Bacon's empiricism and inductive reasoning.

Confucius's practical approach to justice

Analects 14:34

或曰。以德報怨、何如。子曰。何以報德 以直報怨、以德報德。

Someone said: "How is repaying resentment with virtue possible?" Confucius said: "What then will you repay virtue? Repay resentment (or harm) with justice (lit. 'straightforwardness'). Repay virtue with virtue" (trans. by Yung Suk Kim).

My comments:

Repaying harm (resentment) with justice (straightforwardness) sounds contrary to Jesus's teaching that one must love one's enemy. But Confucius's teaching is practical and necessary because wrongs must be dealt with rather than condoned. Injustices cannot go unpunished or unchecked. So, we must consider the enemy situation and the nature of love. Otherwise, we cannot use Jesus's love command of the enemy apart from the context. Some might even ask: Is loving an enemy psychologically or morally salutary? Is it possible at all?

Summary of Confucius's Thought

I found a plausible room for a new interpretation of Confucius' thoughts against the traditional one, which begins with ren (love) and yi (righteousness), followed by zhi (knowledge or wisdom) and li (propriety). This tradition derives from Mencius (4th century BCE), a great interpreter of Confucius. In my critical reading of the Analects, however, I see a different key to interpreting Confucius. That is, Confucius begins with zhi and ren at the same time (for example, see Analects 4:1, 6:23, 15:33, 17:6, and 19:6), and his point is these two elements must be balanced in human behavior, just as the mind and heart go together. Otherwise, yi (righteousness) and li (propriety) are part of zhi and ren. In Analects 6:23, knowledge is compared to water while love is to the mountain. Knowing involves dynamic flow like water, and love is calm like the mountain. Knowledge must be flexible, nourishing, and reflexive. Love must be big and enduring. Below is Ana. 6:23.

The Master said, "The wise find pleasure in water; the virtuous find pleasure in hills. The wise are active; the virtuous are tranquil. The wise are joyful; the virtuous are long-lived." (trans).

Analects 13:23

“The most profound person (lord's son, kunzi) seeks harmony, but maintains differences. The small person is aligned with others (crowds), but does not seek harmony” (Analects of Confucius 13:23, trans by Yung Suk Kim).

Key phrases from Kongzi (Analects)

Translated by Yung Suk Kim, Ph.D

Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity

Samuel DeWitt Proctor School of Theology

Virginia Union University

Analects (Ana.) 6:23: "The knowing person likes water; the humane person likes mountains. The former is advancing and exciting, and the latter is calm."

Ana. 11:12: "Chi Lu asked about serving spirits. Kongzi said: "If you cannot serve humans yet, how can you serve the spirits? The disciple dared to ask about death. The master said: "If you do not know life yet, how can you know death?"

Ana. 13:23: "The most profound person (lord's son, kunzi) seeks harmony, but maintains differences. The small person is aligned with others (crowds), but does not seek harmony."

Ana. 15:24: "Zi Gong asked: “Tell us with one word as to how we can live during our whole life?" Kongzi said, 'Isn't it reciprocity?' Do not impose on others what you do not want for yourself."

  

Three Virtues in 1 Cor 13:13

Yung Suk Kim, Ph.D.

Professor of New Testament and Early Christianity

Samuel DeWitt Proctor School of Theology

Virginia Union University

"And now faith, hope, and love remain, these three, and the greatest of these is love" (1 Cor 13:13).

What is faith? Is it simply a will to trust God? Is it some form of conviction that God exists? Is it the knowledge or confession that Jesus is the savior? Or is it holistic faithfulness that seeks to imitate Jesus? How does faith relate to hope and love?

What is hope? Is it only personal emotion or feeling about security in Christ or God? Is it only future eschatological hope completed in the future? Is it manifested in the present even dimly?

What is love? Why is it the greatest among the three? What is love's relationship with faith and hope? Is love a charity? What does it say about the love of God and the love of neighbor? Does this love include the love of the self?

Which virtue comes first? Does Christian life begin with faith? Or with hope? Or with love? Or all at the same time? Thomas Aquinas thinks love is a charity that sustains faith and hope. For him, faith is a will or knowledge in God; hope is essentially the thing of the future; charity is a driving force that one can engage in the world, embracing the love of God for others. But for me, faith, hope, and love are inseparable. Whatever we do, our actions must be consistent with these three virtues in balance. 

Reflections on Ecclesiastes (Qohelet)

 

[Courtesy of FreeBibleImages.org]

The first section of Eccl. 1:2-11 sets the tone for the entire book, which concerns the nature of human life and its meaning or purpose. The question is: How can one live in a world of contrariness and ephemerality? One of the pivotal metaphors throughout the book is "hebel" (breath or vapor). The issue is not that we are a mere breath or vapor but how we interpret it as we live in a world of nonsense-like realities. "Vanity of vanities" is not a good translation because the point is not so much on the complete futility of human life as on the short yet valuable life.

According to Qohelet (Ecclesiastes), the ideal life is not to seek the mere future or gain an immortal life elsewhere. Rather, it is in the here and now. Tomorrow is not in our hands. The world is an uncertain one (Eccl 11:1-6). Heaven and earth are fair to everyone (Matt 5:45; Dao De Jing 5: 天地不仁). Anything can happen at any time to anyone. That reality is not simply because this world is evil but because the nature of life in the world involves vulnerability and death. We are Hebel ("vapor, breath" in Eccl 1:2; 12:8). We must say: "I live short and I am breath or vapor." Of course, this reality with "hebel" does not implicate or suggest a life of living carelessly or irresponsibly. Hebel or short-lived life does not mean that our life is worthless or vain.  Rather, our short life is more valuable and precious than otherwise because we live short. So, the right attitude is to remember our death and value our time so preciously.

Focus on your valuable life to be happy, enjoy your life in a good way (Eccl 3:12), work with others (Eccl 4:7-12), and love them as you care for yourself. "I know that there is nothing better for them than to be happy and enjoy themselves as long as they live" (Eccl 3:12). You need to follow what your heart tells you, not be pressured by others (Eccl 11:9).

So, the wise person values today and now, remembering his/her eventual death (Eccl 7:2, 4). "It is better to go to the house of mourning than to go to the house of feasting" (Eccl 7:2). "The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning, but the heart of fools is in the house of mirth" (Eccl 7:4). The conclusion is we must save time (Eccl 12:1-7). The following Latin phrases make great sense: Memento mori: Remember that you die. Carpe diem: Seize the day. Amor fati: Love of fate.

Qohelet is Not a Doctrinal Book

I like Qohelet because there is no doctrine whatsoever. Qohelet is not a doctrinal book. While humans need true wisdom, there is no push for one kind of theology. Even with God-talk in the book, there is no traditional theology either. There is a deep critical reflection on humanity in a seemingly nonsensible world. People can read this book from nothing, without presuppositions about the ideal life or theology.

No wisdom or knowledge, wealth, pleasure, achievements, or social status can give true happiness to one. Life is wind, and the same fate is for the wise and fool. People come and go away, not possessing anything after they die. They will be forgotten by those who come after them.

Eccl 2:24 suggests that it is better to live simply than otherwise: "There is nothing better for mortals than to eat and drink and find enjoyment in their toil." Also, in 3:12-13: "I know that there is nothing better for them than to be happy and enjoy themselves as long as they live; moreover, it is God’s gift that all should eat and drink and take pleasure in all their toil."

People can live, honoring seasons in their lives (Eccl 3:1-8). "There is a time to be born and a time to die" (Eccl 3:2). It is so simple that humans are just like animals. They are from the dust and return to dust (Eccl 3:20).

I appreciate Qoholet's candid observation of humanity as in Eccl 3:18-22. Here we see the lowly humans compared to animals, which is nothing wrong.

3.18 I said to myself with regard to humans that God is testing them to show that they are but animals. 19 For the fate of humans and the fate of animals is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and humans have no advantage over the animals, for all is vanity. 20 All go to one place, all are from the dust, and all turn to dust again. 21 Who knows whether the human spirit goes upward and the spirit of animals goes downward to the earth? 22 So I saw that there is nothing better than that all should enjoy their work, for that is their lot; who can bring them to see what will be after them? (NRSV Updated Edition).

Season/Time (3:1--8, NRSV)

For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven:
2 a time to be born, and a time to die;
a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted;
3 a time to kill, and a time to heal;
a time to break down, and a time to build up;
4 a time to weep, and a time to laugh;
a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
5 a time to throw away stones, and a time to gather stones together;
a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
6 a time to seek, and a time to lose;
a time to keep, and a time to throw away;
7 a time to tear, and a time to sew;
a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
8 a time to love, and a time to hate;
a time for war, and a time for peace.

Eccl 3:1-8 should not be understood as fixing God's individual plan for each person. Qohelet does not talk about determinism, so to speak. Hebel (vapor/breath) presupposes all kinds of uncertainties and possibilities in our lives. That is, anything can happen to anyone at any time, be it good or bad. The life of hebel is reminiscent of the Buddhist teaching of annica, which means everything changes. Likewise, there is another similar teaching of Buddhism, which is dukkha ("all are involved in suffering"). While Buddha focuses on suffering, the sheer reality is we live a life of pain and suffering because we are hebel--which is nothing wrong. We need to accept who we are in light of Hebel. Do not bother with many things that are not going well. Rather, focus on yourself from a bigger, godly perspective and live a simple life.

Hebel
Again, the consistent theme of Qohelet is hebel. The issue is how we understand things in the world that exist and disappear, including humans. Ecclesiastes (Qohelet) talks about this. However, many misunderstand "hebel" in Eccl 1:2 and translate it as vanity. The literal meaning of the word is vapor or breath. Vapor represents something evanescent. But simply because something is short-lived or disappears eventually, that does not mean that something is useless or vanity. What is discussed in Qohelet is the sheer reality of not-permanent beings. The question is then: How should we live with this reality that seems to be vanity? The view of "you reap what you sow" in Proverbs is not upheld by Qohelet, who is thoroughly realistic in his view of the world and humanity, saying that "the same fate awaits everyone" (Eccl 9:3). See what Qohelet says in Eccl 9:2-3:

Everything is the same for everyone. The same fate awaits the righteous and the wicked, the good and the bad, the pure and the impure, those who sacrifice and those who don’t sacrifice. The good person is like the wrongdoer; the same holds for those who make solemn pledges and those who are afraid to swear. This is the sad thing about all that happens under the sun: the same fate awaits everyone. Moreover, the human heart is full of evil; people’s minds are full of madness while they are alive, and afterward they die (Common English Bible).