“I delight in love, not in sacrifice”: Hosea 6:6 and Its Rereading in the Gospel of Matthew

The first part of the article deals with four different understandings of Hosea 6:6 in the context of that entire book: (1) the repudiation of the cult as such; (2) the rejection of a particular notion of cult; (3) the priority of ethics over the cult; and (4) the symbiosis of cult and ethics, i.e. that an authentic cult interweaves ethical values and proper ritual conduct. The author concludes that the fourth interpretation best fits the message of the Book of Hosea. The second part of the article deals with the problem of the textual Vorlage which would have been used by Matthew. He seems to have quoted the Hebrew text in a way that remains faithful to his contemporary hermeneutical rule, according to which each element of a biblical parallelism was to be interpreted separately, based on the belief that every single line carried equal weight and conveyed a new truth or a new law. The Matthean rereading of Hosea 6:6, the focus of the third part, is presented from two perspectives: the synchronic and the diachronic. In the synchronic presentation, the main point of concern is the contribution of the quotes in 9:13 and 12:7 to the understanding of those Matthean pericopes. Finally, the diachronic reading deals with the Matthean use of Hosea 6:6 within the context of the Matthean community and its dialogue with the Rabbinic Judaism of that day.

Emotional preparation for the unification of Korea: Through the embracement, forgiveness and love shown in the Gospel of Matthew

The greatest wish of the Baeda l people, or South Koreans, living in the Korean Peninsula is the unification of Korea. However, even when it has been 70 years since the outbreak of the Korean War, the two Koreas that used to be one nation are still in conflict. There have been many discourses on unification over the past 70 years, but these discourses still fail to create clear rules and a framework for unification. Discourses from the perspective of biblical theology offer insight regarding the problems at stake as well as alternatives, but they do not offer perspectives on a definite solution. This article, in line with its statement on biblical theology, does not pretend to contribute to a clear-cut solution to meet the challenge of Korea’s unification. Rather, this article intends to contribute to the formation of an emotional consensus that can contribute to the unification of Korea by looking at the teachings about peace in the Gospel of Matthew. The article explores whether the notion of embracement, forgiveness and love written during the conflict between the Matthean community and Formative Judaism can be applied to help create an emotional bond between the two Koreas. The terms embracement, forgiveness and love found in the Gospel of Matthew are upheld as symbolising peace derived from opposition and conflict. Jesus taught us to overcome situations of opposition and conflict through embracement, forgiveness and love.Contribution: The purpose and contribution of this article was to discuss if the notions of embracement, forgiveness and love found in the Gospel of Matthew can be helpful for the emotional preparation of the peaceful unification of the Korean Peninsula by comparing the situations reflected in the Gospel of Matthew and that of the Korean Peninsula.

The Matthean community’s state of coexistence between Jews and Gentiles

The past century has seen various studies on the nature of Matthew’s community, and conclusions are still being debated. The study on which this article is based acknowledges the past studies, but further proposes that the nature of the Matthean community was one of coexistence. The Matthean community implied in the book of Matthew coexisted in three ways. Firstly, Jews and Gentiles coexisted within the community: the Jewish–Christian-centred community had started to accept Gentiles and became a community where Gentiles and Jews lived together. Secondly, the community was in a state where both the Jewish law and the teachings of Jesus were followed. Finally, the community tended to set both Jews and Gentiles as targets for the mission. This means that there was missionary coexistence within the community. These three main reasons are the basis for the claim that the Matthean community maintained the nature of coexistence.