Heaven Being Torn Open

As Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. (1:10)

According to the report in Mark's Gospel, there were three special happenings at the moment Jesus got baptized. First, heaven was torn open. Second, the Holy Spirit descended like a dove. The third, there was some hearings from heaven. Today's story is about the first happening.

It is said that heaven was torn open at that moment when Jesus was emerging out of the water after being soaked up. How on the earth was heaven divided? Is it possible for heaven to be torn open? When we could see the rays of the sun through the thick clouds, heaven looks like opening up, but the writer of Mark's Gospel did not seem to mean that kind of physical phenomenon. If you want to understand the expression of heaven being open, you should know first what heaven meant to the people in ancient times. According to the creation myth, on the second day God created heaven with dividing water from water. The gap between waters is a celestial sphere, that is heaven. If we follow this logic, before heaven was created, this world was full of water, and beyond heaven still water exists over there. In Noah's Big Flood, all the windows of heaven opened and water poured down through them. To the ancient people, heaven was such an unaccountable world that they could not help writing like that way.

The people in the New Testament age understood heaven as a hiding place of life. So they thought it was natural for God to be in heaven, and for Jesus to ascend to heaven. Before their eye the mystery of life was in accordance with the unreachable mystery of heaven. But today to the people who are boasting of very advanced biology and physics this kind of thoughts sounds very silly. However, that is not true. We are never more advanced than those. But rather in a sense that they relied themselves on mystery of life, they could be much more advanced spiritual people. Today our lives, destroying the mystery of life, are only being focused on the information of life, not looking at the mystery of life. Is it possible for us to enrich our lives in this way?

The description that heaven was being torn open when he came out of the water means that Jesus is the core of life. It does possibly mean that the mystery of life is opening up by Jesus. Every incident happened to Jesus mean heaven being torn open literally just like that expression. We get experiences of heaven being open through Jesus and put our fate on that. Heaven being open should happen right now at this moment in our daily lives. It means those life-opening experiences.

Lord, you are the way, the truth and the life. Through you I believe I got a life. Amen.

The Baptism of Jesus

At that time Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. (1:9)

The four Gospels are telling Jesus' baptism in a little different nuance. The Book of Mark reports very simply and directly that Jesus was baptized by John. At that time people might think this sounds a little strange. How could it be possible that the Messiah, Jesus Christ, got baptized by Baptist John? Maybe because of that problem, Matthew is telling this situation through John's mouth like this: "But John tried to deter him, saying, 'I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?'"(Matt. 3:14). The writer of the Book of Luke reports only the fact that Jesus got baptized, with omitting the story of 'John' in Mark's Gospel as well as of an excusatory exposition in Matthew's Gospel.

That question why Jesus got baptism is still valid these days. Why did Jesus, who is a sinless person and the Christ for salvation of mankind, get baptism, which means getting forgiveness through confession of sins? (Mark 1:4) It is possible for us to analyze this as follows:

First, Jesus might see the possibility of the light of salvation through John the Baptist like other people at that time. Since the Books of Gospels do not pay attention to the actual relationship between Jesus and Baptist John, we cannot get the precise information about it through the books of Gospel, but somewhat in a practical manner we could say like this: Jesus might consider John's baptism as a renewing power for the people.

Second, Jesus might not be sure of his character as a Messiah. It is strange for him to get baptism from John if he was confident of being a Messiah. It is so hard to figure out from when Jesus starts to embody the idea of being a Messiah. It is not right to insist that he knew it from the time he was a child. Because Christian faith regards Jesus as God himself, it might sound to be blasphemous to say like Jesus' realization of being a Messiah, but without damaging the reality of Christian faith we should keep on asking this kind of questions.

Third, he might get baptism in the sense of being humble down to the human level. His consistency of humbling down showed in the fact that he came down from heaven to the earth as well as that he's been living an ordinary life like other people. On any moment Jesus was not in prestigious state of mind. It was so peculiar that many pious people thought Jesus actions to be very ridiculous. His getting along with the sinners and enjoying wines, there can be nothing wrong with his baptism like other people.

The essence of the incident of Jesus' baptism is summarized that he is historically a real person. A real person who has blood and flesh like us standing on foot so that he needed to get baptism of repentance. Christianity never doubts Jesus' humanity like this in any moment, and it showed such resolute attitudes towards the theory of docetism as heresy, that it tried to scrape of that theory.

Even today we should think the history of Christianity to be very precious. We are the people who were debt practically to the early Christians' faith, their church leaders, as well as to the seniors of faith who have been working through 2000 years of age. Without their heritage of faith, it is impossible for us to have faith today. It could be a harsh nonsense for modern Christianity to give emphasis just on daily spiritual experiences, without knowing theology, which could be history of Christianity, as well as Christian spirituality.

Oh, God. We like to realize Jesus is the foundation of life, who got baptized in the river Jordan, even though he is the sovereignty of the baptism.

The rich and the kingdom of God (3)

The rich and the kingdom of God (3)

It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. (Mark 10:25)

The epigram, ‘A camel and the eye of a needle’ was a proverb of those days. Literally it was a sort of hyperbole. If we read this sentence literally, it gives a nuance that it is impossible for the rich to enter the kingdom of God. Could it be true? Is the rich surely not able to enter the kingdom of God?

We cannot deal with such matter in full-scale in a short meditation. Firstly such epigram does have a meaning on the condition to premise special situation of those days. It can be a word to solace the poor people or the word was given as many problems had happened due to the goods. For your reference, it is not advisable to apply the epigram of the Bible in our practical life without considering the actual context.

The word, ‘it is so hard for the rich to enter the kingdom of God’ is connected to Jesus teaching on the Mountainside in Matthew chapter 5 which says “Blessed are the poor in spirit!” Though these two words seem to have overstated but basically it is right. Let us once put aside the matter of richness and think of the teaching on the Mountainside about the poor. When you understand it, the teaching about the rich will be understood naturally.

Even today as it was so in the ancient society, it is very difficult for the poor to escape from their destiny. The legacy of the forefather’s poverty has been handed down to their descendants. Such people give up the hope for this world and pursue another world fervently. I mean such life attitude is blessed. On the contrary, the rich has a lingering regret for this world. Such people cannot pursue the kingdom of God for they have to give up their affection for the world. Ultimately they are cursed.

I hope it is clear to you now. The destiny of those who put their security matter on the goods of the world cannot but lands in futility. It is because the things in this world will be eventually disappeared. Please do not misunderstand. I do not mean the nothingness and futility of life in this world itself. The central point is the question of where our souls will harbor.

The rich and the kingdom of God (2)

The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, "Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! (Mark 10:24)

The disciples were amazed at Jesus’ teaching that the rich were so hard to enter the kingdom of God. Was they shocked because of the fact that they also were not exceptional from the possession oriented life. They might not reach to such understanding. They might be perplexed before his teaching that was totally different from their traditional viewpoint.

For the Jews, to be a rich means to be blessed by God. The history of patriarch from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob till Joseph were consistent to such accumulation of wealth. The descendants also were the blessing of God. It includes a long life without any sickness. On the contrary, poverty is God’s discipline. A handicap and an incurable disease are also the result of sin.

Today Korean church might be captured by the composition of “Jesus success, unbelief failure”. They are worshipping success and extremely are afraid of failure. We cannot blame such attitude for it is human nature. The problem is that it is twisted as the centre of faith because church incites it candidly.

The prophet of the Old Testament delivered totally different message. They focused on the message of justice and peace rather than material blessing. At this point, the Old Testament is a historical struggle between a king’s political and economic ideology leaded by priest and prophesy divine message of prophet. If the disciples’, the common public of Israel, idea were closed to the thought of the former but Jesus was the latter.

A different world viewpoint cannot but crash. Including the Old and New Testament 2000 years of Christian history also is such crashing history. When such crash reveals as religion it is an experience of ‘wonder’ and as non-religious then it could be anger. Fortunately, the disciples’ experience was the former.

The rich and the kingdom of God (1)

Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!" (Mark 10:23)

After returning of the rich man who came to Jesus with a question about eternal life Jesus now was teaching to his disciples about the relationship between the goods and the kingdom of God. He taught the difficulty of the rich to enter the kingdom of God

Here how much the size of the goods could be? There are four family members with 24 square meters apartment while three members with 50 square meters apartment. The latter has more goods comparatively. However, the family with 50 square meters apartment has lesser goods compare to the man with a condominium and a golf membership. The family with 24 square meters has more goods compares to the family with rent house in basement or top floor. For we have difficulty to confirm who is ‘the rich’ it is a little dangerous to generalize simply ‘the rich’.

However, if we follow our common sense there would be a certain degree. It would be not beyond the limit that others would blame. Then would it be the middle class of that society? Or is a little under the middle class? Even the same middle class the standard of Korea and Indonesian are totally different.

We have to see the above saying as rather than the matter of much or less of possession but the warning for possession oriented life. Luke’s gospel delivers us the teaching of the Lord following. “You cannot serve both God and Money." (Luke 16:13b) If we connectively think this teaching and the teaching the above, the above teaching clearly points out possession oriented nature. Possess, that is the goods is the product of human being we cannot reach to eternal life, the life of God. It is the same just as possession and existence are different.

Possession and worry

At this the man's face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth. (Mark 10:22)

Hearing Jesus’ command to give up his goods and follow him, the rich man went away sadly, because he had great wealth. To slightly change the content of the story, if a man with a little wealth hears the same command of Jesus would he follow him with a joyful heart? In my point of view, such possibility is very less. Basically there is no much difference between the difficulty faced by a rich man in renouncing his wealth and the difficulty faced by a poor man in renouncing his little wealth. Whether it is great or small man is bound to be ruled by the goods.

Gripped by materialism we perpetually worry for uncertainties of life. Most people are affected by the wave of worries of this world. Those who do not have goods worry about the uncertainty of getting it and those who have much material worry about the possibility of losing it. There is none in this world who can escape from this hook. It would be possible for man to live alone like Bubjung (the name of monk) who wrote ‘Non-possession’ but this is also impracticable for those who have a responsibility to support his family.

However, such difficulties do not merely come from the responsibility to support the family. The spirit of the age where he belongs gives a greater influence. Material deficiency is more sensed in material centered society but it is not so in the society where there is human-centered.

‘Ancient Futures: Learning from Ladakh’ is a story about the life of Ladakh people residing in a remote place of Tibet. The people in that place enjoy their lives struggling with sterile environment. Generally, they are poor. However, they do not bother much about their status of poverty. For them there is only life which is sufficient for them.

Our worries mainly originate from our mind that is engrossed in the materialistic things of the world without which, we think, we would lose our lives. Worldly people do that as they are but it is even more miserable if we Christian who absolutely depend on Jesus’ resurrection also do the same thing. The deficiency of material only renders discomfort; it has no power to destroy our lives. Do not cross the bridge until you get there.

In the desert (3)

"a voice of one calling in the desert, 'Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.'" (Mark 1:3)

The desert is not a romantic place. There are no TV, Karoake room and tennis court. There is nothing for us to entertain ourselves. It is not the place to have an alumni reunion, a mutual saving club and nor to have date with lovers. It seems a place far from enjoying life.

A spiritual desert also is never joyful place. There is no revival service where a talkative revivalist makes audiences to burst into a roar of laughter. There is no a union meeting of choir. Nor is elder raising ceremony and church offering ceremony. Nor is an open worship service, worship and praise and praying together with one voice. Is there any Christian who looks for a spiritual desert where no religious entrainment?

The answer for the critical reason that we avoid a spiritual desert is we do not satisfy with God only. So we hate to go to the desert where we have to concentrate on God only and secure the depth of life only in the relationship with God. We cannot bear even in a single day in such place. If we are required to stay in a month then we may renounce Christianity itself. In a certain point, the desert is a way of self-destruction for those who are not ready spiritually. Pannenberg said in his sermon, “The way to God’s victory’ explained the desert in Isaiah like the follows connected with a nihilism that Niche told.

Today the word ‘desert’ in our modern consciousness becomes the image of nihilism after Niche mentioning of “The desert grows: Cursed to those who hide the desert” in his book ‘Thus Spoke Zarathustra’. We cannot lightly escape without taking any step from such spiritual desert of nihilism. There should be God’s calling that Israel people had experienced in Egypt. Israel people cross over the desert following the Lord who was calling them. We have to here a calling, the very thing the prophet of today’s content realized, to prepare the way of the Lord to enable to cross over the desert. Such calling helps us enable to hold a clear direction of the way to cross over the desert. It is easy to lose its direction in the desert generally. In the case of hearing such God’s calling to indicate the way in the desert and so in case of having such particular self-effacing experience it can be a background to point out God’s is sincere.

I wonder is there such clear direction of way in the desert of nihilism. In all the territory of nihilism is the loss of sense of direction predominantly working? In fact many people appeared in history and called many people. However, they were often proved as a sort of mirage that destroyed their followers who were wondering in the desert. They also made the escaping way of their followers unknown. We all knows, either the eastern or the western, magic image which appeared in the desert of nihilism. Not only a personal but the entire nations are going to the way of destruction through such mirage. (Pannenberg, translated by Dr. Jung Yongsup, Present God, p.74)

Today most of us are living in the city quite different from the desert. Though some are living in the country the form of real life is not much different from the city. Religious life also inclines to the joy of city life style which is totally different from the desert. However, it is very strange that everything seems splendid, eventful and pensionable but the nihilism of the desert, as Niche pointed out, rules over the moderns and the modern Christians. Some of you may think your religious life is filled with a spiritual energy. If it is so practically then it is fine. If you deal with your church with such spiritual it is great good fortune. I hope such spirituality may affluent continuously.

However, if your spiritual is getting dull though you have frequent religious meeting in the church which decorated with the highest class interior then you have to think of the spiritual desert once more. The desert is that you have to meet God alone or fact to the essence of life. The final desert may come with the death but we need such practice in our usual life before the angel of death comes to call us. The practice is to meet the absolute power alone.

In the desert (2)

"a voice of one calling in the desert, 'Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.'" (Mark 1:3)

Isaiah chapter 40 that here Mark quoted is the scribe so called ‘Second Isaiah’. While he was writing this, Isaiah might be carved in his heart the messenger who was coming across the desert with the news of returning Babylon captivity. The messenger is the person who makes ‘straight paths for the Lord.’ Isaiah described the fact like this. “You who bring good tidings to Zion, go up on a high mountain. You who bring good tidings to Jerusalem, lift up your voice with a shout, lift it up, do not be afraid; say to the towns of Judah, ‘Here is your God!’" (Isaiah 40:9).

Yes. The completion of life should pass through the desert like Israel’s faith had concentrated in 40 years of desert life and the news of returning of Babylon captivity came across the desert. If we don’t have spiritually deserted life we may not reach to the spiritual life. Jesus also strived to pray and fast for 40 days in the desert right before starting his public life and even was tempted by Satan at the end. It means the desert is the right place to fight against an absolute existence.

The general character of the desert is simple. There are soil, stone, sand, cloud, sky, wind and a few sorts of plant and animal the inhabitant of the desert. In ultimate viewpoint all these contain the abundance of life too but it is too monotonous if we see it bases on the standard of human civilization. Let’s observe carefully the fact that it was possible to experience the Lord in such place, such incidents numerously happened in Israel’s history, even in Christian history not only the saints in the desert but also the flourish of the monastery movement that kept a certain distance with civilization. Why have the monastery movement and the desert spirituality kept Bible faith and the foundation of Christianity? Let’s time to think.

In my opinion, God experience is ‘being’ experience. A wondering experience before the fact that there ‘is’ something is rightly that. Why there is something not exist but exist. Why there is a man not exist but exist? Why there is only materials such as solid, liquid and air. Why a mosquito is a mosquito and a dandelion is a dandelion? Why there is ‘something’ not ‘exist’ in the middle of a mosquito and a dandelion? Such question is related to the finality of existence. There is no exact answer for this despite a numerous repeated questions and even the answer cannot but a superficial. God begins with such ultimate question. Though the Bible seems to give a simple answer practically it has gone through an ultimate questioning process. From Mount Horeb the Lord clarified himself to Moses, “I am that I am.” Martyn Luther interpreted in this way. “Ich werde sein, der ich sein werde.” (I will be the very existence to be. Or I will be the existence I want to be.) Whether interpret in this or that one thing is very clear that God is the key word of existence matter.

The ultimate existence experience more abundantly happens in the desert that simply exists. There are not much things to see. By looking a little we can see much bigger. There are not much things to possess in the desert. By possessing a little, we can possess much more abundant thing. There is not much thing to think in the desert. By thinking a little we can think much more fundamental and essential things. From simple life much more profound deepen spirituality alive. Jesus advised Martha, “You are worried and upset about many things.” The life in the desert that could be through with civilization enabled Israel people to put their heart on the Lord the root of existence. They could complete the Law by concentrating the command of the Lord only.

In some point we modern people are more unfortunate than ancient people. Though we lay aside other topics firstly we have too much things to consider surviving, or not that but to extend self. Compare to Mongolian or the nomads in Tibet we are forgetting the basis of our life by possessing too much and reproduce it a progressive scale, and a strong attachment to a competitive planning. Modern people lost their root of life and accomplished capital and entertainment instead. They deserted the desert and cultivated civilization but the root of life grow fainter and fainter

Not only such practical life we don’t have a desert in our religious life. Church also no more a desert but a market place. The church that should be a desert in the world produces more things to see, to do and events than the world. Now we have to stop church building, reduce the amount and kinds of offerings at the proper level, simplify church organization, and reduce talks and even prayer meetings. A church in the city cannot completely break up its relationship with civilization if possible a church should revive the form and sprit of monastery. The person who stay alone in the desert and see endless the horizon, the sunset glow and the Milky Way hung high in the night sky have nothing to do and to say. He only talks speechlessly with God who talks to him in the mystery of existing things.

“A church is the desert of the world.”

Nazareth in Galilee

At that time Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. (1:9)

Mark explained that Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee to the Jordan River where Baptist John was baptizing. It means that the hometown of Jesus is Nazareth in Galilee. Galilee was the whole area of northern province in Israel. The central province was Samaria, and the southern part was Judea. Judea was the province with legitimacy as descent of King David's royalty, Samaria was not acknowledged for their impurity of blood because of interracial marriages with Gentiles, and Galilee was regarded as the legitimate Judea's people but it was again discriminated because of the faraway locations from the Jerusalem, the capital city with the temple.

Throughout history of ancient kingdom, Galilee including Samaria had been having hostile relations with Judea. After King Solomon died, the kingdom was divided with the north and the south. The broad provinces including Galilee as well as Samaria were where General Jeroboam founded a country as the name of Israel, when King Solomon was still living. It was a big land and there were lots of people. It was the result of public alienations from the ruthless administration of Solomon, who was known as the king of wisdom. Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, could have a small land of southern Judea. Northern Israel was conquered by Assyria before Southern Judea was. Maybe at that time many people in Galilee and Samaria were captured as prisoners and those provinces must be colonized by Assyria. Then Samaritans got married with the Gentiles, and henceforth, they were looked down upon by other Israelites.

Galilee also was governed by Assyria but they were different from Samaria. They did not marry interracially. Probably people in Galilee might have some resistant tendency. When we see that the central government in Rome regarded Galilee as very dangerous place, we could guess how fearful their tendency could be. We didn’t know how strong their resistant tendency was, but there was a beautiful lake in Galilee. It was the Lake Galilee. Jesus declared the good news of God's kingdom near the Lake Galilee. Capernaum, Bethsaida, Gennesaret, Magdalene, and are the towns surrounding this lake. This lake might cleanse the harsh hearts of Galilee people. When Jesus was a child as well as a youth, the environmental factors in this Galilee region might give some strong impact on him. Nazareth in Galilee, being looked down with cynical criticism like "how could anything good come from there?", was the hometown of Jesus, where it had decided the fate of Jesus.

The fact that the hometown of Jesus was not Jerusalem but Nazareth in Galilee means that salvation of God have started from the unexpected place by an unexpected way. Jesus was not such a special person with any social privileges, fame, and any special achievements. In this point of view, it is necessary for us to have eyesight which could peel off the stereotyped viewpoints built upon by society. We'd better change our way of living in which we regard living in the big cities like Seoul as very worthwhile, even though there could be inevitable circumstances. Where could Nazareth in Galilee be to us today?

Lord, give us wisdom to find out our spiritual hometown. Amen.

In the desert (1)

"a voice of one calling in the desert, 'Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.'" (Mark 1:3)

Mark 1:3 is quoted from Isaiah 40:3. Of course Mark didn’t quote it literally but modified a little bit. The original version of this from Isaiah says, “A voice of one calling: ‘In the desert prepare the way for the LORD; make straight in the wilderness a highway for our God.’” Luke’s gospel added Isaiah 40:4, 5 while Mark quoted only a verse, “Every valley shall be raised up, every mountain and hill made low; the rough ground shall become level, the rugged places a plain. And the glory of the LORD will be revealed, and all mankind together will see it. For the mouth of the LORD has spoken." (Luke 3:4-6). The original of Isaiah has changed in Mark one time and much added more in Luke gospel. Why such things had happened? It is a question why we cannot get the same result from the same incident if we premise it as God’s word. The same matters will be repeated in the future again so let’s step forward by holding this question here.

‘The desert’ Mark quoted from Isaiah’s writing is the exact matching conception to the Jewish nation. There is no different view to clarify historical origin of the Jewish nation. The tales of their patriarchs like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Joseph are found after Exodus and it doesn’t have much historical weight. Precisely speaking this tales are found in retrospective way after the kingdom of David and Solomon when their national identity is firmly rooted. The incident to establish their national identity to be true to the name is Exodus, the emancipation incident escaped from Egypt Empire. They entered into totally new religious world by shifting the basis of their life from the civilization of Egypt Empire to Midian desert which remained as primitive natural status. In present-day term a religious, global ‘paradigm shift’ had happened to them.

It used to say they lived no less than 40 years in the desert. Except Joshua and Caleb (?) the people more than 20 years old at the time of Exodus all had died in the desert. It means Israel consisting of the people who were influenced by Egyptian politics, culture and order completely replaced with new generations. In the desert they were provided a necessary spirituality as the people of God and disciplined accordingly. For them the desert was everlasting spring water of spirituality.

As you know well Mount Horeb where Moses met the Lord God in flames of fire from within a bush and Mount Sinai where Moses received the Law including the Ten Commandments. Both mountains were the same place. Moses experienced the Lord at Mount Horeb, the holy place of Median through Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian and at last he could complete the Law, the essence of Israel belief. The mount of the Lord was a part of the desert. It means the desert rightly brought possible way to Moses to experience the Lord.

It may say not only the Midian desert but also the history of Israel itself would be called the desert. The destiny of a stranger thrown to the desert was rightly their history. They hold to fierce survival struggle like an orphan between the empires that had ruled Europe and Near Eastern regions. A person or nation who has to survive in the desert in reality couldn’t but show warlike attitude for they have to cross over the border of death and life every moment. The Israel’s attitude toward Palestine natives is rightly the same. As North Korea’s system seems abnormal to us Israel’s anti-Palestine policy also may be seen in abnormal.

However, the fact that Jesus came through Israel’s history that had experienced the Lord in the desert is decisively important to Christians. Precisely speaking, if there was no Israel of the desert there might be no Jesus too. Gospel comes through the Law and it cannot come without the Law. Jesus was clearly the son of Israel who received God’s word in the desert. If we remove the God of the desert we cannot fully understand Jesus and the salvation incident through him.

Possession and Non-possession

Jesus looked at him and loved him. "One thing you lack," he said. "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." (Mark 10:21)

Jesus told to the rich man who declared he had kept the commandments since he was a boy, “One thing lack.” He might be so much perplexed for Jesus’ answer because he had lived the most exemplary typical life style of Judea society. According to the Lord’s saying, what he lacked to possess eternal life was his complete surrender for his possession.

Do you agree with Jesus’ saying that the complete surrender for our possession is the way to eternal life? I explained earlier that Jesus command to the rich man to surrender his possession plainly revealed his false consciousness. I wonder a little my explanation could be sounded to justify a possession oriented life. There might be a possibility of misunderstanding that Pastor Jung is justifying ‘the theory of clean rich’ that a pastor called Kim asserted.

It is not so. The assertion to be a clean rich man is wrong logically and religiously. Rather than affluent possession, a force has to be a clean rich man is really matter. Such force nothing but isolates in both, the possessed and the non-possessed from the center of life.

On the contrary, an assertion that Christian has to be a poor also cannot get unconditional assent. If we think seriously about solidarity with our neighbor and future of the earth, better to live a poor but honest life even the rich man but we cannot make it absolute. There are many reasons here but one of them is a difficulty to establish a universal and an objective standard of a clean wealth. Compare to the public life of North Korea, South Korean publics all are living in luxury.

An Exemplary man

"Teacher," he declared, "all these I have kept since I was a boy." (Mark 10:20)

The Ten Commandments that Jesus dealt with was a too easy task for the rich man. He confidently declared, “All these I have kept since I was a boy.” It was not a lie. To give a slight exaggeration, from his mother’s womb he was a sincere Christian for he was very sincere with God’s word and fervent in prayers. Perhaps he did not eat his meal unless he thoroughly memorized the Ten Commandments affixed in front of the dining table.

Those who are accustomed to strict religious life from their childhood have greater possibility of staying within the norms of the church without being drifted away. The hymns singing together with Sunday school friends, the Bible verses recited in unison and various religious educational programs like Summer Bible camp and so on naturally build up the personality and psychology of an individual. Such person would be quite sensitive not only in keeping the formality of the church life but also in observing and maintaining the morality. He would suffer a great deal from guilty conscience even in an insignificant matter. Such person is praised for living an exemplary life in the sight of all.

Generally speaking, this is the best life. In any case, such kind of life cannot be castigated. However, ironically, the problem is that we cannot get eternal life with such kind of life despite its value. If you feel that eternal life is too much of an abstract term in this paragraph, to be more concrete the term eternal life can be referred to as satisfaction. In the same manner, an exemplary life cannot guarantee true satisfaction. However it does not mean that a careless and imprudent life can quench a spiritual satisfaction.

Eternal life, a true satisfaction is the gift comes from the relationship with God. If an exemplary person makes a faithful relationship with God he can experience eternal life. On the contrary, if a person does not have a faithful relationship with God, he can experience neither eternal life nor even its shadow though he may be an exemplary person recognized by everybody. In the face of such ultimate reality, the rich man’s statement, “All these I have kept since I was a boy” does not have any meaning.

Baptism with the Holy Spirit

"I baptize you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit"(1:8)

John said Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit, but actually Jesus did not. It is possible to guess his disciples might. According to the Acts, many apostles and church leaders baptized, but in Paul's letters, Apostle Paul did not baptize often except some special incidents. We cannot figure out exactly how this baptism could be one important church ceremony in early Christian community. I think that it did not occur in one instant, but through the progress of Christianity being settled down as Latin theology, the ceremony of baptism could be made systemized. As we consider the Apostle’s creed being started from the questions and answers for baptism in Roman Catholic Church, baptism must be recognized as an important ceremony from the beginning of the church.

In fact, there is no distinct separation between baptism with water and one with the Holy Spirit, regardless of all the baptism being done with water. But according to the Acts, baptism with water was a religious proof of faith in Jesus and being forgiveness of sins, and baptism with the Holy Spirit used to be usually related with speaking in a tongue. I do not have a definite answer about why they used to relate baptism with the Holy Spirit with speaking in a tongue. Probably the people in those days might understand speaking in a tongue was a typical transformation of the Holy Spirit. Paul himself had experiences of speaking in a tongue. He was known as a person who spoke in tongue more often than others. But he acknowledged speaking in a tongue in a little passive way.

If the trumpet does not sounding a clear call, who will get ready for battle? So it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air. (1 Corinthians 14:8-9) But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue.(1 Corinthians 14:19)

Of course in conclusion Paul encouraged doing prophecy and speaking in a tongue in more decent way. (1 Corinthians 14:40), but nevertheless, he did not support the idea of speaking in a tongue positively. The general nuances in chapter 14 in 1 Corinthians suggest that it is evident he has a passive attitude toward speaking in a tongue.

Let's get back to the question in the above? Why did Christians in the age of Luke who wrote the Acts regard speaking in a tongue as an important phenomenon of baptism with the Holy Spirit? The answer is in the limited Christian epistemology. I don't want to explain long. The Israelites who wandered around the wild for 40 years saw the columns of clouds and fire as God's guidance for them. It could be definitely explosion of volcano, but in their position they recognized them as appearance of God. Like this, speaking in a tongue seems to be the result of understanding faith in the early Christian community. Just like we do not regard the eruption of volcano as God's appearance today, we do not consider speaking in a tongue as baptism with the Holy Spirit either. I am telling you that we cannot accept peculiar faith experience for a certain age as universal standards for Christian truth.

Perhaps some people could refute like this. According to your logic, is there any basis to assert that Christianity is truth? Yes, there is! The point I emphasized on in the above is not that Christianity does not have any connections with truth or that the actions of God's revelation is imperfect, but that the knowledge of human beings to experience those is very limited. It is so clear that our knowledge of understanding should be self-examined thoroughly when we see Christianity kept on believing the theory of heliocentricism as a paradigm to understand universe even after Copernicus.

And then what kind of evidence could we have for baptism with the Holy Spirit? I cannot declare what could be because baptism with the Holy Spirit is the happening for God only. I could merely suggest two directions. One is about the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit. The main character of the baptism is not the person who baptize or who is baptized, but it is Triune God himself. If we consider this, the assumption that we should get another baptism, in case we were not well prepared for the baptism, must be very absurd. The other thing is about the fruits of the Holy Spirit. If we are baptized with the Holy Spirit, eventually we should bear fruits of the Holy Spirit. But those fruits we cannot make sure of, but only God could. Therefore, only in case we rely on God who is the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit, we are able to keep our position as a person being baptized with the Holy Spirit.

Lord! I pray that I could live as a person being baptized with the Holy Spirit, the spirit of life. Amen.

Baptism with Water

"I baptize you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit"(1:8)

When I was in the 8th grade, I took preview test for baptism which is not used anymore these days, and when I was a 9th grader on Christmas, I was baptized. On those days if you reach to a certain age, you could be easily baptized without any difficulties. Because there was no pastor at the church I was attending, on the baptism day there came a visiting pastor. How strange it was. How was it possible for a pastor to visit our church on such a busy time like Christmas? Probably I did not remember the exact date or the exact season of my baptism. It seems to prove that I was not prepared well for the baptism. I think I've finished preparation as memorizing the Lord's prayer, the Apostle's creed, and Ten Commandments, and studying some biblical commonsense for several questions and answers. On those days I used to go to the church for fun with my friends, and without any special motive, I was baptized randomly I think.

You don't have to get baptism again even though you had not been well-prepared. Through the church history, there was a group of rebaptism, and we cannot totally deny some of their assertions, but if we understand the true meaning of baptism, it is meaningless to talk about practical effect of baptism. Fairness of baptism could be established by who has the initiative for baptism, not by the person who is doing baptism or is being baptized. Of course the sovereignty of baptism is on triune God. I don't want to develop a deeper theological discussion of baptism in here, so let's get back to the topic of John's 'baptism with water'.

John explains he baptized with water. As a matter of a fact, baptism would be done with water anywhere. The reason why John describes baptism with water is because that it should differentiate from Jesus' baptism with the Holy Spirit. When we consider that baptism basically means to emerge from water as a new person, John's baptism with water could mean a change of personality. In more precise view, baptism with water could stand for that kind of personality change. Such change of both personality and ethics is the epic center of John's message.

This society asks for that kind of change to the religion. Religious people are asked to be respected from others in this world. If we understand the experience of God could not be separated from reality itself, the change of personality is one of the most important factors for Christian faith. If Korean Christians could show their changed moral and ethical personality, the viewpoint of this world towards the church might be much different. This kind of change for personality and ethics does not stay only in a personal level, but it should include a systematic social change too. The church should fight for realization of justice and peace in the society. Liberation theology, Minjung(the people) theology, Feminist Theology and etc could be some kinds of devotional religious attitudes towards change of the world, which could be more decent with humanity. Personal changes emphasized by conservative position as well as social changes by liberal position could be regarded as baptism with water. Both of them could be understood like that because of their viewpoints of change of the way of living.

However, Christian faith is not satisfied with the change of living pattern on personal or social level. It requests more fundamental change. Johns' baptism with water is very real and desperate, but it is still provisional and limited because John could see that clearly, he confessed that he could baptize only with water. Baptism with water should be made a room for baptism with the Holy Spirit, definitely being in a different level in quality, as soon as possible.

Lord, are we lingering on the stage of John's baptism with water? Or maybe aren't we the people even not being baptized with water? Please help us to live in the deep inside of core baptism. Amen.

A messenger of the Lord

It is written in Isaiah the prophet: "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way"-- (Mark 1:2)

If Mark’s gospel was a degree thesis it might be disqualified for he quoted a scribe of Malachi while he was quoting Isaiah’s one. Verse 2 that Mark quoted as the writing of Isaiah the Prophet is written in Malachi 3:1. The writing of Isaiah appeared in verse 3. It is not clear whether he was misunderstanding or he might think to distinguish two authors vexatious. Even today we also stop to discuss about this matter and jump into the quoted word. The reason I’m doing like this is that there often appears unconscious or intentional mistake in the Bible and we already have made a conclusion about such matter when we pointed out some manuscript in which ‘son of God’ was missing.

Malachi 3:1 Mark quoted says, God will send his ‘messenger’. It might mean God works through a man. If I give a little stronger expression, it may mean there is no man no God’s work. However, do not misunderstand. It doesn’t mean God is depended on you when God does his work. Nor is a certain extinguished man can monopolize or substitute for God’s work. The meaning of messenger explains the relationship between God and man that necessarily should be on the process of actualizing God’s salvation activities and also explains the way of God’s working in this world.

However, the important point in this paragraph is what is the mission that God’s messenger, that is, God’s worker. If we know it we can come to know the identity and nature of workers. Malachi that Mark quoted gives us a crystal clear answer. His work is ‘to prepare the way’. We have to keep attention to the word, ‘prepare’. The one who prepare God’s salvation activity is rightly God’s messenger. He is neither the person who, of course, works God’s work directly nor substitute for God’s work. The subject of work is not man but God. It means God’s salvation activity is an exclusive incident that is possible only by God. No man or organization in this world to deal with such exclusive work. As no one blossom a dandelion flower by himself there are no one to substitute for God’s work. God does his work by himself.

There are some people who have a burning desire with a mission as if they are substituting God’s work. Some dreams an ambitious dream to be a witness of gospel till the end of the world. Even such as the instigation, “Boys, be ambitious!” rules over a pulpit of church. Of course the idea to devote one’s life for the kingdom of God denying oneself is great. Like John the Baptist who Mark kept in his mind the life to preach the message of repentance with living a poor but honest life in the wildness should be encouraged. I respect them wholeheartedly on the one hand feel shame before them on the other. However, no matter how great John the Baptist life was such life itself was not the work of the Lord. It was no more than to prepare the work of the Lord. So John the Baptist confessed he was not able to tie up the throngs of Lord’s shoes. If the churches of today recognize the fact of total helplessness in salvation incident which is the work of the Lord, much righter figure of church will be resorted. For the churches may give up their certain self-praise, self-achievement and program for church itself.

The writing of Isaiah the Prophet

It is written in Isaiah the prophet: "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way"-- (Mark 1:2)

Mark now is quoting the writing of Isaiah the Prophet. It is clearly written by Isaiah but we accept it as God’s word. Mark also might think it as God’s word. Here we face very troublesome problem. The problem is how we can think the writing of the authors of the Bible as God’s word. Is it that God tells the prophets actually? Expressing it a little more plainly, does it signify that God actually speak? Or a man though speaks actually but we accept is as God’s word for it is the truth? Is “the writing of Isaiah the Prophet’ Isaiah’s? Or of God? Let’s simplify this question. Why Isaiah’s writing is the word of God?

Looking it at level of historical fact, the Book of Isaiah was accepted as the word of God by the incident that Judaism made a decision to accept 39 documents as the cannons among the holy document of the Old Testaments in the Jamnia meeting in AD 70. Then is not Isaiah God’s word before canonize? And the documents that weren’t recognized as the Cannon are not the word of God? Such question can be applied in the New Testaments it is not only the matter of mere scholastic curiosity but also is an actual matter directly related to our faith life. It is because we believe God’s word is the only authority cited to ordain our life.

Preachers often insist that they are preaching in substitution for God’s word. Those who goes a little further they are preaching as they have heard the word of God in their prayer. The misunderstanding about God’s word occur such egregious folly. God doesn’t meet man directly. Those who see God dies. How can we see the reality of the world? It is impossible for a limited man to meet and hear directly the word his word who is the owner of the ultimate life including life and death unless and until he dies.

The Book of Isaiah is not the word as the sound or writing that God had directly given to Isaiah. He interpreted the world where he was living by looking into the spiritual depth. He interpreted the destiny of his nation which was confronted with a crisis at the sight of God who is the Creator, the king of justice and peace. We have to see that God speaks to the people in this world in this way. Those who are able to understand God’s word when God talks they are rightly a prophet. God told to Israel people through Isaiah for he had sharp spiritual ears. Mark was explaining about John the Baptist who was to prepare the way of the Lord through the very ‘Prophet Isaiah’s writing’. Mark met God’s word through Isaiah’s writing and we today are meeting with God’s word though the Gospel of Mark. God’s word reveals himself through such spiritually awaken people, that is, the Prophets. It may be rightly history of revelation and salvation. Our life is hanging on the moment of such history.

The commandments

You know the commandments: 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, do not defraud, honor your father and mother.'" (Mark 10:19)

Jesus selected a few phrases from the later part of the Ten Commandants and suggested the rich man who asked about eternal life. These are murder, adultery, stealing, false testimony, defraud and honoring his father and mother. Its order is a little different from that of the Ten Commandants. It is written in a reverse order. Jesus seemed to have suggested him the later part of the Ten Commandants in a general manner.

The first part of the commandments is about God and the later part is about man. The first four phrases deal with the vertical relationship and the later six phrase deal with the horizontal relationship. The brief summary of the commandments is ‘to love God and to love our neighbor’. It means that these are the most important structural elements in human life.

The amazing point here is whether we are able to incorporate love in the commandments. The command, do not murder, mentioned above is one of the important commandments. However many do not clearly understand that murder is a serious sin against God. The problem is that there is conventional acceptance of murder as something legal. The Jews who received the command ‘do not murder’ participated in the war. They massively murdered people irrespective of age or sex; a great number of people-young and old, men and women were murdered in Jericho and Ai. They interpreted their acts as part of God’s command. False testimony and honoring one’s father and mother were also frequently manipulated for quenching men’s greed.

In this connection, the commandments have a character of dualism. One the one hand it prohibits the society but on the other hand it cleverly rationalizes man’s selfishness. Even today, such thing happens in our society just as it did in the past. All evil activities have now been disguised as acts of legality. Today we have to deal with these commands in two ways- as a religious law and as a positive law. Firstly, we can develop the command to protect the weak in society as much as possible. Secondly, we can transcend the limit of the command with the eschatological imaginative power.

A prophet Isaiah

It is written in Isaiah the prophet: "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way"-- (Mark 1:2)

Mark quoted a prophet Isaiah’s writing as people give a footnote to their book or thesis today. Why did he so? I am not able to read Mark’s mind but probably he did it for the readers of Isaiah might know about a prophet Isaiah well.

There is no other community than prophets in Israel’s history. Of course a king gave the greatest influence directly to their life and a priest, to their religious life. It could say, a king and a priest took a higher position of power group priest criticized them from out of power. Of course a king, a priest and a prophet didn’t form such relationship all Israel’s history. According to case, prophets took a role of a schemer standing close to a king but in a general stream it is possible to give such classification.

The critical fact to classify them was in the way of the prophets’ activities. Prophets were living with ‘speech’. They poured out ‘speech’ to a king, a noble and Israel people. Those speeches are so called ‘the prophets’ that take the center of the Old Testament. Except Moses’ Pentateuch and poems all documents are the prophets. The preceding prophets that deal with Israel’s history and the latter prophets that contain speech of prophets are all the prophets’ speeches. Even Moses’ Pentateuch also basically should regard a work of prophets. Poems also are so. For the contents of Moses’ Pentateuch and Poems contain the prophets’ historical interpretation in it. I would like skip it for I am not able to give a decisive answer for such Biblical theology matters.

Among the prophets who were working in Israel’s history there were not only the prophets the name we could figure out but also there were many prophets who had worked namelessly and disappeared. The reason why their speech doesn’t exist in history might be varies. It might be their speech didn’t have much persuasion power or the level of their speech was too high to understand for people of those days. Or there might be absence of their disciples who would keep their speech as a document. Or it might be remained as an excellent scribe but could be burnt out by a king who was reluctant with the content of his document. However history has progressed and now we have prophets’ prophesy or sermon that is called mainly the latter prophets.

Prophets or foretellers insisted their speech and writing as a revelation of the Lord God. They themselves insisted like that but it might be mostly accepted by people of next age. Or such speech and writing might be natural in the ancient Israel. However, they spoke and wrote toward Israel with keeping an attitude to declare the word that the Lord had given them. By the way, their work was basically reading history, analyzing it and suggesting the alternative. To read history means rightly to interpret it and it required an inspiration. That inspiration of course came from God. So their speech was accepted as a revelation and a prophecy.

At this point, the speech of prophets again cannot but the object of criticism historically. The saying a prophecy that interpret history again is criticized by history means such activity is spiritual matter. A historical interpretation may be different from a mathematic proposition, “a sum of inner angle of a triangle is 180 degree.” Historical interpretation is rather similar to play Mozart music. For it have almost limitless layers of interpretation. As there are a musician to imitate Mozart music there were many prophets in Israel history who only imitate God’s revelation. Rather there were many to distort salvation history. Though it wasn’t related to God’s will at all they were focused by the majority. For those false prophets not only made good religious position in Israel but also smoothly dealt with the role of scratching the itching points of the crowd. Populism is even now the greatest temptation for the people of preaching God’s word to alert. Though they are praised extremely in their days their reality will be strictly revealed by history.
.
There are many to worry about Korean Christian history. They boils with rage saying why all the churches are doing like this. When we think of Jesus who drives out the merchants in the temple it is nature for us to get anger for the church that looks likes idol worshipping. However, do not hurry. There was not a single moment of absence of false prophet in human history. It is possible to make a certain new community by the spirit of revolution but once the revolution get success the leaders of that revolution rapidly changes into a false prophet with color difference only. We open experience such case in history. It doesn’t mean status quo is our alternative. I would like to say the fact that true prophecy and false prophecy are eventually evaluated by history or do not miss such hope. As we obey such stream of history, we should participate to such revolution and change movement dynamically.

Here the more decisive matter is that our prophecy, our sermon and our historical interpretation are eventually verified historically. Till that time our prophecy cannot be a decisive one. Till that time our historical interpretation also is only tentative one. We can say it rational relatively or cannot say like this but it always identify with truth. It means the standard of truth is not inside us. So for us there is no other way but open ourselves with our best in order to identify with the spirit of truth that leads history.

Prophet Isaiah was such person. Israel’s history evaluated him as a true prophet and chose him like that. We today Christians are following their evaluation and choice.

A good person

"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good--except God alone. (Mark 10:18)

Jesus’ answer to the question of the person who asked about eternal life begins with the concept of goodness. Jesus first declines the title ‘good teacher’. Jesus said, “No one is good except God alone.” I have a little wonder why Jesus said like this. Jesus is the son of God and has the oneness with God in true nature. He exists beyond what is good. He is the way, the truth and the life. He is the Messiah. Then why did he say, “No one is good except God alone.” Here I would like to simply point out two important points which support the reason of Jesus’ reply.

First, in those days Hellenism and Judaism talked about God’s goodness. The goodness indicates God’s exclusive nature. Jesus categorically divides himself from God by saying, “No one is good except God alone”. He sees God as the object to which he should address. So he called the father “Abba father”. He absolutely obeyed to that Abba father with the remarkable total obedience even to die on the cross, and by the very father he was raised from the dead after three days. A division between Jesus and God is very important in understanding the true concept of trinity. The incidence of incarnation can be realized under this condition.

Second, if we want to understand the meaning of ‘God is good’, a deeper understanding of being good is highly essential. It does not mean a mere benign or kindhearted quality. It is a divine nature. This divine attribute is quite different from that of human, a mere creature. To be the good, it demands certain cognition which is essential to earn it. It is crystal clear from our daily life. We cannot practice virtue for we do not know what is right and wrong nor do we know what result comes out our activity. The quality of being good is a rare and exclusive attribute of God.

The shoe strings

And this was his message. "After me will come one more powerful than I. the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie.( Mark 1:7)

John's confession that he was "not worthy to stoop down and untie" the thongs of sandals sounded like some idiomatic expression for the most humble down position. If you have to untie someone's shoestrings, you must bend down on your knee. And you should look at the shoes only. The bent down position with your eyes looking down could mean the extremely humbling position. John, who has lowered down himself, could become such special a person like that.

Perhaps it is one of Tolstoy's works. There is an old man who was doing shoe repairs in the half basement room. Through the window he used to look at the feet of all townspeople. It must be more real to say that he has been looking at the shoes on their feet. On Neighbor's feet and their shoes he put his mind, with an instant look at the shoes, he could figure out whose shoes they could be. One night in his dream Jesus came up to make a promise that he would come to visit next day.

I am going to stop now because you might know the rest of the story. Those ordinary people whom he met during the day were Jesus himself the story was saying. The person who used to look at the other's feet must be very humble. It was saying that Jesus came to that kind of a person. Maybe isn't it possible for us, who are losing our hearts to something else, not to recognize him?

According to the gospel of John (12:1-8), Mary, sister of Martha, poured an expensive perfume which could cost 300 denarion( a worth of year's wages), on Jesus' feet and wiped them with her hair. People could not understand this. Jesus explained like this. "'Leave her alone,' Jesus replied. 'It was intended that she should save this perfume for the day of my burial.'"(John 12:7) The gospel of Luke explains she had lived a sinful life. (Luke 7:39) People regarded her action as so strange. It looked so strange that the woman who had such bad reputation came up in public, and what was worse, she was crying and wet Jesus feet with her tears, and kissed them and poured perfume on them. But Jesus said this. “Her many sins have been forgiven--for she loved much. But he who has been forgiven little loves little.”(Luke 7:47)

One day with his imminent death Jesus washed his disciples' feet. I heard that several churches are doing the ceremony of foot washing during the lent. It might mean they want to humble down themselves to the lowest place like Jesus. Even though it could be ceremonial, through this kind of ceremony I hope that we could enrich the spirituality of humility. But I am not sure that this kind of spirituality of shoe strings could happen in reality. It might be possible to lower yourself down to the earth in words, but actually it could not be that easy like words. For example, I don't think I could live to take care of old people with dementia with leaving behind everything that I am doing right now. I don't think I could be friends with dying people like Mother Teresa. Of course I could have self-consolation by making some kind of excuse like I have urgent things to do besides this. However, it is not the level of what I have a work to do or not but the level of spirituality. This is a question that I could live humble enough for anybody not to recognize me. This kind of spirituality could not be built up in a couple of days. For the spirit of Christ control us, we should start to empty ourselves in rather slow pace. Could it be possible for our lives to be enriched simply by untying the shoestrings of others if we turn our eyes into the down, not the above, as much as possible?

Lord, I like to learn the spirituality of humility. I believe it could happen only through the Lord Jesus who came from the heaven to the earth. Amen.

The gospel (03)

The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God. (Mark 1:1)

In the previous mediation I told the interpretation of the Old Testament that understood Exodus and captivity’s return as ‘good news’ has no more effectiveness in the New Testament. I would like to excuse for may be a certain misunderstanding for this saying. It doesn’t mean to change our oppressed structure of life, mostly it is related to economy and politic, into the structure of liberty is meaningless. Today in Korea, the thing to change our social structure in order to help foreign laborers’ life without any indifference is directly related to the gospel that church should proclaim. Not only this, there are endless problem inside and outside of our country that should be overcome with our cooperative solidarity. I mean church should bring forward a problem with awakened spirituality in order to actualize justice and peace in the life of this world. At this level I have been participating for a long while with KNCC Daegu and Kyungbuk Human Rights Commission and Pastors’ meeting and I will continue this activities. It includes an ecological movement too. We have to develop the necessary actions in detail in order to keep the earth as the lasting possible planet. These also can be the universal evangelical movement on the whole level.

However, if these activities are the only and unique choice is Christian faith necessary? Such things are possible with consciousness, ethics and humanism. Christian faith neither thinks these things are meaningless nor these things can be postponed but totally depends on something beyond such things. That is no other than God. Early Christian experienced that God through Jesus Christ. So Jesus Christ was a gospel for them. Such faith tradition is continuing to us.

However, it is sorry to say we still face difficult to find out the verified answer for the relationship between the reality of gospel and Jesus Christ. It is because it can be solved with a few words but belongs to the ultimate secrets of all existence. We would ultimately wait for the hour when the secret completely reveals doing our best to understand and explain it.

Think of it why it is a secret. The first paragraph of so called ‘the eight blessings’ that show a reality of gospel a little bit is, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (Matt. 5:3) Though Luke’s gospel omits ‘spirit’ whether poor in material or spirit the teaching that such people will possess the kingdom of heaven gives us feeling of a little alienation with our real life. Our experience is just opposite to this. This world just isolates such poor people. Even then after reading such teaching if you think simply that it is just teaching of ‘empty my heart’ also not much correct. It is because Christian faith is not a religion to cultivate our heart. It will take much more complicated discussion to know why a poor can possess the kingdom of heaven. If I give a simple answer, only the poor people desire the kingdom of God where all material discrimination will be ended. Though we interpret this word with this way the reality is still in secret. At the situation of not knowing what the kingdom of God is we cannot say we know two relationships.

Now if you understand ‘the gospel about Jesus Christ’ first thing should be arranged is what ‘good news’ is. Mark began to write his gospel in order to explain it. At this point, to heed to his speaking is the top prior and necessary attitude for us who is living with Christian faith.

The gospel (02)

The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God. (Mark 1:1)

The meaning of gospel (evangelion) is blessed and good news. In the Old Testament that had written based on the history of the Jews, the best news was Exodus and return from Babylonian captivity. We can easily imagine Israel people’s suffering as minor national in Egypt where they went for their survival, and insult they had to go through in Babylonian Empire where they were captured as POW. At this point, Exodus from Egypt, return from Babylonian was the best news, that is, gospel.

In this incident we have to pay attention to two facts.
First, Egypt and Babylonian who destroyed Israelite’s life were empire. A little precisely speaking, we may call them imperialism, the attribute of empire. Imperialism is the power to excise its hegemony by limiting authority of truth to them only and Egypt and Babylonian were topical empires. Their ruler was rightly regards as a god. If anyone has eyes to see the world they are able to see what is empire and imperialism of today. Is Christianity of Korea today crying out freedom from imperialism that oppresses public’s life with such almighty power? Do we know the object that we have to fight against? Reversely, we don’t know clearly Christianity itself excises empiric hegemony. It is so that a desire to extend self endlessly is imperialism in content aspect. Seeing at the point, church that should preach gospel brining up the evil power in their inside that they should overcome.

Second, Exodus and captivity return was an act of God. The core of the story of Exodus was that God has nullified the empire’s almighty power. The reason that Egypt who already has equipped a strong battle power couldn’t but give up Israel was not because of Moses’ charisma but help of the Lord God. The reason Cyrus king of Persia was able to drive out Babylonian also caused by God’s power. God freed Israel from Babylonian by using Cyrus was Israel prophets’ historical interpretation. It means salvation begins from God. The salvation incident that God raised was gospel for them.

Because the Old Testament testified God’s involvement in Israel’s history which should survived in between empires gospel mainly related to politics, social incidents. At this paragraph we have a possibility to loss our direction. Identify gospel with political liberation is a direction error of Bible reading. Gospel can be raised politically but political liberation is not rightly gospel. The core of the Old Testament that stated Exodus and captivity return also rather God’s action than political incident itself. They experienced God in that way among severe international order.

Now the New Testament approaches gospel totally new horizon by Jesus Christ. Though the political background of the New Testament also Roman Empire the gospel of New Testament declares the utmost liberation through identification with a certain personality rather than a political liberation. Probably, the New Testament faces up to the reality of impossibility of political liberation in fundamental level. Yes. Though political liberation is so much serious it is not gospel in real meaning. If we think maximization of welfare which is the final target of politic the answer is very clear. The community in the New Testament finds out the reality of gospel in a personality, an incident and a destiny in a person called Jesus. However, question about gospel isn’t end here it but continues in this way. What is the reality of gospel? How do we think seriously?

The gospel (01)

The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God. (Mark 1:1)

There are not only the Presbyterian Church, the Methodist Church, the Holiness Church and the Baptist Church but also a denomination named ‘gospel’ in Korea. ‘The Gospel Church’ is the very denomination. It is comparatively healthy denomination with not much conservative but even not the progressive. There is a denomination which is much more closed to the word of gospel though it doesn’t put the word gospel at front. ‘The Assembly of God’ is the very denomination. I cannot remember the exact name for it has divided. However, the Assembly of God is famous for not such official name but another name so called, ‘Full Gospel Church’. The reason that the popular name ‘full gospel’ overtakes their official name is due to ‘Yoido Full Gospel Church’ while a pastor Yongki Cho is attending his pasturing work. Unknown people can misunderstand full gospel as a name of denomination. The name full gospel is funny. Is there false gospel in the world? A false gospel is not rather gospel. If it goes in this way there will be a possibility to come named ‘true full gospel church’.

When we indicate a tendency of faith we use ‘evangelism’. It seems to call the believer’s attitude as ‘evangelism’ that try to keep a certain distance with society by keeping Christianity’s tradition and recognizing evangelical work as their important mission. Though they call themselves as ‘evangelist’ practically they are conservatism or fundamentalism. We call the people’s faith attitude as ‘Neo-evangelicalism’ who has same stands with conservatism in all but comparatively has openness toward ecumenical movement. They involves in social salvation differs from conservatism who biased on individual salvation only. It doesn’t mean that they are able to carry on dialogue with a liberation theology or Minjung(Popular) theology at some level. I don’t remember clearly but they seemed to raise their voice about social justice after Lausanne international meeting in Switzerland in end of 1970.

However, it is right to divide their faith and theological tendency as conservative and progressive, fundamentalism and liberalism but it seems conceptually incorrect to arrange it by making ‘evangelism’ stand before ranks. In German, all protestant churches are called ‘evangelical church’ (evangelische Kirche) except Roman Catholic. Literally ‘evangelische Kirche’ means gospel church but practically it means protestant church. Why do they call it in this way should be studied at the church historical point. Strictly speaking, Roman Catholic churches also an evangelical church. As Mark’s gospel sees it clearly at the first verse, Christian community which regards Jesus Christ as gospel is basically evangelic church whatever their forms.

As no one can possess wind exclusively gospel is either. Gospel is not give to those who approach to Jesus’ incident conservatively neither is give to the people of progressiveness. Gospel is not the object of possession to the church that shows a certain tendency toward Jesus’ incident but God’s salvation incident of God that is raised through Jesus Christ. Practically those who want to be sincere to gospel should concentrate on the things to believe and follow it absolutely. If a conservative churches want to find out their identity from gospel they have to protect the tradition of church. If a progressive church wants to remain as an evangelical church they have to participate in present history with evangelical way. If a conservative and a progressive in Korean church extents the power of gospel showing their own special quality, there will be no more quarrel each other. When it will come? Such day surely will come? The day evangelical conservative and evangelical progressive entrust each other and work for the kingdom of God!

The gospel about Jesus Christ

The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God. (Mark 1:1)

The four gospels located at the first position of the New Testament are all about the story of Jesus. Partially there are Jesus’ birth story and an episode in his twelve years old but as a whole his public life from his leaving home, goes through Galilee, Samaria and Jerusalem where he is captured and executed on the cross is the core of these gospels. The period was one year at short and two year at long. Compare to the founders of other religion or saints not only his whole life is short but his activity period also too short. It is a shorter period of 3 years collage life in India. If Jesus lived a little longer in this world, what changes would be happened to the history of Christianity, Europe and world? If he lived in this world as long as his life was given from the heaven like the Buddha what had happened to him and this world? It was a futile imagination. However, Jesus’ story that had happened in very short period is content of the gospels.

I found the word noun ‘Gospel’(evangelion) and its verve ‘to evangelize(evangelizo)’ two times in Matthew, six times Mark and four times Luke. Mark’s gospel the shortest among the four used it mostly and the longest Matthew’s gospel rarely. John’s gospel that had written in latest strangely didn’t use it even in single. As we confirm from the conception of Logos or light and darkness, because he had received the influence of Greek philosophy greatly, did the author of John think a word ‘gospel’ in rustic? In Apostle Paul’s epistle we can find out this word many times. However, not only the fact Mark’s gospel used the word ‘gospel’ mostly (1:1, 14,15, 8:35, 10:29, 13:10) but also the author of Mark brought ‘gospel’ abruptly signifies its’ seriousness. Why did Mark plainly prescribe the storybook about Jesus as ‘gospel’, good news?

It seems Christian faith begins and ends with the fact that Jesus Christ is rightly gospel. If someone is not pleased with this fact then he has to choose other religion or live without religion. Either this or that life is the same, if we see it superficially it doesn’t have much differences between the person who accept Mark’s statement and the person not. Each people live their own given lifetime and go. I don’t have any desire at all to say something this and that about those people. They can live more elegant and nobler life than me. What life they maintain I don’t care and I accept Jesus Christ as the gospel of my life. I don’t have much room to take care of others for it is too much burden for me not only to understand the relationship between Jesus Christ and gospel but also the trial to enter into abyss of such spiritual world. Other things in this world are just references for me to live in this world. Those who have experiences to write a thesis may now an importance of references and footnotes. Despite this a thing is very clear that these are not the theme of a thesis.

However, the statement that Jesus Christ is gospel is not simple one. Firstly we have to understand the difference of the term in Jesus and Christ and look into how it has identified. And we have to look into a personality as Jesus, his work, his teaching and finally the incident that had happened to him as whole step by step. Literally too we have to think the difference between Jesus Christ’s gospel and gospel ‘about Jesus Christ. Jesus is the subject in the former and the object in the latter. Such matters will be gradually clarified and we don’t need to enter in too death today.

Do we know who Jesus is today or do we give any effort to know him? Do we know what is the world lied before us or even try to know it? Do we know my wife, my husband, my children, my mother, my father or even try to know them? Everything is placed likely dead as a still-life painting. Merely we are appreciated with these in order to cheer up our mood like housewives who laugh frolicsomely while changing their cloth. (Ladies, don’t feel bad.) We may be nothing but the people who enjoy religious game by changing Jesus’ position here and there according to our mood. Does really the word Jesus Christ is gospel live for us?

What is Power?

And this was his message: "After me will come one more powerful than I, the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie. (Mark 1:7)

Baptist John is a person to come up in the history to introduce Jesus Christ, not himself. All of his teachings and actions were toward Jesus Christ only. In today's text, he mentions the power of Jesus. He knew very well how powerless he was, but how great the power of Jesus was, being so different from his own essentially. So he confessed that in a figurative way he could not be able to untie the throngs of Jesus' sandals.

However, we could not help acknowledging how great the power of Baptist John was if we think more reasonably. Perhaps he moved around with more people than Jesus. Just like celebrity pastors these days. When we see the historical fact that Jewish leaders avoid the encounter with Baptist John in those days even though they tried to provoke a quarrel with Jesus, we could imagine how strong the authority of Baptist John could be. He was beheaded by King Herod but even the king was scared of John. Only Baptist John criticized his marriage to his brother's wife. Herod could not do anything but putting John into a prison. It was because Baptist John had total trust from the people, and what was more, King Herod might respect him deep inside of his mind. What did he mean, who had such a powerful reputation, when he was saying after him Jesus could have more power? What on earth was that power he meant?

People judge a person's power according to his achievement. If someone has power, it means he has achieved a lot. We regard someone who has a political power or has riches like that. Even the power of a pastor is judged that way. To increase the number of congregation could mean the power of a pastor. The power of competitiveness, which is the topic of these days, is a correct word to recognize the power of a person.

If we understand the power in this way, Jesus could be the most powerless person. His outward achievement was so tiny. Lots of people followed him for a while, but most of them dispersed so soon. The disciples are not much unlike them. Jesus brought up a big uproar at the temple of Jerusalem, but there was no guarantee it was being cleansed. Did he win over the dispute against the scholars of the laws? After Jesus the Laws were read in a different way? Through a historical viewpoint we cannot find out any progress for that. He did not liberate his people from Romans. He did not liberate the people from labor. At last he died on the cross powerlessly. The cross could be the extreme example of being powerless.

Now we should make it clear our notions what the idea of power is like. I am telling you that we should reconsider what is regarded as the power in this world means a real power. Real power should revive the world. The thing from the human beings has two sides all the time even though it is very big and great. It could revive and kill at the same time. Even though you achieve something, if it works as a power to revive in some area and to kill in other field, it could not be a real power. For example in the World cup for soccer, if there is a winning team, there must be a losing team. The first runner-up could mean that there must be the last. If human civilization enriched us, it could mean ecosystem was damaged. If you could not revive in a perfect condition it could not be a true power.

Do not misunderstand. I am not totally denying all the human actions for justice and peace, and all the scientific and artistic activities. We should put into action to revive life as much as we could. But we must not forget the fact that this world has immeasurable depth and width. We are the beings thrown into this unaccountable universe, not independent beings who confront this world. So in this kind of condition, we are nothing. Even we could not predict the result, it could be a nonsense for us to judge this world.

The power is the existential basis of God and it comes only from God, who created and will accomplish the world in eschatological way. In Jesus, this kind of things happened. The salvation of God has been accomplished in Jesus. How great does the power of John seem to be, it was still dependent upon the power of Jesus. We Christians are the people who rely on not our own power, but definitely on the power of God. The basic in the theory of justification is to realize how much helpless we are before the incident of salvation. Before the incident of salvation, the pastor with ten thousand congregations as well as a pastor with 10 people is powerless alike. Only Jesus is the power of God. We could taste a world of Christian spirituality, when this kind of things happens in accordance with our real life.

Oh Lord, we like to be a person who really does discriminate what real power means. Like Baptist John we like to expose the power of Jesus into this world. Have mercy on us who feel self-pity in our feeble ability. Amen.

The belt

John wore clothing made of camel's hair, with a leather belt around his waist, and he ate locusts and wild honey. (Mark 1:6)

Baptist John wore his clothing so simply. He put on the belt. Ancient Israelites generally put on the clothes with a belt. John had the simplest food enough to survive. When I was reading John's story living in the wild in the Bible, I remembered the one scene in the Old Testament. That was the ceremony on the eve when Israelites living in the region of Goshen in Egypt did. They killed the lamb and put its blood on the sides and tops of the door frames, and ate the roasted meat and the bread without yeast with the bitter herbs. Exodus chapter 12 verse 11 describes this scene like this:

"This is how you are to eat it: with your cloak tucked into your belt, your sandals on your feet and your staff in your hand. Eat it in haste; it is the LORD's Passover."

Generally speaking, on the table you are supposed to loosen your belt, take off your shoes, put down whatever you were holding on your hands, and you should eat slowly as much as possible. But at the feast of Passover, you should eat on the exactly opposite way. The reason was that they were to leave Egypt as early as possible next morning. Leaving Egypt means that the basis of life changes from the life of a slave to that of a free man. Similarly you cannot be idled at the moment as the center of your existence is about to change.

Exodus 12:11 points out to us the more important thing. The feast in haste stands for remembering the night of Passover. On that night the angels of death wandered around the whole area in Egypt. The first born of man and animal died. It was God's last punishment towards Pharaoh who stands for arrogance of human beings as well as towards the Egyptians who oppressed the minority in their country. Without exception the human beings seems to understand who he is when he faces a critical moment of survival in his existence. The angels of death just passed over the household, who put lamb's blood on the door post. That incident meant Passover. At the moment that the angels of death passed by very close, you cannot have your meal in very comfortable condition.

If you take a look at this world more calmly, we could see the angels of death still visiting us these days also. It happens to the young people, even to the children as well as to the old people. At the hospital, in the war, at the highway, at factories, or at home with domestic violence, all the various kinds of death happen wherever people is living. We just neglect because we are unwilling to face those. How hard we try not to face, we cannot avoid the angels of death coming like nightly fog.

We cannot figure out exactly what the massive death in Egypt, the tenth disaster, was. In ancient world it might not be rare to have this kind of massive death. The most fearful thing to them must be the total destruction of a village, or a nation by natural disaster, or plague. The writer of Exodus explains this as God's punishment. Do not regard this kind of explanation of history as a joke. Without realization this kind of massive death could happen to us. Many different species of living creatures on earth extinguished. One of them is dinosaur. Is it not possible for human beings also belong to this category? You may say we have civilization unlike them. Do you trust that civilization? Do you believe civilization save us from massive death? There is much possibility that human civilization could be cause of extinction of human species. In the long future, 10 billion years later, one very intellectual creature that might be different from a human being might hand in the thesis of doctoral degree that could be the topic of a cause of human species.

If you are the person who can feel a big force of death and life, you have to wear a spiritual waist belt, like Israelites 3400 years ago, who were having a feast of Passover with a waist belt, and like Baptist John who baptized 2000 years ago, with a waist belt on. For the race we are supposed to tie a waist belt, we need a waist belt for our spiritual race.

Oh Lord please help us to prepare a belt on our waist like Israelites who were having the feast of Passover on that critical moment between life and death, and Baptist John who has been living in the wild as a stranger in that dark age. Amen.

Certificate of divorce (2)

They said, "Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away." (Mark 10:4)

Why did Moses permit a man to write a certificate of divorce? Briefly it was an evil order made by Israel’s patriarchal culture. If a man makes his mind, simply write a certificate of divorce and send her away. Even Korea had a time to send his wife away based on the seven valid causes for divorce. A talkative and jealousy were of such conditions. Human view of ancient that woman, child, slave and etc are a little inferior human being compare to an adult man seemed to adapt to Moses’ certificate of divorce.

However, other view point also possible. We can divide into two. First, Moses’ certificate of divorce recognized unavoidability of divorce. There is a case husband and wife cannot live together from the very beginning and such things can happen while they are living. Because of husband and wife relationship is a special, there seems to have two sides. Despite pretty difference in two, resemble at each other with understanding is one side, and nagging each other for the lifelong even a tiny difference do not accept is the other. It will be a wise decision to separate by divorce rather than bothering each other continually.

Second, a certificate of divorce can be a safeguard to protect a woman. This also should think it setting ancient society forth as a premise. In those days a divorced had nowhere to depend on. Deuteronomy that send a woman away writing a certificate of divorce adds like this, “if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another man.” (Deut. 24:2) It legalized remarriage. A woman with a certificate of divorce is able to remarry.

The important point here is that a law has its limitation of the ages but basically it is based on life oriented character. What system of today makes human life abundant?

Regarding a historical criticism

"What did Moses command you?" he replied. (Mark 10:3)

Jesus replied to Pharisees who said something or other about divorce what was Moses’ teaching. This reply also has the same connection with Jesus’ saying of bringing a denarius Roman currency to Pharisees who questioned right or not to pay tax to Caesar. Here we have a diverging question from the main stream. Had such similar question and answer truly happened in Jesus’ public life?

Before giving reply we have to know the following fact. The gospels are not the book narrated Jesus’ public life according to the exact chronicle. The author of gospel accepted many traditions of Jesus editorially in the ‘situation of life’ of early Christian community where he belonged. The gospels are born with precise connection of two facts.

In Mark 10:1-12, writings about divorce Logion (One of the sayings of Jesus not recorded in the Gospels but supposed to have belonged to the source material from which they were compiled) and theological discussion of early Christian community are mixed. According to the study of the scholars of New Testament, verses 1-10 is related to the community’s life and verses 11,12 is related to Logion. I want to stop here for these matters require very precise historical criticism process.

Some of you may anxious about that is a historical criticism finally denying the work of the Holy Spirit? Such anxious is an excessive solicitude. I don’t say a historical criticism is everything. Though we catch hold of the realistic truth of the Bible text, the word of God doesn’t interpret of itself. It is similar case with the fact that grasping of materials in “The Last Supper”, used technique in it, the trend of times it, painter’s psychological status and etc doesn’t mean perfect interpretation of this painting. A historical criticism is the minimum foundation. Say to the medical, it is similar to take X-ray photographing. Though a doctor is so efficient he cannot deal with a cancer patient without such basic inspection. Likewise a historical criticism is an essential fact to interpret the word of God rightly.

Duplicity of question

Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" (Mark 10:2)

Some Pharisees came and asked Jesus, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” It does not make any sense when we see this particular question without pre-comprehension. It is not right at all to desert a wife. This question asked by the Pharisees indicates that there is story behind the scene.

Firstly, this question has a similar connection with their question in Mark 12:14, “Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?” Pharisees did not have any concern on the matter of paying taxes but to trap Jesus by means of this question. Going back to the time of Moses, there is a teaching in which Moses commanded to send out a wife by making a divorce certificate. It can be interpreted into two ways. Firstly, it damages the right of a woman and at the same time it gives the right of the woman’s survival through the certificate of divorce. A woman can remarry if she has a divorce certificate. However, this question was a trap. If Jesus agrees with the question of deserting a wife then he would become an immoral man otherwise he could be branded as a man who violates Moses’ authority.

‘Question’ is an entering door to truth. Those who put their heart toward truth ask ceaselessly. According to the tradition of Zen priest, they take “What is this?” as a subject of conversation. Those who open their heart toward God cannot but naturally raise questions. Why does God keep silent before evil and misfortune? What does it mean practically that God told the prophet?

Recently the Vatican issued a bull to the entire Catholic believers who do not call Jehovah in public meeting. Instead, they can call God or Lord. Why does God not have name? Such question brings us spiritual affluence while a question to trap others destroys our souls.

The eye of faith

Jesus then left that place and went into the region of Judea and across the Jordan. Again crowds of people came to him, and as was his custom, he taught them. (Mark 10:1)

According to the narration of Mark’s gospel, now after leaving Capernaum, Jesus was going down to Jerusalem. To cut short Jesus’ public life, we can say that Jesus called his disciples in Capernaum, preached the kingdom of God and went to Jerusalem where he was executed on the cross. It is generally understood that the duration of Jesus’ public life was 3 years but it is not correct. It may be 2 years at the longest estimate or a year at the shortest estimate. His public life was very short. What could he do so many things in such a short period of time? It is natural that there is no record of Jesus’ public life both in Jewish and Roman history. Nobody gave importance to his ministry.

What we Christians have the misunderstanding today is rightly directed to this point. Many think that Jesus indeed did marvelous and magnificent work in his days. It is said he healed many sick people, fed more than five thousands with five loaves and two fishes, drove out demons etc, as he stirred up the entire Israel. However, Jesus did not have time to do such work. Captured by the kingdom of God, he lived and was executed on the cross ridiculously.

It does not mean that all statements of the gospels are statements of falsehood or exaggeration. It is a matter of faith and not necessarily the realistic incidence. If a realistic statement is a dead one then a faithful statement is a living one. Meaningful things cannot always be happened with facts. Only truth can be captured by the eye of faith. The faith of Jesus’ disciples and early Christian community explored the depth and the power of salvation of Jesus but their endeavors were too insignificant and not even necessary for the Judean and Roman historians of those days.