구약신학에 있어서 창조의 진정한 회복: 폰 라드의 역사적 신앙고백에 대한비판적 검토를 중심으로

Abstract

In his article, “The Loss and Recovery of Creation in Old Testament Theology,” Walter Brueggemann argued that Gerhard von Rad caused the loss of creation in Old Testament theology by “marginalizing” creation in theology; however, as a “new paradigm” that takes creation as the horizon of Old Testament theological interpretation emerged, the recovery of creation took place in Old Testament theology. This paper, first, critically examines if the “new paradigm” mentioned by Brueggemann would recover creation lost by von Rad. In addition, this paper diagnoses the problems with von Rad’s argument causing the loss of creation in Old Testament theology, and suggests that only by the “biblical” discussion considering the bible as the word of the authoritative revelation of God would be the true recovery of creation in Old Testament theology. Von Rad argues that the so-called “the short historical creed”(Deu 26:5b-9; 6:20-24; Jos 24:2b-13) took the absolute position in the process of the formation of the Pentateuch, that the Creation of the world or the events of Mt. Sinai were not mentioned in “the historical Creed” but it is found in the texts written after the exilic period and that the doctrine of creation was a religious statement added to the doctrine of redemption. However, as a result of a “biblical” examination of “the short historical creed” in this paper, it is found that creation and God the Creator were implied in the biblical context of the historical creed. This means that “the historical creed” is not a summary of the history of Salvation that simply states God’s Salvation or a confession. It is confirmation that the promise of God the Creator has been fulfilled, reminding people of their exodus from Egypt and their return to Canaan. “Historical anamnesis” about this promise and fulfillment is based on creation and should be understood as an extension of the creation covenant, for God’s creation is the theological ground and starting point of his promise. Von Rad intentionally excludes the events of Mt. Sinai that hinders “a confession hypothesis” from the “historical confession of faith.” However, the biblical context of “the historical creed” reveals that the Exodus was conducted by God the Creator, who made a covenant at Mt. Sinai(esp. Deu 4:32-34). Creation is not a by-product of the history of salvation formed by a confession, but an actual event described in Genesis. The Bible says that the understanding of creation theologically precedes the understanding of salvation. The starting point of theology is the Bible’s teaching of creation, not of salvation. Genesis reveals that God is the Creator of this world from the beginning. Von Rad’s opinion that the Old Testament is a confession of divine activity in history considers the Bible as a product of human experience and knowledge, not “revelation.” The Bible is “God’s revelation” not “a confession.” The Bible’s emphasis is not on what men thought about God, but on how God let men know about Himself. The recovery of lost creation is possible through “biblical” discussion about “the historical creed,” not through the change of the paradigm that takes creation as the horizon of the Old Testament.