므낫세의 죄: 열왕기하 21장 1-18절의 문헌비평적 읽기
The Sin of Manasseh: A Literary-Critical Reading of 2 Kings 21:1-18
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
구약성서가 역사적 과정을 거쳐 형성되었다는 것과 수신자를 전제하는 전달 텍스트로서 역사적 단계마다의 최종 본문을 가지고 있다는 점으로부터 구약성서 주석은 역사적이어야 하며 그 방법적 절차로서의 문헌비평은 공시적 고찰과 통시적 분석을 상호 보완적으로 사용해야 한다. 이 논문에서는 므낫세 본문을 공시적으로 고찰하고 통시적으로 분석하여 이전의 이 본문에 대한 문헌비평적 연구 결과와 다른 결론에 도달하게 되는 과정을 보여준다.
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to explain literary criticism, one of the significant methodological tools in the historical exegesis of the Old Testament, and to illustrate its application through an analysis of 2 Kings 21:1–18. Literary criticism proceeds from the premise that the Old Testament is composed of traditional texts transmitted over an extended period of time. It further assumes that the present final form of the text contains traces indicating that the earliest form was refined and expanded in the course of its transmission. Literary criticism seeks to identify these traces, trace them back to recover the earliest form of the text, and distinguish it from later additions. It then situates these additions within their historical context, interprets the final form of the text at each stage, and elucidates the theological shifts that occurred in the process. In classical literary criticism, elements of discrepancy observable in a text—such as contradictions, repetitions, and tensions—were regarded as signs of diachronic disunity and thus served as the basis for diachronic divisions of the text. More recently, however, scholars have raised the possibility that such discrepancies may stem from the author’s tacit acquiescence or deliberate intent, thereby problematizing the relationship between lack of cohesion and textual disunity. This issue is closely related to how synchronic considerations and diachronic analysis are to be employed in literary criticism. This study, based on the intercorrective relationship between synchronic examination and diachronic analysis, analyzes 2 Kings 21:1–18 and demonstrates that, contrary to the results obtained through classical literary criticism, the majority of the passage (with the exception of vv. 8–9 and v. 15) was composed by a Deuteronomistic historian during the exilic period. It further argues that, within the Deuteronomistic History, the Manasseh narrative serves to explain the cause of the downfall of the kingdom of Judah.