바울신학의 새 관점 비판: 바울복음의 기원-칭의론과 최후의 심판론을 중심으로-
Criticism on the New Perspective of Paul Theology:Origin of Paul-Gospel Focus on justification and final judgment.
6
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study makes an attempt to review and assess some of the main tenets of the New Perspective on Paul(NPP), giving attentions to the arguments of its three significant proponents, i. e., E. P. Sanders, James Dunn, and N. T. Wright. In the introduction a short chronicle of the debate around the issues of the NPP is provided to show how it has developed and what points are in great concern for the camps of pros and cons. Then, Covenantal Nomism is critically reevaluated. Some literal evidence from Psalm of Solomon and Jubilee is appraised as examples that do not support Covenantal Nomism. Even James Dunn comments that Sanders “may have focused to closely on the covenant dimension and underplayed the nomistic dimension (covenantal nomism). Second Temple and Jewish writings may well be less consistent than Sanders argued.”Covenantal Nomism does not accurately delineate the Second Temple Judaism. Synergism would be the most evenhanded definition of it. James Dunn’s claim that Paul’s gospel of justification by faith developed in the context of gentile mission is also weighed. Galatian texts are analyzed to demonstrate that Paul’s gospel of justification by faith was not an outcome of development over an extended period of time, but a God-given message acquired through revelation of Christ. Due to the nature of the Damascus experience which was in no need of further clarification, Paul was able to go to Arabia for evangelical efforts to convert the descendants of Ishmael into the gospel. Galatians 1:23, “The one who formerly was persecuting us is now proclaiming the faith”points to the fact that the essence of Paul’s message was “the faith”indicates that the central concept of Paul’s gospel preached right three years after his Damascus experience was no other than faith. James Dunn proposes two justifications: initial justification by faith and final justification by works. He understands justification not as a legal status attributed to believers, but as a process during which believers go through actual transformation by the Holy Spirit. N. T. Wright apprehends righteousness of God as divine faithfulness to the covenant. He denies the notion of the imputation of righteousness to believers, asserting that their obedience to the covenant is the basis for the final justification. Thus, two of the proponents of the NPP, in fact, declare that final judgment of believers is in accordance with works. However, in the reformation tradition justification is clearly distinguished from sanctification. Only in catholic or Armenian tradition do these two concepts interpenetrate each other. The justification is a legal status that is given to them, yet it is also denotes a status that will be declared in the final judgment. The propitiation done through the death of Christ has an effect on all the sins committed throughout their whole life. Christian doctrines regarding the final judgment is to be differentiated from that of Judaism because Christian anthropology, which is so pessimistic, is quite different from that of Judaism. Law and works do not belong to the category of justification but of Christian ethics. At the final judgment God justifies believers free from their works because of Christ through faith and by grace.
Abstract
This study makes an attempt to review and assess some of the main tenets of the New Perspective on Paul(NPP), giving attentions to the arguments of its three significant proponents, i. e., E. P. Sanders, James Dunn, and N. T. Wright. In the introduction a short chronicle of the debate around the issues of the NPP is provided to show how it has developed and what points are in great concern for the camps of pros and cons. Then, Covenantal Nomism is critically reevaluated. Some literal evidence from Psalm of Solomon and Jubilee is appraised as examples that do not support Covenantal Nomism. Even James Dunn comments that Sanders “may have focused to closely on the covenant dimension and underplayed the nomistic dimension (covenantal nomism). Second Temple and Jewish writings may well be less consistent than Sanders argued.”Covenantal Nomism does not accurately delineate the Second Temple Judaism. Synergism would be the most evenhanded definition of it. James Dunn’s claim that Paul’s gospel of justification by faith developed in the context of gentile mission is also weighed. Galatian texts are analyzed to demonstrate that Paul’s gospel of justification by faith was not an outcome of development over an extended period of time, but a God-given message acquired through revelation of Christ. Due to the nature of the Damascus experience which was in no need of further clarification, Paul was able to go to Arabia for evangelical efforts to convert the descendants of Ishmael into the gospel. Galatians 1:23, “The one who formerly was persecuting us is now proclaiming the faith”points to the fact that the essence of Paul’s message was “the faith”indicates that the central concept of Paul’s gospel preached right three years after his Damascus experience was no other than faith. James Dunn proposes two justifications: initial justification by faith and final justification by works. He understands justification not as a legal status attributed to believers, but as a process during which believers go through actual transformation by the Holy Spirit. N. T. Wright apprehends righteousness of God as divine faithfulness to the covenant. He denies the notion of the imputation of righteousness to believers, asserting that their obedience to the covenant is the basis for the final justification. Thus, two of the proponents of the NPP, in fact, declare that final judgment of believers is in accordance with works. However, in the reformation tradition justification is clearly distinguished from sanctification. Only in catholic or Armenian tradition do these two concepts interpenetrate each other. The justification is a legal status that is given to them, yet it is also denotes a status that will be declared in the final judgment. The propitiation done through the death of Christ has an effect on all the sins committed throughout their whole life. Christian doctrines regarding the final judgment is to be differentiated from that of Judaism because Christian anthropology, which is so pessimistic, is quite different from that of Judaism. Law and works do not belong to the category of justification but of Christian ethics. At the final judgment God justifies believers free from their works because of Christ through faith and by grace.
참고문헌 (34)
- Carson, D. A., "Summaries and Conclusions, In Justification and Variegated Nomism: Volume 1 The Complexities of Second-Temple Judaism", pp.505~548 (2001), Baker
- Carson, D. A., "The Vindication of Imputation, In Justification: What's at Stake in the Current Debates", pp.46~78 (2004), IVP Academic
- Dunn, James D. G., "The New Perspective on Paul", BJRL, 65, pp.95~122 (1983)
- Dunn, James D. G., "The Parting of the Ways Between Christianity and Judaism and Their Significance for the Character of Christianity" (1991), SCM
- Dunn, James D. G., "The Theology of Paul the Apostle" (1998), T& T Clark
- Dunn, James D. G., "Beginning from Jerusalem: Christianity in the Making, vol. 2" (2009), William B. Eerdmans
- Dunn, James D. G., "If Paul Could Believe Both in Justification by Faith and Judgment According to Works, Why Should That Be a Problem for Us?, In Four Views on the Role of Works at the Final Judgment", pp.119~147 (2013), Zondervan
- Eddy, Paul Rhodes, "Justification in Contemporary Debate, In Justification: Five Views", pp.53~82 (2011), IVP Academic
- Enns, Peter, "Expansions of Scripture, In Justification and Variegated Nomism: Volume 1 The Complexities of Second-Temple Judaism", pp.73~98 (2001), Baker
- Eskola, Timo, "Theodicy and Predestination in Pauline Soteriology", pp.1998, Mohr
- Falk, Daniel, "Prayers and Psalms, In Justification and Variegated Nomism: Volume 1 The Complexities of Second-Temple Judaism", pp.7~56 (2001), Baker
- Gathercole, Simon, "Where Is the Boasting: Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul’s Response in Romans 1–5" (2002), Eerdmans
- Graf, David F., "Nabateans", Anchor Bible Dictionary, 4, pp.970~973
- Hengel, Martin, "Paul between Damascus and Antioch: The Unknown Years" (1997), SCM Press
- Horton, Michael, "Traditional Reformed View, In Justification: Five Views", pp.83~111 (2011), IVP Academic
- Laato, Timo, "Paulus und das Judentem" (1991), Ǻbo Akademi
- "Paul and Judaism: An Anthropological Approach" (1995), Scholars Press
- Lichtenberger, Hermann, "Das Tora-Verständnis im Judentum zur Zeit des Paulus: Eine Skizze,”", Paul and the Mosaic Law: The Third Durham Tübingen Research Symposium on Earliest Christianity and Judaism, pp.7~23 (2001), Eerdmanns
- McGrath, Alister E., "Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification" (1986), Cambridge University Press
- Reymond, Robert L., "바울의 생애와 신학" (2003), 크리스챤다이제스트
- Sanders, E. P., "Paul and Palestinian Judaism" (1977), Fortress
- Schreiner, Thomas R., "바울과 율법" (1997), 기독교문서선교회
- Seifrid, Mark A., "Justification by Faith: The Origin and Development of a Central Pauline Theme" (1992), Brill
- Silva, Moisés, "The Law and Christianity: Dunn’s New Synthesis", WTJ, 53, pp.339~353 (1991)
- Stendahl, Krister, "The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West, In Paul among Jews and Gentiles", pp.199~215 (1976), SCM
- Thrall, Margaret, "A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians" (2000), T&T Clark
- Wright, N. T., "The Paul of History and the Apostle of Faith", TynBul, 29, pp.61~88 (1978)
- Wright, N. T., "What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity?" (1997), Eerdmans
- Wright, N. T., "Justification: God’s Plan and Paul’s Vision" (2009), IVP Academic
- 김세윤, "이사야 42장과 바울의 소명, In 바울신학과 새 관점: 바울복음의 기원에 대한 재고", pp.174~176 (2002), 두란노
- 김세윤, "바울신학과 새 관점 : 바울복음의 기원에 대한 재고" (2002), 두란노
- 김세윤, "Works and Salvation-Reward(행위에 따른 심판과 선행의 보상에 대한 바울의 가르침)", 한국복음주의신약학회 제1회 국제학술대회 자료집 (2011), 한국복음주의신약학회
- 김철홍, "바울이 아라비아로 간 까닭은?: 갈라디아서 1:17에 나타난 바울의 선지자적 자의식"", 신약논단, 16(1), pp.173~198 (2009), 한국신약학회
- 최갑종, "한국교회와 구원론: 새 관점에 대한 복음주의의 대응–바울의 ‘이신칭의’(the Justification by Faith) 교훈을 중심으로-", 한국개혁신학회를 주최 제28회 정기학술심포지엄 (2010)