본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

로마서의 저술 목적-로마서는 바울의 변증서 또는 자기 소개서?

The Purpose of Romans: Is It an Apology of Paul or a letter of His Self-Introduction?

1

조회

0

다운로드

5

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

Since F.C. Baur in the middle of the 19th century, modern exegetes have been inclined to think that most of the Pauline epistles should be read in the light of historical situations, especially under a serious consideration for Paul's (alleged) trouble with the Judaizing Jerusalem Church leaders. Recent scholarship has also been moving toward understanding the Romans as an ‘apology’ for his gospel or a letter of ‘self-introduction.’ They have assumed that Paul felt himself and his gospel under attack, among the leaders of the Primitive Church and/or in the Roman church, then needing to be justified. But was there indeed any theological confrontation between Paul and the Jerusalem church leadership? When the descriptions about the reciprocal agreement regarding the understanding of the gospel among them in Gal 2 and about the friendly reception of Paul by the Jerusalem church in Acts 15 and 21 are fully considered, it is highly improbable that there really happened Paul's demonstration of theological apology. And was it necessary for Paul to write a letter of theological self-introduction to the Roman church because of being suspected of his gospel or his apostleship? In Romans we cannot find any statements of self-justification, but we see rather authoritative teachings in every passage. A series of controversial questions found in dozens of verses like 2:1-5,17; 3:1-3 and so on cannot be references to real situations but to diatribe questions raised by an imaginary interlocutor only for rhetorical purpose. In comparison with the last generation, today there is a growing number of scholars who in the section Rom 14:1-15:13 rightly see the real occasion for the letter. The issue is whether the ceremonial commandments of the law should be kept or not by believers. In view of the abnormally long treatment of a practical theme in one and a half chapters, even in the last part of the body of the letter, here one must not fail to notice a hermeneutical significance for the discussion of the purpose of Romans. In other words, the situation of the divided community of the Roman church caused through their different views of the observance of the law came to lead a result that Paul wrote them Romans, a copious book-letter, where he as an apostle of the Gentiles explains the gospel especially in connection with the law and the problem of the preference of Israel. So Romans is best explained as an ‘apostolic pastoral letter.’

Abstract

Since F.C. Baur in the middle of the 19th century, modern exegetes have been inclined to think that most of the Pauline epistles should be read in the light of historical situations, especially under a serious consideration for Paul's (alleged) trouble with the Judaizing Jerusalem Church leaders. Recent scholarship has also been moving toward understanding the Romans as an ‘apology’ for his gospel or a letter of ‘self-introduction.’ They have assumed that Paul felt himself and his gospel under attack, among the leaders of the Primitive Church and/or in the Roman church, then needing to be justified. But was there indeed any theological confrontation between Paul and the Jerusalem church leadership? When the descriptions about the reciprocal agreement regarding the understanding of the gospel among them in Gal 2 and about the friendly reception of Paul by the Jerusalem church in Acts 15 and 21 are fully considered, it is highly improbable that there really happened Paul's demonstration of theological apology. And was it necessary for Paul to write a letter of theological self-introduction to the Roman church because of being suspected of his gospel or his apostleship? In Romans we cannot find any statements of self-justification, but we see rather authoritative teachings in every passage. A series of controversial questions found in dozens of verses like 2:1-5,17; 3:1-3 and so on cannot be references to real situations but to diatribe questions raised by an imaginary interlocutor only for rhetorical purpose. In comparison with the last generation, today there is a growing number of scholars who in the section Rom 14:1-15:13 rightly see the real occasion for the letter. The issue is whether the ceremonial commandments of the law should be kept or not by believers. In view of the abnormally long treatment of a practical theme in one and a half chapters, even in the last part of the body of the letter, here one must not fail to notice a hermeneutical significance for the discussion of the purpose of Romans. In other words, the situation of the divided community of the Roman church caused through their different views of the observance of the law came to lead a result that Paul wrote them Romans, a copious book-letter, where he as an apostle of the Gentiles explains the gospel especially in connection with the law and the problem of the preference of Israel. So Romans is best explained as an ‘apostolic pastoral letter.’

참고문헌 (104)

  1. A. Andrew, "Das, Solving the Romans Debate", pp.106~14 (2007), Fortress
  2. A.Nygren, "Der Ro¨merbrief" (1965), V & R
  3. A.Schlatter, "Gottes Gerechtigkeit: Ein Kommentar zum Ro¨merbrief", pp.363~372 (1980), Mohr
  4. A.J. Guerra, "Romans and the Apologetic Tradition: The Purpose, Genre and Audience of Paul's Letter", pp.1~ (1995), Cambridge Univ. Press
  5. Achtemeier, "신약성서개론", pp.367~370
  6. B.Byrne, "Romans", pp.403~407 (1996), Liturgical Press
  7. B.Witherington III, "Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on St Paul’s Letter to the Galatians" (1998), Eerdmans
  8. B.Witherington III, "Paul's Letter to the Romans:A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary", pp.325~33 (2004), Eerdmans
  9. Bornkamm, "The Letter to the Romans as Paul's Last Will and Testament", TRD, pp.27~28
  10. C. Blomberg, "오순절 성령 강림에서 밧모섬까지 (사도행전-계시록 개론)", pp.372~373, 기독교문서선교회
  11. C.D. Myers, "Epistle to the Romans", pp.5~820, ABD
  12. C.E.B.Cranfield, "The Epistle to the Romans", pp.817~823 (1986), T. & T. Clark
  13. C.H. Dodd, "The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans", pp.xxv~xxvi (1949), Hodder & Stoughton
  14. C.J. Hemer, "The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History", pp.277~307 (1989), Mohr
  15. C.K.Barrett, "The Epistle to the Romans", pp.256~273 (1984), A & C Black
  16. "Conzelmann & Lindemann, Arbeitsbuch, 229, 231-32", ~
  17. D.E. Aune, "Romans as a Logos Protreptikos", pp.278~296, TRD
  18. D.E.Aune, "The NT in Its Literary Environment", pp.219~220 (1987), Westminster
  19. D.F. Watson, "Diatribe, in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters", pp.213~214 (1993), IVP
  20. D.J.Moo, "The Epistle to the Romans", pp.21~ (1996), Grand Rapids: Eerdmans
  21. D.L.Bock, "Acts" (2007), Grand Rapids: Baker Academic
  22. É Trocmé, "L’épître aux Romains et la méthode missionaire de l’Apôtre Paul", NTS, 7, pp.148~153 (1961)
  23. E.Haenchen, "Die Apostelgeschichte", pp.81~103 (1965), Go¨ttingen: V & R
  24. E.Ka¨semann, "An die Ro¨mer", pp.389~390 (1980), Mohr
  25. E. Ochsenmeier, "Romans 1,11-12: A Clue to the Purpose of Romans", Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, 83, pp.407~411 (2007)
  26. F. Hauck, "koino,j, TWNT 3, 791", ~
  27. F. Watson, "The Two Roman Congregations: Romans 14:1-15:13", pp.203~215, TRD
  28. F.F. Bruce, "Galatian Problems. 2. North or South Galatians?", BJRL, 52, pp.243~266 (1969)
  29. F.F. Bruce, "The Romans Debate―Continued", pp.178~179, TRD
  30. F.F. Bruce, "Commentary on the Book of the Acts", pp.299~300 (1986), Eerdmanns
  31. G. Bornkamm, "Der Ro¨merbrief als Testament des Paulus", pp.120~139 (1971), Kaiser
  32. G.Bornkamm, "Paulus", pp.103~111 (1983), Kohlhammer
  33. G. Klein, "Paul’s Purpose in Writing the Epistle to the Romans", pp.29~43, TRD
  34. Gu¨nther Harder, "Der konkrete Anlass des Ro¨merbriefes", ThViat, 6, pp.13~24 (1958)
  35. H. Conzelmann, "Arbeitsbuch zum NT", pp.229~230 (1982), Mohr
  36. H. Conzelmann, "Die Apostelgeschichte, HNT 2", pp.4~7 (1972), Mohr
  37. H.Gamble, "The Textual History of the Letter to the Romans:A Study in Textual and Literary Criticism", pp.84~95 (1977), Eerdmans
  38. H.Hu¨bner, "Law in Paul’s Thought" (1984), T. & T. Clark
  39. H.Koster, "Einfu¨hrung in das NT im Rahmen der Religionsgeschichte und Kulturgeschichte der hellenistischen und ro¨mischen Zeit", pp.575~ (1980), Walter de Gruyter
  40. H.W. Bartsch, "Die Amfa¨nger des Ro¨merbriefes", StTheol, 25, pp.81~89 (1971)
  41. I.H.Marshall, "Acts", pp.204~205 (1991), Eerdmanns
  42. J.A.Fitzmyer, "Romans", pp.31~32 (1993), Doubleday
  43. J.A. Fitzmyer, "The Acts of the Apostles", pp.49~60 (1998), Yale Univ. Press
  44. J.C. Beker, "Paul the Apostle: The Triumph of God in Life and Thought", pp.87~89 (1988), Fortress
  45. J.C. Hemer, "Acts and Galatians Reconsidered", Themelios NS, 2, pp.81~88 (1976)
  46. J.D.G. Dunn, "Romans 1-8" (1988), Word Books
  47. J.R.W. Stott, "Romans: God’s Good News for the World", pp.34~36 (1994), IVP
  48. Jervis, "The Purpose of Romans:A Comparative Letter Structure Investigation", pp.158~164 (1991), JSOT
  49. K.Barth, "Der Ro¨merbrief" (1919), EVZ
  50. K.Haacker, "Der Brief an die Ro¨mer", pp.8~10 (1999), Evangelische Verlagsanstalt
  51. K.P.Donfried, "The Romans Debate" (1991), Hendrickson
  52. K.P. Donfried, "A Short Note on Romans 16", pp.44~52, TRD
  53. K.P. Donfried, "Introduction 1991", pp.lxix~lxx, TRD
  54. Ka¨semann, Ro¨mer, "신약성서개론", pp.353~356, Achtemeier
  55. Karris, "Romans 14:1-15:13 and the Occasion of Romans", pp.65~84, TRD
  56. Karris, "The Occasion of Romans", 69~
  57. M. Dibelius, "Das Apostelkonzil, in Aufsa¨tze zur Apostelgeschichte", pp.84~90 (1953), Evangelische Verlagsanstalt
  58. M. Dibelius, "Die Apostelgeschichte als Geschichtsquelle, in Aufsa¨tze zur Apostelgeschichte", pp.91~95 (1953), Evangelische Verlagsanstalt
  59. M.Hengel, "Acts and the History of Earliest Christianity" (1979), SCM
  60. M. Rauer, "Die “Schwachen”, in Korinth und Rom nach den Paulusbriefen" (1923), Herder
  61. M. Rauer, "Schwachen", pp.97~100
  62. Minear, "The Obedience of Faith", pp.8~12
  63. Myers, "Epistle to the Romans", pp.820~825
  64. 하, "새로운 신약성서개론 상", pp.1991, N. Perrin
  65. N. Taylor, "Paul, Antioch and Jerusalem: A Study in Relationships and Authority in Earliest Christianity", pp.96~103 (1989), JSOT
  66. O. Michel, "Der Brief an die Ro¨mer", pp.30~31 (1978), V & R
  67. P.Billerbeck, "Die Briefe des NT und die Offenbarung Johannis: Kommentar zum NT aus Talmud und Midrasch", pp.307~308 (1985), C.H. Beck
  68. P. Lampe, "The Roman Christians in Romans 16", pp.216~230, TRD
  69. P. Stuhlmacher, "The Purpose of Romans", pp.236~242, TRD
  70. P.Stuhlmacher, "Der Brief an die Ro¨mer", pp.13~16 (1989), V & R
  71. P.J. Achtemeier, "현대적인 방법을 적용한 새로운 신약성서개론", pp.364~371 (2008), 대한기독교서회
  72. P.S. Minear, "The Obedience of Faith: The Purposes of Paul in the Epistle to the Romans", pp.7~17 (1971), SCM
  73. P.T.Gadenz, "Called from the Jews and from the Gentiles:Pauline Ecclesiology in Romans 9-11" (2009), Mohr Siebeck
  74. R.Bultmann, "Der Stil der paulinischen Predigt und die kynisch-stoische Diatribe" (1910), V & R
  75. R.Jewett, "Romans", Fortress, pp.80~91 (2007)
  76. R.Pesch, "Ro¨merbrief", pp.5~6 (1987), Echter
  77. R.E.Brown, "신약개론", pp.797~798 (2003), 기독교문서선교회
  78. R.J. Karris, "Paul’s Jewish Heritage in Romans", Bible Today, 45, pp.293~294 (2007)
  79. R.J. Karris, "Romans 14:1-15:13 and the Occasion of Romans", pp.68~, TRD
  80. R.P. Martin, "NT Foundations 2: The Acts, the Letters, the Apocalypse", pp.190~ (1994), Eerdmans
  81. R.Y.K.Fung, "The Epistle to the Galatians", pp.16~28 (1982), Grand Rapids: Eerdmans
  82. S.K.Stowers, "The Diatribe and Paul's Letter to the Romans" (1981), SP
  83. Stuhlmacher, "The Purpose of Romans", pp.239~242
  84. T.H.Tobin, "Paul's Rhetoric in Its Contexts: The Argument of Romans", pp.98~103 (2004), Hendrickson
  85. "Taylor, Paul, Antioch and Jerusalem", ~
  86. "Tobin, Paul's Rhetoric in Its Contexts", ~
  87. U. Schnelle, "The Letter to the Romans: Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense LVI (2007)", Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, 83, pp.551~552 (2007)
  88. U.Wilckens, "Der Brief an die Ro¨mer(Ro¨m 1-5)", pp.44~46 (1978), Benzinger
  89. U. Wilckens, "Der Brief an die Romer (Rom 12-16)", pp.81~83 (1982), Benzinger
  90. W. G. Ku¨mmel, "Die Theologie des NT nach seinen Hauptzeugen", pp.122~124 (1980), V & R
  91. W. Grundmann, "A Greek-English Lexicon" (1983), At the Clarendon
  92. W.Schmithals, "Der Ro¨merbrief:Ein Kommentar", pp.489~493 (1988), Gu¨tersloher
  93. W. Wiefel, "Jewish Community in Ancient Rome", pp.92~93, TRD
  94. W.G.Ku¨mmel, "Einleitung in das NT", pp.273~274 (1983), Quelle & Meyer
  95. W.S. Campbell, "Why Did Paul Write Romans?", pp.264~269 (1974), ExT
  96. Watson, "The Two Roman Congregations", pp.203~206
  97. Wiefel, "Jewish Community", pp.94~
  98. Zeller, "Der Brief an die Ro¨mer", pp.17~241 (1985), Pustet
  99. 김득중, "사도행전 연구", pp.69~ (1991), 나단
  100. 김세윤, "바울이 로마서를 쓴 목적, in 예수와 바울", pp.453~468 (2001), 두란노
  101. 이한수, "복음은 구원을 주시는 하나님의 능력" (2008), 이레서원
  102. 전경연, "로마서 신학" (2001), 대한기독교서회
  103. 최갑종, "바울연구 I", pp.395~408 (1999), 기독교문서선교회
  104. 홍인규, "로마서 어떻게 읽을 것인가", pp.18~19 (2001), 성서유니온 선교회

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (5건)