영과 정신은 동일한 것인가: 판넨베르크의 인간학과 자연신학에서 고찰

Abstract

With the viewpoint of natural science, phenomenology, psychology, philosophy and theology etc., Pannenberg develops the formation process of spirit and/or soul with Darwinism in his Anthropologie in theologischer Perspektive and discusses the relationship of spirit and soul in Toward a Theology of Nature. This article has a purpose to research on identity of soul and spirit through his anthropology and theology of nature. Pannenberg develops the formation process of spirit with Darwinism in his anthropology. He develops the peculiarity of the human being against the other animals out of behavioral science of the animal and philosophical anthropology and theological anthropology in “The Person in Nature” of his anthropology. He induces the concept of spirit through formation process of identity of self “The Human Person as a Social Being” and “The Shared World” of his anthropology. With Darwinism development process, consciousness is induced from behavior pattern and concept of soul and/or spirit is induced from consciousness. The ‘physical characteristic’ that Pannenberg himself talks fades and flows into the tendency excluded, from the phase of a spirit transferred by consciousness. Consequently the discontinuation between conceptual regulation of spirit from formation process of identity of self and theology description of end will be a natural result. In Pannenberg’s theology of nature, his conceptual regulation about soul which is based on its own transcendence tendency synthesize union of soul and spirit, but he affirms that soul is not identical with spirit and is not manifestation of spirit. When he develops about soul and a spirit with connecting pneuma of ancient times, wind, breathing and breath in the Bible, even if the location of spirit and soul is changed, any special does not occur. In spite of he asserts spirit differ from soul, it seems that he considers spirit and soul as identical form of the existence. I think his effort into theology is worth of being located as the virtue to become the theologian standard.