본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

성서무오설의 함정 - 재물론으로 변한 “불의한 청지기” 비유

Biblical Infallibilism in a Pitfall: A Mommonist Twist of the Parable of the Unjust Steward

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류기타인문학

초록

This paper centers around the parable of the Unjust Steward appearing at Luke 16:1-13 of the Bible, which strikes one as approaching sheer nonsense, dangerous nonsense at that. How is it that an unfaithful steward, about to be relieved of his position, wins praise from his employer when he carries out his sly plot to steal more from the latter? Biblical infallibilists would maintain that the Holy Scriptures are divinely inspired from beginning to end and therefore are nowhere spotted with any mistakes whatsoever. It is none of their business how one should wade through a murky maze, grappling with the nonsense quiz just mentioned. The crux of the matter, I will argue, has to do with the agelong practice of taking for granted the 'declarative' sentence pattern of Clauses 8 and 9, when they are really questions—'rhetorical questions,' to be more specific—that are pointed at the steward's unfaithfulness, his mammonist attitude. The interrogative reading cracks the puzzle, sending everything back to its place. What we have here, though, is not merely an issue about 'sentence patterns.' We are dealing with a grave situation in which the declarative reading at issue is being capitalized on imprudently—or rather, impudently—by some churchmen who wish to warrant their own earthly purposes. The 'question mark' that this study unearths and retrieves at the ends of the sentences under consideration hopes to bring to a full stop the familiar sorts of mammonist subterfuge that a careless or mindless soul would habitually and conveniently resort to.

Abstract

This paper centers around the parable of the Unjust Steward appearing at Luke 16:1-13 of the Bible, which strikes one as approaching sheer nonsense, dangerous nonsense at that. How is it that an unfaithful steward, about to be relieved of his position, wins praise from his employer when he carries out his sly plot to steal more from the latter? Biblical infallibilists would maintain that the Holy Scriptures are divinely inspired from beginning to end and therefore are nowhere spotted with any mistakes whatsoever. It is none of their business how one should wade through a murky maze, grappling with the nonsense quiz just mentioned. The crux of the matter, I will argue, has to do with the agelong practice of taking for granted the 'declarative' sentence pattern of Clauses 8 and 9, when they are really questions—'rhetorical questions,' to be more specific—that are pointed at the steward's unfaithfulness, his mammonist attitude. The interrogative reading cracks the puzzle, sending everything back to its place. What we have here, though, is not merely an issue about 'sentence patterns.' We are dealing with a grave situation in which the declarative reading at issue is being capitalized on imprudently—or rather, impudently—by some churchmen who wish to warrant their own earthly purposes. The 'question mark' that this study unearths and retrieves at the ends of the sentences under consideration hopes to bring to a full stop the familiar sorts of mammonist subterfuge that a careless or mindless soul would habitually and conveniently resort to.

참고문헌 (8)

  1. Cavendish, Richard, "Kings & Queens: The Story of Britain’s Monarchs from Pre-Roman Times to Today" (2006), Metro Books
  2. Lang, J. Stephen, "What the Bible Didn’t Say: Popular Myths And Misconceptions about the Good Book" (2003), Fall River Press
  3. Nolland, John, "Word Biblical Commentary. Vol. 35B. Luke 9:21-18:34" (1993), Word Books
  4. Pettingill, William L., "1001 Bible Questions Answered" (1977), Inspirational Press
  5. Porter, J. R., "The Forgotten Bible: The Unknown Jesus, Visions of the Apocalypse, Prophets & Patriarchs" (2001), Watkins Publishing
  6. Robertson, A. T, "A New Short Grammar of the Greek Testament. 10th Edition" (1977), Baker Book House
  7. Spivey, Robert A, "Anatomy of the New Testament: A Guide to Its Structure and Meaning" (1995), Prentice Hall
  8. Valantatis, Richard, "The New Q: A Fresh Translation with Commentary" (2005), T & T Clark

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (12건)