개혁주의 관점에 입각한 폴 틸리히의 신학방법 비판

김귀탁 亞細亞聯合神學大學校 大學院 2005 국내석사

The intellectual sources of Paul Tillich's rich and monumental theological system are many. They include Platonism, the medieval Christian mysticism, the German Idealism, such as Schelling, the existentialism from Kierkegaard to Heidegger as well as Martin Khler's Theology of meditation. His diverse thoughts are closely connected with his life's surroundings. As he was to cross so many borders and oceans during his life, so Tillich adopted "the boundary line" as an image which depicted and defined his stance in the world of thought. Throughout his career, he found himself walking the narrow line between the temperament of his mother and his father, between the beauty of the countryside and the fascination of the city, between the church and secular culture, between politics and philosophy, between science and theology. Because he stood on the boundary line between two contrast world, he adopted a peculiar theological method after his own style for a synthesis of the two. His theological methods automatically flowed out from his diverse thoughts. In his □□Systematic Theology□□ Tillich says that method and system determine each other. This implies that his theological methods had an decisive influence on systems of his theology. The theological methods which he have used in his theology are "the method of correlation" and "the method of (religious) symbol". In Tillich, Systematic Theology uses the method of correlation. And it makes an analysis of the human situation out of which the existential questions arise, and it demonstrates that the symbols used in the Christian message are the answers to these question. That is, he finds questions in human situation and obtains answers in Christian message or Bible. Therefore the method of correlation make much of a mutual relation between human situation and Christian message, philosophy and theology, context and text. It looks to be a rational and an intellectual method seemingly. But it made God a kind of stopgap to explain those infrequent limit-situations of life or some of our metaphysical puzzles. This is to appeal to God only in our human weakness and bewilderment. After all, it distorts the truth with a logic that can not be acceptable. In addition, for the same reason he don't interprets the passages in Bible literally but symbolically. He says that in the true symbol, reality is apprehend. He looks on symbol as the highest form of religious speech. He intended to made many Christian teachings newly acceptable to modern men. In so doing he seeks to de-literize(not de-mythologize) biblical symbols(Christian messages). But this attempt produced an improper interpretation of Christian messages by contraries and thereby put God into a category of ambiguity. The starting point of his theology is not God's word, but human situation. As a result of that, his theology is called Cultural Theology, Philosophical Theology or Apologetical Theology. He intended to define the way in which Christianity is related to secular culture, from which the church had been isolated. But his aim ended in failure. Of course his analysis of men's spiritual condition and his apologetic for Christianity were not only intellectually impressive but have achieved a wide response and influence. He has influenced many men in the field of philosophy and theology and mainly through such men made an impact on contemporary thought. However his hard work caused widespread damage in modern theological circles and God's church. This damage is the result that was caused by his theological methods. A fatal defect of Tillich's theology is putting aside a dimension of spiritual(or invisible) realities that Bible apparently states. In his theology there is the common faults which modern western theologians have made because of their interpreting the objects and contents of theology by reason. They are fond of establishing their own philosophical systems by the method of reductionism. So they ignores a supernatural world and change the world of realities into the world of epistemology. We find such tendencies and traits in Paul Tillich's Theology. For such reasons as above mentioned, we conclude his theology as "theology from below" which we reject. Therefore we cannot help criticizing his theological methods and the contents of his theology that were systemized by them. The purpose of this paper is to criticize Paul Tillich's theological methods from the standpoint of Reformed Theology. And the final result of that critique is that his theological methods oppose or distort the fundamental truths that orthodox theology have kept up to the present. According to Tillich's theological methods, there are not an idea of God as the Creator and Personal Being in his theology. And there are not also thoughts of Redemption through Christ's Cross(man's salvation from sin and death that issued from His death on the cross), His Resurrection, His two natures(the personal unity of a divine and a human nature), and His Incarnation in his Christology. After all Tillich's theological methods led him to commit the critical errors that modern liberal theology have showed until now. They are Pantheism, Situational theology(or Situational Ethics) and Philosophical theology(Theology that is under the rule of Philosophy) etc. Above all, Christianity is the religion of a salvation. The central truth of the Reformed Theology is "salvation by the gospel faith." But There is not the way of such salvation in Tillich's theology. In conclusion, Paul Tillich became the most dangerous and apprehensive theologian in Christian Faith.

“교회 안의 작은 교회 운동”에 나타난 요한 웨슬리의 선교사상 연구

이재완 亞細亞聯合神學大學校 大學院 2004 국내박사

The current day Korean church is overlooking the serious charac- teristic of renewal, which is an essential problem of Christianity. This is where John Wesley was in agony. The proclamation of the truth of the good news was wakening little by little. It was turning out that in actuality the church was, little by little, looking in the face of deterioration. This thesis is about the understanding of Wesley's church, especially "the small groups in the church" and "its idea understanding of missions". Through this research, the author desires the recovery of church renewal, and build a biblical church. As Wesley's parents were Puritans, he was brought up under the strict discipline church as well as family life. He also learned the dynamic element of the small group and theological methodology, which is (Bible, reason and tradition). Wesley was encouraged with the fellowship of the Moravian brothers and it led him to grow in his spiritual life. All these experiences and resources helped him to establish the doctrine of the church. After following British traditional church life, in 1738 he came to know the "heart burning spiritual experience" in depth. After this experience, Wesley emphasized "salvation through faith." He also proclaimed the good news saying, "the whole world is my parish". the twenty-first century Korean church should renew itself by taking as a model Wesley's profound understanding about the power of the church, renewing and maturing of the church through Small groups and through regular discipline. The significance of Wesley's church emphasized a functional view rather than regulations. In authority, he added elements from the Ang lican experience of Scripture, reason, and tradition. He defined the church as a "community of believes" which is a "community of God's people. And the "church works through faith in love" and it is church's body that gives "the living faith." Consequently, to live accordingly in God's grace, Wesley emphasized the word of God, fasting and Holy Commun ion. Thus, Wesley's elements of the "true meaning of grace" became the main point for the Methodist Movement. Not just adapting this element, he also established this in "small groups" for continuous discipline. Moreover, the important thinking for church understanding is the concept of "small groups", As he continued his revival movement the number of the believes increased rapidly. He started other new meetings to follow up on them. Because of this, he was criticized as a disruptive leader, but he never separated from the British church. He called the small groups "class meetings," "band" or "society" and "select societies;" and he led them. Then, why did Wesley understand Methodism as "small groups in church"? Because, its' primary necessity was for the fellowship of the believers. At that time, the worship and Holy Communion in British church lacked the fellowship, which was in the early church. Ultimately the essence of the church is the fellowship of the believers. This fellowship brings discipline and training among believers and spiritual growth. The methodist church invited all people who wanted salvation to attend the "small groups." Here we can Wesley's mission approach through the "small groups." Wesley also said that essentially Christianity was a social religion. That is why his Methodist movement through "small groups" was exter nal and socialistic ultimately this leads to purification. His Gospel move ment was not to be limited to believers, but to be spread around and to influence the whole world. From here, the author wants to discuss and summarize the mission ideas, which come from Wesley's "small groups". First, the Methodist movement was a layperson's mission movement. In all levels laypeople participated in pastoral roles without any ordination it also emphasized the importance of the layperson's role. Wesley had experienced repentance. Especially through a Moravian small group, he experienced a power through the fellowship of believers, which resembled the early church. Not only was this a renewing for his life, he in turn led many souls to Jesus Christ. For the edification and spiritual growth of the converts, he created a highly developed system. For Wesley, these elements were appropriate in the early church. He took this from Pietism in Germany, especially the Moravian laypeople. Wesley took the responsibility of evangelizing the world, which the Moravians couldn't complete. The second Methodist movement was church revival. Wesley wrote in his notes as, the flesh and soul will make one human, the Holy Spirit and discipline will make one Christian. Wesley especially emphasized trai ning and discipline. The converts were trained and participated in lay mi ssionary work activities. He started his out door preaching in 1739, and by 1791 he covered the whole of Britain and applied the good news to missionary work. He also started several new groups and produced reg ulations for growing believers. These "small groups" eventually grew an d with this power, they were able to bring revival to the British church. Third, Wesley thought that these small groups were not separated churches; rather they were an effective method to save souls. Through "small groups," besides preaching the gospel, he focused on the true meaning of society. In British history there was no other significant movement that compared to the "small groups" movement that had so changed the public's moral values. In conclusion, as Wesley emphasized the word of God, living faithfully, observing Holy communion, and church renewal. H. A. Snyder mentioned that, renewal exists only through the "small group." Through the small group's fellowship it is possible to renew a believer. Then thr ough the believer's change we can renew the church. As Wesley started the biblical church and had a passion for missions, we also should keep and follow discipline and spiritual training. If we all have this "heart burning experience," churches will be very powerful in the future.

印度 狀況 神學의 批判的 硏究 : 救援論 中心으로

조범연 亞細亞聯合神學大學校 大學院 2005 국내박사

This Thesis is written as an effort to criticize the Indian Contextual Theology and develop effective methods to evangelize the Hindus in Indian area according to evangelical central truth. For this purpose I first studied the evangelical theology in ACTS Theological Synopsis as criterion of truth. In this investigation, we can infer the main concepts just like "reality of sin and universality of perdition", "seriousness of salvation", recovering of "justification by faith alone", "justification by faith as the basis of works righteousness", "a living faith" as central truth through the research of Calvin's and Wesleyan theology. Secondly, I researched the theory of Hinduism focused on soteriology(ways of salvation) and evaluated and criticized the reincarnation, yoga, caste system and pantheistic and syncretic salvation as preunderstanding of Indian Contextual Theology. Thirdly, I investigated the historical background and formation of Indian Christian Contextual Theology. I proposed the basis, meaning, direction, logics and trait of Indian Theology. In this chapter I proved that Indian Theology has been interwinded with Hinduism. Fourthly, I studied soteriology of Indian Contextual Theology based on four main theologians that are Brahmabandhab Upadhyaya - "jnana marga", A. J. Appasamy - "bhakti marga", P. Chenchia - "Theology of New Creation", M. M. Thomas - "karma marga" and classified their theologies into 8 subjects as soteriological subjects(authorities, man and sin, God, Christology, pneumatology, grace and sacrament, eternal life and conversion) and criticized their theology according to evangelical central truth. Fifthly, I evaluated their syncretic disposition and divided their syncretism into four parts just as inclusivism centered cosmic Christ, fulfillment, plural parallelism and hinduistic syncretism. Lastly, I proposed missiological points of contacts for the Indian Mission through comparative study of Bible and Sanskritan Books(Vedas and Upanishads). For this Study I researched comparing the theories in the 7 parts which are God, World, Human, Sin, Sanctification, Savior, Power Encounter. One fact has emerged from the survey of Indian Theology that is the existence of two main 'strands' of thought, the advaita strand represented especially by Upadhyaya, and the personalist or theistic strand seen Appasamy, with the two strands tending to have mutually exclusive 'clusters' of ideas. Thus Upadhyaya's outlook inclines toward monism in which the transcendent unity of God is not impaired. He rejects the idea of avatara, which comes from the theistic strand, favours mysticism of the 'monistic Trinitarian' pattern rather than simple bhakti, and finds the distinction between God and the world in a version of maya rather than in a firm doctrine of creation. Appasamy on the other hand thinks of God primarily in personal terms, encourages Christian bhakti, welcomes the avatara idea as applied to Christ, and see the world as real. Indian Theology is being driven to an interwinding of two strands, a synthesis of jnana marga and bhakti marga, and indeed in their different ways Upadhyaya and Appasamy both seem to admit this possibility. Signs of this mingling can be seen in the interpretation of Saccidananda-Brahman as Trinity, leading to a development of the Logos-Cit idea; in the dialectical treatment of the nirguna-saguna polarity; in maintaining the equality of Brahman and Isvara while at the same time identifying Isvara with Christ. I proposed the Indian Christian Theology has to need two chief concerns. The first is to remain faithful to his experience and knowledge of Jesus Christ. Secondly, we must be concerned to interpret and proclaim our understanding and experience in such a way that other men may come to the same knowledge. In order to do this we must proclaim Christ and the significance of Christ in such a way that our contemporaries and compatriots may fully understand the message, and this involves us in the problems of effective communication and persuasive proclamation. I propose we need to make the biblical message so relevant to the Hindu's preunderstanding that he hears what the God has to say to him through the word. The some of the special emphases needed in India are Religious Authority(sruti, yukti, anubhava), Hindu-Advaita system(monistic), World and Reality(stemming from maya), Community Consciousness(stemming from Caste), Power Evangelism. I, however, assert that there are three aspects involved in any valid contextual theology. (1) Contextual Theology is the Contextualization of the biblical revelation - human fallenness and God as trustworthy. (2) Contextual Theology Depends on the Power and Presence of the Holy Spirit. (3) The Ultimate Goal of Evangelical Theology is Worship and the Glorification of God. Lastly, in the context of the Hindu notion kharma and the total lack of assurance of salvation, I believe the recovery of "justification by faith" and "central truth" is one of the greatest needs in the formulation of an Indian Christian Theology.

존 칼빈과 찰스 하지의 신학방법론과 인식론에 관한 비교 연구

조권수 亞細亞聯合神學大學校 2017 국내박사

Abstract Comparative study on the theological methodology and epistemology between John Calvin and Charles Hodge Cho, Kwon Soo Ph. D. in Historical Theology The Graduate School. Asia United Theological University This dissertation is the study on the discontinuity of theological methodology and epistemology between John Calvin and Charles Hodge. The point I am going to focus on is discontinuity between the Reformation Theology of John Calvin in the 16th century and the Reformed Orthodoxy Theology of Charles Hodge in the 19th century in regards to theological methodology and epistemology. Generally, many people misunderstand that the Reformation Theology of John Calvin and the Reformed Orthodoxy Theology of Charles Hodge is almost the same. We can say that the opinion has validity to a degree. However, in the viewpoint of theological methodology and epistemology, their teachings show unexpected decisive discontinuity. Calvin’s theology has a close continuity with St. Augustine, St. Bernard of the medieval, and the Reformer Martin Luther in Germany on the matter of epistemology and theological methodology. Calvin’s theological methodology for true biblical spiritual understanding is not a mere rational pursuit of understanding. On the contrary, it is a spiritual experience and inner conviction which are far more than human reason. Also it brings the Bible, experience, tradition, and reason together in the Holy Spirit. Calvin acknowledged human reason as a gift of God, but he had better control of it under the authority of the Bible. In Adam, the first man, all mankind has guilt and total corruption together. Because of this practical original sin, all mankind runs into the limits getting the full knowledge of God from not only the general revelation but also the special revelation. Therefore, Calvin emphasizes divine assistance through the Holy Spirit from above and by far beyond human reason on the sound understanding of Creation, Fall of Adam, and Redemption of Christ. It is a historical truth that the Bible which is God’s revelation for salvation was given to all mankind. But nobody can reach efficacious spiritual knowledge on the Bible only through human reason without the assistance of the Holy Spirit. Calvin made a conclusion that sound Reformation doctrine’s understanding was acquired only by the illumination and indwelling of the Holy Spirit in Saints. Charles Hodge had confidence like John Calvin in regards to Original sin and especially guilt that was taught in the Bible. Although his emphasis on practical corruption of original sin by nature was much poorer than Calvin, he maintained his opinion that human beings had a heavy guilt which gave them eternal death under Adam’s sin. That guilt is resulted in the burden of eternal death, which humans cannot resolve the problem for themselves. Now, God has promised Jesus Christ as a ransom for the guilt of man in the Bible, so all mankind has a duty to learn and understand the word of God and the gospel even through human reason. Hodge was certain that the understanding like the above can be efficacious understanding of God. He believed that there is no contradiction between the Bible and human reason and even scientific knowledge. Charles Hodge had confidence that the Bible and its gospel became efficacious when even human reason believed the authority of the Bible and received its doctrines as it is. But his logic and conviction were on the lines of the Arminian theological methodology type which acknowledged not only Adam’s fall but also human reason and power. Charles Hodge accepted completely Reformed scholastic theology of Francis Turretin in the 17th century. He did not accept Calvin’s Reformation theology in the 16th century on the whole like Jonathan Edwards who was his spiritual ancestor in the 18th century and accepted Calvin’s theological methodology. The main point is, as Scotland Common Sense Philosophy taught, Hodge had over-confidence on human reason and he believed that human reason can be an another instrument for true spiritual understanding along with the Holy Spirit. Above all things, the discontinuities between Calvin in the 16th century and Charles Hodge in the 19th century is manifested, first of all, on the matter of understanding total corruption and the value of human reason, and secondly, of the transcendent epistemology and theological methodology. Since Calvin believed that the change of theological methodology could change the contents and effect of biblical gospel as a result, he could not disregard not only the contents of gospel but also the theological methodology which made it possible to understand the Bible and the gospel aright. Hodge accepted most parts of Calvin’s theology including the possibility of rationalistic methodology which was demanded in his era. And he even accepted willingly a modified theological methodology for his epistemological choice. That means the Reformed Orthodoxy doctrine of theological methodology does not assert an independent work of the Holy Spirit for true biblical spiritual understanding. It accepts another methodology for truth along with human reasoning together that was taught by the Scotland Common Sense Philosophy. The one important assertion in this thesis is the Semi-Arminian type’s Orthodoxy theological methodology. It accepts Calvin’s Reformation theology contents within the framework of the Arminian methodological type. Its doctrine is manifested as the Reformed theology externally, but the type of its theological methodology is a Arminian color plainly. And the other is a natural conclusion from that methodology, humanistic evangelism which asserts that the knowledge acquired from the Bible and doctrine through human reason, assent to that knowledge, and human intelligent decisions can be acknowledged as a regenerated saving faith taught by the Bible. Calvin emphasized on and on that biblical epistemological contents and theological methodology for it are efficacious when we pursue the harmony of the Word and Spirit well. But Hodge pursued modified theological methodology which allowed human reasoning too much more than Calvin. So, the assertion that Hodge’s epistemology undermined Calvin’s essential contents has enough validity. Calvin’s Reformation doctrines and biblical gospel, which were derived from the Bible, are well understood spiritually by using his theological methodology aright focused on the work of the Holy Spirit. It is because of the practical limit on Adam’s fall and human’s total corruption that all of the teachings in the Bible itself alone are not efficacious to all mankind. I believe that it is so urgent to recover the conviction of Reformation epistemology and theological methodology in the 16th century. It means that God’s efficacious calling to acquire the spiritual knowledge of God in Christ as a saving faith through the Bible and the gospel of Christ is always using the type of biblical theological methodology concentrated on the Holy Spirit taught by Reformers like John Calvin in the 16th century invariably-even now.

“과학적” 신학 방법론을 위한 칼빈 신학의 과학성 연구

박욱주 아세아연합신학대학교 대학원 2012 국내박사

Scientific theological methodology embraces fundamental principles and criteria of scientific theological methods. These theological methods are engaged with continuing attempts to guarantee internal coherence of system of theology and to enable the cognition and verification of transcendent reality written in the Scripture. In the light of these aspects of scientific theological methodology, it is incontrovertible that Calvin's theological methodology is of voluminous significance in arguments concerning the definition, legitimacy, and intellectual coherence of scientific theology; his theological methodology, not only satiates criteria for scientificity of theology, but also explicitly allows insights into legitimate future prospect for scientific theology. Calvin's theology, properly responding to the demands for internal coherence of system and cognition of transcendent reality, determinately engages the scientific nature of Christian theology with the central purpose(scopus) of Christianity, the salvation of human soul. But, it is apparent that an exact articulation of Calvin's insights into the scientificity of Christian theology requires deliberate definition of 'science' and 'scientificity'. 'Science'(scientia; Wissenschaft) originally was a term which meant an entity of coherent system of knowledge; scientificity(Wissenschaftlichkeit) was consequently defined as the nature of a scientia-an academic discipline-which principally hinged on coherent methods and system in a scientia itself. But in the modern ages, such traditional definition of scientia was substituted for the definition of scientia as 'φύσις', a term which had signified natural philosophy. This transition was induced by an impetuous emergence of Enlightened scientific view, which grounded its ultimate foundation in mathematical and geometric reasoning and empirical positivism. These methods were successfully enunciated by Descartes, Newton, and Comte. The Enlightened scientific view presently evolved into materialism and developed into logical positivism which renounced to acknowledge the intellectual legitimacy of reflections on metaphysical and transcendent reality; the Enlightened scientific view unfolded its scientistic nature, induced the emergence of dogmatic scientism, and overpowered the minds of people. Eventually and broadly, all sorts of knowledge, except for that of natural science, were envisaged to be meaningless. However, it was gradually ascertained that this scientism will frustrate the creative prospects of all academic disciplines, including natural sciences; scientism itself was also an ideology and all human academic endeavors have no choice but to hinge on some ground motives or foundational beliefs. On account of its obvious and critical limitation, scientistic view has been the subject of continual intense discussion; on the parts of thinking people, the arbitrary definition of science and scientificity on the basis of methods of natural science is increasingly being adjudicated to be a false reduction of meaning. Therefore, for an objective investigation on the meaning and legitimacy of scientific theology, it must be favorably assented that 'science' signify scientia, a coherent entity of knowledge which comprehends not only natural but also transcendent cognition, and that scientificity be approved by the presence of coherent method appropriate for the object of cognition. Yet in the 18th and 19th century, Enlightened scientific view prevailed in the Western world. Kant's moral theology and Schleiermacher's anthropologized and positive theological method signaled the deep impact of the notion of intellectual legitimacy and coherence constructed by Enlightened view of natural science on theological methodology. Both Kant and Schleiermacher were committed to theological studies 'from below' and from human perspective; both the philosopher and the theologian deemed their main object of cognition to be the humane, and not as "the Divine". But Barth, through the celebrated debate against Scholz, initiated an attempt of apology for the 'specific' scientificity of theology; he insisted that "the Divine" be the specific object of theological studies, and that Christian theology can be a scientific discipline merely by following its particular method of cognition. Since Barth, due to his exemplary way of apology for scientific theology, theologians who devoted themselves to the justification of scientific theology have shared the consensus that "the Divine" is the ultimate and the essential object of cognition in theological studies. They attempted to investigate and verify the statements on transcendent reality written in the Scripture with methodological premises somewhat universal and somewhat particular simultaneously. Among them, Dr. Chul-ha Han indicates that a significant number of theologians who have advocated the legitimacy of scientific theology have had a markedly ambivalent attitude towards central truth-the salvation of human soul through gospel faith-of the Scripture. He claims that three decisive fallacies-fallacies of conceptual approach, rationalistic criticism of the Scripture, and scholastization-underlie the methods of modern Western rationalistic theology, and that those fallacies influenced scientific theological methodology to pretermit the soteriocentricity of itself in its recent history. Concerned about this problem, Dr. Han, analyzing the scientificity in the soteriocentric theology of Calvin, sets three methodological criteria of theological scientificity. Dr. Han asserts that a scientific theology should, firstly, summarize(summa) all parts(pars) of the Scripture soteriocentrically. As the central truth-salvation of human soul through gospel faith-comprehends the existential and transcendent reality of salvation, summa of the Scripture will hinder the microscopization of biblical and theological pars. Secondly, a scientific theology should completely and genu

약속과 보존 : 존 오웬의 모세 언약론 연구

장헌민 亞細亞聯合神學大學校 2014 국내박사

For this dissertation I have studied John Owen’s doctrine of the Mosaic Covenant, specifically in relation with the New Covenant. The contemporary church has been plagued with a "cheap grace" syndrome, meaning Grace without the condemnation of the Law. The reason is due to the collapse of the mechanism device for the relevant balance between law and gospel, in contrast to the soteriology of the Reformation in the 16th century. Because of this many theological groups identify law with gospel or mix both ideas in various ways, the tendency is to be biased towards neonomism and antinomianism. Specifically, the view of Dispensationalism, Theonomy, NPP, NCT, FV, Mono-Covenantalism, Karl Barth etc. are it's tendencies. Evangelism also tends to put excessive emphasis on the Covenant of Grace to guard against Dispensationalism. Therefore, the 16th century’s Reformation soteriology outlined by Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solus Christus etc. is on a shaking foundation. One reason for these confusions seems to be in Westminster Confession of Faith(WCF). According to the WCF, since the corruption of the first Adam, all the covenants are the Covenant of Grace. Therefore the Mosaic Covenant also belongs to the Covenant of Grace. However such perspective to view both gospel and law as the administration of the Covenant of Grace, depending on where the emphasis is laid, could unintentionally allow to conceive either nomism or antinomianism. This view also has probability to be inclined to mono-covenantalism, such regards the Covenant of Grace as the only unique covenant of all the redemptive history indirectly. Although John Owen(1616-1683) is referred to as the prince of the puritans during the 17th century, believed the WCF to weaken the principles of protestant Reformation soteriology. He understood the Mosaic Covenant from a different perspective. Owen borrowed from Luther's distinction between 'the Law and the Gospel' to show the contrast between the old and new covenant in soteriology. According to Owen, the Mosaic Covenant is completely another different covenant with the Covenant of Grace. The Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant have completely different characters and functions each other in the soteriological dimension. Unlike the WCF, Owen could not find any soteriological similarities between the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant at all. While the Covenant of grace is unconditional, the Mosaic Covenant is a conditional one. If this distinguishing distinction fails, many problems are revealed to the surface. At the same time the Mosaic Covenant is not the Covenant of Works, because all salvation after the Fall is 'only' made through the Covenant of Grace(Sola Gratia). God's redemptive history after the proto evangelium in Genesis 3:15 says that God only presented one way of salvation, not two. Therefore, the Mosaic Covenant is not also the covenant of works. If so, how does Owen understand the Mosaic Covenant? According to Owen, the Mosaic Covenant is the only 'particular' third covenant that God has ordained solely for the nation of Israel. The Mosaic Covenant consists of the Covenant of Works(the Ten Commandments) republished and represented. The promises and warnings of temporal blessings are deeply related to the preservation of the Israelites' covenantal / national identity in Canaan. When God entered into a covenant with Abraham, He promised the birth of the Seed. That is to say Christ, the future descendant of the seed of Abraham. For this providential purpose, God entered into a temporary Mosaic Covenant with Israelites. Until the New Covenant is fulfilled, He controls and preserves Israelites with the law. Thus the birth of Christ according to God’s promise to Abraham had to be protected until the accomplishment. In that sense, the Mosaic Covenant is a kind of realistic national temporal covenant excluded from soteriological function. Therefore, according to Owen, the Mosaic Covenant or the Mount Sinai Covenant is neither the Covenant of Works nor the Covenant of Grace. It is a kind of National Covenant contracted with Israel. It is a temporary covenant given to a particular definite region and people at one point of time in the redemptive history(Heilsgeschichte). This covenant is essentially irrelevant to eternal salvation and doom of humankind. However, the moral laws (the Ten Commandments) republished in Mosaic Covenant is connected to the New Covenant. The moral laws are actually engraved in the spirit of covenant contractor with the New Covenant. Although the Mosaic covenant is a temporary passing covenant for the nation of Israel, Owen understands the moral law of the Covenant of Moses is still binding on to the Christians of the New Covenant. God's law of creation is eternal law. Owen accepts the third use of the Law according to the tradition of the Reformation. In this dimension, the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant are in a consecutive and continuous relationship. Therefore, the continuity and discontinuity between the Old and New Testaments exist together. If we regard the Mosaic covenant as the National Covenant, it is abrogated and discontinuous. However, from the standpoint of renewal of moral law, it is still effective and continuous. Thus, Owen disconnects and connects effectively the Law and the Gospel, or the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant. Through this he effectively criticizes the confusion about modern semi-Pelagianism, mono-covenantalism, and antinomianism. In conclusion, Owen believes the Mosaic Covenant to be a republication of the covenant of works. He believes that the Mosaic covenant is superimposed upon, and organically independent from the covenant of grace. For Owen, this made the Mosaic covenant distinct from the new covenant in substance and essence; and not a mere administration of the covenant of grace. Moreover, Owen’ fundamental distinctio

경건주의와 오순절주의의 관계성에 대한 역사신학적 고찰

김재희 아세아연합신학대학교 2016 국내박사

This dissertation is suggested that it could become a proper powerful capability for revival of present Church to the merits of Pentecostalism which extract from the fact, through researching the corelation between Pentecostalism and Pietism, on which Pentecostalism is a fruit drawn from Pietism. In both, there is a movement sharing a common ethos and having a smellier theological characteristics. Also up to historical trace, it makes known that Pentecostalism which is a part of "the parental inheritance" or "ancestral line" of Pentecostalism by genealogical research, and at least related to a descendant of Pietism. Pietism is an important ingredient in that network of movements that prepared the way for the emergence of Pentecostalism. Each of Pietism and Pentecostalism is, as is called "Second Reformation" or "third Reformation" as a reformed movement to seek the vividness of Christian, being a historical movement which shares a very unique ethos. They had convinced of the essence of Christian as a personal relationship with Christ rather than doctrines or offices, so that they were to represent a vivid organic relationship with Christ. It was a empirical-forcing belief to desire to meet Christ directly, empathizing experience of conversion and sanctification by making a pursuit of a proper relation with God, and as a result, there were many fruits of social service and mission. It was the core of Pietism not only to place inner piety and the establishment of virtue but also to underline the dynamic relation between belief and life as common value of Pentecostalism so that it was important to ethic practice and life. Both Pietism and Pentecostalism share pros and cons of theological characteristics except the doctrine of the baptism of the Spirit. The purpose of this dissertation is, therefore, to provide to present Church with meaningful insights of which pertain the theological merits from comparing both Pietism and Pentecostalism and supplement doctrinal elements as the other respect of Evangelicalism, which are weaken in relative both Pietism and Pentecostalism. This is what I intend for Churches to be revived through recovered piety by the power of the Holy Spirit as the revival of German Pietism led by Philipp Jakob Spener who was influenced by Johann Arndt and August Hermann Franke as a successor of Spener from the end of 17th century to the beginning years of 18th century and Pentecostalism in 20th century. The range of this dissertation is restricted that in Modern Pentecostalism, it deals with the theology of Charles Parham and Classical Pentecostal Movement, which do not deals with Charismatic Movement and Neochaismatic Movement. For this purpose, this dissertation explores following. In Ⅰ chapter, it represent the purpose of research, the history of research, theses and the method and range of research. In Ⅱ chapter, the historical, theological and thoughtful relation between Pietism and Pentecostalism. By doing so, it makes known a very unique ethos which shares by both Pietism and Pentecostalism, through comparing study on genealogical trace of Pentecostalism as its root along to Pietism. In Ⅲ chapter, it will explore what the foundation and background of Pietism are until the Second World War, Pietism had been underestimated to compared with its contributions. It will quest the theology of Spener as a founder of Pietism and the contributions of Johann Blumhardt who worked a role of the bridge of between Pietism and Pentecostalism so that to represent the influence of Pietism on theology and Church. In Ⅳ chapter, it will explore what the foundation of Pentecostalism is. the foundation of Pentecostalism consisted in Pentecostalism in 17th and 18th century, the Holiness Movement influenced by John Wesley in 19th century, especially the movement of the higher life and Keswick convention which were direct roots, and the theology of Charles Parham who was a founder of Modern Pentecostalism and these influence. In Ⅴ chapter, based all research until, it will explore what continuity and discontinuity of Pietism are, and demonstrates that Pentecostalism come from Pietism, which succeed in good theology and belief. In Ⅵ chapter as a conclusion, it summarizes up to concerned. According to argument, It is the theological merits of Pietism and Pentecostalism to be precious inheritances which can be a energy to make a divergence at present Christian again.

린드벡의 후기자유주의 신학비판

이윤희 아세아연합신학대학교 대학원 2009 국내석사

지금까지 1980년대 이후 모더니즘적인 자유주의 세계관에 대한 회의론의 확산과 함께 등장한 포스트모니즘 사상의 신학적 표현 중 하나인 린드벡의 후기 자유주의 신학(Postliberal theology)에 대해 살펴보았다. 지난 10여 년간 미국 신학계에서 활발하게 논의되고 있는 린드벡의 후기 자유주의신학은 ‘현재 상황’과 ‘성경’ 즉 다른 말로 하자면 ‘자유’ 혹은 ‘보수’라는 양단논법에 의해 ‘복음’의 순수한 의미가 상실되어 있는 상황 속에서 ‘새 시대를 위한 복음’이라는 딜레마에 대한 흥미로운 해답을 시도하고 있는 신학이다. 후기 자유주의 신학은 특별히 예일 대학교 신학부와 관련이 있는데, 그 대표적인 공로자가 바로 역사 신학교 교수인 조지 린드벡이다. 그는 그의 책 “교리의 본질”에서 자신의 접근 방식을 기술하는데, 이제까지의 잘못된 종교 이론 즉, 종교에 대한 인지적 접근과 경험-표현적 접근을 비판하면서 현대철학, 사회학, 심리학, 종교학 등의 이론적 지평 아래 문화-언어적 적 접근(culture-language approach)이라는 새로운 종교이론과 이를 기초한 새로운 교리 이론 곧 규칙이론(rule theory of the doctrine)을 제시했다. 사실 린드벡은 “교리의 본질”에서 자신이 조심스럽게 밝히듯이 후기 자유주의 신학 자체를 정립하여 펼쳐 보이는 대신 그것을 “향한”(toward a postliberal theology) 가능성을 타진하려는 목적을 지니고 있다. 린드벡이 이 책을 통해 의도한 것은 루터교 역사신학자로서 린드벡은 교회사에 나타난 여러 다양한 교리들을 연구해왔고, 또 카톨릭과의 대화에 앞서 왔었다. 이러한 경험의 배역에서 과연 기독교 안의 여러 상이한 “교리”들을 어떻게 이해해야지만 그들간의 “대화”를 가능케 할 수 있을까 하는 문제를 고심하게 된 것이다. 먼저 린드벡의 후기 자유주의의 사상적 배경을 다시 재고해보면, 먼저 그 명칭 자체가 포함하고 있는 것처럼, 린드벡의 후기 자유주의 신학은 포스트모더니즘의 사상적 영향을 받았다. 특별히 포스트모더니즘의 대표적 특징인 근대성의 통합성과 토대주의를 거부하고 상대적, 파편적 특징을 가진다. 이러한 영향으로 린드벡의 후기 자유주의 신학은 기독교 신앙의 특수성을 강조하고 있다. 포스트모더니즘 사상의 또 하나의 영향은 누구나 동의하는 보편타당한 지식 체계나 진리의 틀을 거부한다는 것이다. 린드벡의 신학방법론에는 포스트모더니즘 뿐 아니라 예일대학의 여러 교수들의 신학 방법론을 받아들이고 있는데, 특별히 동료인 한스 프라이의 이야기 신학에서 더 많은 영향을 받았다. 즉 린드벡은 한스 프라이의 성경 이야기에 대한 접근 방식을 조직신학적 관점에서 채용한다. 그리고 린드벡의 후기 자유주의 신학의 대표적 신학방법론인 문화-언어적 접근에서의 언어 문제는 비트겐슈타인의 언어게임에 이해의 근간을 두고 있다. 기어츠의 문화 인류학에 대한 견해 조차 린드벡은 자신의 교리 연구에 적용함으로 프라이의 본문 내적 접근 방식을 확장시켰다. 린드벡의 후기 자유주의 신학의 문화-언어적 종교론과 규칙 이론적 교리관은 진리에 관한 전통적 견해들과 완전히 다른 새로운 진리관, 즉 ‘체재 내적 진리관’을 지시한다. 그에게 있어서 진리는 어떤 공동체의 체재 내에서만 참일 수 있다. 즉 어디서나 통용될 수 있는 객관적인 진리는 없고 내부적인 나름대로의 한계를 지닌 진리가 있을 뿐이라는 것이다. 그것은 언어와 문화도 마찬가지이다. 린드벡에게 있어 존재론적 진리(the ontological truth)는 더 이상 존재하지 않는다. 따라서 체재내의 진리인 행위적진리(perfor- matory truth)가 의미를 가질 뿐이다. 이런 점에서 복음주의자인 맥그래스는 린드벡이 어떤 객관적인 실재를 다루는 체계 외적인 측면은 간과했다고 비판한다. 예를 들어 성부와 성자의 동일본질 교리는 단순히 기독교 공동체의 언어 규칙을 제공하는 2차적 진술일 뿐 아니라 실재를 지칭하는 1차적 언어이기도 하다는 것이다. 그는 실제로 기독교 교리들은 신앙의 내용을 지적으로 표현해 놓은 진리주장들로서 그것의 실재적 진위가 가장 중요한 출발점이라고 보아야 한다고 주장한다. 체재내적 진리관을 신학에 적용할 때 등장하는 개념이 “본문내재성” (intratextuality)이다. 여기서의 ‘본문’(text)는 경전을 뜻하는데, 종교들 나름대로 자신들의 경전을 가지고 있으며, 신자들은 그 안에서 그들의 삶을 살고 실재를 이해하기 위해 추구하는 해석적 기틀을 마련해 주고자 했다. 그러나 이러한 그의 주장은 철저하게 거대담론을 거부하고 파편화된 이야기 거리를 찾아다니는 포스트모더니즘의 논리에서 나오는 영속적인 진리와는 상관없이 표현적 이야기에 불과하다. 이 점에서도 맥그래스는 린드벡의 잘못을 지적하는데, 린드벡의 체계 속에서는 왜 성경에서 출발해야 하는지에 대한 설명을 주지 않고 있다고 문제를 제기한다. 즉 린드벡은 종교적인 공동체의 중심에는 항상 정경이 존재하고 이러한 정경이 공동체의 세계관을 형성하는 권위를 가지고 있다는 형상학적인 분석에서 출발하여, 기독교 공동체의 경우에는 성경이 그러한 정경의 권위를 가지고 있 The purpose of this thesis is to criticize George A. Lindbeck's postliberal theology, an important postmodernism theology that appeared with commenting both traditional evangelism and liberalism. His theology try to provide a theological possibility in order to explain some important issues in dispute between liberal theology and evangelical theology. This thesis deals with a intimate understanding of Lindbeck's postliberal theology, influence of his theological thought, his theological methodology, the important theological issues of his postliberal theology, the theological criticism for his ideological background and presuppositions by the Evangelism. First of all, to accomplish the purpose of this thesis, I investigated the essences, characteristics, and theological perspectives on Lindbeck's postliberal theology through the documents written by Lindbeck. Specifically, it discussed both Problems of postliberal theology and a counterproposal to them by using method that examined Lindbeck's documents that criticized postliberal theology. Also, it inspected cultural-linguistic model of both religion and doctrine through methological access of postliberal theology in order to study postliberal theology thoughts of Lindbeck. Lindbeck is a postmodern theologian who received what postmodernists insisted. He understands religion as a cultural-linguistic model that influenced by Wittgenstein and some Hns Frei. For his theology, Human is existence that express and understands oneself by language. In addition, his language forms his society. In this sense, Lindbeck claims that human religious experience is possible because of language. And thus Lindbeck emphasizes that Christians must not start from human experience and interpret the bible though it. It is to exchange Bible language for human language, and as a result, the Bible becomes not God's Word but human word. Lindbeck claims to let the Bible speak to human with own language. this is according to Barth's teaching. It means that the Christianity should not be judged by the viewpoint of modernism and rather that modern society be defined by biblical language and the meaning of human lives be found in it. Lindbeck's postliberal theology emphasizes on the distinctiveness of christianity and as a principle refuses to follow the liberalism that rushes headlong into danger of the identification of the truth of the Gospel with the cultural norms of American liberal late in the 19th century. In addition, postliberal theology insists that the Scripture is the supreme sourse of Christian thoughts and values, and that recommends the bible language for the purpose of preventing the Christianity from becoming post-Christianity in these days, and that has strong points to make confirmation of Jesus Christ as a central figure in thoughts and lives of Christian church.

이사야書에 나타난 시온 主題

김진회 亞細亞聯合神學大學校 1996 국내석사

개혁주의 신학에서의 칭의 교리 연구 : 마르틴 부처와 조나단 에드워즈를 중심으로

박균상 아세아연합신학대학교 2017 국내박사

ABSTRACT This thesis is aimed at studying on the doctrine of justification in the light of Reformed theology. Unbiblical life of believers who are assured of their justification lead us to take re-consideration of whether the traditional doctrine of justification is authentic. Furthermore, the lack of Christ-like life style in believers and the modern churches including Korean churches lead several theologians to argue whether the traditional doctrine of justification has any theological defective. In response to this kind of significant theological issue, this thesis has purposely and comparatively selected two Reformed theologians - Martin Bucer and Jonathan Edwards. Martin Bucer contributed to the original conceptualization of justification in the light of the Calvinistic Reformed theology (instead of the Lutheran theology) in the beginning of the Reformation in sixteenth century, and Jonathan Edwards had remarkably elaborated the concept of justification in the eighteenth-century. The centrality of thesis is on this comparative studies, because it leads us to see how the profile of the doctrine of justification of the Reformed theology has changed from the sixteenth-century Reformation to the eighteenth-century in America. Firstly, I studied on how the doctrine of justification of Martin Bucer has been directly influenced by the legal justification of Martin Luther and indirectly by Thomas Aquinas and Erasmus. In this respect, I also dealt with Martin Bucer’commentary of the Epistle of Paul to the Romans in a sense that it is significant in understanding his doctrine of justification. This studies has then showed us that he did not differentiate the doctrine of justification from the doctrine of sanctification. Instead, his doctrine is characterized double justification which combined with sanctification, on which it contains good deeds and stresses itself. In particular, his double justification harmonized both Pauline justification and Jamesic justification on which both are seen distinguished, and well applied pneumatologically. Futhermore, the good deed and righteousness of God are well harmonized in a spectrum as justification and Bucer interpreted dynamically the righteousness of God to link the Law not like other Reformed theologies. Secondly, I studied on the doctrine of justification of Jonathan Edwards. The fact that I underscore is that Edwards clearly distinguished justification and sanctification, whereas Martin Bucer combined them as we have seen. However, Edwards closely followed in the footsteps of John Calvin who distinguishes justification and sanctification but not separates. I also dealt with the background of the doctrine of justification of Jonathan Edwards as anti-theses against to the Enlightenment of John Loch, antinomianism and Arminianism. I more specifically studied on how Edwards related justification to sanctification; he argued that the faith of justification of believers must bring them to the dynamic and actual process of sanctification with the result of the manifestation of the Christ-centered life style in their real and daily life. Therefore this studied has convincingly showed us that the lack of Christ-like life style in believers and modern churches including Korean churches does not attribute to any defects of the original and traditional doctrine of justification of the Reformed theologians in the sixteenth century. On the contrary, this studies cleary argues that the proper understanding and acceptance of the sixteenth-century Reformed doctrine of justification would bring us to the transformational sanctification with the result of Christ-likeness life style, as salt and light to the world, of believers and modern churches including Korean churches.