바울의 부활신학 : 고린도 전서 15장 중심

박재철 고신대학 신학대학원 1989 국내석사

바울의 復活神學의 構造에 關한 一考

許延行 長老會神學大學 1986 국내석사

J. 몰트만의 십자가 부활신학 연구

윤삼중 總神大學 1992 국내석사

J. 몰트만의 부활신학 연구

홍성표 한신대학 1988 국내석사

누가의 부활신학 연구

옹상곤 호서대학교 1996 국내석사

위르겐 몰트만의 부활신학 연구

금확섭 서울신학대학교 2003 국내석사

판네베르그와 몰트만의 부활신앙 연구

임성택 연세대학교 연합신학대학원 1998 국내석사

Christian belief in resurrection has been the main issue besides Jesus' crucifixion in any period and the root catechism in ups and downs of church. The understanding of resurrection has been regarded in a new way as various questions rise in order to prove the incident with essential curiosity because it has been thought of as a never changeable issue and reported to be true. As people intend to understand resurrection in a different way, it is regarded not as a stereo-typed dogma but a critical, theological issue. Passing through the 19th century, the traditional theory of a close got wiped out which used to be the faithful belief starting from the beginning of Christianity. As a result, the fact is that there is no theory of resurrection with the unified prestige in discussing Christianity regarding it. This has brought about various interpretations about resurrection and caused a church to have dilemmas. Aware of such reality, Jurgen Moltmann, the best theologian of the 20th century and the preacher of "The Hope of Theology", and another theologian, Wolfhart Pannenberg, can be compared in their theories of resurrection in a meaningful way, That's because they both thought the questions of future and history over based on hope. In this respect, comparing their theories would make one understand the resurrection in a new way: Moltmann suggested a new version of the close theory, having criticized the traditional one and the modern one in his unique viewpoint whereas Pannenberg worked on the theory in a different direction. the former view it as a rather future hopeful incident rather than historical one, whereas the latter in the opposite way, show the difference. According to Moltmann, because Pannenberg emphasized only the structural plot in Jesus preoccupation and his definite proof of it, the conflict between the Jesus' fighting for his right and the proof regarding it has been eliminated. As Pannenberg interprets revelation and the theology in a universal way, the hope of revelation related to the symbol of resurrection has its own meaning only in the human theory of the world open theory. According to Moltmann, the modern human theory fighting for the universal openness originates from the revelation and the Christian Theory and that's way Pannenberg was not wrong, but if Pannenberg was right, Jesus' fighting for his right and his resurrection become just a simple example for people to think universally and humanistically. Therefore, Moltmann thought that if he examined the beginning of christianity regarding resurrection beyond Pannenberg's formal expectation, Jesus' right and resurrection can be looked over quite fairly. Plus, Moltmann's revelation his true understanding of the theology are discovered in the inquiries of God's justice among the human's vice and afflictions. The focus of this inquiry is not the human theory of the general history but the God's justice for the live and the dead and the expectation of the future victory. Therefore, Moltmann thought of resurrection as an essential condition for accomplishing God's justice generally in the judgement of the good and the bad. However, He was opposite with Pannenberg who said that the resurrection of the dead can be stated meaningful in the aspect of the theory of a close. That is, preoccupation can prove the preoccupied only in the aspect of the preoccupied. Believing this requires strong belief when historical preoccupation is pointed out and proved. Such belief can be realized only in the preoccupation Moltmann said the gospels regardmg resurrection at the beginning of Chnstianity is revealed preoccupation as Pannenberg said in its form but in its content, it shows the uniqueness of the gospels regardmg resurrection by the crucified's preachng of 'The King Of Justice.' The reason for regarding the resurrection theology as Christian is because the theory of a close belongs to the resurrection theology but in its content, it is to the Christian theology sue to it preaches resurrection. Moltmann states that Jesus never hesitated in his preaching about Heaven through judgement and resurrection before anyone else, but in preachng that the one born again is the one crucified. Therefore the revealed engagement that Moltmann emphasizes shows a preoccupied structure of the resurrection theology and Jesus' preaching. For this engagement, he put forth Pannenberg's concept of the expectation. Moltmann was against Pannenberg who said that he was influenced by Barth and based on such prestigious principle like God's Word, explaining the detailed structure of the engagement. The resurrection theology can be defined as the preaching of Jesus, His Crucifixion, His supporter's treachery, the motives and symbols of the revealed expectations. Resurrection is the symbol of the historical close and the beginning of the new world. The symbol of the dead's revival stands for the qualified new lives, fully aware of death. So far the resurrection theology being so one-dimensional, Moltmann was worried the aspect of the global change with the Easter might get weakened. That's why he emphasized the social relation of the hope in the resurrection theology. Moltmann who understood the hope of resurrection as the expression of expecting God's justice not the individual's final fate said that such understand of resurrection is to the reformed justice beyond Pannenberg's simple hope of human theory and the tendency of the world history. The resurrection theory is a newly defined one not preaching about the above but the praying of the live and the dead for God's justice. That is universal inquiry raised by the depth of the hope in resurrection is about God's justice. In the Crucifixion, all the afflictions of the mankind's tragic history are depicted. Moltmann said that the resurrection theory can be fully understood in the inquiry of God's justice and focus on the openness for justice in afflictions. Therefore, Pannenberg 's universal intentions and Bultmann's existential ideas are the aids for thearchy and nothing but the aiding boundary to answer this question.

復活의 歷史的 硏究와 마가福音의 復活 神學

강정원 慶星大學校 大學院 2004 국내석사

The resurrection of Jesus is one of the central themes in the New Testament. But it was a very new concept in the original Hebraic understanding of humanity. In fact Israel had not been that gravely concerned with the matter of after life until the end of its era. The people in that era rather emphasized upon Yahweh's intervention, either blessings or punishment, which should be realized in their earthly lives. However, in late Judaism, such view of this worldly intervention changes to the worldly rewards, salvation after death. This thought expands to having the hope of resurrection in the late Judaism. The New Testament witnesses to the fact that the early community believed not only in God's raising Jesus from the death, but also such a beliefs-in-resurrection bore a tremendous effect on forming the disciples' mission of evangelism as well as on their lives' ethical guide. We may summarize the New Testament times' understanding of the resurrection in the following ways. First, the Old Testament's few verses related with the resurrection are not referring to the resurrection per se, but are the descriptions of racial recovery or of the faithfulness of God. Second, such an resurrection thought has come to be the concrete divine justice from the aspect of theodicy as the resurrection thought came to be related to the racial sufferings. Third, through such an resurrection symbols the New Testament writers could give courage and consolation to the early community in terms of their actual experience of Jesus' resurrection. Fourth, the disciples' experience of the resurrection was not a 'findings of empty tomb' but 'an experience of Jesus-phany.' Fifth, the first disciples and the early Church come to recognize the death of Jesus as the sacrificial victim for the sin of Israel through the reality of the resurrection. Sixth, such an experience of the resurrection has been linked to Christ's mission commitment to the disciples. This thesis on the Markan understanding of the resurrection showed that Martin Kahler and his followers have underestimated the Markan narration of Jesus' resurrection at the expense of overestimating the suffering narration alone. But these scholars have overlooked the importance of the resurrection in Markan Gospel in spite of Mark's presentation of Jesus' resurrection as a significant conclusion in his Gospel, not to mention its being the indispensible kerygmatic element in the early Church. Consequently we may argue that Jesus' resurrection has the significant role in constituting the Gospel writings as the kernel of Mark's major concern and, as such, 'the key of Markan theology.' Accordingly it will be more correct to say that Markan Gospel is an 'resurrection oriented Gospel' rather than a 'crucifixion oriented Gospel.' In other words, it will be more convincing to say the Markan Gospel as a 'theologia triumphi' or 'theologia resurrectionis' rather than as a 'theologia crucis' or 'theologia passionis.' In this respect, it seems that Mark's placement of Jesus' baptism in the beginning, the story of Jesus' transfiguration on the mount in the middle, and the resurrection event in the end of his writing is not a mere coincidence. God raised Jesus from the death. This raise is God's vindication of Jesus and shattering all the enemy's attempt to kill Jesus. This God's vindication, viz. the resurrection, out of Jesus' suffering and death has a very significant meaning to the readers of the Markan Gospel. For the Markan community too was facing the same fate that Jesus underwent, namely, they were facing the 'via dolorosa' or the 'via crucis.' What Mark wished to present to the suffering Markan community was the good news of triumph, of God's vindication. The aim of Markan Gospel was to make the Markan community stand firm on the Christian beliefs through encouraging them who were being faced in suffering and martyrdom. The resurrection of Jesus is being presented as the event of divine ending His people's suffering and sorrow by way of His coming into human history, and as the guarantee in transforming the 'darkness' into the 'risen sun.' Mark's preaching to his community to have the hope for resurrection beyond death was not only for the suffering Markan community, but it is also for the Christians in all times who are suffering, and as such, will it certainly remain as the Gospel.

부활절 전례의 이해 : 부활 성야 미사의 신학적 분석을 통해

조중현 대전가톨릭대학교 대학원 2016 국내석사

「전례 헌장」 5항은, “주님이신 그리스도께서 죽음과 부활의 파스카로 구원을 완성하셨다.”고 말한다. 이처럼 예수가 이룬 파스카의 신비는 교회가 지닌 희망의 원천이며, 세상 끝 날까지 기념해야 할 영원한 기쁨인 것이다. 교회는 이러한 파스카의 신비를 전례로써 기념하고 현재화하는데, 이러한 전례의 정점이 바로 ‘예수 부활 대축일 성야 미사’이다. 그러나 오늘날 급격한 사회 변화와 세속화의 영향으로, 구원에 뿌리가 되어야 할 ‘부활 성야 미사’가 부담스러운 짐으로 전락하는 상황이다. 이러한 현실일지라도 ‘부활 성야 미사’에 담긴 의미를 신자들이 알 수 있다면, 그리스도인이라는 정체성에 기쁨을 느끼며 부활 성야 전례에 참여할 수 있을 것이다. 따라서 본 논문은 ‘예수 부활 대축일 성야 전례’를 이해하기 위하여, 부활절의 의미를 성경에서 증언하는 사건부터 교의의 발전 그리고 전례적 이해를 통해 알아볼 것이다. 그리고 현대 교회 문헌에서 의미를 찾고, 부활 성야 전례의 역사적 흐름을 살펴볼 것이다. 더불어 실질적인 부활 성야 전례를 해석 해봄으로써 ‘예수 부활 대축일 부활 성야 전례’의 신학적 의미를 그리스도인들에게 제공하고자 한다. In Article 5 of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy(Sacrocanctum Concilium), it says that Christ the Lord fulfilled our redemption through his death and resurrection which is the Paschal mystery. This mystery, which Jesus realized, is the source of hope for the Church and is an everlasting joy which should be remembered till the end of our days. The Church commemorates the paschal mystery and makes it present through liturgy, especially through ‘The Easter Vigil Mass’ which is the summit of all liturgies. However, due to the impacts from the rapid change and secularization of the society, ‘Easter Vigil Liturgy’ which should be the root of salvation is becoming a heavier burden for the faithful. Even if it is so, when the faithful are able to understand the deep meaning of Easter, they will be happy to be Christians and to participate in Easter liturgy. Thus, this thesis tries to provide the meaning of ‘Easter Vigil liturgy’ by making a research on the biblical events, theological developments, and liturgical understanding of Easter. Moreover, the paper examined present-day Church documents and the historical current of the liturgy of Easter Vigil. Finally, this thesis tried to offer the theological meaning of ‘Easter Vigil Liturgy’ by analyzing and interpreting the Easter liturgy itself.

부활전승의 여성신학적 의의 : 고전15:3-8과 마르16:1-8에 대한 편집사적 비교 연구

김진경 이화여자대학교 대학원 1990 국내석사