Earticle

본 연구는 기원전 8-7세기에 있었던 신명기 개혁운동에서 나타난 사회 개혁의 한 부분으로 약자보호, 특별히 나그네 보호에 대하여 살펴본다. 필자는 그 원인 중의 하나로 농촌의 소자유 농민들의 이농현상에 주목한다. 이런 배경에서 신명기 개혁운동에서는 다양한 인도주의적 및 법적 보호를 주장한다.

Prohibiting Oppression of the Disadvantaged and the Aliens in Society by the Deuteronomic Reform-Movement Dong-Gu Han, Th.D. Professor, Department of Theology Pyeontaek University The present article studies the social reform, a part of the deuteronomic reform-movement which was taken place in the 8th-7th centuries BCE and was particularly concerned with the oppression of the socially disadvantaged and the aliens. The economic growth of the 8th century had brought about enormous changes in the Israelite society, the very cause of widened gap between the rich and the poor. The majority of the Judaean cities expanded around the time of late 8th century, which had resulted in the three times larger residential area of Jerusalem by the time of 7th century. The massive immigration of the refugees from the northern kingdom was the main cause of the expansion, alongside that of the farmers from the rural regions. Israel as a state charged its people tax and corvee, to which tributes to Assyria were added. The prolonged state of war left the farmland deserted with the reduced agricultural products. Because of the economic hardship, the rural farmers fell into debt to the rich, who took advantage of the situation to increase their wealth. Since Hezekiah the aliens/the sojourners had been a serious social problem. The theological justification to support them was definitely associated with this historical context. The present article seeks to find the exact reasons of the appearance of the aliens, particularly the historical causes of it in the 8th-7th centuries BCE. The concern for the aliens and the socially weak in Deuteronomy is examined in light of various legal ordinances. Among the ordinances are (1) the prohibition of excluding the aliens from the Sabbatical services(Deut 5:14), (2) the encouragement of various groups in society to attend the services(Deut 16:11, 14; 26: 11; cf. Deut 2:18), (3) the bringing of the tithes to help the poor(Deut 14:28-29; 26:12-13), (4) the concern for the socially disadvantaged attested in humanitarian ordinances(Deut 24:6-25:18).

이 논문은 구약성서의 환대에 대한 연구를 통하여 다문화 가정들을 어떻게 다루어야 할 것인지에 대한 성서적 해답을 찾아보고자 한다. 필자는 창세기 19장과 사사기 19장에서 환대의 사회적 관습이 침해당하여 혼란한 사회를 이루는 원인이 공동체 안에 살고 있는 외국인 혹은 다문화 가정들을 동등한 권리를 가진 구성원으로 존중하지 않는 데에 있다는 점을 주장한다.

Understanding the Bible within the Multi-Cultural Society - A Study on Hospitality in the Old Testament - Pong Dae Im Lecturer at the Methodist Theological University Graduate Theological Union, Ph.D. This study addresses the topic of hospitality in the Old Testament, particularly in an attempt to respond to the steadily increasing rate of multi-cultural families in our society and the subsequent need to understand how to treat them hospitably in our community. Hospitality, a practice of receiving and extending friendship to strangers, is a highly esteemed virtue in the Old Testament. The concept of hosting originated with the need for aid when being away from home. A stranger is welcomed into an encampment, village, or town and is given a new status as a guest, thereby removing the hostile overtones associated with the different and the unfamiliar. While Gen 18:1-8 provides an example of hospitality, the stories of Sodom(Gen 19) and Gibeah(Judg 19) accuse violations of the communities’ obligations to provide hospitality. In Gen 19, the Sodomites treat Lot as an alien and disregard him, in Judg 19, old man which treats the Levite hospitably is a resident alien just as Lot was in Sodom. Resident aliens - or ‘sojourners’ - were not qualified to function as hosts. In both instances the host, who is responsible to protect the guest, is a resident alien, while the citizens from the community attempt to rape the guest. The tragedy comes in making resident aliens serve as a community’s hospitable party, which is not respected by the men of the city. As a result, the inhabitants of Sodom and Gibeah violate the law of hospitality by harming the guests. Many similarities between Gen 19 and Judg 19 suggest that Israel is always in danger of becoming like Sodom(cf. Isa 1:10; 3:9) and hence liable to a punishment like that of Sodom(cf. Deut 29:23-24). These biblical cases help us to understand the fact that we need to treat the multi-cultural families increasing in number in our society, not as the marginal groups, but as the full members of our community.

이 논문은 고대 이집트인들이 사고했던 신명(神名) 이해 방식에 근거하여 출애굽기 3장 13-15절에 계시된 하나님의 이름, hy<h.a(, rv,a] hy<h.a(,(에헤예 아쉐르 에헤예), hy<h.a,((에헤예) 그리고 hwhy에 관한 계시 방식과 이집트 신 이름 소개 방식을 상호비교 탐구하여 하나님의 이름에 담긴 의미를 해석하고자 한다.

An Interpretation of the Name of God, hwhy in Ex 3:13-15 Based on the Ancient Egyptian Understanding Eun-Pyung Ju Lecturer at Sungkyul University ACTS Ph. D. Until now, Old Testament studies has attempted to find the meaning of the holy name of YHWH. But we are hesitant to define the holy name of YHWH because God did not state the meaning of His own name clearly. This paper explores the meaning of God’s name, YHWH, and how it was revealed to Moses in Ex 3:13-15. Moses asked God of His name in Ex 3:13: “If I come to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your ancestors has sent me to you’, and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?” This question is related to the consciousness of God among the ancient Near Eastern people. We can resolve this problem through the method of comparing Ex 3:14 with Egyptian Myth(=“The God and His Unknown Name of Power”). Egyptian god, Ra had diverse names according to his divine character and potency. Likewise Babylonian god Marduk had fifty different names. Ancient Near Eastern people thought that God did not describe the meaning of hwhy just as the foreign gods did. And God reveals himself as the one who emphasizes the existence and continuity by using wordplay of the root verb hy"h'. We can summarize the meaning of hwhy in four aspects: 1) Ontologically, God is the existential God. 2) Futurologically, God reveals His own existence through the exodus in Egypt for the future. 3) The almighty God cannot be compared with ancient Near Eastern gods who were called by various names according to their ability and character. 4) God cannot be restricted to a name. God is the only one and real infinite God.

이 논문은 레위기 19장의 5개의 정형화된 핵심적 표현들 - ‘나는 야웨다’, ‘내가 거룩하니 너희도 거룩하라’, ‘안식일을 지켜라’, ‘너의 하나님을 경외하라’, ‘네 이웃을 네 몸처럼 사랑하라’ - 과 구약의 타법전들과의 전승사적 상관관계와 신학적 상호관계 및 그 신학적 의미를 검토하였다.

Studies on the Theology of Lev 19 on the Basis of Analysis and Comparison with other Legal Codices: Focusing on 5 Stereotyped Expressions Cheol-Woo Park, Ph. D. Professor, Graduate School of Theology, Nazarene University Leviticus 19 is a theological essence of the Old Testament. It has very unique rhetorical particularities in developing its theology by using stereotyped expressions. I tried to examine its traditio-theological interconnectedness with other legal corpora of the Old Testament by analysing 5 stereotyped expressions(“I am Yahweh”, “Your should be holy as I am holy”, “Keep my Sabbaths”, “Fear your God”, “Love your neighbour as yourself”). It shows that the compiler of Lev 19 emphasized his theological views by using such stereotyped expressions. I could observe theses expressions were the result of inheriting and developing further the other Old Testament legal corpora such as Covenant Law, Deuteronomic Law, Ten Commandments etc. Particularly, the expressions like “I am Yahweh”, “You should be holy as I am holy”, “Love your neighbour as yourself” are those which were cited as stereotyped expressions in the New Testament. These expressions should be regarded as the theological foundation for the universal love for all mankind proclaimed by Jesus Christ. The compiler of Lev 19 gives us the clear answer for such fundamental questions as who God is and how we should live, on the basis of such rhetorical devices(esp. stereotypical expressions and parallelism). The text also provides us with a meaningful direction of Christian living in multi-cultural societies.

이 논문은 모세가 약속의 땅 입성이 하나님으로부터 거절되었음을 다루는 민수기 20장 2-13절을 구조 분석적으로 해석한 것이다. 이것을 통해 본 논문은 민수기 20장 2-13절이 모세의 죄가 무엇인지 밝히는 것에 관심을 갖고 있지 않고, 모세가 이스라엘 백성을 가나안 땅에 이끌고 감에 있어서 정당한 지도자가 아니라는 사실을 강조하고 있음을 보여준다.

A Synchronic Reading of the Account of Moses' Failure to Enter the Promised Land in Numbers 20:2-13 Seokgyu Jung, Ph.D. Professor, Department of Theology Hanyoung Theological University This paper is an exegetical paper on the final form of Numbers 20:2-13, which depicts Moses' failure to enter the Promised Land. This paper is not concerned about the exposing the cause of Moses' failure, but about the intention of the text. In order to disclose the intention of the text, this paper examines the final form of the text by a synchronic approach rather than a diachronic approach. First, this paper analyzes the structure and texture of the final form of Numbers 20:2-13. The extant form of Numbers 20:2-13 is portrayed in the rhetorical scheme of inclusio of the introductory exposition on the situation (20:2a) and the concluding etiology on the name (20:13). In this framework, the main block concerning the event caused by the lack of water (20:2b-12) is described in terms of a five-part concentric design as follows: a. People's negative evaluation on Moses' action (20:2b-5), b. Moses' and Aaron's response on the people's complaint (20:6a), c. YHWH's instruction (20:6b-8), b'. Moses' and Aaron's response on YHWH's command (20:9-11), a'. YHWH's negative evaluation on Moses' action (20:12). Second, the structural analysis on Number 20:2-13 exposes the literary intention of the text. In its extant form, the third major unit concerning YHWH's instructions to Moses (20:6b-8) is most highlighted by being placed at the center of the literary block (20:2b-12) in the chiastic structure, and the first and fifth major units (20:2b-5, 12) are emphasized by composing the rhetorical scheme of inclusio. In YHWH's instructions to Moses (20:6b-8), YHWH is exhibited as not only a comforter with Moses and Aaron in trouble, but also the One who provides the best possible thing for the people in need as well as the One who restores the crisis of the leadership of Moses caused by the people's protest. The framework of the account (20:2b-5, 12) illustrates that Moses was not a legitimate leader for the people as they entered Canaan by emphasizing the negative evaluations on Moses by both the people from below and YHWH from above (cf. the law of kingship in Deut 17:14-20). Third, other texts concerning Moses' transgression (Num 20:22-29; 27:12-14; Deut 32:48-52) portray YHWH's denial of Moses and Aaron in relation to their leadership and its transfer to Joshua and Eleazer. Also, the final form of Numbers 20:2-13 shows that YHWH is the only leader of the Israelites but not Moses by the comparison between YHWH's leadership and Moses' leadership (20:12-13).

이 논문은 사경과 신명기에 나타나는 ‘나할라’(약속의 땅에 대한 표현)의 의미의 차이를 조사하고자 한다. 필자는 ‘나할라’가 신명기에서는 ‘하나 된 이스라엘 전체’를 가리키는 용어로 사용되며 이것은 히스기야 시대의 역사적 상황과 연관된 것임을 밝힌다.

A Study about the differences of the meaning of hl'x]n: between Tetrateuch and Deuteronomy Kyu Seung Han, Ph.D. cand. Department of Christian Studies Soongsil University The purpose of this paper is to search the differences of the meaning of hl'x]n: (inheritance/possession) between Tetrateuch and Deuteronomy. The words indicating the land of promise is various in Torah. But this paper only reviews hl'x]n: as a expression of the land of promise. In Genesis, God gave the promise of the land to the three patriarchs, Abraham, Issac and Jacob. But in Genesis, the words indicating the land of promise are mainly #r<a, or hZ:ßxua. In Exodus, hl'x]n means the place to which God leads Israel or Israel itself as the people of God. Leviticus is the most important text that describes the land of promise in the Old Testament. But hl'x]n is scarcely appeared in Leviticus. Leviticus mainly uses hZ:ßxua. Once hl'x]n: is used in 25:46, it means the hired workers or strangers who live in Israel. In Tetrateuch, Numbers the most frequently uses hl'x]n:, for example, in the story of the five daughters of Zelophehad. In Numbers 27 and 36, hl'x]n: iis used 21 times. But in Numbers it indicates a personal or familial inheritance(possession). In contrast, in Deuteronomy, hl'x]n: indicates the land of promise especially “the land which the LORD your God is giving you(2nd person singular) as an inheritance to possess”(Deuteronomy 15:4-5). It is not a personal or familial dimension. hl'x]n:, in Deuteronomy, is used to show the promise of the land for Israel as a whole community. What is of importance, is that this idea is related to the historical background of the period of Hezekiah. In the reign of Hezekiah North Israel perished and many people flowed into Judea. Hezekiah had an ambition to make one Israel. On the basis of the historical background, E.W. Nicholson affirms that Deuteronomy was written in the reign of Hezekiah. Therefore the desire of one Israel penetrates Deuteronomy. Naturally hl'x]n, in Deuteronmy, is an expression of the whole community to which God gave an inheritance to possess, and is a theological statement to justify the territorial expansion involving the North Israel in the period of Hezekiah.

이 논문은 북왕국 난민 유입 가설을 비판적으로 재고하는 것을 목적으로 성서적, 고고학적, 역사적 증거를 조사한다. 필자는 난민 가설의 주된 근거로 사용되는 예루살렘 성벽 확장이 북왕국 난민의 유입을 증명하지 못함을 밝히고 그것이 신명기의 기원과 같은 여타 이론에 미치는 함의를 다룬다.

Rethinking the Northern Israelite Refugee Theory Koog-Pyoung Hong, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Department of Theology Seoul Jangsin University It has been commonly assumed that a group of northern refugees flooded into Jerusalem after the fall of Samaria (722 BCE) and they played an important role in the ensuring religious reform in Judah. This essay reconsiders the biblical, historical, and archaeological evidence and explores its implications. The Hebrew Bible is almost entirely silent about any mass immigration from northern Israel to Jerusalem. The archaeological evidence of the expansion of the Jerusalem wall, which does prove a major societal change in Judah around the 8th century BCE, still remains inconclusive in proving the influx of northern refugees. Against the underlying assumption that the doomed Israelites would have found refugee in Judah given their ethnic tie, it is pointed out that the realpolitik around Judah and Israel at the wake of the Assyrian threat may not have allowed Hezekiah to accept Israelite refugees. To question the refugee theory is not to categorically reject the influx of Israelites; it is rather to critically rethink the implications of the ambiguity around this theory. While it is true that the refugee theory helps resolve many difficult questions around the composition history of biblical literature, the efficacy of the theory does not ensure its validity. As the uncritical basis of the theory lays bare, one must reconsider its implications to theories that are dependent upon the refugee theory. An uncritical acceptance of the refugee theory frequently resulted in a failure to pay attention to a complex dynamic involved in Judean's creative reception and reinterpration of the old Israelite tradition. It is suggested that in order to better understand this critical period in which Judah found a new self identity and went through a critical theological revolution, one must pay attention to the subtile dynamic between Judah and Israel at the aftermath of the Assyrian conquest. This will lead into a new way of understanding of the composition history of the texts that were composed or compiled in this period.

이 논문은 ‘아픈 자의 시’를 통해, 건강과 장수의 열풍 속에 살고 있는 현대인들로 하여금, 건강을 잃었을 경우를 성찰하게 한다. 시편 6편, 38편, 88편이 보여주는 바, 건강이 악화됨에 따라 인간관계는 고립되나, 야웨와의 실존적 관계는 견고해진다. 나아가 시편 41편은 환자를 돌보는 자가 받을 복을 제시해줌으로서, 아픈 자를 돌보는 윤리적인 공동체를 제시한다.

A Study on the Lamentation in the aggravation and restoration of the Healthy Tae-Kyung Kim, Dr. Theol. Lecturer at Department of theology Methodist Theological University The present study aims to examine the influence of the sickness on the individual lamentation. For this study, I investigate the Psalm of sickness 6; 38; 41; 88, and analyse the relationship between the sickness and the theological response to it. Through this study, this paper will show the theological difference among the Psalms of sickness on the one hand. On the other hand, it will present the theological reflection for the ethical society, in which the people care the sick person. Firstly, the sickness causes the change of relationship between the sick person and his God. In the case of the first stage of the sickness Psalm 6, the psalmist recognizes the cause of his dieses as God's anger. However, he accepts it not as God's judgement, but as God's educational instrument for him. In the case of the middle stage of the sickness Psalm 38, the psalmist recognizes his sickness as relating to his own guilt und repents it. In the case of the late stage of the sickness Psalm 88, the psalmist accepts his dieses as his own guilt. However, he does not repent his guilt. Rather, through the discussion with God he attempts to make theological foundation for the restoration of his healthy. Secondly, the sickness causes the change of the relationship between the sick person and the others. In the case of Psalm 6, the psalmist is against his enemy on the base of the confidence for God's salvation, by which God will restore his healthy. However, in the case of the Psalm 38 and 88, the psalmists experience the social isolation. In the case of the Psalm 41, the Psalm of thanksgiving, the psalmist insists the God's blessing to the person, who cares the sick person. In this way he pursues the ethical community, in which the people cares the sick persons.