Earticle

이 글은 오늘날 신자유주의라는 경제현상으로 인해 우리 시대를 지배하고 있는 세계화 현상을 비판적으로 분석한 후, 구약성서에 나타난 세계화와 관련된 문학적, 신학적 표지들을 살펴보고, 문제점에 대한 예언자적 사역의 방향을 제시한다. 이 글은 세계화 현상이란 거부할 수 없는 현실 속에서, 성서학자로서 기독교인으로서 하나님의 뜻에 올바로 행동하기 위한 성서적 사유방향을 안내하고 있다.

This paper pursues to analyze contemporary globalized context of the world, to find various markers signifying globalization in the Old Testament, and to suggest the directions for prophetic ministry. This paper takes Walter Brueggemann's methodology in analyzing the prophetic texts by which Brueggemann defines the prophet as a challenger against royal ideology. What he means 'royal ideology' includes dominant cultures of our days like wealth, position, seeking security as well as royal ideology of the biblical times. Chapter two deals with new contexts caused by globalization. The new characteristics are 'globalization as ideology,' 'intensification of economic inequality among classes,' 'cultural diversity,' 'glocalization,' and 'creativity.' In sum, the contemporary new characteristics were driven from an economic philosophy called neo-liberalism which is spread over politics, society, cultures as well as economy, thus threatening God's created order in the world. The globalization has been accelerated by the development of information technology. There is no word for 'globalization' in the Bible, but we can find markers for signifying 'globalization.' In chapter three, the paper deals with 'literary and theological markers for signifying globalization in the Old Testament.' First, in creation story, God proclaims that everything in the world is created by God. The emphasis on God's sovereignty was the rejection of a dominant imperialistic Babylonian ideology. Second, in Exodus story, Yahweh is described as having sovereignty over history and nature. Yahweh's punishment over Pharaoh was an attack over Egypt's dominant ideology. Third, in the history of Israel, markers of globalization occur in entire history. The paper seeks to explain markers of globalization by dividing the period of a united kingdom, two divided monarchy, exiles, and Ezra & Nehemiah. Fourth, in prophetic texts, universalism in which Yahweh controls all nations as well as Israel occurs in various texts. Fifth, in wisdom literature, the marker for globalization is that Israel not only accepted the wisdom literature of ancient Near East, but also reinterpreted it according to its own tradition. Chapter four suggests the directions for prophetic ministry in globalized context of the world. First, monotheism is a rejection to a belief that any other thing except God can have a sovereignty over human being. Israel people in the exilic period did not accept imperialistic Babylonian ideology by the confessing monotheism in which only Yahweh is God. In the globalized contemporary world, we should reject any ideology that money can save the world. Second, for overcoming economic inequality in the globalized world, prophetic justice should be proclaimed. Third, capitalism is the most dominant economic system which make many various voices disappear in the world. We can find different voices in the Old Testament. Prophets rejected a unified royal theology and adopted traditional egalitarian spirit to oppose substantial discoure of their world. Fourth, it is noteable that globalization has very close connection with glocalization. Two concepts are not contradictory, but complementary. Fifth, because of diversity of contemporary world, creative imagination is required. Prophets saw visions in the crisis of history. We should also have a vision of globalization for the poor and the oppressed.

이 논문은 구약이 표상하는 상징 구조를 통하여 오늘날의 범세계화 정황을 살펴보고자 한다. 이 상징 구조는 독일의 철학자 칼 야스퍼스가 이름 붙인 바 ‘굴대 시대’(the axial age)에 나타난 초월의 정신으로 특징된다는 점에 주목하여, 필자는 예언자들이 표상한 초월의 믿음에서 범세계화의 과정에서 빚어지는 문제를 비판하고 돌파할 수 있다는 논지를 펼친다.

This paper attempts to study the situation of today's globalization through the symbol structure of the OT. This symbol structure is characterized as the spirit of transcendence in ‘the axial age’ the term which was firstly named by Jaspers. By using the OT prophets' belief of transcendence, the present writer assumes, we may criticize and overcome the problems occurring in the process of globalization. For this purpose it may be necessary that the present writer as a sociologist admits the influence of the German sociologist M. Webber, who stretched his concern over the ancient Judaism, in terms of grasping the importance of the prophetic tradition, and also the influence of the Ameican sociologist Bellah, who made the idea of ‘the axial age’ an important issue in this age, in terms of confirming the existence of the transcendent world in the OT. This paper aims to reveal the problem of globaization by the help of the idea which I have already presented for the issue of globalization as well as by the help of some other scholars' opinion. In the process of globaization the world markets became wide open, under the situation which the giant companies of much capital made a huge profit. In doing so, Globaization has lost its balance. Although there have been some voices which call for the control of the world markets, we hardly find any serious effort to define its motive and driving force which supports and leads the globaization. Here this paper moves to the spirit of transcendence in the OT, by which we may find the power of the symbol leading to a successful overcome of the contradictory situation of the globaization. The belief of transcendence does not absolutize any of the present thing. It rather demands transformation of it by the norm of the transcendence. We need to deny this world rather than to conform it in order to live by this kind of the spirit of transcendence. Being empowered by the spirit of transcendence, we are able to criticize and overcome the ongoing globalization. Lastly, by the help of the opinion of Bellah that the concern of theology and sociology belong to the same realm of the scientific world, this paper emphasizes that theology and sociology should meet and know each other in order to connect the OT tradition and globaization, and also emphasizes that the problem of globaization can be overcome by the symbol tradition of the OT.

본 논문은 하나님의 창조사역이 말씀으로 이루어졌다는 단선적 사고를 보완하는데 목적이 있다. 필자는 창조행위를 묘사하는 히브리어 동사들에 대해 언어학적 분석방법을 적용하여 창조는 말씀뿐만 아니라 하나님의 행위에 의해서도 이루어졌음을 밝힌다. 이를 통해 필자는 창조에 대한 단선적인 관점을 수정하는 기회를 제공하고자 한다.

The purpose of this article is to correct the one-sided thought, that God' Creation has been accomplished only by his Words. But if one observes well the biblical text, he finds, that it is not so. The Creation has been made not only by God' Words, but also by his real action. Therefore the linguistic analysis to the text is to be so used that one may observe it in the sight of the movement of God. At first the concern is to be concentrated especially on the hebrew verbs, which describe well the creative action of God. They appear successively for six days. According to the seven-day-creation process this work is so divided into seven sections. The interpretation of the first sentence is concerned with one hebrew verb 'ar'B''. The verb plays an important role in the Genesis 1. It is very extraordinary, that it takes only God as its subject and needs no material for the creation. It also has the active meaning and appears again with relation to the living creatures in v. 21 and 27. The Word plays an important role in the first creation of Light. From the second creation the transitive verbs appear in Text. Above all 'ldB(badal/divide)'verb plays an important role in God's work. At third day the earth participates also in a creation according to the order of God. In comparison with other days the process of the fourth day is relative long. First of all lights are made here not by God's word but by his direct action(!t;n' natan/put). From the fifth day living creatures are created by God's work. At sixth day the creation is culminated in the creation of man and woman. Finally God stops his work and takes a rest at seventh day. All of this makes proof, that the creation is made not only by God' Words but also by his aimed work. Therefore this article offers the opportunity to people, the one-sided thought for the Creation to re-think.

본 논문은 창세기 2-3장의 히브리어 아롬(~Ar['), 아룸(~Wr[), 에롬(~roy[e)에 대한 어휘 연구를 통해 그 정확한 번역들을 제시하고, 그 언어유희의 의도를 파악하는데 그 목적을 둔다. 필자는 시대적 흐름에 따른 의미 변화의 유무를 염두에 두면서도 주로 공시적/문학적 관점에서 연구를 진행함으로써 에롬을 제외하고 아롬과 아룸은 기존의 번역들을 재고해야 할 필요성을 발견하고 그 언어유희의 의도를 파악한다.

The Creation account of Genesis 2 and the Fall account of Genesis 3 are not only naturally related to each other but also dramatically contrasted by a rhetorical technique called paronomasia as shown in the three Hebrew terms `ārôm (~Ar[', 2:25), `ārûm (~Wr[', 3:1), and `êrôm (~roy[e, 3:7, 10, 11). Unfortunately, however, this fact has been misinterpreted, as well as totally or partially overlooked. The purpose of this research was to investigate the usage of the three Hebrew terms in the Old Testament, to decide their meanings in each of their contexts, to check the suitability of their translations, and finally to perceive the intention shown in the delicate wordplay the three Hebrew words create. The research was done mainly from the synchronic/literary perspective, while keeping in mind possible changes in their meanings through the ages. The results can be recapitulated as follows:First, the Hebrew term `ārûm employed for the description of the serpent in Genesis 3:1 is used obviously with a positive connotation and thus should not be translated as “cunning” or “subtle,” but “clever” or “wise.” The usage of `ārûm in Genesis 3:1 may be a double entendre, connoting not only the “wise” serpent as the instrument of the Fall but also the “cunning” Tempter who made the serpent his instrument. In that case, however, there is no way to translate it suitably. Second, the Hebrew term `êrôm (pl. `êrummîm) used in describing the post-Fall Adam and his wife in Genesis 3:7, 10, 11 means ‘complete nakedness’ of shame and humiliation, with genitals exposed, of which the meaning is clearly shown in Genesis 3 itself, and especially in Ezekiel 16:7 and 23:29, and thus it should be properly translated as “naked ” or “nude.”Third, the Hebrew term `ārôm, chosen to describe the pre-Fall Adam and his wife predominantly connotes ‘partial nakedness’ in other contexts, but not ‘total nakedness,’ and thus should be contextually translated as “lightly dressed,” “poorly clothed,” or “in undergarments only.” The word `ārôm (pl. `arûmmīm) in Genesis 2:25 has been interpreted to mean their pre-Fall childlike innocence, but it rather seems to portray their being clothed with light, being in the “image of God,” just as God wraps Himself with light as with a garment (Ps 104:2). However, their robe of light must have departed forever soon after the Fall, and consequently they became `êrôm (pl. `êrumîm), that is, completely “naked.” Therefore, the translation “naked” is not suitable for depicting their being clothed with light, but there is no proper translation of this word that denotes “robe of light.”Last but not least, the reason for employing `ārûm in Genesis 3:1 instead of ḥāḵām (~kx, “clever, wise”) or śākal (lk;f', “be prudent, have insight”) must be for the rhetorical technique of the wordplay that it makes with `arûmmīm (sg. `ārôm) in 2:25 and `êrummîm (sg. `êrôm) in 3:7, 10, 11. The paronomasia that `ārôm (pl. `arûmmīm, Gen 2:25), `ārûm (3:1), and `êrôm (pl. `êrummîm, 3:7, 10, 11) make may be intended to bring into prominence the point of departure for the tragic event of the Fall, dramatically contrasting the pre-Fall human appearance (`ārôm) with the post-Fall human appearance (`êrôm), as well as naturally connecting the Creation account in Genesis 2 with the Fall account in Genesis 3.

이 논문은 유다-다말 이야기(창 38장)가 족장 내러티브 가운데 중요한 위치를 차지하며, 유다와 다말이 부부 족장으로서의 기능을 다하고 있음을 주장한다. 사실상 유다는 아브라함, 이삭, 야곱에 이어 네 번째 남성 족장의 위치를 차지하고, 다말은 사라, 리브가, 레아, 라헬의 위치를 승계하는 여성 족장의 지위를 얻는다. 이들은 의미심장한 자녀(베레스)를 낳음으로써 제1내러티브(창~왕하)의 넓은 맥락에서 새로운 해석의 지평을 제시한다.

From a patriarchal narrative viewpoint, the main characters, Judah and Tamar, both play pivotal roles in Genesis 38 and also in the wider story. Judah’s character in Genesis 38 at a micro level represents him as the reluctant and despotic father of his family who is brought to accept his own failings. On the meso level, that is within Genesis 37- 50, this transformation of Judah’s character allows for his role to become that of family spokesman and leader of his brothers. While Joseph seems to be more powerful as the governor in Egypt, Judah ultimately has the more significant role as the deputy of Jacob’s family in Canaan. Judah’s character develops through the sequence ‘Departure- Transition-Return’ in the final patriarchal narrative. In the end, Jacob’s blessing of Judah (Gen. 49:8-12) is the most favourable he gives to any of his twelve sons. In retrospect, this creates for Judah the status of a fourth patriarch succeeding his father Jacob in relation to the Kingdom of the South Judah in light of the Primary Narrative (Genesis - Kings) as a whole. Tamar, the sparring partner of her father-in-law Judah, shows her role as a meaningful mother and as one of family builders along with Judah in her story in Genesis 38. Surviving a period of trial as a childless widow, she finally succeeds in giving birth to the heirs of Judah by means of a plan that she herself devices. Tamar embodies all the key features of the role of the previous four matriarchs (Sarah, Rebekah, Leah and Rachel) and becomes a remarkable male ancestor of Davidic line (Ruth 4:12-22). This means that Tamar can thus be presented as the fifth matriarch and is the crucial link in the wider context of the Primary Narrative.

본 논문은 민수기 22-24장에 등장하는 발람의 역할과 기능을 사회학적으로 분석한 연구이다. 발람은 신탁 전문가와 예언자의 역할을 한 전문 종교인으로 기술되어 있다. 필자는 발람이 비록 이방인이었지만 최소한 민수기 22-24장에서는 하나님의 말씀을 충실하게 전하려 했던 전문 종교인으로 묘사되고 있음을 밝힌다.

Balaam is described as a religious specialist in the Book of Numbers 22-24. “A religious specialist,” as Turner defines and elaborates, “is one who devotes himself to a particular branch of religion or, viewed organizationally, of a religious system.”Balaam primarily acts as a diviner who transmits divine oracles to Balak, King of Moab. The Bible does not directly state the process of divination which is performed by Balaam; the indirect evidences indicate that the divinatory process consisted of binary questioning such as “Yes” or “No.” The divinatory function of Balaam can be compared to that of a Mesopotamian “bārû” or Israelite “priest”; however, the Bible does not label him as either. Besides diviner, Balaam is also portrayed as a prophet who receives divine messages and relays them to a third party. Yet, just as in the case of him not being called a diviner, Balaam is not labeled as the religious title “prophet.” However, the technical terms used to describe Balaam gives evidence that he acted as a prophet. He is portrayed as a seer who can watch visions overwhelmed by the spirit of God. In this regard, the biblical Balaam’s role can be compared to that of the Balaam described in the inscriptions found at Deir Alla. Like the Balaam in Numbers, the Balaam in Deir Alla saw nocturnal visions and delivered them to the king in the morning. In conclusion, we can simply say that Balaam intermediated divine oracles by playing the role of diviner, prophet, or both. Like other diviners in the ancient Near East, he used various skills to ask, receive, and interpret divine will and to recite it to the clients.

이 논문은 전도서 11:1-12:8이 삼단양식을 기본구조(A-B-A’)로 구성되어 문학적 단일체를 형성하고 있으며, 특히 ‘헤벨’과 ‘창조주 하나님’에 대한 선포를 문학적 신학적 기본 골조로 하여 하나님에 대한 경외와 하나님 없는 인간의 탐심과 열락의 허무성을 강조하는 본문임을 보여준다.

Qoh 11:1-12:8 is one of the most disputed passages regarding the understanding of its structure and demarcation of literary units. Many scholars consider Qoh 11:7-12:7(8) as an independent unit, separate from 11:1-6. G. S. Ogden is one of those recent scholars representing this position. Daniel C. Fredericks raised an opposite view, and claimed that Qoh 11:1-12:8 is an independent literary unit. I am at one with Daniel C. Fredericks on seeing it as a single independent structure. However, I detected some problems in his understanding and analysis of the passage and have attempted complement his structural view. Particularly I approached the passage from the angle of the triadic pattern of Hebrew literature. The triadic pattern is an important rhetorical device and appears throughout the book of Qoheleth (cf. 2:1-26; esp. 18-23; 3:10-15; 4:1-16; 5:18-20; 9:7-10). Qoh 11:1-12:8 was composed in the literary frame of the triadic pattern with hebel and the proclamation of the God of creation as its central literary components, and by developing its theological contents in the interconnection of three subunits 11:1-8, 11:9-10, and 12:1-8. Each of these three subunits was composed with its own triadic pattern(A-B-A’ structure). Additionally, the structure of the first subunit (11:1-8) and third subunit (12:1-8) are in structural parallelism in that both similarly have an additional concluding passage in their endings. This unit (11:1-12:8) emphasizes the importance of the fear of God of creation and the vanity of human folly. It has been strengthened with the threefold emphasis of hebel at the end of the unit(12:8). All these elements and other particularities analysed in the article show the literary unity of Qoh 11:1-12:8 with its triadic pattern of structure, and the poetical artistry which should be considered in the efforts of translation and interpretation of the book of Qoheleth.

본 논문은 히브리어 용어 ‘페하’가 구약성서와 성서 외적 자료들에서 어떻게 사용되었고, 또한 누구를 지칭하는 것이었는지를 살피는 내용이다. 필자는 비문학적인 자료들을 근거로 사마리아 속주와 유다 지역에 기원전 6-4세기까지 많은 총독들이 존재했었음을 알려준다.

Governor is, according to Korean lexicon, a head of the colonial administration and a position that governs all administrations of province. In other words, this word presupposes the historical background of colonization, and it means a chief who is appointed in the province. The purpose of this study is to understand the use of Hebrew peḥāh in the Old Testament and the epigraphic materials. Generally Hebrew peḥāh derived from the Assyrian Province- System, and the deuteronomistic Historian accepted the concept of Hebrew peḥāh firstly in the Old Testament, and the Israelites in the exilic period realized Hebrew peḥāh by the experience of the exile, for example by the prophet Jeremiah and Ezekiel etc. Furthermore the meaning of Hebrew peḥāh indicated not only the Governor of the province, but also the chief officer of the region under the province. The region of Jehud began with an independent province in the period of Nehemiah, and the role of Nehemiah was authorized as Governor again (Neh 2:6; cf. Neh 5:14). There were many Governors according to the epigraphic materials, for example, Bagohi, Jechezkia, Jehoezer, Ahzai, Elnatan, Hanana or Hanuna, Malkiu, Uriu, and YʾZN(?) BR YŠB in the province of Jehud, and Sanballat, his two sons Delaja and Shelemja, [?]YHW) and Hananja in the province of Samaria.

본 논문의 목적은 그리스 신화의 ‘입-출애굽 모티프’를 찾아내어 그 역사적 배경을 규명하는 것이다. 아르고스의 공주였던 이오가 이집트로 이주해 체류하다가 그 후손들이 이집트를 탈출해 고향으로 돌아가는 내용이 ‘입-출애굽 전승’에 해당된다. 그리스나 다른 민족들의 입-출애굽 전승의 확립은 세계 모든 문명들이 이집트에서 비롯되었다는 헬레니즘 시대(기원전 3세기) 알렉산드리아 학파의 이집트 기원설에서 찾을 수 있다.

The purpose of this thesis is to figure out “the eisodos-exodus motifs” from the available Greek myths and to examine their historical settings. Egypt, with abundant food yielded by a large scaled agriculture due to the Nile, has attracted many poor peoples of its neighbour countries. Thus many ethnic groups entered into and after a while came out of it. This kind of movements, as like as Joseph’s entry and Moses’ exit, creates a general eiso-exodus tradition. The entry into Egypt by of Io, the princess from Argos, and the escape of her descendants are appropriate into this category. Historical background of the Greek eiso-exodus traditions can be summarized to the contemporary circumstances of the three phases as follows. Mycenaean trade relation with Egypt in the 16th Century B.C.E., migrations of the Sea peoples in the 13th-12th Centuries B.C.E., and the foundation of Naukratis in the Delta as a Greek emporium in the 7th Century B.C.E. Among these the case of the Sea Peoples has been the most reasonable prototype for the Greek eiso-exodus traditions. Hecataois of Abdera asserted that the emigrants from Egypt founded towns in Judah, Greece, Babylonia, and Colchis et. cet. This tendency was formulated by the 3rd Century Alexandrian historiography in terms of national propaganda which emphasizes that main world civilizations were originated from Egypt.

이 논문의 목적은 1800년까지의 한국 구약성경 해석의 역사를 재구성하려는 의도로 출발하여 중국과 한국에서 십계명이 어떻게 번역되고 해석되었는가를 추적하여 밝히고자 하는 것이다. 이 논문에서 필자는 서청미시소경(序聽迷詩所經)과 천주실록, 그리고 십계명가를 중심으로 연구하였다.

This study starts to re-construct the history of Old Testament interpretation in Korea up to the year 1800. The purpose of this article is to trace translation and interpretation of the Old Testment in China and Korea with a particular emphasis on the Ten Commandments. Earlier arguments that date the history of Old Testament interpretation in Korea from approximately 1900, I argue, are overly restrictive. Given that Chinese characters(hanja) were used as the official script of consecutive states on the Korean peninsula, from the Three Kingdoms, the Goryeo dynasty, and up to Joseon, any interpretation of the Hanmun bible(漢文聖經) must also be taken into consideration. A translated version and interpretation of the Ten Commandments appears in Jesus-Messiah Sutra(序聽迷詩所經), written in 635-638, after the introduction of Nestorianism to China. I expect the Ten Commandments to have been introduced to Silla, Goguryeo, and Baekje, all of which had frequent contact with Tang China. Additionally, records exist of bible translations during the Yuan dynasty, raising the possibility of introduction of the bible via Christians to Goryeo. In contrast, we find the bible was brought to Joseon through a variety of routes. Beginning in 1592, several catechisms including Cheon-ju-sil-lok(天主實錄) were already imported into Joseon, and in 1610 Huh-Gyun brought back Ge-12-jang(偈十二章), including a copy of the Ten Commandments, from China. Other bible versions such as the Cheon-ju-seong-gyeo-sib-ge-jik-jun(天主敎十誡直詮) were imported into Joseon and widely distributed. This process of proactive interpretation is clear in the Song of Ten Commandments of 1779. The Song of Ten Commandments stands out as a work written in traditional Korean gasache(가사체), and has the added characteristic of having been written from the beginning in Hangul. Unlike the formalized Ten Commandments of the Chinese catechisms and transcribed in Chinese characters, this version is written in easily accessible Hangul alphabet and includes daily expressions used by commoners such as ‘ggogdugagsi (puppet, 꼭두각시), namusinmak (나무신막), ohneuwul georeom (midsummer fertilizer, 오뉴월 거름), pariddae (swarm of flies, 파리떼), ggamagggachi (crows and magpies, 까막까치)’. Such characteristics point to an independent interpretation by a native of Joseon. The Song of Ten Commandments allows us to ascertain the pre-19C history of biblical interpretation in Korea. Further, the existence of the Chinese character catechisms imported since approximately 1592 sheds even greater light on this process.