1920년대 한국교회와 공산주의의 관계

허정윤 ( Jung Yoon Huh ) 한국복음주의역사신학회 2013 역사신학 논총 Vol.26 No.-

To the Koreans 1920s were a time of hardship dominated by the Japanese Empire. But the gospel had taken root as a enlightening teacher to Korean Churches by the first generation of the Christian missionaries at these times. On the other hand, the second generation of missionaries began to come with the liberal theology in their hands. Korean People were suffering the aftermath of the failure of the 3.1 Independence Demonstration Movement after 1919. But Koreans did not stay only to the frustration. Many people who did not abandon the dream of the national independence chose asylum abroad and the others who remained endeavored to find a new way to obtain the independence. This phenomenon was also the same to the Christians who led the Koreans` independence movements and the 3.1 case. On the other hand, the Communist revolution which succeeded in the Russian Empire by Lenin in 1917 seemed to the Korean people as a new signal light for the national independence movement. So some independence movers welcomed communism and some Christians did the same. However, Korean people at that time did not properly know communism but rather considered it as one method of the national independence movements. Anyway, the communism gradually came to show their true colors and became a hostile forces to Korean Churches. This paper is being expected to inform properly about the communist entity which led Koreans to the cruel tribal war in 1950, especially to the Christians who suffered religious persecution by them.

생명기원 논쟁에 대한 신학적, 과학적 고찰

허정윤(Jung Yoon HUH) 창조론오픈포럼 2013 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.7 No.1

Evolutionism is the major basis of Atheism which Christianity must break. In this essay Oparin"s chemical evolutionism would be analysed and the errors criticised. Is the origin of life based on the method of the dialectical materialism, which means materialistic evolution through chemical reactions, as Oparin asserted? The resolution of this essay says "Never". Because material is impossible to produce spirit which is the specularity of living phenomena, even though it does unlimited evolution and organizes every chemical reactions. Life is not the sum total of material parts. Chemical evolutionism to find the origin of life in material cannot be resonable theory. The origin of life was rather based on the spirit which could not be produced through chemical reaction. And material was only material for the phenotype of life.

신학과 과학의 생명기원 논쟁에 대한 고찰

허정윤(Jung Yoon HUH) 창조론오픈포럼 2012 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.6 No.2

From a theological perspective, Darwin’s theory of evolution is the doctrine of the idols which opposes to Christianity most heavily. Darwin’s evolutionism is only a theory explained in the way of inductive reasoning from his records of observation. But he skewed at the data, and his theory is very subjective. He built his hypothesis based on the limited observation records and ignored the contrary evidences. In other words, he tries to explain several phenomena in one theory. He applies the theory of evolution to any case. That is, the evolutionism is an omni-potent theory which can explain every mutation occurring at random in the nature without purpose or direction. Evolutionary theory can not be called empiricist science which has a strict system and rules. The vitality of Darwin’s theory of evolution has been maintained by his friends’ enthusiastic supports to defend him, theologians’ ignorance and deliberate aversion, the oppression to its critics in the scientific community and social changes. Darwin’s theory of evolution has been changed by too many “mutations” and “natural selection.” The original theory is completely gone away now, and there remains only the fossilized theory. Of course, from the standpoint of modern theology, what we need to resist is modern evolutionism. However, if one does not know the historical “original type”, he or she never know the identity of the modern evolutionism as “varieties”, which has undergone “natural selection” and “mutation.” Therefore, this paper is my first attempt to verify and then analyze the “original type” of the evolution theory.

하나님 신(神)과 창조의 새로운 이해

허정윤(Huh, Jung Yoon) 창조론오픈포럼 2010 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.4 No.1

Christianity is the religion to believe in God the Creator and His Son, Jesus Christ whom He sent. Therefore a Christian has to believe in the creation by God first and foremost. However, the creation story in Genesis was written in the ancient time, thus being no more than a myth in the eyes of the modern people who think scientifically. Accordingly there is a stagnation of the growth of Christianity in the modern times. When a scientific view prevails, anything requires scientific verification. It also needs to be reasonable from the philosophical view. Modern man have the characteristic of making much of scientific rationality. This is the reason why the creation story in the Bible which a Christian understand it as historical needs to be re-interpreted. Then it might invoke sympathy of the modern people. Needless to say, it is not easy, but Christians should not give it up. This paper intends to set a cornerstone of re-interpreting the creation story for the modern people. The work is, in other words, to criticize the evolution theory which has been dominating the modern science and philosophy, and to shed light on the biblical creation theory from the view of the Eastern thought.

과학적 무신론의 시발점으로서 <공산당 선언>에 대한 비판

허정윤(Jung Yoon HUH) 창조론오픈포럼 2015 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.9 No.1

The purpose of this paper lies in researching and criticizing about the Communist Manifesto. Marx and Engels declared to abolish eternal truths, all religion, and all morality instead of constructing them, on the new basis of the Communist Manifesto in 1848. This conception was developed to the prototype of the scientific atheism, being painted with a color of science atheistically in their later writings by accepting Darwinism. Anyway the system of the scientific atheism is a theory of spontaneous generation or evolutionism which consists of materialistic evolutionism of Marx-Engels-Lenin-Stalin, Darwin"s biological evolutionism and Oparin"s chemical evolutionism. Even though the scientific atheism look,s as if it had a consistent system, it is truly a false theory. The Communist Manifesto stands at the starting point of the scientific atheism.

조나단 에드워즈의 <하나님의 천지창조 목적>과 “하나님의 영광”

허정윤(Huh Jung Yoon) 창조론오픈포럼 2011 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.5 No.2

The suggestion that the end of God"s Creation is "for the glory of God" has been broadly supported so far. But the words, "for the glory of God" as the end of God"s Creation was transformed from the end of man"s life for the "glory of God" in the 1st article of the Westminster Confession. It may be not wrong to say that the end of life of Man the creature should be the same as the end of the Creation of God the Creator. Nevertheless, the assertion that they should be the same is not unreasonable. According to the Genesis, Adam the creature committed sin of disobedience to God and he was banished from Eden. This event makes it hard to say that the omnipotent God"s creation was successful. Then, why is it that Christians mention the "glory of God" even though he was not so successful in accomplishing of the end of His creation? American theologian Jonathan Edwards asserts that the end of God"s Creation is the "glory of God" by using reasoning and citing the Bible in his book Concerning The End for Which God Created the World . If one intends to suggest the "glory of God" is the end of the omnipotent God"s Creation, there must be a huge presupposition here: the Creation by good God should be perfect without affliction on the creature. Also this question should be answered: Why have humankind had suffered from the original sin of Adam after being created? These questions should be reviewed in order to understand the "glory of God" properly in Edwards" book. For it is not allowed that the tribute of the "glory of God" is understood as meaningless words. The book has won best praises for the times. I have researched carefully Concerning The End for Which God Created the World. He endeavors to analyze the issues from multi-angles by using Bible and philosophical reasoning. This research on the book can be summarized as two: First is to criticize Edwards" view that the "glory of God" as the last end of God"s creation may not be the same as that of Jesus Christ"s ministry. Second, the book is proved as an unfinished work by Edwards, and that makes it hard to overestimate the theological value of his writings on the "glory of God" in the book. These two proofs functions as a guide to understand the difference between the biblical "glory of God" and the "glory of God" of Edwards.

자연발생론과 다윈의 진화론에 대한 비판

허정윤(Jung Yoon HUH) 창조론오픈포럼 2014 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.8 No.1

A series of theories which might be called “scientific atheism” had been published by Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species, Carl Marx and Engels’ works on materialism and Oparin’s The origin of Life. But this series of “scientific atheism” has been proven only academic arguments now by my verification of the theories. Then, these theories of “scientific atheism” are no more than ‘variations’ of spontaneous generation theories respectively in the World philosophical history. As “scientific atheism” has turned out to be a fallacy, it should be treated as empty idealism in the scientific societies. In this viewpoint, my verification will be explained in this assertion. But this paper covers only Darwin’s so-called biological evolution theory because of want of space. The other verification on two other theories would be issued in the next papers.

오파린의 생애와 사상

허정윤(Jung Yoon HUH) 창조론오픈포럼 2013 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.7 No.2

Oparin was undoubtedly a very famous scientist in the world. He approached the answer to the well-known but unsolved problem to men, the origin of life, by suggesting a revolutionary theory at his times. But it seems not coincidental in terms of the timing that his theory agrees perfectly with the communist dialectic materialism which has upset the Russian Empire. His theory made a considerable contribution to establish one-party dictatorship of the communist. As the rewards given to him from the Communist Party and the Government, he could enjoy the privilege and benefits all his life. Whether Oparin intended or not from the beginning, he may hardly be regarded as a pure scientist for this reason. Oparin"s theory is very simple. Life on the earth is inevitably to arise at some stage by the law of matter, by which inorganic matter evolves into organic matter, more complicated organism at the next and a living body finally. This process, however, has not been fully proven in the scientific perspective. It is thus still in the stage of a scientific hypothesis. Nevertheless, his theory based on the dialectical materialism has many problems, because which thoroughly destroys the human religious tradition and the minimal cultural ethics system. The impersonality behind this theory has been revealed under the communist regime, and it is regarded that their reign had been disastrous in the history of the USSR. But there remain dangers in Oparin"s theory, that the disastrous period may come again. For its followers are attempting to replace religion by it. Therefore religious people, especially Christians have to watch out for the Anti-Christ forces armed with this theory. To do so, all Christians need to study Oparin"s theory and the background of the theory. Here lies the goal of this thesis.

과학적 무신론의 형성 과정에 관한 소고

허정윤(Jung Yoon HUH) 창조론오픈포럼 2014 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.8 No.2

Darwin"s The Origin of Species seems to be completed as one systematic evolutionism by being complemented by Oparin"s The Origin of Life. However, Darwin"s evolutionism dissolved first in the Marx-Engels" materialistic conception of history, and Oparin"s evolutionism came into the world on this soil. In this way three ideas has formed in one and is called "Scientific Atheism" But the problem is that it is based on the materialism which is different from the fact. Modern materialists thinks various forms of life came out of a chunk of proteins and life is being made out of some materials by accidental chemical actions. In the view of materialist, man does not need to hold responsibility for his doings, because he has only evolved gradually from a simple cell to a complex animal. The thinking of man is only a reflection of materials, and value of human beings is meaningless. What an atheist seeks is only victory in the every day war for survival and has no other goal. As non-atheists We must hope to live in the world not like that. It is the reason that we have to criticize on the "Scientific Atheism". No matter how he changes title or theory of his thought, his action remains the same as far as it is on the basis of atheism, I was motivated to write this assertion to find grounds of criticism on "Scientific Atheism" by pursuing the process of its birth.

과학적 유신론 정립을 위한 노자의 자연 이해 연구

허정윤(Jung Yoon HUH) 창조론오픈포럼 2016 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.10 No.1

This essay aims to found Scientific Theism as a response to Scientific Atheism. In order to do this, the author proposes the paradigm shift of the understanding of Nature and particularly he proposes to use Laotzu"s concept of Nature. Laotzu, one of ancient Chinese philosophers, thought that the beginning Nature consists of Being and Not-Being. The idea is mathematically expressed in a formula, ‘1+0=1.’ In Laotzu’s view the ‘1’ existing in the beginning Nature is Tao(the Way), the Creator and the source of everything in Nature. But modern science says that everything in Nature came into being from the Big Bang occurred in a lump of materials called ‘singularity’. The author proposes that we could accept the singularity is the same natural subject as Laotzu’s Nature of Being and Not-Being. He maintains that we have to shift the paradigm of understanding of Nature, and to extend its objects of study to Laotzu’s Nature. He believes that Laotzu’s understanding of Nature could provide the foundation to unify Scientific Theism and Scientific Atheism.