칼빈과 한국장로교회의 학파별 구원론 비교연구 -칭의와 성화를 중심으로-

조봉근 ( Bong Geun Cho ) 광신대학교 출판부 2012 光神論壇 Vol.21 No.-

The Doctrine of Salvation (Soteriology) is very important doctrine amongst all doctrines in Christian Theology. The doctrine of salvation of the Presbyterian Church which come from John Calvin’s thought system is a model doctrine of salvation. This article will analyze and appraise Soteriologies of every sect in the Korean Presbyterian Church by comparing with the standard Calvin’s Soteriology. In particular, logics of justification & sanctification of each School through comparing their books and articles will be considered. Finally, this article will evaluate views on the doctrine of Justification & Sanctification of School of Hyung-Nong Park, School of Yune Sun Park, School of Jong- Sung Rhee, and School of Chai-Choon Kim. In John Calvin s view on 'the relationship between Justification and Regeneration’, John Calvin talks of the relationship between Justification and Regeneration (Sanctification) in Book III of his Institutes of the Christian Religion. Though he does not claim that the two are the same, but also claims that they cannot be separated. Thus, since Calvin saw Justification and Regeneration to be the same but inseparable, we must criticize Osiander who saw Justification and Regeneration as identical. At the time, Osiander said “they that use together the gift of Regeneration and the free forgiveness are one and the same”. Yet, Calvin tells us that Justification and Regeneration cannot be separated but must be distinguished. Calvin telle us ''though the favor or Justification is inseparable with Regeneration but they can be distinguished. Since the fact of the traces of sin within the Righteous are well known through experience, the Justification of the Righteous must be completely distinguished from a reformation into a new life (Romans 6:4). God starts from within his elect this latter point and within them progresses gradually or slowly through a whole lifetime which leaves them in a position to be condemned in trial.” Calvin claimed that Justification was not the ‘Gift of Righteousness' but an ‘Imputation of Righteousness’,and that we only receive the priceless righteousness only through faith(grace) by God’s mercy’,and also that Justification is “God’s proclaiming us as righteous in his grace”. In other words, Calvin tells us that “the actual holiness of life is not to be separated from priceless imputation of righteousness” and that “Christ became for us righteousness, wisdom, holiness and redemption (1Cor 1:30),and at the same time does not sanctify(regenerate) ex calls anyone righteous. These privileges are eternal and are bound by an inseparable band. So he saves those that are enlightened by the wisdom of the Holy Spirit, and those he makes righteous, and also sanctifies.” He also says, “just as Christ cannot be divided into parts, the two things which we experience in him, that is righteousness and sanctification(regeneration) are bound and cannot be separated.” Calvin calls 'the relationship between Justification and Regeneration in one words “we cannot be called righteous without our deeds, but also cannot be called righteous by them. This is bemuse in our participation of Christ which makes us righteous, sanctification is inclusive just as righteousness is.” Furthermore,Galvin in his claim of the union of the Saints to Christ, “therefore the union of the head to the parts of the body, ‘Christ’s living within us has the most important meaning to us. Thus Christ becomes our Lord, He makes us participants of Him within the gifts which he bestows on us. We are not contemplating Him far outside of us so as to allow for the imputation of his righteousness. It is because we are clothed with him and are attached to him. On Soteriology of John Calvin’s Institutes : Sanctification is the Will and Work of God the Holy Spirit. Calvin s Doctrine of Sanctification is centered upon sovereignty of God the Holy Spirit and man cannot pursue virtue without control of God the Holy Spirit and His guidance. The people of God is transfigured by God the Holy Spirit and they have to devote themselves entirely to God in order to be sanctified. Calvinistic thought is that sanctification requires a continual reliance on God to purge man’s depraved heart from sin. Sanctification may be achieved by following the Word and Work of God the Holy Spirit. It is very imp extant for Christians to understand how we be sanctified through God the Holy Spirit. The method used to be include worship and praise, studying the Holy Scripture and the practice of love. It is God's will that any person may pursue sanctification via the church since through worship and praise Christians are cleansed of sins. The man of God is influenced by the Holy Spirit through studying the Holy Scripture. Because the Holy Scriptures are able to make man wise for salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. The practice of love through our sincere prayer is also very important to rid ourselves of unholy desires. Through sincere prayer, Christians are able to preserve their chastity and overcome the dirty desires in order to devote themselves completely to God. The man who has consistently received the control & guidance of the Holy Spirit in Christ, climax of sanctification can finally be reached. There are many controversial points concerning stagnancy of growth of the church which are affected by external and internal influences. External factor of decreasing population is a rapid growth of mundane culture and prosperous economy, but internal factor is the depredation on Christian quality of faith. God permits many different methods to expand the Kingdom of God on earth, however He would like to sanctify them rather than a quantity of His people. Korean Christian has to do the best to realize the life of Gospel in order to reform the depressed Korean Church. It should be also essential to guide the man correctly. If we all the time submit ourselves in accordance with the volition of the Holy Spirit, spiritual change of us will be ultimately realized Sanctification as well as Justification. Anthony A. Hoekema is an American Reformed theologian from Dutch who would not tolerate the easy way to explain Justification & Sanctification and keeps to what is God-centered. In explaining soteriology, Anthony Hoekema is a better theologian than other theologians. According to him, Justification and Sanctification are both in Mystical union with Christ. So, What is meaning Union with Christ of Anthony Hoekema? Interesting, firstly Anthony Hoekema starts the Order of Salvation from Union with Christ in Christ. he defines Union with Christ has its basis in Christ’s redemptive Work.¹²⁵ On Soteriology of Hyung Nong Park’s School : In Dr Hyung Nong Park’s Dogmatic Theology Volume V (Soteriology),he describes the order of Salvation in following terms; “Calling, Regeneration, Conversion, Faith, Justification, Adoption, Sanctification, Perseverance of Saints, Glorification”. In comparison his former student Dr. Chul Won Suh urged the Work of the Holy Spirit as the dimension of redemption only in the historical sense. However, Dr. Bong Geun Cho accepted not only Dr. Ghul Won Suh’s theory, but also agreed with Dr. Hyung Nong Park’s explanations. Dr. Bong Geun Cho does not think it is a matter associated to the order of time, but as the order of Logic. Dr. Cho argues it is not an absolute order(a sequence) but a comparative order for the explanation. He thinks it is quite possible for every reformed scholar to have different logic or different explanations to one another. In his own work, Order of Salvation, it includes the followings, “Union With Christ →"Calling has two things as Internal Calling and External Calling ― then Internal Galling(Effectual Galling) which is similar with Regeneration→and Regeneration is unconscious work of the Holy Spirit in human being, Conversion is conscious work of the Holy Spirit in human being. Conversion has two sides, Faith and repentance. And Justification by faith. What then is faith? Calvin defined it as “a firm and certain knowledge of God's benevolence toward us, founded upon the truth of the freely given promise in Christ, both revealed to our minds and sealed upon our hearts through the Holy spirit”¹²⁶. Indeed, faith is “the principal work of the Holy Spirit,' a supernatural gift that those who would otherwise remain in unbelief receive by grace¹²⁷. Again and again, Calvin reiterated that faith is the unique gift of the Holy Spirit. Relationship with Regeneration and Conversion, both is the same work of the Holy Spirit, Regeneration is unconscious work of the Holy spirit in human being, but Conversion is conscious work of the Holy Spirit in human being. However, within conversion there are two sides; positive side being faith and negative side being repentance. Also “just as it is written: The righteous will live by faith.” : Justification will soon take place by faith. The operation of the Holy Spirit in faith that follows has ‘Justification’ as the first step and adoption as the second step and their relationship is again same as the two side of Coin. If that is the case, we need the following question. How can we explain the developing 'Sanctification, Perseverance, Glorification’ next? Sanctification is specifically the work of this indwelling and directing Holy Spirit. Those three things are the supernatural gifts and steps by the Holy Spirit. They grows up consistently more and more in the ‘baptism with the Holy Spirit’. However Sanctification starts from Regeneration. After Regeneration, Sanctification is gradually going on step by step. And Climax of Sanctification finishes in physical death of Christian who born again. And Sanctification does not only stop, but also does not drop from salvation, this is Perseverance of Saints. Perseverance means the engagement of our persons in the most intense and concentrated devotion to those means which God has ordained for the achievement of his saving purpose. And Physical Resurrection of the Saints is Glorification. Body of Christians is Gbrified in the second coming of Jesus Christ. Glorification is associated and bound up with the coming of Christ in glory. On Soteriology of Jong Sung Rhee’s School: The first ever scholar of Jong Sung Rhee s School was Dr. Jong Sung Rhee him self. Unfortunately, although he wrote a book on Pneumatology, he did not write any books about Soteriology. The reason for this is because he holds two theological positions. He accepted not only the Barthian position but also the Calvinistic position. Even though he stands on both positions he has tendencies to lean towards the Barthian side. This was the cause that prevented him from writing a sound doctrine on Soteriology. However, his former student Dr Seung Yong Hwang of Honam Theological University overcame this problem and wrote about Soteriology in his Systematic Theology (Soteriology) Volume Two. He quoted theological logic from Saved by Grace, a book on by Anthony A. Hoekema as well as Systematic Theology by Louis Berkhof. Professor Hwang described his Soteriological Logic as follows; Order of Salvation (Union with Christ, Calling, Regeneration and Effectual Calling, Conversion, Faith, Justification, Sanctification, Perseverance of the Saints) by Louis Berkhof. Order of Salvation by Dr. Seung Young Hwang s were as follows; ‘Union with Christ, Calling, Regeneration, Repentance, Faith, Justification, Sanctification, Perseverance of the Saints' In Soteriology, faculties of Systematic Theology in fact held different views of theological positions from each other,but incredibly they were able to graciously accept their different views in order to bring their work together. For example, Myung Yong Kim, Chul Ho Youn, and Johan Hyun including Yoon Bae Choi, who are professors of Systematic Theology in Presbyterian College and Theological Seminary, permitted and a lowed other faculties' with different views as well as had understanding for colleagues with different thoughts. However,only Professor. Yoon Bae Choi who had studied Systematic Theology at tradition of Reformed Church in Netherland, wrote an article on Calvinistic Soteriology. He described in detail his Order of Salvation as follows; “Faith,Justification, Sanctification(Repentance, regeneration),Election or Calling, Resurrection and Glorification”. Professor. Choi defined faith as the supernatural grace given to us by the Holy Spirit and it is very important operation by the Holy Spirit. And he also defined Justification as the gracious forgiveness by God to sinners and forgiveness of sin. He said ‘Sanctification is to repent throughout one’s entire life and a Christian must live a holy(sanctified) life in Christ’ . Unfortunately, Presbyterian College and Theological Seminary does not have a necessary (compulsory) subject on Soteriology in Master Divinity Course. Faculty Group of Presbyterian College and Theological Seminary, which belongs to Tong-hap Denomination, supports World Council of Churches. On Soteriology of Yune Sun Park’ School: Among theologians of the Park Yune Sun’s School¹²⁹, a theologian to have excelled in dealing with the doctrines of Justification and Sanctification is Dr Park Young-Don of Korea Theological Seminary, Cheonan. Park Young-Don says, “occasionally it has been said that the Reformation having attached too much weight on Justification has in comparison overlooked Sanctification. Andrew Murray said that the Reformation rediscovered the doctrine of Justification but sincs it did not develop upon Sanctification it was a half a Reformation. However, such criticism comes from a lack of understanding of Calvinistic theology. Calvin had great interest in Sanctification and has dealt with in depth about the topic, enough to be called “theologian of sanctification”. For Calvin, though the Reformation has Justification as its principle and core doctrine, Justification is not the goal of a Christian Me but is the ground and starting point. Calvin s realistic interest was a godly life towards God. A constant striving for godliness penetrates through his teaching and his life. The main character of Calvin s doctrine of Sanctification was formed in situations of debate with the Roman Cathdic Church. Calvin strictly differentiates Justification and Sanctification and allows for the unstable doctrine of Justification to depend on Sanctification. This was appropriate answer to the error done by the Roman Catholic Church which seriously damaged the conviction of salvation. At the same time he emphasized that these two doctrines were very closely united, which effectively swept off the criticism of the Roman Catholics, that the Reformed Church’s doctrine of Justification weakened the importance of Sanctification and in turn promoted ethical dissoluteness and incidence. Together with this, Calvin blocked at the source the dangers of the doctrine of Justification being abused as a doctrine that incurs non-legalistic confusion. In this way, Calvin differentiated Justification and Sanctification against legalism, and against non-legalism he emphasized their connection, and as a result effectively overcame both extremes, and such strategic arguments farm the recent works an Calvin s Soteriology. Galvin starts his study of Sanctification from a strict Christological viewpoint. According to Galvin, the whole process of Sanctification has its roots in unity with Christ. The pattern of Sanctification is in the imitation of Christ’s death and resurrection by dying to sin and resurrection by righteousness. The driving force of the Sanctification flows from Christ5 s death and resurrection. The ultimate goal of Sanctification is also to have the likeness of Christ's image. Ultimately, Jesus Christ who died and resurrected for us is the origin and the pattern of Sanctification, the Christ who lives in us is the driving force of our Sanctification, and the Christ who is in glory is the goal of our sanctification. That is to say that the beginning and the end, the Alpha and the Omega of sanctification is Jesus Christ. According to Calvin, Sanctification is made up of two sides. That is, Sanctification is gradually proceeded by the daily process of the death of the old-self (mortificatio) and revival into the new- person. The two sides of Sanctification is less in stages but occurs simultaneously, and is intimately connected like the two sides of a coin. ‘Self denial and ‘Taking up ones cross’ is the two sides of death (mortificatio). Calvin emphasized self denial as the core of a Christian life. Without self-denial, we cannot expect revival into a new person, viz. progress in Sanctification. God only rules where there is self-denial, but where there is no self-denial all kinds of sin rule. Self-denial is in gear with the great thesis of Calvinistic theology, ‘Soli Deo Gloria’ . Without the death of the self which is thirsty on vain glory, shouting the slogan ‘Soli Deo Gloria is just empty words. Without self-denial, even the holy slogan 'Soli Deo Gloria can only be misused to skilfully disguise the corrupt desires of the self. Therefore, complete death of the self, it’s destruction is the only solution. The life of the believer in this world is closer to participation of Christ's passion than the participation of his glory. The whole process of sanctification can be seen as a kind of path of endless death wherein we follow the same path of the way of the Cross which our Lord walked. All the life of this world is a continuous battle against death where there are trials and tribulations, it is a life of the Gross. Even if we proceed in our sanctification, we cannot mature above the cross. When we forget this fact we fall into all kinds of pride and fancies of perfectionism. Therefore, there is in the life of a believer moans and groans and cries that come from not being completely free still from the tribulations of sin. Such cries deepens our longing and hope for a eschatological salvation from within a believer. Calvin s doctrine of sanctification which has highlighted the still in sanctification works for an appropriate restraint and correction to the modern church which has inclined towards excessive triumphalism in attaching too much weight to the 'already' element. This is a time, more than ever, for us to listen mere carefully to Calvin's voice that emphasizes the point that we should be denying ourselves and take up our cross to follow our Lord. It is a teaching that is most abhorred and unpopular to this age of self-love in which we live. In our Reformed Church, the thing that is missing the most is denying oneself and following the Lord in taking up one’s Cross. No matter how well we follow Calvin s theology theoretically, if we have no self- denial we cannot be said to truly follow Calvin. When there is no self-denial, even Calvin’ s theology can only be used as a tool to secretly further one’s own glory. Where there is no self-denial, a terrible idolistic sin called self-worship can rampage. Without the death of the self which is thirsty for if s own honor and glory, even the godly slogan 'Soli Deo Gloria is used for the corrupt desires of the self. Therefore, the only way of sanctification is death. Calvin s doctrine of sanctification does not make any compromises in emphasizing this fact. Only the dead can live. Only he who has completely emptied himself can be full of the Holy Spirit. Only such people can save the Church and give to God all the glory.” Furthermore, Dr. ‘Upright Rock’ Park Yane-Sun’s Soteriology (Justification and Sanctification) is summarized in 『Refotmed Dogmatics』 which is a book that has condensed his bible commentaries. According to Dr Park “Justification is a legal term where a criminal is called innocent through a legal proclamation by a court”, and in such a case “the criminal called innocent does not have to have any righteousness for the claim to be valid, and when one believes Jesus Christ, God legally proclaims him one who participates in Christ’s righteousness’ Park also explains that “Since Christ’s righteousness is the fruit born from Christ’s death and resurrection, therefore it is the righteousness of God.” Park also writes in his commentary that true statement “the proclamation of Justification which is bestowed upon believers is given only through faith, and is irrelevant to the persons moral qualifications” is clearly seen in the words of Romans 4:4 “New when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.” Park continues to say “God does not do this to the believer because he foresees righteous deeds he will do by his own efforts. It is done by God's sovereignty, God does it because he has decided that he will personally make the believer righteous in Christ.” On Soteriology of Chai Choon Kim’s School : The Soteriological viewpoint of Chai-Choon Kim’s School differs basically from that of the Hyung Nong Park’s School. The School of Chai-Choon Kim neither claims Salvation as being exclusively by Jesus Christ nor the inerrancy of the Holy Scripture, because they do not believe that the Holy Scripture is the Word of God. Originally, The School of Chai Choon Kim did neither accept Soteriology of John Galvin nor the inerrancy of the Holy Scripture, because they started from methodology of Karl Barth's theology. Therefore, they have enjoyed hermeneutic methodology of Rudolf Bultmann, Paul Tillich, Jurgen Moltmann, and such theologians. Theologies of Modern Liberal Theologians are very broad. Most Faculty Members of Hanshin University have not only think of the Holy Scripture as a book of religious experience, but they also believe that higher criticism on the Holy Scripture to be right. Dr Bong Rang Park, Chang Shik Lee, and Jae Yong Joo tends to Pluralism of religion and postmodernism. It follows that their Soteriology differs from their Biblical Soteriology. They had already given up Christian Soteriology since 1948. Consequently, they all came to accept salvational doctrines of the World religions. Their doctrines are not original Christian doctrines but are Synthetic doctrines. These doctrines sympathizes with and leads Christianity to World Religions, which will eventually mean no more need for Salvation by Jesus Christ. Actually, Chai-Choon Kim’s view on Doctrine of Justification and Sanctification can be said to be near non-existent. Dr. Chai-Choon Kim was the first to take on Barth’s theology in the history of Korean Presbyterian Church and in his study of the bible, he established Barth's outlook on revelation and effective criticizing method among his students. This led to his students taking on the position of secular level of studying which unfortunately meant they turned their back on the pure gospel of Christianity to take on the side of polytheisme instead. Therefore, not only the importance of Soteriology but also the doctrine of sanctification research declined to be the most weakest religious body. Thus/so-called systematic theology Dr. Bong-Rang Park, non-religious scholar Dr. Kyung-Jae Kim and systematic theology Dr. Young―Suk Oh do not insist on the faith of only Jesus where “Only through believing in Jesus Christ one can be saved”. Therefore, pure Gospel of Christianity can rarely be found from Dr. Ghai-Choon Kim and associates from his school. The originator of his founding school, Dr. Ghai-Choon Kim, did not leave any thesis or written works of any kind relating to soteriology, nor did his students. For example, Dr. Bong-Rang Park, who graduated and taught systematic theology at Han-Shin University for many years, did not leave any clear and distinctive work on Soteriology. Also, Han-Shin University s Korean Theology Research Center lead by Dr. Byung-Moo Ahn was only too busy striving to embrace and translate the following (Karl Barth, J rgen Moltmann, Rudolf Bultmann, Paul Tillich Modern Radical Theologians and higher criticism of the Holy Scripture of Religions- geschichtliche Schule or universalism), but they did not learn Soteriology properly. Even today, most theologians of Ghai-Choon Kim's School and his associates stand on the relativistic side of non-religious scholars. Especially, not only Dr. Kyung-Jae Kim who is developing the theory of Religious Universalism, but also Dr. Young-Suk Oh and Dr. Kyuun-Jin Kim are in the case of those who are enjoying the comfort of the Minjung Theology Category. However, peculiarly Dr. Kyuun-Jin Kim, who has taught systematic theology at Theological College of Yonsei University far a long time, has written in chapter 9 of his book ‘Christian Systematic Theology’ in relative detail of “Faith, Justification, Sanctification and the Grace of God” over a surprising 230 pages. Also, there is an epoch making fact in that Dr. Kyuun-Jin Kim deals with “the relationship between Justification and Sanctification” just like traditional Reformed Theologians, Nevertheless, Dr, Kyuun Jin Kim is approaching the thoughts of Barth than Calvin. On the other hand, Kyuun Jin Kim’s soteriological understanding is almost identical to Dr. Ho―ik Hur’s “Holistic Understanding of Soteriology”.

칼빈과 한국장로교회의 학파별 신론 비교연구 -하나님의 속성과 사역을 중심으로-

조봉근 ( Bong Geun Cho ) 광신대학교 출판부 2013 光神論壇 Vol.22 No.-

Are the Korean Presbyterian churches actually continuing and developing Calvin s theology? Galvin s Theology is the Creed in which every protestant denomination normally accepts as well as being accepted by the Orthodox Conservative Presbyterian Church. These days, all heretics reject Christian Theology of John Calvin (the Attributes & Works of God),and also they do not believe the theory of Creation and Providence. So we cannot find out the real Truth behind their Doctrine of God (the theory of Creation and Providence). Unfortunately, they urges Pantheism, Deism, and Evolutionism rather than Orthodox Doctrine. According to Timothy George⁸⁹, neither Reformer Luther nor Zwingli devoted much attention to the theory of Creation and Providence. Both accepted the Orthodox formulations of the oneness and threeness of God developed by the early church councils, but neither felt compelled to elaborate on this teaching. At the beginning of his career Calvin too followed this pattern. The first edition of the Institutes contained only a meager statement on the theory of Creation and Providence. Chai-Choon Kim of Radical Presbyterian Church of Korea was largely influenced by Karl Barth, Bultmann School and Jurgen Moltmann. Although Minjung Theology of Korea itself boast of originality, on dose inspection, Minjung Theology of Korea is almost identical to Liberation theology derived from South America & Moltmann. And most of liberal theologians who belongs to English Academic School denies the theory of Creation and Providence. Such trend like these prevents and challenges the Apostle’s Orthodox Greed, and I am now trying to compare the writings on the theory of Creation and Providence between John Calvin and Korean theological Scholars. The theory of Creation and Providence were not to be understood as divisions. There was one God who knows Himself and who has revealed Himself as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Trinity was the foundation of salvation for only could one who was truly God redeem those who were utterly lost. In the liturgy of baptism and in the doxology faith in the Trinity was confessed not in order to fully define the being of God but only not to be silent before the mystery of His presence. Dr. Hyung-Neng Park of Conservative Presbyterian Church of Korea was greatly influenced ty Louis Berkhof. Berkhof was not known for being original or speculative but for being very good at organizing and explaining basic theological ideas following in the tradition of John Calvin, Abraham Kuyper and Herman Bavinck. Theologian Wayne Grudem has called Berkhof's Systematic Theology “a great treasure-house of information and analysis, probably the most useful one-volume systematic theology available from any theological perspective.” Berkhof’s writings continue to serve as systematic presentations of Reformed theology. They are organized for use in seminaries and religious education as well as individual reference, though his systematics works are demanding reads. The first edition of the Institutes contained only a meager statement on the theory of Creation and Providence. So, Timothy George⁹⁰ says as follows. “Having derived from Scripture the Triune nature of God, Calvin next described the activity of God in relation to the world in creation and providence. These doctrines, fall under the general rubric of the “Knowledge of God the Creator” in contrast to the “Knowledge of God the Redeemer,” which Calvin discussed in Books II-IV of the Institutes.” Dr. Chai-Ghoon Kim of Korean Radical Presbyterian Church was largely influenced by Karl Barth, Bultmann School and Jurgen Moltmann. Although Minjung Theology of Korea boast of originality, on dose inspection, Minjung Theology of Korea is almost identical to Liberation theology derived from Moltmann. Also, Most of liberal theologians who belongs to English Academic School denies the theory of Creation and Providence. Such trend like these prevents and challenges the jostle s Orthodox Creed, and I am now trying to compare the writings on the theory of Creation and Providence between John Calvin and Korean theological Scholars. Professor Hyung-Nong Park, origin scholar of Hyung-Nong Park’s school was hugely influenced by American scholar, Professor Gresham Machen. Of course, H. N. Park himself in the prefab of his book testified he was influenced by the following scholars; Charles Hedge⁹¹, A. A. Hedge⁹², B. B. Warfield, Dabney, Shedd, H. Smith, Abraham Kuyper, Herman Bavinck, G. Vos, and A. H. Strong. However, when describing the attributes of God, H. N. Park in fact mostly employed the farm of the American scholar, Louis Berkhof.⁹³ Hence evidently we can identify Louis Berkhof was H. N. Park’s biggest influence. In H. N. Fork’s book, “Dogmatic theology Volume Two (Doctrine of God)”, the attributes of God is divided into two groups: ““uncommunicable attributes.” and communicable attributes”. Uncommunicable attributes is divided into four parts:“absoluteness(Self-existence),immutability, infinity and uniquenessfonenessy”⁹⁴ and communicable attributes of divided into five groups: “spiritual discussed in terms of the attributes, intellectual, moral attributes, the attribute of the sovereign, wealthy attribute.”⁹⁵ In inspect to the “Work of God”, within the ‘Eternal Works’, the “Divine Decrees” and ‘Predestination’ are described whereas the ‘Creation’ and the ‘Predestination’ are covered within the “Temporal Works”. Providence when dealing with the Work, “Universal or General(Ordinary) Providence,” as well as “Special Providence” and “Extraordinary Providence(Miracles)” (transitive) are closely covered. However, all of the above explanations that he used were originally taken from Herman Bavinck’s Reformed Dogmatics rather than Louis Berkhof's Systematic Theology, As a former student of Hyung-Nong Park, Professor Bong-Geun Cho of Kwang Shin University has written four books : Reformed Theology, Core of Essential Theology, Biblical Dogmatic Theology and An Outline of Modern Reformed Dogmatics concerning Textbook of Theology. Almost all of which reconfirms Hyung-Nong Park’s theology. On the other hand, Dr. Chul-Won Suh in his “Lecture Notes”, he dealt with the summary, the name of God, the nature of God, the attributes of God, the Trinity and the work of God (intend, scheduled, creation, providence). Especially in the “Doctrine of God”, he dealt with “absolute attribute” (Self-existence, simplicity, infinity, immutability) and analogic 1 attributes”(life, intellect, commitment, love, of, sovereignty). In the “Work of God” he discussed “dealing with intend (expected)” and “Election and Reprobation.” He then discussed the “Election before the downfall(supralapsarianism) and Election after the downfall(infralapsarianism) After that he followed the discussion with the 'theory of creation then refuted against “the opposite theory(dualism, theory of emanation, and evolutionism). He divided “spiritual world” from the “material world” and explained and compared the two. He pointed out the mistakes in “Deism and Pantheism” when dealing with ‘Providence.’ “Special providence(Preservation, Concurrence, Government)” and '"Extraordinary Providence” were discussed with most of the credit going to Cornelius Van Til and reused general scheme from reformed theologians. Professor Moon―Ho Ha of Calvin University of Korea in Seoul, in his book, “Dogmatic Theology, Volume 2: Doctrine of God” he discussed “does God exist?” and “can God be known?”. In part 2 of “the existence of God” he dealt with the “attributes of God” as well as the :incommunicable attributes (self―existence, immutability, infinity, uniqueness)” and “communicable attribute (spirituality, intellectual attribute, and sovereign moral attributes, attributes, wealthy enemy attribute)” In part 3, within “the Work of God" he explained and discussed almost identically to the statement and works of Prof. Hyimg―Nong Park, Prof. Chul-Won Suh and Prof. Bong-Geun Cho. In particular, Moon-Ho Ha dealt with nature” (universality, confidentiality, Sovereignty, tolerance) similar to the three professors mentioned previously. The theory of Creation and Providence were not to be understood as divisions. There was one God who knows Himself and who has revealed Himself as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Trinity was the foundation of salvation for only could one who was truly God redeem those who were utterly lost. In the liturgy of baptism and in the doxology faith in the Trinity was confessed not in order to fully define the being of God but only not to be silent before the mystery of His presence. Dr. Hyung- Nong Park of Korean Conservative Presbyterian Church was greatly influenced 1,Louis Berkhof. Theology of Hyung―Nong Park was influenced by Louis Berkhof, however on close inspection it was originally derived from Herman Bavinck. So, theology of Herman Bavinck’s summary⁹⁶ is as follows: "The Knowledge of God is the central, Core Dogma, the exclusive content of theology. From the start of its labors dogmatic theology is shrouded in mystery ; it stands before God the incomprehensible One. This knowledge leads to adoration and worship; to know God is to live. Knowing God is possible for us because God is personal, exalted above the earth and yet in fellowship with human beings on earth.”⁹⁷ Profess or Hyung- Nong Park, origin scholar of Hyung-Nong Park’s school was hugely influenced by American scholar Professor Gresham Machen. Of course, H. N. Park himself in the preface of his book testified he was influenced by the following scholars; Charles Hodge⁹⁸, A. A. Hodge⁹⁹, B. B. Warfield, Dabney, Shedd, Smith, Abraham Kuyper, Herman Bavinck and G. Vos, A. H. Strong. However, when describing the attributes of God, H. N. Park in fact mostly employed the form of the American scholar, Louis Berkhof.¹⁰⁰ Hence evidently we can identify Louis Berkhof was H. N. Park’s biggest influence. In H. N. Park’s book, “Dogmatic theology Volume Two(Doctrine of God)”, the attributes of God is divided into 2 aspects: “uncommunicable attribute.” & communicable attribute”. Uncommunicable attribute is divided into 4 parts, “absoluteness(Self―existence), immutability, infinity and uniqueness(oneness)” ¹⁰¹ and communicable attribute of divided into five parts “spiritual discussed in terms of the attributes, intellectual, moral attributes, the attribute of the sovereign, wealthy attribute.”¹⁰² In respect to the ‘"Work of God”, within the 'Eternal Work’,‘Decrees’ and 'Predestination are described whereas the ‘Creation’ and the ‘Providence’ are covered within the “Temporal Work”. Providence when dealing with the Work, “General(Ordinary) Providence,” as well as “Special Providence” and “Extraordinary Providence( Miracles)” (transitive) are closely covered. However, all of the above explanations that he used were originally taken from Herman Bavinck’s Reformed Dogma tics rather than Louis Berkhof’s Systematic Theology. Here, Professor Bong-Geun Cho will looks at the view of Jong-Sung Rhee and kyun-Jin Kim’s belonging to the Radical Denominations of Korean Presbyterian Church. First, Jong-Sung Rhee and his book, ‘"Doctrine of God” moves away from the long traditional view of the Orthodox Church and expresses new creationism as follows: “the creation of the world record at the beginning of the Bible, also teaches the beginning of all things, because many people think that scientific, historical textbooks to teach the world and the origin of the universe and everything in it, the creation of the world record, but it think is or is not the answer for the evolution Moses recorded Genesis objects objectively, scientifically, as modems think eventually climb to find its origins in theory, find that the God was the first cause because to weaken the human record of Genesis Moses himself inspired by the Holy Spirit of God, the revelation that the Genesis record does not he, as well as science did not know to understand or explain scientifically was not interested.”, he claims Genesis was written by human Moses himself, denying it was inspired by fee Holy Spirit. Surprisingly on the other hand, the thoughts of kyun-Jin Kim and Young-Suck Oh's are completely different. First, even though University of Yonsei’s kyun-Jin Kim used Barth' s view mostly, he sided with the conservative Korean Church’ s situation and influence to reinterpret positively about creationism. By saying, “evidence for the creation and recognition of God is the recognition of faith to get through an encounter with Jesus Christ, through His revelation in the God revealed in Jesus Christ, that He is not God, who alone in humans, human with the God who is.” He explained Christologically. However,former Professor Young- Suck Oh of Hanshin University explained creationism with New Sociology in Liberation Theology. ‘Creation’ is nothing but God’s secret will externally expressed. Originally, incident where God himself projected externally what he already possessed was creation only Himself. In other words, creation itself is an revelation event. If we were to put ‘In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth”. “(Genesis 1:1) in another words, he who is infinite and perfect allowed and is going to achieve the limited and imperfect world of time and space. He has entered this limited situation. We can illustrate this by “Eternal World (World of God Himself) →Work of Creation→ Temporal World(world of creatures).” If this is true, creation ministry serve as a bridge between eternal world and the time world. Meditating on previously mentioned, Divine Decrees and Predestination was a secret only God should have known but Will of His Decrees secret was slowly revealed through Work of Creation. According to Herman Bavinck, he saw is as “intends concept implications within the time of its realization”(Eph. 1:4). When the infinite and imperfect God intentionally expressed his plan and providence in the temporal world, the almighty God revealed his revelation by entering the world of finiteness. This was the only closest strategy he could use to close “a huge gap between infinite and finite.” This case is the incarnation. Therefore, the incarnation(John 1:14) is case of ‘Immanuel’, belonging to the fundamental mysteries of Christianity. So, the New Testament, the creation ministry is the ministry of Jesus Christ(Colossians 1: 16). Logically it is totally impossible transfer from finite to infinite but the paradoxically Almighty God performs the impossible(Matthew 19:24-26). The narrow minded humans could only create the theory of evolution to distrust God s Omnipotence. This is because theory of evolution is a theory that rejects all the biblical evidence that “God created all kinds of creatures himself (Genesis 1:3―31). In fact, there is no literature which recorded stay of 'monkey evolving into a man.” This is merely a groundless imagination. Consequently, followers of* evolution theory greatly modified their weak theory and made New-Darwinism, then eventually changed it to “macro evolution”. The process theologians of modern liberalism also cleverly used the word ‘creation’ along ‘process’ in order to defend the evolution theory and corrected part of “mystery of creation” so as to explain God's creation ministry, comprehensive and rational to humans. However, the logic of the process theologians does not only unbiblical but completely deny the verb(bara =Gen.1:1,21,27) meaning creation of absoluteness, in the original Hebrew Holy Scripture with evil intent. If so, what does God created ‘existence’ from nothing imply to us? Dr Hyung Nong Park was influenced by Professor Charles Hodge of Old Princeton theological Seminary, Hodge strongly refuted evolutionism as follows; "Hodge s critique of Darwinism is part of his Anthropology section in volume 2 of Systematic Theology, This section begins with an explanation of the “Scriptural Doctrine” regarding the origin of mankind. He points out two things from the scriptural account in Genesis; first that man s body was formed by the immediate intervention of God and secondly, that his soul was derived from God. It as one of the subsections under “Anti―Scriptural Theories” that Hodge considers Darwinism.¹⁰³ Hodge acknowledges Darwin s status as a prominent naturalist and for his knowledge and skill in observation and description, as well as his “frankness and fairness.” He states that his theory, however, suffers from the basic defect of attributing “all the infinite diversities and marvelous organisms of plants and animals are due to the operation of unintelligent physical causes.”

김동리의 「까치소리」 다시 읽기

임영봉(Lim, Young-bong) 중앙어문학회 2015 語文論集 Vol.61 No.-

살의 충동에 사로잡힌 ‘봉수’라는 주인공이 살인 행위에 이르게 되는 과정을 그리고 있는 ?까치소리?의 주제에 대해 작가 김동리는 화엄사상이라는 불교적인과론의 표현을 의도했다고 주장하고 있다. 그러나 상식적인 독해에 의거할 때 작가의 그런 의도는 실패한 것으로 판명된다. 작가 김동리의 의도와 작품 내용의 불일치 문제는 ?까치소리?에서 작가의 ‘오인’이나 ‘착각’이 작동하고 있다는 사실을 환기시켜주고 있으며 이러한 성격의 오인은 김동리의 내면을 지배하고 있는 무의식과 모종의 욕망을 드러내 주고 있다. ‘이중 액자식 구성’이라는 ?까치소리?의 복잡한 이야기 형식 또한 작가의 억압된 무의식이 작용한 결과이다. ?까치소리?에서 작가의 유년기 체험과 정신적 외상은 ‘모성적 초자아’의 대두와 ‘죽음 충동’으로 나타나고 있다. 아버지의 권위를 대리하고 있는 모성적 초자아는 주인공 봉수의 정상적인 삶을 방해하면서 외설적인 쾌락을 부추기는 존재이다. ?까치소리?의 마지막 장면에서 주인공 ‘봉수’는 쾌락원칙의 경계를 넘어 충동적인 향락의 주체 자리에 서게 된다. 이 충동적 향락의 주체인 ‘봉수’의 폭력적 ‘파괴 충동’은 궁극적인 차원에서 죽음을 통해 무기체의 상태로 되돌아감으로써 영원한 안정과 평화를 얻고자하는 작가의 무의식의 표현으로 볼 수 있다. This is an essay that attempts to unveil the multilayered meanings and new possibilities of interpretation of Kim Dong-ri’s literature, focusing on the “The Cry of Magpies”(Contemporary Literature, 1966.10). “The Cry of Magpies” carries with it a special meaning and a problematic status in the context of Kim’s literary world. It relates how the death drive of the main character, Bong-su, eventually leads to an act of murder. Kim argues that the story’s theme is the expression of Hwaom Idealism, a Buddhist idea related to causationism. However, based on reading in the common sense, it seems that the intentions of the author fail to be achieved. The inconsistency between the author’s intentions and the content of “The Cry of Magpies” brings to attention the fact that a misconception or illusion may be at work in the author’s thinking. the author’s stubbornness, which derives from this type of misconception, could be seen as an expression of the subconscious and a sort of desire that dominates Kim’s inner world. In terms of structure, “The Cry of Magpies” has a double-double narrative or frame story; that is, it not only consists of an external story and an internal story, but the internal story also has another frame story within. The use of this complex story structure may be seen as an irruption of the author’s suppressed subconscious. The significance of “The Cry of Magpies” comes from the fact that it is an expression of the author’s childhood experiences and psychological trauma. In the story, the psychological trauma of the author manifests itself through a maternal superego and a death drive. The maternal superego, which substitutes for a father’s authority, is a distracting factor that gets in the way of a normal life for Bong-su; it is also a source of obscene pleasure. In the very last scene, Bong-su is reborn as a subject of impulse that goes beyond the pleasure principle, through the act of murder. The nature of the destructive violence shown by this impulsive character could be seen as an inverted expression of the author’s desire to acquire eternal stability and peace by returning to a state of nothingness in death.

A Comparative study of the Christologies of John Calvin(1509-1564) and the Korean Presbyterian denominations

( Bong Geun Cho ) 한국복음주의조직신학회 2011 조직신학연구 Vol.15 No.-

Celebrating a quincentenary of Calvin`s birth, the question we want to consider is how does Protestantism(in particular The Presbyterian Church) fundamentally different from Roman Catholic Church and Judaism? The difference between Orthodox Christian Church and other religious sects lie here in the answer to the question above. So, until now, what has been the Christology of the Korean Church? I would like to concentrate particularly on the individual sect`s own Christology of The Korean Presbyterian Church which divided from 1951. In a comparative study on the Christology, viewed by professors of different theological seminary, I would like to compare views from selected scholars of Hapdong, Tonghap, Kichang. Kosin, ACTS and Theological Department College of Yonsei University. Former President Dr. Hyung-Nong Park came back to Korea after graduating from Princeton Theological Seminary, U.S.A. He taught his students the Christology of John Calvin. Consequently, his students went on to teach the members of their Churches. For example, two of his students were Chul-Won Suh of Chongshin University and Bong-Geun Cho of Kwang Shin University, who accepted Christology of John Calvin which was taught by him. Firstly, Dr. Chul-Won Suh dealt The Creation-Media torship of Jesus Christ in his dissertation, 1982. This actually concerned A Study in the Relation of the Incarnation and the Creation and also A Christology(2000) which was written by him urges Christology from above Abstiegschristologie von oben nach unten. Professor Byung-Ho Moon deals with wide variety of topics within Calvin`s Christology, which includes Christ as mediator of angels and the Church. He says "Calvin`s Christological understanding of the law features both Christ in the law and the law in Christ. The law represents Christ as its truth and substance and reveals his eternal presence as the Mediator at the same time." On the other hand, Professor Bong-Geun Cho of Kwangshin Universty deals with the atonement, resurrection, eternal life in his book, the core of essential theology. Secondly, he deals mainly with the theology of atonement, intercession. Thirdly, in his book, Calvin`s Dogmatics, John Calvin described The Person and The Work of Christ. In respect to another viewpoint, Professor Hae-Kyung Park of ACTS considered "the significance and benefits of the doctrine of the Ascension of Christ in Calvin`s Christology." 189) Professor Hae-Moo Yoo of Korea theological seminary was enjoying a picnic on a liberal hill over the reformed theological line. In 1954, an article, ``The Christology of Calvin`` was presented by Dr. Sang-Hee Moon of Yonsei University. In 1984, Dr. Jong-Sung Rhee of Chang Shin University wrote a big Christology(515P.), however, his writing became weak when he wrote a section concerning The Christology of John Calvin. He did also deal with A Christology of Emil Brunner and Karl Barth rather than John Calvin. Professor Chul-Ho Youn of Presbyterian College and Theological Seminary concentrates not only on the research concerning Theology of Barth`90, but he also solemnly criticizes on the Theology of Karl Barth, In the same school, Professor Myung-Yong Kim supports theory of Reconciliation of Karl Barth, while also enjoying the Barth`s Logic. Professor Kyuun-Jin Kim of Yonsei University deals widely with the Christologies of modern theologians as well as Karl Barth, but sadly, he failed to be concerned with The Christology of John Calvin. Finally, I want to remember Two books of Christology of Professor Moon-Ho Ha of Calvin University, Seoul and Dr. Seung-Yong Hwang of Honam Theological University and Seminary, Gwangju.

後百濟 甄萱과 海洋勢力 : 王建과의 海洋爭覇를 중심으로

姜鳳龍(Kang Bong-Ryong) 역사교육연구회 2002 역사교육 Vol.83 No.-

This study is on the relationship between maritime powers in the Post Three Kingdoms era of Korean history and the conflict between the two most powerful military leaders of the time, Gyeon Hwon of the Post Baekje dynasty and Wang Geon, the founder of the Goryeo dynasty. Firstly, I shall discuss the political trend surrounding the maritime powers in the Suncheon(順天) area led by Park Yeong-Gyu(朴英規) and Kim Chong(金摠). In 889, Gyeon Hwon was sent by the Unified Silla court as the leader of government forces to defend the kingdoms southwestern area. On arriving in Jinju(晋州), however, he declared independence for his forces from Silla and successfully won over the local maritime powers led by Park and Kim that were based on the Suncheon area at the time. The alliance between the leaders provided Gyeon Hwon a valuable opportunity for maritime experience, which would become a major contribution to the growth and expansion of the Gyeon Hwon government. At this stage, Gyeong Hwon didn"t move to the southwestern area, but rather turned to the north, to the inland area of Muju(武州, todays Jeonnam Province). During the journey he continued to rally local militias until he finally seized Gwangju(光州) in 892. In Gwangju, which he used as the base of his forces, he initiated military campaigns for 9 years against the maritime powers in the southwestern area without any significant success. He founded the Post Baekje kingdom in 900 with Jeonju(全州) as the capital of his newly born kingdom. His campaigns against the southwestern area kept on, but the results were just the strengthening antipathy of the area and a sense of impending crisis among its people. Meanwhile, Wang Geon was able to successfully advance to the southwestern area in 903 under the strong support of the local sea-coastal militia led by Oh Da-Ryeon(吳多憐) who was, like many others in the area, nursing ill feeling against Gyeon Hwon. Then, Wang himself had to face resistance from island-based militia groups in the area, such as the one led by Neung Chang(能昌), as well as counteractions by Gyeong Hwon. It was in 914 at the latest that Wang Geon was able to overcome the hostility of his military rivals, thus securing the southwestern area as a safe power base for him. Among a number of local maritime militias wielding influence in Jinju(where Gyeong Hwon first declared his independence) during the period between 924 and 927, was one by Wang Bong-Gyu(王逢規). His was a powerful political faction that maintained an independent diplomatic channel with the Post Tang dynasty based in the Shang Dong peninsula, China. His militia seems to be one of the major maritime powers in the area, along with those led by Park Yeong-Gyu and Kim Chong that could maintain political influence under the approval and even protection of Gyeon Hwon. He was last referenced by history books in April 927, after which he disappeared from recorded history. A possibility is that he was eliminated during the military conflicts in April 927, surrounding Dolsando(突山島) and Namhaedo(南海島) Islands at the sea of Jinju. The military conflict between Gyeon Hwon and Wang Geon over the maritime hegemony continued to seesaw until the tide was in Wangs favor in 935. Gyeon Hwon finally surrendered to Wang Geon in June after he was ousted from power by his son, Sin Geom. Silla surrendered in October same year. The last maritime power in the area, led by Park Yeong-Gyu, also surrendered in February of the following year. Now the political picture of the maritime hegemony during the Post Three Kingdoms era was left to Wang Geon to draw.

Classroom Culture as a Source for the Mismatch Between Korean Students' Performance and Motivation

Bong, Mi-Mi 이화여자대학교 사범대학 교과교육연구소 2004 East west education Vol.21 No.-

Korean students typically demonstrate superior academic performance compared to students in other countries. Yet their motivation toward learning is dangerously low, often at the lowest level among the countries that participate in various international comparisons. The author conjectures that such disparity between Korean students' performance and motivation has more to do with typical instructional practices in Korean classrooms rather than general cultural differences. The author discusses specific factors that are presumed to affect students' motivation negatively according to the T. A. R. G. E. T.(i.e. task, authority, recognition, grouping, evaluation, and timing) dimensions of classroom culture suggested by Ames (1992).

조봉암과 진보당 : 제3의 길

주봉호(Joo Bong Ho) 동북아시아문화학회 2009 동북아시아문화학회 국제학술대회 발표자료집 Vol.2009 No.10월

장 깔배의 성령론에 관한 한국장로 교신학자들의 논의

조봉근 ( Bong Geun Cho ) 한국복음주의조직신학회 2012 조직신학연구 Vol.17 No.-

깔뱅은 성령의 사역을 그의 『기독교 강요』총 80장에서 전체적으로 다루고 있다. 깔뱅은 『기독교 강요』제1권 성령론적 입장에서 신인식론, 계시론, 성경론을 기술하고 있으며, 그래서 그의 성령론은 그의 ‘성경관’에 잘 나타나 있다. 그는 “성경의 학생”이 되기를 거부하고, “성령의 조명”을 받기를 거부하는 인간은 이미 정죄를 받았다고 말한다. “시력이 약한 사람이 안경 없이는 똑똑히 볼 수없듯이, 우리도 하나님을 찾을 때, 성경의 안내를 받지 않으면, 즉시 혼돈에 빠질 정도로 연약하다.” 고 주장하며, 동시에 성경이 하나님의 말씀인 것을 알 수 있는 최종적 증거는 성령의 내적 증거에 있음을 강조했다. 즉, “하나님의 살아있는 말씀을 발견하고, 그 말씀이 우리 각인에게 선포된 것을 깨달으려면 성령의 감화된 증거가 꼭 있어야 한다.” 고 말한다. 즉, 깔뱅은 믿음에 응답하는 “성령의 내적 증거”를 “성경의 권위”를 발견하는 최고표준으로 보았다. 깔뱅에게 “성령과 성경의 관계”는 불가분리성을 가진다. 그래서 깔뱅은 “우리가 하나님의 사역들을 잘 관찰하는 것은 당연한 일리지만 보다 도 중요한 것은 성경를 경청해야 한다.” 고 말한다. 그러나 깔뱅은 성령과 성경을 그대로 동일시하지 않는다. 그는 성령께서는 성경에 기록된 말씀을 오직 조명할 뿐이지, 성경 위에 여하한 새로운 사실을 첨가하지 않는다고 주장하면서, 성경은 하나님께서 우리 신자들에게 성령의 조명을 베풀어 주시는 은혜의 방편이라고 설명했다. 깔뱅은 그가 주장하고 있는 교리를 성경 자체에서 인용하고 있다. “율법과 예언들은 사람의 뜻을 따라 전달된 것이 아니라, 성령에 의하여 감동된 사람들이 쓴 하나님의 말씀이다.”라고 확신했다. 즉, 깔뱅은 성경이 바로 “성령의 학교”라고 밑었다. 또 ”성경의 저자들은 성령의 도구요, 기관이요, 필사자등이었다.” 라고 말한다. 또 그는 “성경은 하나님의 말씀이 인간의 언어로 계시된 것이라” 주장하면서, “성령께서는 성경 속에서 응변적인 수사법과 더불어 조잡하고 세련되지 못한 문체까지도 동시에 사용하신다.” 고 말한다. “깔뱅의 성령론”에 대한 연구는 조봉근을 비롯한 김재성, 오영석, 이은선, 변종길, 차영배, 이종성, 이수영, 최윤배에 의해서 발표되었고, “깔뱅의 영성”에 대한 연구는 전 숭실대학교 교수인 김영한 박사에 의해서 발표되었다. 깔뱅이 추구했던 성령론은 크게 5가지로 정리할 수 있다. 깔뱅의 성령론은 첫쨰 성경적인 성령의 내적 증거이다. 둘쨰, 기독론 안에서의 구원론적 믿음이다. 셋째, 교회론적 은혜의 방편들(말씀, 성례, 기도)을 강조한다. 넷째, 삼위일체론적 성령이해이다. 다섯째, 종말론적 이웅은혜로서 칭의뿐만 아니라 성화를 똑같이 중요시하여 칭의와 성화를 조하하려고 했다. Does ‘Peneumatology’ have a “dogmatic position” for John Calvin? This question arises because the dogmatic system all reformed theologians generally construct include Introduction, Theology. Anthropology, Harmatology, Christolohy, Soteriolohy, Ecclesiology and Eschatology, but superficially exclude pneumatology. However, if we look at Calvin`s The Institutes of the Christian Religion as a whole, we can see that Pneimatology does not belong to any other category, but Calvin deals with it in detail directly and indirectly in Chapter 80 of The Institutes. Calvin is certainly, as in the words of B.B.Warfield of Princeton Seminary of USA, in reality the greatest theologian of the Holy Spirit. Calvin begins from the first book of The Institutes in writing the doctrine of the Scripture in a Pneumatological perspective, and Calvin`s most important theological standpoint is well apparent in his view of the scripture in his Pneumatolohy. According to Calvin “One who refuses to be a student of the scripture of to be illuminated by the Holy be Known by the illumination of the Holy Spirit and through the help of the Scripture.” (Institutes 1.14.1.) Calvin claims that just like when we become old or weak or through any other ailment our sight becomes poor we need the help of spectacles to see right, we must be guided by the Scripture to find God, otherwise we are so weak that we fall in to confusion. At the same time, Calvin emphasizes that the final evidence that the Scripture is the Word of God is in the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit. In other words Calvin expresses the opinion that “ to find the living Word of God and to know that Word has been personally sent to each man, there needs to be the inspirational testimony of the Holy Spirit.” To put in another way, Calvin saw the “internal testimony of the Holy Spirit” as the best standard in finding “ the authority of the Scripture.” For Calvin, “the relationship between the Scripture and the Holy Spirit” has an inseparable quality. Calvin always studied “the work of the Holy Spirit” within the Scripture, and does not project his own subjective world of experience. This is why he claims that “though it is right for man to investigates the works of God but for a greater good we must listen carefully to the words of the Scripture.” However in one hand he does not agree with identifying the Holy Spirit as the Word of God. He claims that the Holy Spirit only amplifies the written words of the Scripture and does not add new truths on top of the Scripture, and that it is indeed the Word of the Scripture that is the means of God`s grace to the believers in giving the illumination of the Holy Spirit. Calvin quotes the Scripture itself for his claimed doctrine. Calvin is certain that “the law and the prophets are not delivered according the will of man, but are doctrines that were written down through what the Holy Spirit made tell.” This is why Calvin believed the Bible was the school of the Holy Spirit. Also he tells us that “the auhors of the Bible are the tools, organs and transcribers of the Holy Spirit. Also he claims that “the Scripture is the Word of God revealed in human language” and concludes that “that Holy Spirit uses both oratorical rhetorics and crude and unsophisticated literary styles in the Scripture”. In the Korean Presbyterian Church, theologians in like of Kim yung-Han, Kim jae-Sung, Byun Jong-Gil, Oh Young-Suck, Lee Su-Young, Rhee Jong-Sung, Lee Eun-Sun, Cho Bong-Geun, Chah Young-Bae, and Choi Yun-Bae(2010) have presented theses on “Calvin`s Pneumatology”. However, in summary we can categorize the Pneumatology Calvin pursued in 7 titles. Firstly, he concentrated in developing a Pheumatolohy that was thoroughly dependant on the Special Revelation of the Holy Scripture. Secondly, he considered the gift of faith in Christ as the great prerequisite to the Work of the Holy Spirit. Thirdly, he tried to explain in balance the Person of the Holy Spirit within the Trinity. Fourthly, he considered the doctrine of Justification just as important as the doctrine of of Sanctification and devised an agreement of Justification and Sanctification. Fifthly, he writes of the Means of Grace (Word, Sacraments, Prayer)in detail as the Grace of the Holy Spirit continually working in believers in their life with Church (spiritual community). Sixthly, he considered the togetherness with Christ as a perquisite of the Work of the Holy Spirit. Lastly, he saw the Work of the Holy Spirit as dynamic behind the entire Soteriology of man.

원문 : 좌업 시간과 알코올 섭취가 30대 남자 사무직 근로자의 혈압과 혈관탄성에 미치는 영향

조봉오 ( Bong Oh Cho ),이인녕 ( In Yeong Lee ),정균근 ( Gyun Geun Jeong ),장창현 ( Chang Hyun Jang ) 한국운동생리학회(구 한국운동과학회) 2014 운동과학 Vol.23 No.3

조봉오, 이인녕, 정균근, 장창현. 좌업 시간과 알코올 섭취가 30대 남자 사무직 근로자의 혈압과 혈관탄성에 미치는 영향. 운동과학, 제23권 3호, 241-248, 2014. 본 연구의 목적은 일과 중 대부분을 좌업근무 형태로 업무를 수행하고, 스트레스로 인해 음주가 잦고, 운동이 부족한 30대 남자 사무직 음주자 15명을 대상으로 좌업 시간과 알코올 섭취가 혈압과 혈관탄성에 미치는 영향을 분석하여 사무직 근로자에게 건강관리에 필요한 정보를 제공하는데 있다. S대학 운동 생리학 실험실에서 사전 인적 사항과 설문을 작성하고, 신장, 체중, 채혈, 혈압, 혈관탄성, BMI를 측정하였다. 알코올 섭취 횟수, 섭취량, 좌업 시간, 그리고 음주 섭취 전과 후 및 시간대별 (10분, 40분, 60분) 혈압과 혈관탄성의 변화를 측정 분석한 결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. 1) 평균 좌업시간이 9.87시간, 음주횟수 및 음주량은 월 평균 9.13회와 12.47잔 이였다. 2) 알코올 섭취횟수 및 섭취량에 따른 BMI, TC, LDL-C, HDL-C, 혈압과 혈관탄성 비교에서 알코올 섭취횟수에서 좌상지 혈관탄성은 통계적으로 유의한 차이를 나타냈다(p<.05). 3) 알코올 섭취 전, 후 비교 분석 결과 우상지와 좌상지의 혈관탄성에서 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 나타났다(p<.05). 4) 알코올 섭취 후 시간대별 우상지 혈관탄성은 통계적으로 유의한 차이를 나타냈다(p<.05). 이상의 결과를 종합해 볼 때, 좌업 시간이 혈압과 혈관탄성에 미치는 영향은 통계적으로 유의하게 나타나지 않았고, 알코올 섭취는 혈관탄성에 통계적으로 유의한 차이를 나타냄을 알 수 있었다. 따라서 이는 직장생활의 스트레스를 음주로 해소하는 경향이 있음을 보여주며 건강에 부정적인 영향을 주고 있음을 알 수 있었다. 또한, 신체가 음주에 적응되어 실험 시 섭취한 적은 양(1/2병)은 1회 12.47잔에 비해 혈압과 혈관탄성에 큰 영향을 미치지 못한 것으로 사료된다. Cho, Bong-Oh, Lee, In-Yeong, Jeong, Gyun-Geun, Jang, Chang-Hyun. Effects of Sedentary Occupation Time and Alcohol Intake on Blood Pressure and Vascular Compliance in 30s Male White-Collar Workers. Exercise Science, 23(3): 241-248. 2014. The purpose of this study was to examine effects of duration of sedentary office work and alcohol intake on blood pressure and vascular compliance in male subjects who were office workers aged between 30 to 39 and frequently drink alcoholic beverages to cope with their stress without exercising for health. The study was to provide health-related information necessary for white-collar workers. We collected data of demographic information, height, weight, blood sample, blood pressure, vascular compliance, and BMI from 15 subjects in S University`s Exercise Physiology Laboratory, and analyzed the frequency and amount of alcohol intake, duration of sedentary work, and changes in blood pressure and vascular compliance at diffident time points (10, 40, and 60 minutes post drinking) from baseline. I t was found that the average time of sedentary work was 9.87 hours, drinking 9.13 times a month on average, 12.47 glasses of alcohol beverages per drink. In comparison of BMI, TC, LDL-C, HDL-C, blood pressure and vascular compliance upon the frequency and amount of alcohol intake, the upper left limb`s vascular compliance had a statistically significant difference (p<.05). In the result of the comparative analysis of pre-and post-drinking, vascular compliance was significantly different in the upper right and left limbs (p<.05). Vascular compliance in the upper right limb after drinking significantly changed (p<.05). As a result, the duration of sedentary work had no statistically significant difference in blood pressure and vascular compliance. T he vascular compliance after drinking h ad a statistically significant difference. This suggested that the result was an index that shows the trend of the office workers releasing their work stress by drinking alcoholic beverages, and that drinking had negative impacts on them. In addition, a small amount of intake (a half bottle) at the test time, after the body was adjusted to drinking, compared with 12.47 glasses per intake, had no great impacts on blood pressure and vascular compliance.

동북아 비즈니스 중심지 추진을 위한 세제개편 내용 및 향후 정책방향

이성봉(Lee Seong-Bong) 한국국제조세협회 2003 조세학술논집 Vol.19 No.-

In July 2002, the Korean government announced a comprehensive plan to develop Korea into the business hub of Northeast Asia. This plan included a number of policy instruments to improve the business and living environment in Korea. One item on this policy agenda was the taxation issue. This study deals with the tax reform policy adopted by the Korean government to promote its vision and strategy for building Korea into the business hub of Northeast Asia. Policy makers in the Korean government deliberated over numerous tax policy options for providing companies, especially foreign companies, with a favorable taxation system in Korea. After an in-depth examination of issues such as tax incentives for the regional headquarters of multinational enterprises and overall tax rate reductions for both corporate and income taxes, the Korean government enacted a special law on Economic Free Zones to provide special tax benefits for foreign investors. This study analyses the reasons behind the Korean governments introduction of these special zones and other tax reduction programs for foreign investors, and also presents some suggestions for Koreas future tax reform agenda in light of its vision of becoming the hub of Northeast Asia.