급성췌장염에 의한 췌장가성남종에서 내시경적 배액술후 발생한 췌장가성남종과 십이지장 및 대장에 발생한 내부 췌장루 1예

김연수,이문성,김진오,조영덕,이영홍,봉형근,조주영,이준성,심찬섭,황성규,전기원,변재호,장재영 대한소화기학회 1996 대한소화기학회지 Vol.28 No.1

성인에서 발견된 십이지장 막양구조

박경규,박형근,김연수,이문성,김진오,조영덕,이영홍,봉형근,조주영,이준성,심찬섭,황성규,함정식,장재영,권귀향 대한내과학회 1997 대한내과학회지 Vol.53 No.2

Duodenal obstruction is the third leading cause of intrinsic obstruction of the alimentary tract in the newborn, the other causes are imperforate anus and esophageal atresia. If the obstruction is incomplete, as with a fenestrated duodenal membrane, the presentation of the symptoms may be delayed and the diagnosis overlooked. And so they are rarely diagnosed in the adult. Diagnosis can be made by contrast duodenography but is more definitive with endoscopy. This is the first case report of a 21-year-old female with duodenal membrane, associated with incomplete rotation of intestine and uterus bicornis, diagnosed by hypotonic duodenography and endoscopy, preoperatively, and successfully treated with duodenoduodenostomy.

연직 유류 월류 시스템에 의해 연결된 두 유류 탱크의 수리학적 반응에 대한 연구

신방웅,사미크레덕,팔머벤슨 충북대학교 건설기술연구소 1994 建設技術論文集 Vol.13 No.1

다수유류 탱크시스템은 주뱅크와 보조탱크, 또는 유통탱크로 구성되는데, 이들은 연직유관의 월류를 통해서 연속적으로 연결된다. 본 논문은 이 다수 유류탱크 시스템의 수리학적 현상에 대해 연구하였다. 실험결과에 의하면 수면위치의 진공압력 이상에 있는 주유류탱크의 상부에서는 3이하의 후르드(Froude)수에 해당되는 유량을 발생시켰다. 더욱이 유관상부가 유관직경의 8분의 1이나 또는 그보다 작은 간격으로 주유류탱크의 상부로부터 떨어진 곳에 위치했을 때 레이놀즈수가 3000이상 또는 3000으로 유류가 흘렀을 때 분리표면에 따라 공기압이 상당이 줄어 들어 공동(Cavitation) 현상이 만들어 짐을 보여 주었다. 유체해석에 사용되는 연직 유관의 진입 저항계수에 대해서도 연구하였으며 그 결과를 기존 발표된 결과와 비교하였다. 4000이하의 레이놀즈수에 해당되는 유체흐름에 대해서는 연직 유관 진입구의 수리손실계수는 레이놀즈수가 줄어듬에 따라 증가하였다. 연직 유관 내로에 대해서는, 오일러수(배수계수)의 변화를 후르드수와 레이놀즈수에 비교하여 연구하였으며 그 결과를 원형 오리피스를 통한 유류흐름에 적용할 수 있다는 종전 결과와 비교하였다.

UO2 소결체에 고온연소반응을 이용한 SiC 코팅

김봉구,최용,김정원,이영우,손동성,김길무 대한금속재료학회(대한금속학회) 2000 대한금속·재료학회지 Vol.38 No.5

Multi-layer coating of silicon carbide and graphite on UO₂ nuclear pellet was carried out with a fluidized bed type chemical vapor deposition unit to enhance the inherent safety of the nuclear pellet and to develop a renovative coating process. Silane, propane and argon gases were used as the source and carrier gases to deposit silicon and pyrolytic carbon. Combustion reaction was performed in an inert argon atmosphere, which conditions were pre-determined by numerical evaluation of the combustion reaction between silicon and carbon to synthesize silicon carbide. Microstructural observation of the combustion products by scanning electron microscopy showed that the inner and outer pyrolytic carbon layers were equiaxed structure. Chemical analysis by Auger electron spectroscopy and X-ray diffractometry revealed that the middle layer formed by a combustion reaction was fine crystalline beta-silicon carbide.

Pseudomonas sp . 접종에 의한 항산화물 다량함유 로즈마리(Rosmarinus officialis L .)계통 선발

박충헌,이봉호,심강보,Shetty, K . 한국국제농업개발학회 1999 韓國國際農業開發學會誌 Vol.11 No.3

Pseudomonas sp.의 접종에 내성을 가진 로즈마리 계통은 basal phenolics, RA 함량 및 lignin 합성 등 여러 가지 생리적인 요인에 의해 항산화물의 합성을 조장내지는 억제하는 것으로 나타났으며 본 시험에서 나타난 주요결과는 요약하면 다음과 같다. 1. 이형종자집단(heterogeneous bulk population)에서 항산화물 합성량이 높은 7계통을 선발하였으며 계통의 유지 및 대량증식에는 MS/BAP 배지가 적당하였다. 2. R-11, 19 계통은 온실에서 다른 선발계통에 비해 2배정도 증식이 빠르고 Pseudomonas sp. 의 접종에 따른 phenolics 합성량도 많아 유망시되었다. The object of this experiment is to systemize micropropagation as well as select high rosmarinic acid producing rosemary clonal lines which are from heterogeneous seed population. Clonal line R-11, 19 showed higher level of phenolic compounds and rosmarinic acid by inoculation of Pseudomonas sp. Elite clonal lines which produced higher phenolic compounds and promoted lignification metabolic processing are R-11. 19.

대장 선종과 Apolipoprotein E 유전형과의 관계

김영호,최윤호,손희정,강태욱,최규완,최봉준,이종철,박상종,이지민,배문희,김재준,이풍렬 대한소화기내시경학회 2001 Clinical Endoscopy Vol.23 No.1

Background/Aims: Apolipoprotein B polymorphism plays an important role in the metabolism of cholesterol. And bile acids, which may be related to the development of colorectal adenomas, An association between apolipoprotein B genotype and colonic adenomas bas been reparted in a western country. This study was designed to determine whether the apolipopratein S was genotype would be associated with proximal or distal colonic adenomas in Koreans. Methods: On the colonoscopy, colonic adenomas were found in 132 patients. Proxima1 colonic adenoma was found in 35 patients and distal colonic adenoma was found in 97 patients. Serum leveis of total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol and trlglyceride were measured. Apolipoprotein E genotype was determined by PCR and allele specific oligonucleotide hybridization. 279 contro1 subjects without an adenoma on the screening sigmoidoscopy were se1ecfed randomly. Results: The serum levels of total choles0'rol, LDL-cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol and triglyceride did not significantiy differ between each adenoma group and control group. The individual frequencies of ε2, ε3 and ε4 alleles in patients with colonic adenomas did not differ from those in control subjects. The frequency of either heterozygote or homozygote for g 4 allele in patients with proximal adenoma was lower than that in control subjects (0.029 vs O.I68, p $lt; 0.05). Conclnsions: The data suggest that g 4 allele may be associated with a lower risk for the development of proximal colonic adenoma in Korean men.

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”.

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.

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.”

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.