데리다의 해체주의 인식론에 대한 칼빈 신학적 비판

최민호 亞細亞聯合神學大學校 大學院 2005 국내석사

This study is critique of deconstructive epistemology in Jaycees Deride, extreme post-modernist on the perspective of Calvin's theological epistemology. Deconstructionism in Deride has threatened the Christian Religion with great strength. The reason is that deconstructionism came from resist against Western metaphysics and is a sort of defiance of Christian Religion as a Book. Deconstruction doesn't simply mean the end of the Reason, the center frame of modernism, and the Death of God. It is rather a charge of the violence that Reason, Epistemic Subject, has and repulsion for the pursuit of the absolute truth of the Christian Religion. Wan that sense, his thought seems to be easily absorbed and present a brand new vision to intellectuals The essence of Deconstructionism in Deride consists in epistemology. He coped with concept of post-modernism pioneers with jumping the horizon of ontological cognition. So to speak, He found motives of deconstruction in the subject of Heist that Headgear's metaphysics had dealt with, Nietzsche's style, and Husserl's phenomenology, however he have developed a new epistemological point of view by differentiating them. By demarcation between Book and Text, he announced the end of the Book. Simultaneously, he claimed that the only thing left is the Text. His difficult passage, "nothing outside the text (il n'y a pas de horstexte.)" means epochs of objective and fixed pursuit of meaning through abstruseness, a main characteristic of Text. This epistemological structure, in conclusion, shows that his view of understanding has extreme relativity and obscurity. Derides epistemology could be judged as follows. First, he addressed the limitation of finite Human Reason. Second, he seized the violence that the pursuit of objective meanings and centralized central concept have. Thirdly, active openness to otherwise through limits of epistemic subject was supposed. However he contributed like above, his epistemology had several problems as below. First, his thought was exposed to the possibility of extreme principal pluralism. Wan the second place, it is possible that the recognition of decentralized concept may commit violence. Lastly, his epistemology was mere Dionysian since it didn't present a constructive alternative plan. Deride didn't criticize the Christian Religion in direct but deconstructed the core of the Christian Religion. That's why the faith in Christian Religion is a matter of recognition. He had challenged the Christian Religion seriously as below. First, he regarded that Christian Religion is confined to the category of metaphysics onto-theological recognition. Thus it is a typical model of Western metaphysics, without stepping' out of ontology. Second, it is recognition of arrogance and self-complacence confined to speculative frame. He hypercriticized as there have been only violence. What answer will the Christian Religion give to Derides challenge? Wan Calvin's theological epistemology, some cornerstones of responding to Derides challenge could be found as below. His theological cpistemology, first, is not a recognition limited to ontological metaphysics but recognition of depending on and being relates with the Absolute Other, God. Second, theological recognition is not wandering in limitation of speculativeness. The aim of theological recognition is the 'phronesis' as sanctification. In this sense, it is clear that Calvin's theological epistemology proved that Christian Religion did not stayed at western metaphysics and already has a solution of the threat of violence. Moreover, in spite of the contribution of Derides epistemology, Christian Religion could not accept his thought. The reasons are as below. First, it is extrinsically that he criticizes Christian Religion or Western metaphysics. His critique on being and psycho-sphere and is obscure. Simultaneously, he thought the cause of violence as the structure and centralizes concept. However, the violence doesn't exist in the visible structure and the pursuit of the centralizes concept. It is in the human being's natures sin. Secondly, his active openness on Otherwise resulted from the pursuit in limitations. Limitation cannot recognize Infinity. It is impossible to pursue infinity in limitation. Thus it is a correct way to approach limitation from infinity, not an opposite way of opening from limitation to infinity. In this sense, his Otherwise was originally wrong in directionality. In conclusion, Deconstructionism in Deride had pointed out arrogance and self-complacence of Western metaphysics and Christian Religion superficially. Wt could not be a sufficient and intrinsically critique on Christian Religion. Calvin' theology already gave us the answer to Deride.

“과학적” 신학 방법론을 위한 칼빈 신학의 과학성 연구

박욱주 아세아연합신학대학교 대학원 2012 국내박사

Scientific theological methodology embraces fundamental principles and criteria of scientific theological methods. These theological methods are engaged with continuing attempts to guarantee internal coherence of system of theology and to enable the cognition and verification of transcendent reality written in the Scripture. In the light of these aspects of scientific theological methodology, it is incontrovertible that Calvin's theological methodology is of voluminous significance in arguments concerning the definition, legitimacy, and intellectual coherence of scientific theology; his theological methodology, not only satiates criteria for scientificity of theology, but also explicitly allows insights into legitimate future prospect for scientific theology. Calvin's theology, properly responding to the demands for internal coherence of system and cognition of transcendent reality, determinately engages the scientific nature of Christian theology with the central purpose(scopus) of Christianity, the salvation of human soul. But, it is apparent that an exact articulation of Calvin's insights into the scientificity of Christian theology requires deliberate definition of 'science' and 'scientificity'. 'Science'(scientia; Wissenschaft) originally was a term which meant an entity of coherent system of knowledge; scientificity(Wissenschaftlichkeit) was consequently defined as the nature of a scientia-an academic discipline-which principally hinged on coherent methods and system in a scientia itself. But in the modern ages, such traditional definition of scientia was substituted for the definition of scientia as 'φύσις', a term which had signified natural philosophy. This transition was induced by an impetuous emergence of Enlightened scientific view, which grounded its ultimate foundation in mathematical and geometric reasoning and empirical positivism. These methods were successfully enunciated by Descartes, Newton, and Comte. The Enlightened scientific view presently evolved into materialism and developed into logical positivism which renounced to acknowledge the intellectual legitimacy of reflections on metaphysical and transcendent reality; the Enlightened scientific view unfolded its scientistic nature, induced the emergence of dogmatic scientism, and overpowered the minds of people. Eventually and broadly, all sorts of knowledge, except for that of natural science, were envisaged to be meaningless. However, it was gradually ascertained that this scientism will frustrate the creative prospects of all academic disciplines, including natural sciences; scientism itself was also an ideology and all human academic endeavors have no choice but to hinge on some ground motives or foundational beliefs. On account of its obvious and critical limitation, scientistic view has been the subject of continual intense discussion; on the parts of thinking people, the arbitrary definition of science and scientificity on the basis of methods of natural science is increasingly being adjudicated to be a false reduction of meaning. Therefore, for an objective investigation on the meaning and legitimacy of scientific theology, it must be favorably assented that 'science' signify scientia, a coherent entity of knowledge which comprehends not only natural but also transcendent cognition, and that scientificity be approved by the presence of coherent method appropriate for the object of cognition. Yet in the 18th and 19th century, Enlightened scientific view prevailed in the Western world. Kant's moral theology and Schleiermacher's anthropologized and positive theological method signaled the deep impact of the notion of intellectual legitimacy and coherence constructed by Enlightened view of natural science on theological methodology. Both Kant and Schleiermacher were committed to theological studies 'from below' and from human perspective; both the philosopher and the theologian deemed their main object of cognition to be the humane, and not as "the Divine". But Barth, through the celebrated debate against Scholz, initiated an attempt of apology for the 'specific' scientificity of theology; he insisted that "the Divine" be the specific object of theological studies, and that Christian theology can be a scientific discipline merely by following its particular method of cognition. Since Barth, due to his exemplary way of apology for scientific theology, theologians who devoted themselves to the justification of scientific theology have shared the consensus that "the Divine" is the ultimate and the essential object of cognition in theological studies. They attempted to investigate and verify the statements on transcendent reality written in the Scripture with methodological premises somewhat universal and somewhat particular simultaneously. Among them, Dr. Chul-ha Han indicates that a significant number of theologians who have advocated the legitimacy of scientific theology have had a markedly ambivalent attitude towards central truth-the salvation of human soul through gospel faith-of the Scripture. He claims that three decisive fallacies-fallacies of conceptual approach, rationalistic criticism of the Scripture, and scholastization-underlie the methods of modern Western rationalistic theology, and that those fallacies influenced scientific theological methodology to pretermit the soteriocentricity of itself in its recent history. Concerned about this problem, Dr. Han, analyzing the scientificity in the soteriocentric theology of Calvin, sets three methodological criteria of theological scientificity. Dr. Han asserts that a scientific theology should, firstly, summarize(summa) all parts(pars) of the Scripture soteriocentrically. As the central truth-salvation of human soul through gospel faith-comprehends the existential and transcendent reality of salvation, summa of the Scripture will hinder the microscopization of biblical and theological pars. Secondly, a scientific theology should completely and genu

경건주의와 오순절주의의 관계성에 대한 역사신학적 고찰

김재희 아세아연합신학대학교 2016 국내박사

This dissertation is suggested that it could become a proper powerful capability for revival of present Church to the merits of Pentecostalism which extract from the fact, through researching the corelation between Pentecostalism and Pietism, on which Pentecostalism is a fruit drawn from Pietism. In both, there is a movement sharing a common ethos and having a smellier theological characteristics. Also up to historical trace, it makes known that Pentecostalism which is a part of "the parental inheritance" or "ancestral line" of Pentecostalism by genealogical research, and at least related to a descendant of Pietism. Pietism is an important ingredient in that network of movements that prepared the way for the emergence of Pentecostalism. Each of Pietism and Pentecostalism is, as is called "Second Reformation" or "third Reformation" as a reformed movement to seek the vividness of Christian, being a historical movement which shares a very unique ethos. They had convinced of the essence of Christian as a personal relationship with Christ rather than doctrines or offices, so that they were to represent a vivid organic relationship with Christ. It was a empirical-forcing belief to desire to meet Christ directly, empathizing experience of conversion and sanctification by making a pursuit of a proper relation with God, and as a result, there were many fruits of social service and mission. It was the core of Pietism not only to place inner piety and the establishment of virtue but also to underline the dynamic relation between belief and life as common value of Pentecostalism so that it was important to ethic practice and life. Both Pietism and Pentecostalism share pros and cons of theological characteristics except the doctrine of the baptism of the Spirit. The purpose of this dissertation is, therefore, to provide to present Church with meaningful insights of which pertain the theological merits from comparing both Pietism and Pentecostalism and supplement doctrinal elements as the other respect of Evangelicalism, which are weaken in relative both Pietism and Pentecostalism. This is what I intend for Churches to be revived through recovered piety by the power of the Holy Spirit as the revival of German Pietism led by Philipp Jakob Spener who was influenced by Johann Arndt and August Hermann Franke as a successor of Spener from the end of 17th century to the beginning years of 18th century and Pentecostalism in 20th century. The range of this dissertation is restricted that in Modern Pentecostalism, it deals with the theology of Charles Parham and Classical Pentecostal Movement, which do not deals with Charismatic Movement and Neochaismatic Movement. For this purpose, this dissertation explores following. In Ⅰ chapter, it represent the purpose of research, the history of research, theses and the method and range of research. In Ⅱ chapter, the historical, theological and thoughtful relation between Pietism and Pentecostalism. By doing so, it makes known a very unique ethos which shares by both Pietism and Pentecostalism, through comparing study on genealogical trace of Pentecostalism as its root along to Pietism. In Ⅲ chapter, it will explore what the foundation and background of Pietism are until the Second World War, Pietism had been underestimated to compared with its contributions. It will quest the theology of Spener as a founder of Pietism and the contributions of Johann Blumhardt who worked a role of the bridge of between Pietism and Pentecostalism so that to represent the influence of Pietism on theology and Church. In Ⅳ chapter, it will explore what the foundation of Pentecostalism is. the foundation of Pentecostalism consisted in Pentecostalism in 17th and 18th century, the Holiness Movement influenced by John Wesley in 19th century, especially the movement of the higher life and Keswick convention which were direct roots, and the theology of Charles Parham who was a founder of Modern Pentecostalism and these influence. In Ⅴ chapter, based all research until, it will explore what continuity and discontinuity of Pietism are, and demonstrates that Pentecostalism come from Pietism, which succeed in good theology and belief. In Ⅵ chapter as a conclusion, it summarizes up to concerned. According to argument, It is the theological merits of Pietism and Pentecostalism to be precious inheritances which can be a energy to make a divergence at present Christian again.

스탠리 하우어워스의 공동체 윤리에 대한 복음주의 신학적 고찰 : 죄와 심판과 은혜의 관점에서 평가

김경천 아세아연합신학대학교 2016 국내박사

At the present day, it seems to be losing that the proper mission of Church is to teach to the saints the better biblical perspective for the ethics and blessing of the Christians. As a result, most of the Christians become to regard the practice of worldly ethics as the marks which are assured the sanctification of regenerated men, and a large part of the main inclination of blessing as worldly worth of which it is merely to live well in this world. According to this tendency, the number of the Christians who pursuit worldly blessing like mammonism are increasing rapidly even in the Churches. But it is not clearly for the Bible to says what blessing is. This is Stanley Hauerwas who is relatively well aware of this crisis of the Church among the theologies. In due his this standpoint, he as a ethics theology falls into the way warning to the Church that on which the Church must be a right Church itself, which is the prime duty of the Church. He demonstrates that the Church must be a community of character, paying attention to the narrative belong to the Church. In this fullness, according to him, it is very the time that the ethics of the Church may become the proper ethics of social. In view on the eyes of his perspective, he has made remarkable achievements to being characterized the importance of the establishment of evangelical character and the ethics of the Church Community. Even though his achievements, there are several serious problems on the theology of Stanley Hauerwas. First of all, it is wrong start point to ignore the concepts of sins, judgement and grace which belong to the very most important elements on soteriology. It is a result of forcing ethic elements and although his agrements would larger hold water it will become no more, no less than a part of secular religion, being aside the truth of ethic of the Bible. This purpose of dissertation, therefore, is to establish a proper ethics of Christian which must be preveniently established the need of grace to overcome sins, before emerging a responsible ethics on which the community ethic of Stanley Hauerwas has been weaken or overlooked, by criticizing the community ethic of him on view of evangelical theology.

한국교인의 한에 대한 목회상담적 고찰

정성광 亞細亞聯合神學大學校 大學院 2000 국내석사

Recently Korean artists and literary men have been concerned about Han which is one of the Korean people's native emotions. Han has seriously influenced the social, cultural, artistical, and religious aspects of Korea, as well as our christian faith and christian unity and even our daily life for a long time. Because Han involves many wrongful emotions, for example, Korean racial sentimentalism, nihilism, defeatism, and so forth, it is difficult for Christians to mature in their faith if they are bound by this emotion. Han has a long history, but it is not easy to explain its meaning. Many people who have studied it try to understand it by means of art rather than philosophy. And the Korean church has not paid attention to Han, but some theologians have started to pay attention to it. Those who have been interested in Han recently are called "Minjung Theologians". They define Han as something regrettable due to unfortunate circumstances in that the poor and the uneducated, the Minjung, were persecuted by the ruling class. Therefore they did not seek a solution for Han on a biblical basis, but tried to solve it through eliminating many sociopolitical problems. Their point of view is not Christian but one of social revolutions. How can we think of this Han? From the standpoint of biblical counseling, how does Christianity analyze and interpret it? Here I try to answer these questions. In addition to criticizing the Minjung Theologian's Han-Thought, I state the biblical approach of pastoral counseling along with understanding Hawpyung (psychological melancholia) and the physical symptoms caused by Han. In order to grasp the spiritual situation of Christians about Han, I researched their attitude concerning it with help of four churches. In biblical counseling, one of the most important points is to establish the human theory to which the Bible refers. Those who bear a grudge (Han) have a conception that they are sufferers themselves. The Bible does not deny that human beings are sufferers and victims,; therefore, Jesus came to us in order to console those who suffer from evil social institutions, evil environments, the stresses of life, unfair relationships, etc. Nevertheless, the important point that we have to remember in biblical counseling is that the human beings must hold himself or herself responsible for sin. Biblical counseling have to deal with these two facts at the same time. But most humanistic counselors (Freudianism, Behaviorism, Rogerianism) as well as Minjung theologians do not admit that human beings should accept responsibility for sin, but they have emphasized that human beings are victims. So Minjung theologians assert that those who bear grudges suffer without acknowledging their own sins. Therefore, in biblical counseling, acknowledgement of sin is the starting point. Pastoral counselors must call to mind that counseling is a fight against sin when they counsel persons who bear grudges. Also in biblical counseling, another point is to deal with the problems of Han by means of religious cures. The methods of religious cures consist of worship, praise, and prayer. Nowadays church worship is so formal that many Christians tend to be come tired of it. We must remember that worship functions as a celebration. So I suggest that many pastors should seek to renew worship, utilize the counseling preaching (Life-Situation Preaching) and perfect the biblical self, the creative self. Finally I want to emphasize that the counselee who bears a grudge will continue to be related to God as counseling for Han. The solution for the Christian's Han must begin by recovering in sin through a relationship between God and human beings. Only this way is a fundamental and essential cure. In approaching Han, we should have a critical, analytical attitude, but we must try to understand it first. And we must regard those who bear grudges as people who need God's cure. We should let them know not only that they are victims but they are also responsible for their sins. And we must emphasize that it is impossible to solve Han without solving people's sins through a relationship between God and humans and forgiveness being freely given. I hope this study will be a stepping stone of pastoral counseling for Han.

예방의학에 대한 영성 신학적 접근

이종웅 아세아연합신학대학교 대학원 2009 국내박사

This study aims at presenting Christian spirituality as a way of living a healthy life, taking it for granted that there is a high correlation between Christian spirituality and physical health, because a human being is not only a physical and psychological being, but also a spiritual being. This research is, therefore, composed of two variables, one being the preventive medicine and the other being the theology of spirituality. Chapter two dealt with the theological discussions of Christian spirituality, presenting its Biblical foundations in the Old Testament and the New Testament. The history of catechism and the inseparable relationship between Christian spirituality and life were also discussed. Chapter three presented the Biblical foundations of the preventive medicine, integrating theology and medical science in the Biblical view on health. This chapter discussed the concept of the preventive medicine, conducting its historical research from the ancient times to the modern age. Chapter four attempted to do a theological approach to psychological principles on health, integrating psychology and theology. The fact that a human being is a spiritual being as well as a psychological being brings about the necessity of this integration. Chapter five was dealing with the "spiricho-somatic" principle that is a new term coined by Tack Joe Kwon. The term "spiricho" is composed of spirit and psyche(mind), and "spiricho-somatic" means that spirit, mind, and body are inseparable in its nature. As a belief that a human being is not only a physical being, but also a psychological being, is reasonable, so a belief that a human being is not only a physical and psychological being, but also a spiritual being is reasonable as well. This chapter also dealt with immunology, presenting the fact that spirituality promotes health by strengthening the immune system which is very crucial for preventing diseases. Chapter five discussed the preventive medicine and the theology of Christian spirituality, applying brain science to theology, using new terminologies such as "God Spot", "brain triad", and "brain triad-neuroimmunology." The integration of theology into brain science is reasonable and necessary, because spirituality is not isolated or separated from human brain. Chapter six was presenting the practical issues on the preventive medicine in view of the theology of spiritualty, employing such theories as "learning therapy" and "forgiveness therapy." These theories formulated by integrating educational psychology, brain science, and theology enabled this study to be practical as well as theoretical. This study concludes that there is a high correlation between spirituality and health in the Biblical and medical perspectives, suggesting us to develop spirituality for preventing illnesses and diseases. The fact that God the Creator who created a human being as a whole being composed of spirit, mind, and body and God the Sustainer who wants us to be healthy is a strong foundation of making the conclusion of this research. 흔히들 현대 의학은 건강을 증진하고 생명을 연장한다고 주장하는데, 의사 프랭클린은 현대 의학을 “죽음의 체계”라고 했다. 그는 ‘부담스러운 임신’에 대한 현대 의학의 해결책이 무엇인가? 라고 묻는다. 현대 통계학이 인간의 평균 수명이 길어진다고 보고하는데, 의사들을 비롯한 많은 사람들은 그것을 현대 의학의 공로라고 생각한다. 그럼에도 현대 의학이 죽음의 체계인 이유를 프랭클린은 왜곡된 통계학 때문이라고 했다. 만약 낙태된 아이들이 예상 수명 계산에 포함된다면 즉 수태된 때로부터 예상 수명을 계산해 볼 때, 예상 수명은 43년으로 줄어들 것이라고 했다. 그런 의미에서 현대 의학을 죽음의 체계라고 했다. 우리 기독교인들은 죽음의 체계인, 현대 의학에게만 인간의 치유를 맡길 수는 없다. 인간의 전인건강을 영, 육, 혼의 건강으로 볼 때, 현대 의학은 죽음의 체계인 것을 배제하고, 온전한 치유가 일어난다 할지라도 1/3의 치유를 담당하는 것이다. 그러므로 본 논문은 현대의학이 감당치 못하는 2/3 부분인 영과 혼의 치유와 현대 의학으로서 해결할 수 없는 부분까지 모두 포함한 전인치유를 위하여 “예방의학에 대한 영성 신학적 접근”을 고찰해 보고자 하였다. 사도 바울은 고린도전서 6장19-20절에서 “너희 몸은 너희가 하나님께로부터 받은바 너희 가운데 계신 성령의 전인 줄을 알지 못하느냐 너희는 너희의 것이 아니라 값으로 산 것이 되었으니 그런즉 너희 몸으로 하나님께 영광을 돌리라”고 했다. 몸은 가장 성스러운 곳이며, 신자들 안에 성령이 거하시는 가장 거룩한 성전이다. 따라서 몸은 단순히 죽어서 사멸되는 육체적 실재만은 아니다. 그러므로 인간은 몸의 건강과 함께 전인적으로 하나님께 영광을 돌려야 한다. 1장에서 세계보건기구를 비롯한 현대의학은 영성의 요소가 반드시 필요함을 강조하고 있음을 논하면서, 그렇다면 기독교 영성과 건강은 어떤 관계가 있는가를 물었다. 이 물음에 권택조의 영성, 지성, 감성의 삼성일체교육으로 인한 영성발달은 건강과 밀접한 관계가 있다는 논지로 삼성일체신경면역학(BNI)을 제안했다. 이를 증명하기 위하여 첫째, 영성은 심리학과 깊은 관계가 있다. 둘째, 심리학과 의학을 통합한 심신의학과 영성은 관계가 있다. 셋째, 면역학과 영성을 접목하여 영성이 심신에 영향을 주어 신경계와 면역계를 활성화 하여 인간을 전인적으로 건강하게 할 것이라는 논지를 본 연구는 증명할 것이라고 했다. 2장에서는 영성과 건강한 삶을 논하기 위하여 성서에 나타나 있는 영성의 개념이 영혼과 육체가 분리된 이원적 개념이 아니라 전인적인 개념임을 살피고, 역사적으로 사용된 영성의 개념이 상황적으로 때로는 지성적인 측면이, 때로는 감성적인 측면이, 때로는 하나님과의 관계적인 측면만 강조되어 적용되었음을 지적했다. 이는 본 연구가 영성에 대하여 삼성일체 중심으로 접근한 것이 올바른 방향이었음을 입증하는 것이었다. 따라서 과거의 이원적 영성의 일상 삶과의 분리는 현대에 와서 이원적 구조를 극복하고 전인적 영성의 삶에 대한 관심이 증가하고 있음을 논했다. 현대의 영성에 대하여, 루터의 영성을 본받아 하나님의 은혜 아래서는 수동적이고 이웃사랑 안에서는 적극적인 형태를 취하는 건강한 삶을 사는 일상적이며 전인적인 타자중심적인 삶을 제안했다. 3장에서 예방의학을 논하면서 예방의학은 역사적으로 볼 때 영적인 면을 항상 요구하고 있으며, 성서적 관점으로 볼 때에도 영적인 삶이 정신적으로나 육체적으로 건강에 도움이 된다는 결론을 얻었다. 그러한 결론은 영적인 삶인 예배, 기도, 성경공부, 찬양 등이 신자로서 하나님과의 관계를 유지하는 가장 직접적인 수단이기 때문에 건강에 필수적인 구성요소가 됨을 논하였다. 성서에서는 육체를 튼튼하게 하는 훈련 보다는 영적 훈련이 더 건강에 중요하다고 말씀 하신다. 특히 구약성서의 예방의학적 측면을 연구하면서 일상생활의 영적인 삶이 질병을 예방하는데 절대적임을 논했다. 4장 전반에서 영성신학과 심리학의 접목을 논한 것은 다음에서 논할 심신상관학과 영성신학의 관계를 정립하는데 영성심리학이 필요했기 때문이다. 그동안 심리학은 프로이드의 영향으로 정신분석을 중심으로 하였다. 그러나 현대 심리학에서 심리학의 제4물결이라고 부르는 정신종합을 주장하게 되었다. 그 이유는 정신을 분석하지만 말고 종합하여 심리적 상처의 치유뿐만 아니라 영적인 절정경험, 창조성, 하나님과의 관계 등의 영적인 문제를 다루어 정신분석학의 한계를 넘어야 하기 때문이었다. 이를 학자들은 영성심리학이라고 부른다. 영성과 심리학의 접목에서 얻을 수 있었던 것은 지금까지 심리라고 부르던 지성과 감성은 영성이 결여된 것이라는 결론이다. 그러므로 건강에 영향을 주는 심리학이란 영성심리학이어야 하며, 심신상관학은 영성이 포함된 영적-심신상관의학(Spirit-Mind-Body Medicine)이어야 한다. 4장 후반에서 영성과 심리학의 접목에서 얻은 영적-심신상관의학에 대한 이론적 체계를 세우기 위하여 몸과 마음의 관계를 연구하면서 의학 분야에

슬라보예 지젝의 무신론 신학에 대한 기독교 신학 관점에서의 응답 : 성 아우구스티누스, 마틴 루터, 조나단 에드워즈의 주체 이해를 중심으로

김경빈 아세아연합신학대학교 2018 국내박사

국문 초록 라캉의 정신분석학과 헤겔의 관념론을 융합한 새로운 변증법적 유물론을 주창한 슬라보예 지젝은 무신론 신학이라는 파격적인 주장을 내놓았다. 그는 라캉의 정신분석학에서 중요한 위치를 차지하는 대타자의 자리에 그리스도를 놓고 믿음은 대타자에 대한 절대적 영향의 관계로 설명한다. 인간이 생존하기 위해서는 사회적 상징체계와의 접점에 있는 중심을 차지하는 대타자에 대한 절대적인 신뢰가 필수적인데, 그리스도인들에게는 나사렛 예수가 바로 그런 존재이다. 하지만 라캉과 달리 지젝은 진정한 대타자는 없고, 절대적 필요성 때문에 있다고 믿을 뿐이다. 따라서 그리스도인들의 대타자인 예수에 대한 믿음도 허상일 뿐이라고 지젝은 주장한다. 또한, 지젝은 헤겔의 변증법에서도 부정의 부정을 완전부정으로 규정하여 존재의 근원을 “있음”이 아닌 “없음”에 둠에 따라서 하나님의 자기 비움인 “케노시스”를 신성의 본질이라는 규정하며 예수의 괴물성을 주장한다. 지젝에게 역사적 인물인 나사렛 예수는 일반적인 인간의 한계를 “광기”로 극복한 괴물과 같은 존재이다. 그리고 이 “광기”는 사도 바울에 의하여 이론화되어 믿음의 실체인 성령 공동체인 교회로 제도화되었다. 이와 같은 신학 작업에도 불구하고 지젝은 확고한 무신론자로 모든 초월적인 존재를 부인하고 종교를 거부한다. 믿음의 실재성을 부인하면서도 지젝이 기독교에 관심을 가지고 무신론 신학이라는 새로운 시도를 한 것은 유럽 문명에 대한 새로운 각성에서 기인한 것이다. 프롤레타리아 혁명의 완성을 최종적인 목표로 삼는 정통 마르크스주의자인 지젝은 기독교에서 혁명의 기원과 가능성을 발견했다. 혁명을 위해서는 주체인 인간의 자발적이고 헌신적인 참여가 필수적인데, 이와 관련된 모든 개념은 원래 기독교에서 기원한 것이다. 원죄로 인하여 죄인인 인간을 구원하는 것이 지상과제인 기독교는 운명론과 자력 구원이라는 양극단을 피하려고 자율적인 주체를 강조했다. 기독교는 인간이 객체가 아닌 주체로서 그리스도 안에서 나타난 하나님의 사랑을 받아들일 것을 요구한다. 이러한 기독교의 모습으로 인하여 현실적으로 불가능했던 나사렛 예수의 하나님 나라 운동이 성공하여 세상을 완전히 변화된 것을 주목한 지젝은 기독교를 사회주의 혁명의 성공을 위한 최고의 모범으로 삼고 있다. 결론적으로 지젝은 사회주의는 해방의 기획을 담고 있는 서구 기독교 전통에서 유래한 것이기 때문에 프롤레타리아 혁명을 위해서는 기독교를 지켜야 한다고 주장한다. 그렇지만 지젝은 기독교가 현실에서 혁명적인 힘을 발휘하기 위해서는 초월적인 종교적 차원의 믿음이 요구된다는 점을 간과했다. 즉, 지젝이 소중하게 생각하는 서구 기독교 문화의 유산은 철저한 유신론에 근거하여 숭고한 가치를 추구하면서 생겨난 것들이었다. 예를 들어 인류의 오랜 악습이었던 노예제도는 영혼의 평등을 강조한 조나단 에드워즈의 영향을 받은 복음주의자들의 헌신적인 노력의 결과였다. 그들은 정말로 성경이 증언하는 기독교 신앙을 있는 그대로 철저하게 믿었다. 따라서 기독교의 믿음은 무신론적으로 적절히 설명될 수 없다. 머리로 알고 있는 하나님에 대한 지식은 중생이라는 외상을 통해서 생겨난 “광기”가 있을 때, 신앙은 믿음으로 발전한다. 하지만, 지젝은 혁명의 동인인 “광기”를 기독교 신앙에서는 의도적으로 제한하여 믿음의 정당성을 훼손하고 있다. Abstract Slavoj Žižek is an atheist who denies transcendent existence, but publicly advocates Christianity. He was born in former Yugoslavia. So His personal experience about religion in unique. Officially, there was on God in his country, but every belief include Christianity and Islam was not just allowed to believe not forced to be member of Church or Mosque by race because of diplomatic relationship with foreign country. So, officially he was Roman-Catholic because he is Slovenian although he did not believe. It was made him to separate faith and belief. He back Christianty as a religion but hard to trust Jesus as God. He can be an atheist theologian in this thought. In this position, he try to study theology for orthodoxy belief in his way. But, his idea in theology is far from orthodoxy. He is firmly materialist, never accept spiritual thing. His understand about belief and faith is a just psychological phenomenon. Žižek use French psychoanalyst Jaques Lacan has suppressed Freud’s most important insights to explain for the faith without belief. The faith is a cultural behavior related to the exchange of symbol like language. The belief is a matter of the big Other who unnamed but presupposed author of social rules. God was the big Other, bur not in modern times. This made people to do every thing they want although it was banned in law of God. Žižek argue it is hard to find anyone who fully believe his religion because can not live to completely obey the order of God. If someone do this, he is crazy in the point of contemporary view. But, crazy man made history. Only this kind of people change the world. Ordinary think and rational behavior that was ground and ground have never affect to the old system. It is not easy to find these things happened. But, Jesus Christ is the best one to achieve this goal. He think Jesus is the ideal revolutionary to accomplish the love of God and Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus lived and dead for this great vision. People in that time thought he failed, but his dream became a reality in the Holly Church that Apostle build in the theology of St. Paul. It change the Western world to be thought about people as a subject. Žižek want to do the same thing in this world to rebuild the Communism. His dream is the vision of Karl Marx. Real freedom and equality can not be guaranteed in the capitalism. In this time, everyone is the prisoner of fetish. The descend of Eastern Socialist promised many thing but it is just for someone who had power. But, Žižek missed very important thing. Belief of Jesus, for the Christ, and about God made it happened in human history. Other people said they were crazy, but His disciples really believed with conscious will. At least it was real to believer to do their best to make it. No belief, no fruition in the real world in the God.

약속과 보존 : 존 오웬의 모세 언약론 연구

장헌민 亞細亞聯合神學大學校 2014 국내박사

For this dissertation I have studied John Owen’s doctrine of the Mosaic Covenant, specifically in relation with the New Covenant. The contemporary church has been plagued with a "cheap grace" syndrome, meaning Grace without the condemnation of the Law. The reason is due to the collapse of the mechanism device for the relevant balance between law and gospel, in contrast to the soteriology of the Reformation in the 16th century. Because of this many theological groups identify law with gospel or mix both ideas in various ways, the tendency is to be biased towards neonomism and antinomianism. Specifically, the view of Dispensationalism, Theonomy, NPP, NCT, FV, Mono-Covenantalism, Karl Barth etc. are it's tendencies. Evangelism also tends to put excessive emphasis on the Covenant of Grace to guard against Dispensationalism. Therefore, the 16th century’s Reformation soteriology outlined by Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solus Christus etc. is on a shaking foundation. One reason for these confusions seems to be in Westminster Confession of Faith(WCF). According to the WCF, since the corruption of the first Adam, all the covenants are the Covenant of Grace. Therefore the Mosaic Covenant also belongs to the Covenant of Grace. However such perspective to view both gospel and law as the administration of the Covenant of Grace, depending on where the emphasis is laid, could unintentionally allow to conceive either nomism or antinomianism. This view also has probability to be inclined to mono-covenantalism, such regards the Covenant of Grace as the only unique covenant of all the redemptive history indirectly. Although John Owen(1616-1683) is referred to as the prince of the puritans during the 17th century, believed the WCF to weaken the principles of protestant Reformation soteriology. He understood the Mosaic Covenant from a different perspective. Owen borrowed from Luther's distinction between 'the Law and the Gospel' to show the contrast between the old and new covenant in soteriology. According to Owen, the Mosaic Covenant is completely another different covenant with the Covenant of Grace. The Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant have completely different characters and functions each other in the soteriological dimension. Unlike the WCF, Owen could not find any soteriological similarities between the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant at all. While the Covenant of grace is unconditional, the Mosaic Covenant is a conditional one. If this distinguishing distinction fails, many problems are revealed to the surface. At the same time the Mosaic Covenant is not the Covenant of Works, because all salvation after the Fall is 'only' made through the Covenant of Grace(Sola Gratia). God's redemptive history after the proto evangelium in Genesis 3:15 says that God only presented one way of salvation, not two. Therefore, the Mosaic Covenant is not also the covenant of works. If so, how does Owen understand the Mosaic Covenant? According to Owen, the Mosaic Covenant is the only 'particular' third covenant that God has ordained solely for the nation of Israel. The Mosaic Covenant consists of the Covenant of Works(the Ten Commandments) republished and represented. The promises and warnings of temporal blessings are deeply related to the preservation of the Israelites' covenantal / national identity in Canaan. When God entered into a covenant with Abraham, He promised the birth of the Seed. That is to say Christ, the future descendant of the seed of Abraham. For this providential purpose, God entered into a temporary Mosaic Covenant with Israelites. Until the New Covenant is fulfilled, He controls and preserves Israelites with the law. Thus the birth of Christ according to God’s promise to Abraham had to be protected until the accomplishment. In that sense, the Mosaic Covenant is a kind of realistic national temporal covenant excluded from soteriological function. Therefore, according to Owen, the Mosaic Covenant or the Mount Sinai Covenant is neither the Covenant of Works nor the Covenant of Grace. It is a kind of National Covenant contracted with Israel. It is a temporary covenant given to a particular definite region and people at one point of time in the redemptive history(Heilsgeschichte). This covenant is essentially irrelevant to eternal salvation and doom of humankind. However, the moral laws (the Ten Commandments) republished in Mosaic Covenant is connected to the New Covenant. The moral laws are actually engraved in the spirit of covenant contractor with the New Covenant. Although the Mosaic covenant is a temporary passing covenant for the nation of Israel, Owen understands the moral law of the Covenant of Moses is still binding on to the Christians of the New Covenant. God's law of creation is eternal law. Owen accepts the third use of the Law according to the tradition of the Reformation. In this dimension, the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant are in a consecutive and continuous relationship. Therefore, the continuity and discontinuity between the Old and New Testaments exist together. If we regard the Mosaic covenant as the National Covenant, it is abrogated and discontinuous. However, from the standpoint of renewal of moral law, it is still effective and continuous. Thus, Owen disconnects and connects effectively the Law and the Gospel, or the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant. Through this he effectively criticizes the confusion about modern semi-Pelagianism, mono-covenantalism, and antinomianism. In conclusion, Owen believes the Mosaic Covenant to be a republication of the covenant of works. He believes that the Mosaic covenant is superimposed upon, and organically independent from the covenant of grace. For Owen, this made the Mosaic covenant distinct from the new covenant in substance and essence; and not a mere administration of the covenant of grace. Moreover, Owen’ fundamental distinctio

린드벡의 후기자유주의 신학비판

이윤희 아세아연합신학대학교 대학원 2009 국내석사

지금까지 1980년대 이후 모더니즘적인 자유주의 세계관에 대한 회의론의 확산과 함께 등장한 포스트모니즘 사상의 신학적 표현 중 하나인 린드벡의 후기 자유주의 신학(Postliberal theology)에 대해 살펴보았다. 지난 10여 년간 미국 신학계에서 활발하게 논의되고 있는 린드벡의 후기 자유주의신학은 ‘현재 상황’과 ‘성경’ 즉 다른 말로 하자면 ‘자유’ 혹은 ‘보수’라는 양단논법에 의해 ‘복음’의 순수한 의미가 상실되어 있는 상황 속에서 ‘새 시대를 위한 복음’이라는 딜레마에 대한 흥미로운 해답을 시도하고 있는 신학이다. 후기 자유주의 신학은 특별히 예일 대학교 신학부와 관련이 있는데, 그 대표적인 공로자가 바로 역사 신학교 교수인 조지 린드벡이다. 그는 그의 책 “교리의 본질”에서 자신의 접근 방식을 기술하는데, 이제까지의 잘못된 종교 이론 즉, 종교에 대한 인지적 접근과 경험-표현적 접근을 비판하면서 현대철학, 사회학, 심리학, 종교학 등의 이론적 지평 아래 문화-언어적 적 접근(culture-language approach)이라는 새로운 종교이론과 이를 기초한 새로운 교리 이론 곧 규칙이론(rule theory of the doctrine)을 제시했다. 사실 린드벡은 “교리의 본질”에서 자신이 조심스럽게 밝히듯이 후기 자유주의 신학 자체를 정립하여 펼쳐 보이는 대신 그것을 “향한”(toward a postliberal theology) 가능성을 타진하려는 목적을 지니고 있다. 린드벡이 이 책을 통해 의도한 것은 루터교 역사신학자로서 린드벡은 교회사에 나타난 여러 다양한 교리들을 연구해왔고, 또 카톨릭과의 대화에 앞서 왔었다. 이러한 경험의 배역에서 과연 기독교 안의 여러 상이한 “교리”들을 어떻게 이해해야지만 그들간의 “대화”를 가능케 할 수 있을까 하는 문제를 고심하게 된 것이다. 먼저 린드벡의 후기 자유주의의 사상적 배경을 다시 재고해보면, 먼저 그 명칭 자체가 포함하고 있는 것처럼, 린드벡의 후기 자유주의 신학은 포스트모더니즘의 사상적 영향을 받았다. 특별히 포스트모더니즘의 대표적 특징인 근대성의 통합성과 토대주의를 거부하고 상대적, 파편적 특징을 가진다. 이러한 영향으로 린드벡의 후기 자유주의 신학은 기독교 신앙의 특수성을 강조하고 있다. 포스트모더니즘 사상의 또 하나의 영향은 누구나 동의하는 보편타당한 지식 체계나 진리의 틀을 거부한다는 것이다. 린드벡의 신학방법론에는 포스트모더니즘 뿐 아니라 예일대학의 여러 교수들의 신학 방법론을 받아들이고 있는데, 특별히 동료인 한스 프라이의 이야기 신학에서 더 많은 영향을 받았다. 즉 린드벡은 한스 프라이의 성경 이야기에 대한 접근 방식을 조직신학적 관점에서 채용한다. 그리고 린드벡의 후기 자유주의 신학의 대표적 신학방법론인 문화-언어적 접근에서의 언어 문제는 비트겐슈타인의 언어게임에 이해의 근간을 두고 있다. 기어츠의 문화 인류학에 대한 견해 조차 린드벡은 자신의 교리 연구에 적용함으로 프라이의 본문 내적 접근 방식을 확장시켰다. 린드벡의 후기 자유주의 신학의 문화-언어적 종교론과 규칙 이론적 교리관은 진리에 관한 전통적 견해들과 완전히 다른 새로운 진리관, 즉 ‘체재 내적 진리관’을 지시한다. 그에게 있어서 진리는 어떤 공동체의 체재 내에서만 참일 수 있다. 즉 어디서나 통용될 수 있는 객관적인 진리는 없고 내부적인 나름대로의 한계를 지닌 진리가 있을 뿐이라는 것이다. 그것은 언어와 문화도 마찬가지이다. 린드벡에게 있어 존재론적 진리(the ontological truth)는 더 이상 존재하지 않는다. 따라서 체재내의 진리인 행위적진리(perfor- matory truth)가 의미를 가질 뿐이다. 이런 점에서 복음주의자인 맥그래스는 린드벡이 어떤 객관적인 실재를 다루는 체계 외적인 측면은 간과했다고 비판한다. 예를 들어 성부와 성자의 동일본질 교리는 단순히 기독교 공동체의 언어 규칙을 제공하는 2차적 진술일 뿐 아니라 실재를 지칭하는 1차적 언어이기도 하다는 것이다. 그는 실제로 기독교 교리들은 신앙의 내용을 지적으로 표현해 놓은 진리주장들로서 그것의 실재적 진위가 가장 중요한 출발점이라고 보아야 한다고 주장한다. 체재내적 진리관을 신학에 적용할 때 등장하는 개념이 “본문내재성” (intratextuality)이다. 여기서의 ‘본문’(text)는 경전을 뜻하는데, 종교들 나름대로 자신들의 경전을 가지고 있으며, 신자들은 그 안에서 그들의 삶을 살고 실재를 이해하기 위해 추구하는 해석적 기틀을 마련해 주고자 했다. 그러나 이러한 그의 주장은 철저하게 거대담론을 거부하고 파편화된 이야기 거리를 찾아다니는 포스트모더니즘의 논리에서 나오는 영속적인 진리와는 상관없이 표현적 이야기에 불과하다. 이 점에서도 맥그래스는 린드벡의 잘못을 지적하는데, 린드벡의 체계 속에서는 왜 성경에서 출발해야 하는지에 대한 설명을 주지 않고 있다고 문제를 제기한다. 즉 린드벡은 종교적인 공동체의 중심에는 항상 정경이 존재하고 이러한 정경이 공동체의 세계관을 형성하는 권위를 가지고 있다는 형상학적인 분석에서 출발하여, 기독교 공동체의 경우에는 성경이 그러한 정경의 권위를 가지고 있 The purpose of this thesis is to criticize George A. Lindbeck's postliberal theology, an important postmodernism theology that appeared with commenting both traditional evangelism and liberalism. His theology try to provide a theological possibility in order to explain some important issues in dispute between liberal theology and evangelical theology. This thesis deals with a intimate understanding of Lindbeck's postliberal theology, influence of his theological thought, his theological methodology, the important theological issues of his postliberal theology, the theological criticism for his ideological background and presuppositions by the Evangelism. First of all, to accomplish the purpose of this thesis, I investigated the essences, characteristics, and theological perspectives on Lindbeck's postliberal theology through the documents written by Lindbeck. Specifically, it discussed both Problems of postliberal theology and a counterproposal to them by using method that examined Lindbeck's documents that criticized postliberal theology. Also, it inspected cultural-linguistic model of both religion and doctrine through methological access of postliberal theology in order to study postliberal theology thoughts of Lindbeck. Lindbeck is a postmodern theologian who received what postmodernists insisted. He understands religion as a cultural-linguistic model that influenced by Wittgenstein and some Hns Frei. For his theology, Human is existence that express and understands oneself by language. In addition, his language forms his society. In this sense, Lindbeck claims that human religious experience is possible because of language. And thus Lindbeck emphasizes that Christians must not start from human experience and interpret the bible though it. It is to exchange Bible language for human language, and as a result, the Bible becomes not God's Word but human word. Lindbeck claims to let the Bible speak to human with own language. this is according to Barth's teaching. It means that the Christianity should not be judged by the viewpoint of modernism and rather that modern society be defined by biblical language and the meaning of human lives be found in it. Lindbeck's postliberal theology emphasizes on the distinctiveness of christianity and as a principle refuses to follow the liberalism that rushes headlong into danger of the identification of the truth of the Gospel with the cultural norms of American liberal late in the 19th century. In addition, postliberal theology insists that the Scripture is the supreme sourse of Christian thoughts and values, and that recommends the bible language for the purpose of preventing the Christianity from becoming post-Christianity in these days, and that has strong points to make confirmation of Jesus Christ as a central figure in thoughts and lives of Christian church.

해방 후 한국교회 종말론에 관한 연구

조주희 아세아연합신학대학교 대학원 2010 국내석사

This study starts with the concern that the Eschatology of korean church since 1945 had to confront radical transitions. In the history of korean church the Eschatology was a significant faith. Especially in 1910, under the times of Japanese colonialism it deeply influenced and motivated the christians of korean church to overcome this challenge. But why this valuable faith start to deteriorate after the Independence(1945) and Korean War? In this thesis firstly this writer researched about the backgrounds of formation and origin of korean church's eschatology. That is the influence of korean traditional religions, which is Shamanism, Buddhism, Confucianism and Tonghak/Chondokyo. And the important influence is American missionary's eschatological theology. Especially those eschatological character is the desirable hope for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Most of all they had a faith of Premillenniallism. This eschatological theology develop by the Pyongyang Great Revival Movement on 1907, driven by pastor Sun-Ju Gil. On 3 Chapter this writer studied the Eschatology of the first period since 1945(1945-1960), when is the period of confusion after the Independence and 6.25 Korean War. The historical situations of this times is political/ ideological confusions, 6.25 Korean War and social disorders. The cause of church is schism of korean churches and denominations. And The Eschatological inclinations of Premillenniallism, which is weariful of the world, brought out the heretic phenomenon. From Korean War, a newly rising religions and Heresy movement begin to appear. Ironically they were a eschatologist with an unsound belief. A examples is "Park Tae Sun's Jeon-Do-Guon", "Moon Sun Myung's Tong-il-gyo". After 6.25 Korean War in the history of korean church, the original eschatological faith to be hard done by false prophet. On 4 chapter this writer researches the Eschatology of korean church since 1960'(1960-1980) in the period of economical development and settlement. The historical situations of this times is nationally economical development movement and a faith's current of seeking fortune. This facts weaken the faith of seeking the future life, which is real substance of Eschatology. That is to say, It brought out the faith more oriented the worldly hope than the heavenly hope. Therefore since 1960's The eschatological faith of korean church was becoming out of issue. Eschatological preaching disappeared from the church's pulpit and it appeared on christian's faith to absence's phenomenon of eschatological faith. In this times The important cause of korean church is so called "To-chak-hwa theology", that is the result of Korean theology. Interest of eschatology and secod coming dropped cause of To-chak-hwa theology. And the remarkable transition of eschatology in korean church is from Premillenniallism to Post-/Amillenniallism. On 5 chapter this writer studies since 1980's(1980-) in the period of the eschatology of korean church. In this times the historical situations is democratization movement, social participation of church, extension of unification movement and citizen movement. And since 1990 the time limit eschatology, so called "October in 1992's syndrome of Da-mi-son-gyo-hwe" occurred. These facts caused church pulpit to avoid the eschatological sermons. That result negligence's phenomenon of the eschatology. 본 논문은 초기 한국교회의 중심신앙이었던 종말론이 해방 이후를 기점으로 어떻게 변화를 거듭했으며, 각 시대마다 어떠한 종말론적 특징을 가지고 있는가? 구체적으로 말하면 왜 그 소중한 복음진리인 종말론과 재림신앙이 변질되어 이단화(異端化) 되어가고, 교회의 강단에서 경시(輕視)되어가고 있는가? 라는 관심에서 시작되었다. 어쩌면 사도행전의 초대교회 사도들과 신자들처럼, 순교를 각오하고 복음을 전하고 신앙을 수호하였던 한국교회의 원동력은 바로 종말신앙에 있다고 해도 과언이 아닐 것이다. 한국교회의 놀라운 성장과 생명력의 가장 중요한 근원 가운데 하나도 역시 종말신앙에 있다. 종말신앙은 일본의 식민통치, 특히 1935년부터 한국교회를 강타했던 신사참배의 도전과 위협을 극복할 수 있는 원동력이 되기도 했다. 그런데 왜 이 소중한 신앙의 진리가 해방 이후와 6.25전쟁을 기점으로 하여 점점 변질되어가게 되었는가? 라는 질문을 할 수 밖에 없다. 본 논문에서는 무엇보다도 먼저, 한국교회가 왜 종말신앙을 자연스럽게 받아들이고 뿌리내리게 되었는지에 관해 살펴보았다. 어떻게 한국교회는 초기 기독교의 시대부터 종말신앙을 갖게 되었는가? 그 요인으로 작용하는 것이 바로 ‘한국의 전통사상’과 ‘재한 미국선교사들의 종말론적인 신학’의 영향으로 보았다. 특히 한국교회 초기 종말론 형성의 종교적 문화적 배경으로써, 근본적인 뿌리가 되는 것은 역시 한국의 전통종교들의 세계관이다. 한국의 전통종교 즉 무교, 불교, 유교에는 종말론적인 암시들이 담겨있어서 초기 한국교회 종말론 형성에 지대한 영향을 주었다는 것이다. 뿐만 아니라 이러한 종말론적인 특징들은 해방 후 한국교회 신자들의 신앙형성, 특히 종말신앙형성에 있어서도 적잖은 영향을 주었을 것이라고 추론할 수 있다. 본 연구자는 이점에 대해서는 해방(1945년) 이전으로 국한지어 설명하였다. 초기 한국교회 종말론 형성의 중요한 또 하나의 뿌리는, 재한 미국선교사들의 종말론적인 신학이다. 재림에 대한 전천년설 종말론적 기대, 즉 복음주의 신앙의 배경을 가지고 입국한 재한 미국선교사들의 종말론적 신학으로부터 받은 영향이다. 초기 한국교회의 성도들이 순수하고도 매우 헌신적인 신앙의 형태를 갖추게 된 것은, 성도들의 재림에 대한 전천년설 종말론적 기대에 대한 확신에서 비롯되었음을 부인할 수 없다. 뿐만 아니라 한국 전통종교들의 종말론적인 특색이 가미된 한국교회 만의 독특한 종말론은 일제치하의 혹독한 시련을 극복하게 된 원동력이 되었다는 것이다. 또한 초기 한국교회 종말신앙의 형성에 또 중요하게 작용한 것은 1907년 평양대부흥운동과 함께 한국교회의 영적인 부흥을 주도했던 길선주 목사의 종말론이다. 길선주 목사는 “종말의 희망을 알리는 나팔수”로서의 역할을 톡톡히 해냈다. 그의 종말론은 역시 세대주의적 전천년설로써 한국교회사에 긍정적, 부정적 영향을 주었음을 밝혔다. 본 논문의 연구 주제인 해방 이후 한국교회 종말론에 관해서는 본격적으로 Ⅲ장부터 논의하였다. 해방 이후 시대구분은 크게 다음과 같이 분류하였다. 1)해방과 6.25전쟁 직후 혼란기(1945~1960), 2) 6·70년대 경제성장운동과 정착기(1960~1980), 3) 80년대 이후 성장기(1980~)이다. 본 연구자는 각 시대별 역사적 상황과 종말론적 특징들, 주요현상들을 중심으로 정리하였다. 첫째로 해방과 6.25 직후 혼란기(1945~1960)의 한국교회 종말론에 관해 살펴보았다. 그 당시 역사적 상황을 보면, 해방 후 정치적 혼란과 남북한 교회의 재건, 6.25전쟁과 사회적 혼란, 한국교회의 분열이라는 사건들이 있었다. 그러한 역사적 사건들은 과연 어떻게 한국교회 종말론에 영향을 주었는가? 본 연구자는 해방 후 정치적·사회적·교회적 혼란 상황은 분명히 종말신앙에 긍정적이든 부정적이든 적잖은 영향을 주었을 것으로 보았다. 해방 후 남북한의 정치적 혼란과 교회의 분열, 6.25동족상잔 전쟁 직후 사회적 혼란은 한국교회로 하여금 다시금 종말신앙에 의존하게 하였다. 그리하여 종말론적인 이단과 신흥종교가 우후죽순처럼 발흥하게 된 계기를 마련하게 된 것이다. 6.25전쟁 이후 사회적 혼란은 한국국민들과 한국교회 신자들에게 힘들고 불합리한 이 세상의 현실너머 초월적인 세상을 추구하는 종말론적 동인(Motive)을 제공하게 된 것이다. 다시 말하면 6.25전쟁은 한국 땅에 종말론으로 무장한 신흥종교와 이단의 싹이 자라게 하는 역사적인 토양(土壤)을 제공하였다고 할 수 있다. 민족적인 비극과 함께, 특히 한국교회의 분열은 그 당시 종말론 이단과 신흥종교 집단의 발흥케 하는 간접적인 요인으로 작용하였다고 본다. 해방이후 그리고 6.25 동란 이후 특히 성행하게 된 종말론적 이단들의 탄생은 한국교회가 해방과 전쟁 후 교회의 재건이라는 무거운 사명을 감당해야만 했던 한국교회의 교단 분열과 동시대적으로 맞물려있다. 교회(교단)의 분열이 종말론적 이단의 발생에 직접적인 영향은 눈에 보이지 않더라도 동시대적으로 간접적으로 강한 영향을 주었다고 생각한다. 마치 세포분열처럼 교회의 분열이 가