예수의 무위자연(無爲自然) 사상

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Fontenrose began his book Python with the words, "every god has his enemy, whom he must vanquish and destroy." Struggle is at the center of the experience of every living thing. A story of conflict would therefore be more or less universal in application. The oldest text dealing with the motif of struggle between gods came from the period of Akkad at the 24th centuty BCE. About 2500 year later, the Book of Revelation also refers to "a beast coming out of the sea with ten homs and seven heads."(Revelation 13:1). This paper studies on how the Old Testament adopts and applies the motifs of myhc struggles between gods attested in "Baal Cycle" of the Ugaritic literature. In Ugaritic the fertility god Baal struggles with Yam, Mot, Ltn, Tnn. The story has been explained in terms of seasonal, ritual, liturgical interpretation, and etc. The conflict motif is also adopted in the Bible. Yet, it seems to be contradictory because the Old Testament states monotheism thus rejecting existence of other gods. To what extent and for what did the Old Testament adopt the motif from the Canannite literature? In chapter two, reads and interprets the struggle between Baal and gods in "Baal Cycle." Four major monsters who fought against Baal were Yam/nhr. Mot, Ltn, and Tnn. These four monsters are also attested in the Bible, where they are personified as symbolic power of evil as discussed in chapter three. In chapter four, I pursues how the Old Testament adopts and applies the motif of myhc struggle. The four monsters in the Ugaritic literature appear in the creation stoty, historical events, and apocalypse as Yahweh`s opponents in the Old Testament. Does it mean that Old Testament accept mythological understanding shared by their circumstances without hesitation? The difficulty lies in that the Old Testament does not provide systematic explanation regarding questions of what we raise. In conclusion, I argues that the Old Testament adopt and applies mythic images drawn from the motif of struggle between gods in Ugaritic literature. This mythic usages of Ugaritic motif in the Bible are attested in creation (Isa 51:9-10, Ps 74:13-15). history(Exod 15:1-18), and apocalypse.(Daniel 7, Revelation 12, 13) its implies that the Old Testament adopted and applied the mythic images of Ugaritic literature for the purpose fo emphasizing of God`s sovereignty in Urzeit, Historie, and Endzeit rather than acception Ugaritic myth in a literal sense.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 곽신환, "주역에서의 자연관 동양사상과 환경문제" 1996

2 길희성, "인도 철학사" 1984

3 장회익, "삶과 온생명" 1988

4 법륜, "동양사상과 환경문제" 모색 1996

5 원정근, "도가철학의 사유방식" 법인문화사 1997

6 박영효, "다석 유영모를 통해 본 노자의 도덕경" 두레 1998

7 김용옥, "노자와 21세기 상" 통나무 2000

8 Fowler, "Who is the Readers in Reader Response Criticism?" 1985

9 Culler, "Theology and Criticism after Structuralism" 1983

10 Dodd, "The Parables of the Kingdom" 1936

11 London, "The Parables of Jesus" 1947

12 J. D. Crossan, "The Historical Jesus" Sanfrancisco 1991

13 Lane, "The Gospel according to Mark" 1974

14 Gould, "The Gospel According to St" 1983

15 Cranfield, "The Gospel According to Saint Mark" 1959

16 Schweizer, "The Good News According to Mark" 1970

17 Crossan, "The Challenge of the Historical Jesus" 1973

18 Crossan, "Raid on the Articulate Cosmic Eschatology in Jesus and Borges" 1976

19 "Paulus und Jesus eine Untersuchung zur Praezisierung der Frage nach dem Ursprung der Christologie" 1967

20 Breech, "Kingdom of God and the Parables of Jesus" 1978

21 "Gottes Herrschaft und Reich" freiburg1969

22 "Das Evangelium nach Markus I" 1978

23 Ernst, "Das Evangelium nach Markus" 1981

24 Grundmann, "Das Evangelium nach Markus" 1977

25 Crossan, "Cosmic Eschatology in Jesus and Borges" 1976

26 A, "A Commentary on the Gospel According to St" 1960-1977