RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      J. P. Gabler’s Distinction between Biblical Theology and Dogmatic Theology  :  An Evaluation from Reformed Perspective

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A100005655

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      J. P. Gabler’s proposal is a good example of scholarship which attempted to work for the church in engaging with the issues of his own era. He was influenced by neologians such as J. Semler, but at the same time he was concerned with ecclesiastical goal of which influence can be attributed to his conservative predecessors like G. T. Zacharia. Gabler’s proposal, unlike the wide-spread understanding of it as being historial-critical oriented, was set to defend the usefulness of Scripture for dogmatic theology, and unfortunately was heavily attacked by Immanuel Kant’s separation of theology from philosophy which lead biblical scholarship into the way of purely historicalcritical investigations of the text. Therefore, in one sense, Gabler can be called the father of biblical theology when considering that his distinction between the two eventually was of help for the establishment of biblical theology as an independent area of theological studies. In another sense, to Gabler is also possible to attribute a different name, defender of dogmatic theology. Gabler wanted to maintain both of these aspects, but the history of criticism did not allow him to do so. His ecclesiastical concern was abandoned by scholarship and only his influence on the historical-critical aspect remains remembered. This sheds significant light upon what reformed scholars need to pursue in the current situation. In spite of the fact that biblical theology and dogmatic theology are now two different areas in theology, they constitute one theological entity and are ultimately interconnected and dependent upon each other. To take a good care of our ecclesiastical concerns in the Korean context today, biblical theologians should delve into not only particular subject matters of biblical theology per se but also the universal, theological questions that the current contexts ask us to answer. Then biblical theology and dogmatic theology will be able to function in proper and fruitful directions.
      번역하기

      J. P. Gabler’s proposal is a good example of scholarship which attempted to work for the church in engaging with the issues of his own era. He was influenced by neologians such as J. Semler, but at the same time he was concerned with ecclesiastical ...

      J. P. Gabler’s proposal is a good example of scholarship which attempted to work for the church in engaging with the issues of his own era. He was influenced by neologians such as J. Semler, but at the same time he was concerned with ecclesiastical goal of which influence can be attributed to his conservative predecessors like G. T. Zacharia. Gabler’s proposal, unlike the wide-spread understanding of it as being historial-critical oriented, was set to defend the usefulness of Scripture for dogmatic theology, and unfortunately was heavily attacked by Immanuel Kant’s separation of theology from philosophy which lead biblical scholarship into the way of purely historicalcritical investigations of the text. Therefore, in one sense, Gabler can be called the father of biblical theology when considering that his distinction between the two eventually was of help for the establishment of biblical theology as an independent area of theological studies. In another sense, to Gabler is also possible to attribute a different name, defender of dogmatic theology. Gabler wanted to maintain both of these aspects, but the history of criticism did not allow him to do so. His ecclesiastical concern was abandoned by scholarship and only his influence on the historical-critical aspect remains remembered. This sheds significant light upon what reformed scholars need to pursue in the current situation. In spite of the fact that biblical theology and dogmatic theology are now two different areas in theology, they constitute one theological entity and are ultimately interconnected and dependent upon each other. To take a good care of our ecclesiastical concerns in the Korean context today, biblical theologians should delve into not only particular subject matters of biblical theology per se but also the universal, theological questions that the current contexts ask us to answer. Then biblical theology and dogmatic theology will be able to function in proper and fruitful directions.

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼