출애굽 모델의 역사신학적 변용 -조선에 관한 역사신학 서술과 죄사학

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구는 역사신학자들의 통사 서술이 출애굽 사건을 인용하는것에서 비롯되었다. 상당수의 역사신학자들은 출애굽 이야기에서 이스라엘을 조선에, 애굽을 일본에 견주는 유비추론을 전제로 역사신학 서술을이어간다.
서술의 골자는 무고한 조선과 죄악된 일본이라는 구도로 나타난다. 그러나 출애굽에 관한 정밀한 분석을 기반으로 명징한 상태에서 역사신학 서술을 전개한 것은 아니었다. 역사를 조망하고 해석하는 모델로서 성경의 출애굽 이야기를 인용하려 한다면 성경이 출애굽에 관해언급하는 것이 무엇인지 파악해야 한다역사적 모델은 역사해석에 관한함의와 그리스도인이 모방해야 할 대상으로서 모범이자 본이라는 의미를갖는다.역사적 모델로서 출애굽 이야기의 본질을 파악하기에 앞서 ‘출애굽’이라는 명칭에 관해 제기된 구약학계의 대체 용어인 ‘이름들’, ‘엑소더스와 에이소더스’, ‘예치아’가 역사적 모델의 명칭으로 적절한 것인지 검토되었다.성경은 그리스도인의 행동 모델로서 출애굽 사건을 제시하고있는데,
‘이름들’과 ‘예치아’는 그리스도인의 행동 목표나 모방의 대상을나타내는 명칭이 될 수 없다. ‘에이소더스(입가나안)’의 시점에도 ‘엑소더스(출애굽)’는 역사적 전거이자 모방의 대상이었다.
‘엑소더스와 에이소더스’는 동등하지 않은 차원의 용어를 병기한 것이며, ‘출애굽’만으로도 충분하다. 따라서 구약학계에서 제안된 대체 용어들보다 ‘출애굽’이 역사적모델의 명칭으로서 가장 적절하다고 판단하며, 이를 ‘출애굽 모델(TheExodus Model)’이라고 명명하였다.
출애굽 사건을 해석하는 관점은 이스라엘의 죄와 구원에 초점을두는 관점과 막시즘(Marxism)적 갈등 구도에서 애굽의 억압과 이스라엘의 고통에 초점을 두는 관점으로 대별된다. 이를 각각 ‘구원론적 출애굽모델’과 ‘계급론적 출애굽 모델’이라고 하였다.
계급론적 출애굽 모델의죄론은 자신(이스라엘)의 죄가 아닌 타인(애굽)의 죄에 초점을 두며, 구원론은 타인의 죄에서의 구출로 파악된다. 구원론적 출애굽 모델의 죄론은 자신의 죄에 초점을 두며, 구원론은 자신의 죄에서의 구원으로 파악된다. 이에 본고는 성경이 애굽의 죄보다 이스라엘의 죄를 강조하며, 인간 세계의 갈등 구조보다 하나님과 인간 사이의 갈등에 주목하고 있음을지적하였다.역사신학자들의 서술은 계급론적 출애굽 모델의 방식으로 전개되었다. 일본의 폭정, 박해를 강조하고 조선의 죄성은 그다지 언급하지않는다.
조선의 죄성은 단지 사회적 변화와 교회의 치리를 다루는 맥락에서 서술되었다. 심지어 조선 민족의 도덕적 우수성이 강조되며, 교회와조선 민족이 혼동되는 모습도 포착된다. 본 연구자는 이를 ‘죄성 서사’와‘도덕성 서사’라고 지칭하였다.
역사신학자들의 서술은 일본의 죄성 서사와 조선의 도덕성 서사로 구성된다.성경이 출애굽에 관해 진술한 대로 구원론적 출애굽 모델을 역사서술에 적용한다면 애굽의 죄가 아닌 이스라엘의 죄에 초점을 두어야한다.
본고에서는 역사신학 서술이 일본의 죄보다도 조선의 죄에 주목해야 한다는 것을 주장하고, 이러한 역사신학 방법론을 ‘죄사학(罪史學)’으로 명명하였다. 죄사학은 자신의 죄와 자신이 모방ㆍ계승하기 쉬운 조상(조선)의 죄를 탐구하는 데에 초점을 둔다. 두는 역사신학 서술의 구체화를 위해 몇 가지 사안을 다루었다. 홍익인간과 조선 통치의 합리성과 3ㆍ1운동은 조선 도덕성 서사의 기반이다.본고는 그것의 허구성과 죄성에 주목하였다. 또한, 풍수지리와 미신, 가정윤리, 군인 대우의 문제 등 현대 한국인이 조선으로부터 모방ㆍ계승한각종 비성경적 죄악을 지적하였다.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 국문초록 ····································································································ⅳ
• Ⅰ. 서 론 ·····································································································1
• 1. 연구의 동기와 목적 ·······································································1
• 2. 연구의 방법과 범위 ·······································································2
• 3. 연구사 ·······························································································4
• Ⅱ. 출애굽 모델 규명 ··············································································6
• 1. 개요 ···································································································6
• 2. 출애굽의 신학적 명명 문제 ·························································7
• 1) 출애굽 신학 해석에 관한 학계의 용어 제안 ·····················7
• 2) 학계에서 제안된 대체 용어 고찰 ·········································8
• (1) 이름들 ·················································································8
• (2) 엑소더스와 에이소더스 ·················································12
• (3) 예치아 ···············································································14
• (4) 역사적 모델의 준거에 따른 검토 ·······························18
• 3) 출애굽 명명의 준거 고찰 ·····················································19
• (1) 역사적 모델의 목적성 ···················································19
• (2) 용어 병기 필수성 준거 고찰 ·······································20
• - i -
• (3) 엑소더스와 에이소더스의 관계 ···································22
• 3. 출애굽 모델의 본질 ·····································································25
• 1) 출애굽 모델 분석의 전제 ·····················································25
• 2) 출애굽 모델 분석 ···································································28
• (1) 구원론적 출애굽 모델 ···················································28
• (2) 계급론적 출애굽 모델 ···················································34
• 4. 소결 ·································································································45
• Ⅲ. 출애굽 모델과 조선에 관한 역사신학 서술 ····························47
• 1. 개요 ·································································································47
• 2. 계급론적 출애굽 모델 역사서술 ···············································50
• 1) 조선의 도덕성 서사와 일본의 죄성 서사 ·························51
• 2) 축소된 조선의 죄성 서사 ·····················································62
• 3. 조선 민족주의 교회론 ·································································65
• 1) 역사신학 서술의 공통적 문제 ·············································65
• 2) 역사신학 서술 문제의 극복을 시도한 학자들 ·················74
• 4. 소결 ·································································································75
• Ⅳ. 죄사학적 이해와 제안 ···································································78
• 1. 개요 ·································································································78
• 2. 죄사학의 성경적 이해 ·································································78
• 1) 죄사학의 성경적 근거 ···························································78
• - ii -
• 2) 죄사학의 대상 ·········································································81