바울신학의 새 관점 비판: 바울복음의 기원-칭의론과 최후의 심판론을 중심으로- (Criticism on the New Perspective of Paul Theology:Origin of Paul-Gospel Focus on justification and final judgment.)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국복음주의신약학회
· 수록지 정보 : 신약연구 / 12권 / 4호 / 838 ~ 874페이지
· 저자명 : 김철홍

초록

This study makes an attempt to review and assess some of the main tenets of the New Perspective on Paul(NPP), giving attentions to the arguments of its three significant proponents, i. e., E. P. Sanders, James Dunn, and N.
T. Wright. In the introduction a short chronicle of the debate around the issues of the NPP is provided to show how it has developed and what points are in great concern for the camps of pros and cons. Then, Covenantal Nomism is critically reevaluated. Some literal evidence from Psalm of Solomon and Jubilee is appraised as examples that do not support Covenantal Nomism. Even James Dunn comments that Sanders “may have focused to closely on the covenant dimension and underplayed the nomistic dimension (covenantal nomism). Second Temple and Jewish writings may well be less consistent than Sanders argued.”Covenantal Nomism does not accurately delineate the Second Temple Judaism. Synergism would be the most evenhanded definition of it. James Dunn’s claim that Paul’s gospel of justification by faith developed in the context of gentile mission is also weighed. Galatian texts are analyzed to demonstrate that Paul’s gospel of justification by faith was not an outcome of development over an extended period of time, but a God-given message acquired through revelation of Christ. Due to the nature of the Damascus experience which was in no need of further clarification, Paul was able to go to Arabia for evangelical efforts to convert the descendants of Ishmael into the gospel. Galatians 1:23, “The one who formerly was persecuting us is now proclaiming the faith”points to the fact that the essence of Paul’s message was “the faith”indicates that the central concept of Paul’s gospel preached right three years after his Damascus experience was no other than faith.
James Dunn proposes two justifications: initial justification by faith and final justification by works. He understands justification not as a legal status attributed to believers, but as a process during which believers go through actual transformation by the Holy Spirit. N. T. Wright apprehends righteousness of God as divine faithfulness to the covenant. He denies the notion of the imputation of righteousness to believers, asserting that their obedience to the covenant is the basis for the final justification. Thus, two of the proponents of the NPP, in fact, declare that final judgment of believers is in accordance with works. However, in the reformation tradition justification is clearly distinguished from sanctification. Only in catholic or Armenian tradition do these two concepts interpenetrate each other. The justification is a legal status that is given to them, yet it is also denotes a status that will be declared in the final judgment. The propitiation done through the death of Christ has an effect on all the sins committed throughout their whole life.
Christian doctrines regarding the final judgment is to be differentiated from that of Judaism because Christian anthropology, which is so pessimistic, is quite different from that of Judaism. Law and works do not belong to the category of justification but of Christian ethics. At the final judgment God justifies believers free from their works because of Christ through faith and by grace.

영어초록

This study makes an attempt to review and assess some of the main tenets of the New Perspective on Paul(NPP), giving attentions to the arguments of its three significant proponents, i. e., E. P. Sanders, James Dunn, and N.
T. Wright. In the introduction a short chronicle of the debate around the issues of the NPP is provided to show how it has developed and what points are in great concern for the camps of pros and cons. Then, Covenantal Nomism is critically reevaluated. Some literal evidence from Psalm of Solomon and Jubilee is appraised as examples that do not support Covenantal Nomism. Even James Dunn comments that Sanders “may have focused to closely on the covenant dimension and underplayed the nomistic dimension (covenantal nomism). Second Temple and Jewish writings may well be less consistent than Sanders argued.”Covenantal Nomism does not accurately delineate the Second Temple Judaism. Synergism would be the most evenhanded definition of it. James Dunn’s claim that Paul’s gospel of justification by faith developed in the context of gentile mission is also weighed. Galatian texts are analyzed to demonstrate that Paul’s gospel of justification by faith was not an outcome of development over an extended period of time, but a God-given message acquired through revelation of Christ. Due to the nature of the Damascus experience which was in no need of further clarification, Paul was able to go to Arabia for evangelical efforts to convert the descendants of Ishmael into the gospel. Galatians 1:23, “The one who formerly was persecuting us is now proclaiming the faith”points to the fact that the essence of Paul’s message was “the faith”indicates that the central concept of Paul’s gospel preached right three years after his Damascus experience was no other than faith.
James Dunn proposes two justifications: initial justification by faith and final justification by works. He understands justification not as a legal status attributed to believers, but as a process during which believers go through actual transformation by the Holy Spirit. N. T. Wright apprehends righteousness of God as divine faithfulness to the covenant. He denies the notion of the imputation of righteousness to believers, asserting that their obedience to the covenant is the basis for the final justification. Thus, two of the proponents of the NPP, in fact, declare that final judgment of believers is in accordance with works. However, in the reformation tradition justification is clearly distinguished from sanctification. Only in catholic or Armenian tradition do these two concepts interpenetrate each other. The justification is a legal status that is given to them, yet it is also denotes a status that will be declared in the final judgment. The propitiation done through the death of Christ has an effect on all the sins committed throughout their whole life.
Christian doctrines regarding the final judgment is to be differentiated from that of Judaism because Christian anthropology, which is so pessimistic, is quite different from that of Judaism. Law and works do not belong to the category of justification but of Christian ethics. At the final judgment God justifies believers free from their works because of Christ through faith and by grace.

참고자료

· 없음