사람들의 완악해짐은 예수가 비유를 사용한 목적인가 결과인가? — 마가복음 4:12의 ἵνα 해석 — (Is the Hardening of People the Purpose or the Result of Jesus’ Use of Parable?: Interpreting ἵνα in Mark 4:12)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : (재)대한성서공회 성경번역연구소
· 수록지 정보 : 성경원문연구 / 51호 / 151 ~ 169페이지
· 저자명 : 권영주

초록

This article explores the following questions: How should we interpret ἵνα in Mark 4:12? Is it used as a purpose clause or a result clause? In order to answer these questions, previous studies tend to focus on grammatical and linguistic issues. The problem is that both positions provide all convincing evidence and arguments. Thus, previous studies offer not much contribution to the issue of determining the meaning of ἵνα clause despite their usefulness. Since previous studies have come to a dead end, this article suggests that scholars should find different avenues of research to resolve this crucial interpretive issue. This article intends to fill this gap by studying three areas: (1) the original context of Isaiah, (2) Mark’s use of Isaiah, and (3) the context of Mark.
Regarding the first area, it is true that the overall tone of Isaiah 6 and its previous context (Isa 1-5) is gloomy. In other words, the message of judgment is predominant. In light of this, it seems right to conclude that Isaiah 6:9-10 is to be interpreted as the message of judgment. However, this article argues that Isaiah’s original context itself includes the message of recovery and hope. For example, Isaiah 6:11-12 indicates that the judgment is temporary rather than permanent. Further, Isaiah 6:13 explicitly states that God leaves the holy seed even in the season of judgment. With regard to the second area, Mark uses Isaiah in the way of de-emphasizing the divine intention and initiative expressed in MT and LXX. MT uses imperative verbs, implying that God takes initiative in the hardening of people. MT also uses hiphil verbs that have causal meaning. This gives the impression that God is responsible for the hardening of people. The uses of future indicative verbs and divine passive verb in LXX have the same effect. However, Mark 4:12 mitigates divine intention in the hardening of people by using subjunctive mood and avoiding reinforced negation(μή rather than οὐ μή). Concerning the third area, both immediate context and larger context of Mark highlight audience’s response and reception. If ἵνα is to be interpreted as a purpose clause in the sense that Jesus’ use of parables intends to harden people’s heart, Mark 4:11-12 may not cohere with the general tone of the rest of the chapter. Putting all these pieces of evidence together, this article concludes that interpreting ἵνα in Mark 4:12 as a result clause makes far better sense.

영어초록

This article explores the following questions: How should we interpret ἵνα in Mark 4:12? Is it used as a purpose clause or a result clause? In order to answer these questions, previous studies tend to focus on grammatical and linguistic issues. The problem is that both positions provide all convincing evidence and arguments. Thus, previous studies offer not much contribution to the issue of determining the meaning of ἵνα clause despite their usefulness. Since previous studies have come to a dead end, this article suggests that scholars should find different avenues of research to resolve this crucial interpretive issue. This article intends to fill this gap by studying three areas: (1) the original context of Isaiah, (2) Mark’s use of Isaiah, and (3) the context of Mark.
Regarding the first area, it is true that the overall tone of Isaiah 6 and its previous context (Isa 1-5) is gloomy. In other words, the message of judgment is predominant. In light of this, it seems right to conclude that Isaiah 6:9-10 is to be interpreted as the message of judgment. However, this article argues that Isaiah’s original context itself includes the message of recovery and hope. For example, Isaiah 6:11-12 indicates that the judgment is temporary rather than permanent. Further, Isaiah 6:13 explicitly states that God leaves the holy seed even in the season of judgment. With regard to the second area, Mark uses Isaiah in the way of de-emphasizing the divine intention and initiative expressed in MT and LXX. MT uses imperative verbs, implying that God takes initiative in the hardening of people. MT also uses hiphil verbs that have causal meaning. This gives the impression that God is responsible for the hardening of people. The uses of future indicative verbs and divine passive verb in LXX have the same effect. However, Mark 4:12 mitigates divine intention in the hardening of people by using subjunctive mood and avoiding reinforced negation(μή rather than οὐ μή). Concerning the third area, both immediate context and larger context of Mark highlight audience’s response and reception. If ἵνα is to be interpreted as a purpose clause in the sense that Jesus’ use of parables intends to harden people’s heart, Mark 4:11-12 may not cohere with the general tone of the rest of the chapter. Putting all these pieces of evidence together, this article concludes that interpreting ἵνα in Mark 4:12 as a result clause makes far better sense.

참고자료

· 없음