히브리서의 종말론: 수직적 관점과 수평적 관점의 융합 (Eschatology of Hebrews: The Incorporation of Horizontal and Vertical Thought Patterns)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국복음주의신약학회
· 수록지 정보 : 신약연구 / 12권 / 2호 / 334 ~ 355페이지
· 저자명 : 이풍인

초록

This paper aims to examine the origins of the thought patterns and their characteristics in Hebrews. The preacher of Hebrews makes use of an eschatological dimension to demonstrate his argument more effectively. The presence of horizontal and vertical thought patterns is one of the much debated topics in the study of Hebrews. As is usually recognized, these patterns are used to explain the significance and supremacy of the once-for-all sacrifice offered by Jesus himself, the perfect heavenly high priest. However, the blend of the two perspectives in the eschatology in Hebrews makes it difficult to understand Hebrews because the same term is used in some passages for a linear perspective but in other passages for a vertical perspective. Various possible sources have been suggested for non-Christian Background such as Philo of Alexandria and Platonism, Qumran, pre-Christian gnosticism, and Merkabah mysticism.
Possible Christian backgrounds include the Stephen tradition, Pauline theology,and 1 Peter. Among these, Philonic/Platonic philosophy or Jewish tradition have been most frequently suggested. During the first half of the twentieth century the Philonic influence on Hebrews was accepted as the dominant voice. In 1952-3 Spicq accommodated this in his two volume commentary on Hebrews,and was followed by many others. However, the view has lost ground because of the criticisms of C.K. Barrett (1956), R. Williamson (1970), and L.D. Hurst (1990), who emphasized Jewish apocalyptic influence on Hebrews.
The preacher of Hebrews uses seemingly similar language and ideas, but they are in fact very different from those of Philo. There is no actual quotation from Philo in Hebrews and between the two schools of thought there are different views on a wide range of basic concepts and ideas. Thus,it seems to be proper to conclude that the structure of the thought in Hebrews is not Philonic but eschatological.
The preacher of Hebrews demonstrates that Jesus’death is a superior sacrifice in the new covenant over the old animal sacrifices. To add weight to the argument, several antithesis such as old/new, one/many, earthly/heavenly,flesh/spirit and interior/exterior are employed. However, the confrontation is settled not in an incident belonging to the transcendental sphere, but in a bodily act of Christ which represents his conformity to the will of God (Heb 10:5-10).

영어초록

This paper aims to examine the origins of the thought patterns and their characteristics in Hebrews. The preacher of Hebrews makes use of an eschatological dimension to demonstrate his argument more effectively. The presence of horizontal and vertical thought patterns is one of the much debated topics in the study of Hebrews. As is usually recognized, these patterns are used to explain the significance and supremacy of the once-for-all sacrifice offered by Jesus himself, the perfect heavenly high priest. However, the blend of the two perspectives in the eschatology in Hebrews makes it difficult to understand Hebrews because the same term is used in some passages for a linear perspective but in other passages for a vertical perspective. Various possible sources have been suggested for non-Christian Background such as Philo of Alexandria and Platonism, Qumran, pre-Christian gnosticism, and Merkabah mysticism.
Possible Christian backgrounds include the Stephen tradition, Pauline theology,and 1 Peter. Among these, Philonic/Platonic philosophy or Jewish tradition have been most frequently suggested. During the first half of the twentieth century the Philonic influence on Hebrews was accepted as the dominant voice. In 1952-3 Spicq accommodated this in his two volume commentary on Hebrews,and was followed by many others. However, the view has lost ground because of the criticisms of C.K. Barrett (1956), R. Williamson (1970), and L.D. Hurst (1990), who emphasized Jewish apocalyptic influence on Hebrews.
The preacher of Hebrews uses seemingly similar language and ideas, but they are in fact very different from those of Philo. There is no actual quotation from Philo in Hebrews and between the two schools of thought there are different views on a wide range of basic concepts and ideas. Thus,it seems to be proper to conclude that the structure of the thought in Hebrews is not Philonic but eschatological.
The preacher of Hebrews demonstrates that Jesus’death is a superior sacrifice in the new covenant over the old animal sacrifices. To add weight to the argument, several antithesis such as old/new, one/many, earthly/heavenly,flesh/spirit and interior/exterior are employed. However, the confrontation is settled not in an incident belonging to the transcendental sphere, but in a bodily act of Christ which represents his conformity to the will of God (Heb 10:5-10).

참고자료

· 없음