한세대학교영산신학연구소

DOI: Vol.69(No.0) 1-1, 2024

Abstract

Key Words

Mun-chul Shin

DOI: Vol.69(No.0) 3-4, 2024

Abstract

Key Words

윤영준 Young-joon Yoon

DOI:10.18804/jyt.2024.09.69.7 Vol.69(No.0) 7-43, 2024

Abstract

In contemporary Deuteronomic studies, the preeminent scholar Eckart Otto has integrated the research of P. E. Dion and H. U. Steymans and proposed the view that, in the 7th century BCE, Judahite intellectuals appropriated EST (Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty) in a subversive manner, leading to the composition of Deuteronomy 6, 13, and 28. Otto posits that this act constitutes the beginning or origin of Deuteronomy (Urdeuteronomium). Subsequently, Otto’s claim, based on a literary connection between Deuteronomy and Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty, has sparked considerable debate among scholars of Deuteronomy. For example, scholars opposing his view have sharply criticized Steymans’ study of Deuteronomy 28, which serves as the basis of Otto’s argument. They contend that a detailed examination of the texts of Deuteronomy and those of the ancient Near Eastern treaty reveals the weakness of Otto’s thesis that the curses in Deuteronomy 28 are directly dependent on EST. The issue lies in that both scholars supporting Otto and Steymans and those opposing them basically conduct literary comparisons between Deuteronomy and EST, yet they reach divergent conclusions. However, the recent discovery of another version of EST at Tell Tayinat in the Levant has opened the door for a new phase of research. The Tell Tayinat manuscript provides strong and significant argument reinforcing the claim of a literary connection between EST and Deuteronomy. Just as a manuscript of EST was displayed in the temple at Tell Tayinat, a similar copy might have been exhibited in the Jerusalem Temple. With this new archaeological discovery from Tell Tayinat, the scholarly approach to Deuteronomy and EST can move beyond mere literary comparison, and the direct literary connection between the two may now gain renewed recognition.

Key Words

Deuteronomy, Esarhaddon’s Succession Treaty (EST), curses, origin of Deuteronomy (Urdeuteronomium), Tell Tayinat, subversive acceptance, 신명기, 에살핫돈의 왕위계승조약, 저주들, 신명기의 기원(원신명기), 텔 타이나트, 파괴적 수용

오성욱 Sung Wook Oh

DOI:10.18804/jyt.2024.09.69.45 Vol.69(No.0) 45-85, 2024

Abstract

The theology of Karl Barth employs dialectics as its theological method. Therefore, Barth has been understood as rejecting the Pietistic theological tradition and neglecting the subjective work of the Holy Spirit. However, by discerning that Barth adopts a theological methodology similar to ‘narrative theology’ and ‘canonical criticism’ instead of dialectics, and by closely reading Barth’s Church Dogmatics IV/2, one can encounter new theological themes. Moreover, it can be found that the themes of Pietistic and Evangelical theology, which Barth often overlooked, are discussed in depth. That is, readers can find that Barth deals under his Christology with discipleship, the imitation of Christ, and the subjective love of the Holy Spirit, conversion, and sanctification which Barth had neglected. In relation to these themes, Barth’s Church Dogmatics IV/2 can adequately engage in theological dialogue with John Wesley’s core theological theme of sanctification, and it can be said that both theologians present reader’s transformative Christology within the narrative community.

Key Words

Karl Barth, Christology, discipleship, imitation of Christ, sanctification, love of the Holy Spirit, 칼 바르트, 기독론, 제자도, 그리스도를 닮음, 성화, 성령의 사랑

정헌태 Huntae Chung

DOI:10.18804/jyt.2024.09.69.87 Vol.69(No.0) 87-125, 2024

Abstract

This article examines the relationship between religion and politics in terms of biblical interpretation during the Great Depression in the United States. To understand Pentecostals’ attitudes toward the New Deal, a state-led economic policy, we will examine three questions: (1) how similar were fundamentalists and Pentecostals, (2) what was the difference between them in responding to the New Deal, and (3) in what ways did they differ from one another? Both fundamentalists and Pentecostals (particularly, the Assemblies of God) embraced the futurist view of the apocalyptic text, believing they lived in the last phase of history and expected Christ’s imminent return. Two groups also looked for the signs of the times within the historical view of the Apocalypse. They identified the Antichrist (frequently the beast of Revelation 13:11-18 that would control the global economic and spiritual domination) with specific historical figures like Benito Mussolini, Communists, and Hitler. Moreover, extending the interpretation to the national level, fundamentalists criticized the New Deal in apocalyptic terms, insistently calling Roosevelt the Antichrist. But in their reluctance to apply the historicist view of Revelation 13 to the president, the Pentecostals differed from the fundamentalists. In addition, the Pentecostals expressed their allegiance to the president in terms of Romans 13.

Key Words

Pentecostalism, Assemblies of God, fundamentalism, apocalypticism, political interpretation, 오순절주의, 하나님의 성회, 근본주의, 묵시사상, 정치적 해석

조지훈 Ji Hoon Cho

DOI:10.18804/jyt.2024.09.69.127 Vol.69(No.0) 127-161, 2024

Abstract

God-centered preaching is the search for God and God’s actions in the process of biblical reading, making them the protagonists of God’s sermon text, and proclaiming the gospel through it. In this way, it encompasses the entire process from the preparation of the sermon to the proclamation. In other words, God-centered preaching is more concerned with theological reading of Scripture and theological preaching than historical, literary, and theological reading of the biblical text. However, this theological methodology of preaching has been largely neglected, especially in the New Homiletics. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate narrative in the context of God-centered preaching. To that end, the writer defines the meaning of the word ‘narrative’ from a sermonical point of view. In the process of defining the word ‘narrative’, historical criticism, literary criticism, and narrative criticism will naturally be discussed. In particular, the writer focuses on historical criticism and narrative criticism and examines their strengths and weaknesses. The writer will then list the advantages that a preacher can take from narrative, which is to draw attention to the fact that the Bible and our daily lives have a narrative and to show that narrative through preaching. The paper also discusses the limitations of narratives: first, that narratives run the risk of diminishing or distorting human life and divine revelation; second, that narratives can alienate preachers from their audiences; third, that narratives can distort the non-narrative aspects of human beings; and finally, that a narrative reading of the Bible can result in a loss of the theological aspect, the centrality of God in modern preaching.

Key Words

narrative, the New Homiletics, God-centeredness, historical criticism, literary criticism, narrative criticism, 내러티브, 새로운 설교학, 하나님 중심성, 역사비평, 문학비평, 내러티브 비평

진현호 Hyun Ho Jin

DOI:10.18804/jyt.2024.09.69.163 Vol.69(No.0) 163-187, 2024

Abstract

This study is about Jonathan Edwards’ prayer. Jonathan Edwards(1703-1758) is the most influential pastor, theologian, and philosopher in the history of evangelicalism. In “Miscellanies,” no. 332, Edwards states that “God is a communicative being.” If “God is a communicative beings,” how does God communicate with His people in prayer? The purpose of this study is to find out the worship theology as a pattern of revelation and response that Edwards pursues in prayer, one of the elements of worship. Edwards considers prayer as the practice of a divine-human conversation. God’s mercy is self-moved, not moved by His people in prayer. God prepares men’s hearts to prayer, and then answers their prayers. So, prayer is God’s favor. In his sermon “God’s Manner Is First to Prepare Men’s Hearts and Then to Answer Their Prayers,” Edwards states that God’s favor toward His people is set forth in a twofold exercise of that favor in prayer: (1) God encourages His people to pray, (2) God listens to their cry. God reveals His favor through prayer. God’s people pray to Him by His favor. For Edwards, thus God communicates with His people as a pattern of revelation and response by the Spirit in prayer. In the historical method, this study uses Edwards’ selected sermons informed by his theological writings to discern his worship theology. In his diary and sermons, Edwards recorded that he sought to convey God’s favor to His people through prayer. In fact, researches about Edwards have been continued in various fields. Unfortunately, however, there is little research on the theology of worship that Edwards pursued. In this respect, the study will be a stepping stone to development of Edwards’ worship theology.

Key Words

Jonathan Edwards, prayer, the Holy Spirit, worship theology, communication, 조나단 에드워즈, 기도, 성령, 예배 신학, 대화

한세대학교영산신학연구소

DOI: Vol.69(No.0) 189-201, 2024

Abstract

Key Words

한세대학교영산신학연구소

DOI: Vol.69(No.0) 202-202, 2024

Abstract

Key Words