728x90
10 For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying sto please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a tservant2 of Christ.
11 For uI would have you know, brothers, that vthe gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel.3 12 wFor I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it xthrough a revelation of Jesus Christ. 13 For you have heard of ymy former life in Judaism, how zI persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it. 14 And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely azealous was I for bthe traditions of my fathers. 15 But when he cwho had set me apart dbefore I was born,4 and who ecalled me by his grace, 16 was pleased to reveal his Son to5 me, in order fthat I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone;6 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 갈 1:10–17.
11 For uI would have you know, brothers, that vthe gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel.3 12 wFor I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it xthrough a revelation of Jesus Christ. 13 For you have heard of ymy former life in Judaism, how zI persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it. 14 And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely azealous was I for bthe traditions of my fathers. 15 But when he cwho had set me apart dbefore I was born,4 and who ecalled me by his grace, 16 was pleased to reveal his Son to5 me, in order fthat I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone;6 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 갈 1:10–17.
10절) 이제 내가 사람들의 인정을 구하는가 그렇지 않으면 하나님의 인정을 구하는가? 아니면 내가 사람을 기쁘게 하려고 하는가? 만약 내가 여전히 사람을 기쁘게 하기위해서 노력한다면 나는 그리스도의 종이 아니다.
- 본문에서 두가지 질문을 던진다. 첫번째는 사람이나 하나님의 인정을 구하는가? 두번째는 사람을 기쁘게 하기 위해서 노력하는가?이다. 이후 13-14절을 보면 바울은 하나님의 교회를 박해하고 멸하기 위해서 열심이 특심한 인물이었다. 모세의 율법을 따르며 사람들의 인정을 받기 위해서 노력하던 인물이었던 것이다. 그는 모세의 율법을 지킴을 통해서 하나님 앞에서 자신을 정당화 했을 뿐만 아니라 자신의 야망을 성취하기 위해서 노력하던 인물이었다. 그런 그가 다메섹 도상에서 주님을 만나고 삶의 방향이 완전히 바뀌게 된것이다. 본절에서 말하는 것처럼 사람들의 인정을 받고 기쁘게 하기위했던 자가 이제 그리스도의 종으로 하나님을 기쁘시게 하고 그분의 인정을 받는것을 최우선의 가치로 여기게 된 것이다.
시장경제에 익숙한 우리들, 이러한 가치를 가지고 많은 교회가 회중들의 입맛에 맞추어서 복음을 변질시키는 것은 옳지 않다.
- We might put the question this way: What is the constituency for our ministry? In a market-driven age we are accustomed to think of every church having a special niche, of every visitor as a prospective customer, and every aspect of worship designed to satisfy the consumers. Paul was reminding the Galatians that the gospel was not a product to be peddled on the marketplace of life. It has no need of shrewd salesmen to make it more palatable to modern tastes. The gospel has its own self-generating, dynamic authority and need not be propped up by artificial means, however sophisticated or alluring. One day every person called to the ministry of the word of God must give an account for the stewardship of that office. On that day we will either be “disqualified for the prize” or hear those coveted words, “Well done, faithful servant.” God, not any human audience, is our true constituency.
In another sense, of course, Paul was indeed seeking to win the approval and thus the hearts of those to whom he preached. He said so explicitly: “Since, then, we know what it is to fear the Lord, we try to persuade men” (2 Cor 5:11). Within the limits of his calling and convictions, he tried “to please everybody in every way” (1 Cor 10:33). To the Jews he became a Jew, to the Greeks a Greek; he was made all things to all people that he might “by all means save some.” In fact, Paul could be remarkably flexible and tolerant about many things.37 He agreed for Timothy to be circumcised even though he was only half-Jewish by birth; he conveyed the decision of the Council at Jerusalem to the churches he had founded in Asia Minor despite certain reservations he may have harbored concerning the wisdom of that agreement; he submitted to the purification rites for entering the temple at Jerusalem; he even rejoiced when certain rival missionaries preached Christ out of envy and ambition while he sat in chains (Acts 16:2–5; 21:26; Phil 1:15–18). He was willing, if not always happy, to make such adjustments and concessions whenever the missionary situation required that kind of flexibility so long as the foundational principles of the gospel were not being compromised. When that did occur, however, he was adamantine in his resistance—not budging an inch in his dispute with the false brothers, opposing Peter to his face in a painful confrontation (Gal 2:5, 11–14).
37 For an excellent discussion of this principle in Paul’s life and ministry, see R. N. Longenecker, Paul: Apostle of Liberty (New York: Harper & Row, 1964), 230–44.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 100–101.
In another sense, of course, Paul was indeed seeking to win the approval and thus the hearts of those to whom he preached. He said so explicitly: “Since, then, we know what it is to fear the Lord, we try to persuade men” (2 Cor 5:11). Within the limits of his calling and convictions, he tried “to please everybody in every way” (1 Cor 10:33). To the Jews he became a Jew, to the Greeks a Greek; he was made all things to all people that he might “by all means save some.” In fact, Paul could be remarkably flexible and tolerant about many things.37 He agreed for Timothy to be circumcised even though he was only half-Jewish by birth; he conveyed the decision of the Council at Jerusalem to the churches he had founded in Asia Minor despite certain reservations he may have harbored concerning the wisdom of that agreement; he submitted to the purification rites for entering the temple at Jerusalem; he even rejoiced when certain rival missionaries preached Christ out of envy and ambition while he sat in chains (Acts 16:2–5; 21:26; Phil 1:15–18). He was willing, if not always happy, to make such adjustments and concessions whenever the missionary situation required that kind of flexibility so long as the foundational principles of the gospel were not being compromised. When that did occur, however, he was adamantine in his resistance—not budging an inch in his dispute with the false brothers, opposing Peter to his face in a painful confrontation (Gal 2:5, 11–14).
37 For an excellent discussion of this principle in Paul’s life and ministry, see R. N. Longenecker, Paul: Apostle of Liberty (New York: Harper & Row, 1964), 230–44.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 100–101.
11-12절) 형제들아 나는 너희에게 내가 너희에게 전한 복음이 사람의 복음이 아님을 알게 하겠다. 왜냐하면 나는 이를 어떤 사람으로부터 받거나 배운 것이 아니라 예수 그리스도의 계시로 말미암아 받은 것이기 때문이다.
바울은 특히 갈라디아서에서 자신의 복음이 사람의 뜻으로 말미암은 것이 아님을 힘주어 강조한다. 그는 다른 복음서에서 처녀들에 대한 교훈이나 삼층천에 대한 이야기는 개인적인 이야기임을 밝히기도 하는데 본문에서는 강력하게 예수 그리스도의 계시로 인한 것임을 이야기한다.
- Despite his reputation for making overweening pronouncements, Paul could on occasion speak with great tentativeness and hesitation. For example, concerning the status of virgins in the church at Corinth, Paul frankly confessed, “I have no command from the Lord” (1 Cor 7:25). Again, concerning his own translation into the third heaven, he was uncertain about whether or not this experience was corporeal (2 Cor 12:2). But here in Galatians, Paul was not dealing with a matter of secondary importance. He was defending the very heart of the Christian faith against a sinister and subversive attack upon it.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 108.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 108.
- J. Bligh comes close to the correct sense of this expression in his paraphrase of the verse: “My gospel (and my preaching of the gospel) do not belong to the purely human level of existence: the gospel message did not come to me through human channels—it was not mediated to me through any man; and my preaching of the gospel has not been guided by human motives and ambitions.”44
44 Bligh, Galatians, 124.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 108.
44 Bligh, Galatians, 124.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 108.
바울은 자신의 이 복음이 사람의 뜻, 전통에 의한 것이 아니고 일반적인 가르침의 수단을 통해서 배운것도 아님을 힘주어 밝힌다. 랍비들의 가르침이 자신의 복음의 기원이 아니라는 것이다.
바울은 예수 그리스도의 계시로 다메섹 도상에서 직접 복음을 받았다. 그는 이 사건이 자신을 사도로 부르신 가장 결정적인 순간으로 본다.
- Paul received the gospel through a revelation of Jesus Christ on the Damascus road (see Acts 9:1–19a; 22:3–21; 26:12–23).
Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2246.
Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2246.
그렇다고 해도 바울이 다메섹 도상에서 예수님을 만나기전에 복음의 내용을 전혀 몰랐던 것은 아니다. 그는 열심으로 하나님의 교회를 박해다던 자로 그들이 믿는바가 무엇인지 분명히 알았을 것이다. 예수의 십자가의 죽음과 부활의 이야기를 들었지만 그것을 믿을수가 없었을 것이다. 그런데 바로 그분을 다메섹 도상에서 만나고 이제 그분을 믿게 된 것이다.
- But was Paul really as independent as he claimed in this text? J. T. Sanders, among others, claims to have found “an absolute contradiction” in what Paul claimed in Gal 1:11–12 and his statement in 1 Cor 15:3, where he said that he passed on to the Corinthians the gospel that he too had received.46 Both verses employ the same Greek word for “receive” (paralambanein), a technical term for the transmission of religious tradition. In the early church the Gnostic exegetes had a field day with Paul’s claim in Gal 1:12 that his gospel was independent of the teaching and tradition of the other apostles. Earlier, they said, Paul had indeed preached “what I also received” (1 Cor 15:3) in common with the other apostles; but in Galatians he disclosed that the true gospel (i.e., the Gnostic one) had been secretly revealed to him alone. For this reason the Gnostics frequently cited Paul as the progenitor of their own interpretation of the Christian faith while rejecting the other apostles and writings of the New Testament as defective and tainted with Judaism.47
However, what Paul was arguing in Galatians was not that his gospel was different from that of the other apostles but rather that he had received it independently of them. Indeed, as we will see, he went to great lengths to demonstrate the basic consistency of his message and theirs. Even when he confronted Peter in Antioch (2:11–14), it was not because Peter was preaching a different gospel from Paul but rather that he had acted inconsistently with the one gospel they both accepted and proclaimed. What, then, was the basic meaning of Paul’s claim to absolute independence of all prior teaching and tradition?
It is certain that Paul knew a great deal about the Christian faith even before his conversion. It is inconceivable that he would have invested so much energy in trying to stamp out a movement he knew nothing about. No doubt the very Christians he persecuted witnessed to him of their faith in Jesus as the Messiah, God’s anointed one who had been cruelly crucified but then raised from the dead by the power of the Father. Only the appearance of Christ on the road to Damascus convinced Paul that their testimony was true. He received the gospel through this firsthand encounter with the risen Christ and not from anyone else. It does not follow, however, that Paul remained ignorant or aloof from the teaching tradition of the early church. Through his contacts with Ananias and other believers in Damascus, not to mention his later visit to Peter and James in Jerusalem, Paul would have had ample opportunity to absorb the early Christian tradition as it was crystallizing in confessional statements (1 Cor 15:1–3), liturgical formulas (1 Cor 11:23–26), and hymns of praise to Christ (Phil 2:5–11). Paul’s point in Galatians is not that he was opposed to or ignorant of this developing Christian tradition, but simply that he was not dependent upon it for his knowledge of Christ. The Jesus traditions which he later learned, incorporated into his letters, and passed on to his churches only served to confirm what he already knew by direct revelation to be true.48
46 J. T. Sanders, “Paul’s ‘Autobiographical’ Statements in Galatians 1–2,” JBL 85 (1966): 335–43.
47 Pagels, Gnostic Paul, 102.
48 Cf. F. F. Bruce’s statement: “He [sc. Paul] must have distinguished in his own mind the sense in which the gospel came to him by direct revelation from that in which it came to him by tradition.… His explanation might be that the essence of the gospel, ‘Jesus is the risen Lord,’ was communicated to him from heaven on the Damascus Road: it was no human testimony that moved him to accept it.… But the historical details of the teaching of Jesus, the events of Holy Week, the resurrection appearances and so forth were related to him by those who had firsthand experience of them” (quoted in R. Y. K. Fung, “Revelation and Tradition: The Origins of Paul’s Gospel,” EvQ 57 [1985]: 39). In addition to Fung’s excellent study, see also G. E. Ladd, “Revelation and Tradition in Paul,” in Apostolic History and the Gospel, ed. W. W. Gasque and R. P. Martin (Exeter: Paternoster, 1970), 223–30, and P. H. Menoud, “Revelation and Tradition: The Influence of Paul’s Conversion on His Theology,” Int 7 (1953): 131–41.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 109–110.
However, what Paul was arguing in Galatians was not that his gospel was different from that of the other apostles but rather that he had received it independently of them. Indeed, as we will see, he went to great lengths to demonstrate the basic consistency of his message and theirs. Even when he confronted Peter in Antioch (2:11–14), it was not because Peter was preaching a different gospel from Paul but rather that he had acted inconsistently with the one gospel they both accepted and proclaimed. What, then, was the basic meaning of Paul’s claim to absolute independence of all prior teaching and tradition?
It is certain that Paul knew a great deal about the Christian faith even before his conversion. It is inconceivable that he would have invested so much energy in trying to stamp out a movement he knew nothing about. No doubt the very Christians he persecuted witnessed to him of their faith in Jesus as the Messiah, God’s anointed one who had been cruelly crucified but then raised from the dead by the power of the Father. Only the appearance of Christ on the road to Damascus convinced Paul that their testimony was true. He received the gospel through this firsthand encounter with the risen Christ and not from anyone else. It does not follow, however, that Paul remained ignorant or aloof from the teaching tradition of the early church. Through his contacts with Ananias and other believers in Damascus, not to mention his later visit to Peter and James in Jerusalem, Paul would have had ample opportunity to absorb the early Christian tradition as it was crystallizing in confessional statements (1 Cor 15:1–3), liturgical formulas (1 Cor 11:23–26), and hymns of praise to Christ (Phil 2:5–11). Paul’s point in Galatians is not that he was opposed to or ignorant of this developing Christian tradition, but simply that he was not dependent upon it for his knowledge of Christ. The Jesus traditions which he later learned, incorporated into his letters, and passed on to his churches only served to confirm what he already knew by direct revelation to be true.48
46 J. T. Sanders, “Paul’s ‘Autobiographical’ Statements in Galatians 1–2,” JBL 85 (1966): 335–43.
47 Pagels, Gnostic Paul, 102.
48 Cf. F. F. Bruce’s statement: “He [sc. Paul] must have distinguished in his own mind the sense in which the gospel came to him by direct revelation from that in which it came to him by tradition.… His explanation might be that the essence of the gospel, ‘Jesus is the risen Lord,’ was communicated to him from heaven on the Damascus Road: it was no human testimony that moved him to accept it.… But the historical details of the teaching of Jesus, the events of Holy Week, the resurrection appearances and so forth were related to him by those who had firsthand experience of them” (quoted in R. Y. K. Fung, “Revelation and Tradition: The Origins of Paul’s Gospel,” EvQ 57 [1985]: 39). In addition to Fung’s excellent study, see also G. E. Ladd, “Revelation and Tradition in Paul,” in Apostolic History and the Gospel, ed. W. W. Gasque and R. P. Martin (Exeter: Paternoster, 1970), 223–30, and P. H. Menoud, “Revelation and Tradition: The Influence of Paul’s Conversion on His Theology,” Int 7 (1953): 131–41.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 109–110.
- The word for “revelation” (apokalypsis) literally means “unveiling, a laying bare, the removal of that which conceals or obscures, a disclosure.” It is used only once in the Greek Old Testament (1 Sam 20:30) but occurs frequently in the New Testament, where it carries at least three nuances: (1) the coming or manifestation of a person, especially the coming of Christ (1 Cor 1:7; 2 Thess 1:7); (2) the disclosure of the true character of a person or truth (Luke 2:32; Rom 2:5); (3) the content of that which is unveiled or manifested (1 Cor 14:6; Eph 1:17).
Which of these three meanings is meant in Gal 1:12 depends on whether we read the phrase “from Jesus Christ” as an objective or subjective genitive. If it is subjective, then it means the revelation Jesus Christ himself disclosed, the revelation by Christ; if objective, then it means the revelation whose content is Jesus Christ, that is, the disclosure about Christ. Neither reading does grammatical or theological violence to the text, and some have taken it as both subjective and objective, the ambiguity perhaps being intended by Paul himself.49 Clearly both are true. On the Damascus Road, Jesus Christ himself appeared to Paul as the revealing one; what he disclosed was the true nature of the gospel, the content of the message Paul was commissioned to preach.
49 See, for example, the comment of W. Grundmann: “The expression describes Jesus Christ as the One who has revealed Himself and made him His apostle, this revelation being an act of God’s grace. Jesus Christ is the One through whom God acts” (“Χριστός,” TDNT 9.551). Also see discussion in Burton, Galatians, 433–35.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 110–111.
Which of these three meanings is meant in Gal 1:12 depends on whether we read the phrase “from Jesus Christ” as an objective or subjective genitive. If it is subjective, then it means the revelation Jesus Christ himself disclosed, the revelation by Christ; if objective, then it means the revelation whose content is Jesus Christ, that is, the disclosure about Christ. Neither reading does grammatical or theological violence to the text, and some have taken it as both subjective and objective, the ambiguity perhaps being intended by Paul himself.49 Clearly both are true. On the Damascus Road, Jesus Christ himself appeared to Paul as the revealing one; what he disclosed was the true nature of the gospel, the content of the message Paul was commissioned to preach.
49 See, for example, the comment of W. Grundmann: “The expression describes Jesus Christ as the One who has revealed Himself and made him His apostle, this revelation being an act of God’s grace. Jesus Christ is the One through whom God acts” (“Χριστός,” TDNT 9.551). Also see discussion in Burton, Galatians, 433–35.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 110–111.
이제 자신의 복음이 사람을부터 온것이 아님을 증명하기위해서 이후 5가지의 역사적 증거를 대고 있다.
- Having set forth his thesis of the nonhuman origin of the gospel in the two preceding verses, Paul began a demonstration of its truth in terms of five historical proofs derived from his own life and ministry: (1) Nothing in Paul’s religious background could account for his acceptance of the gospel (1:13–17). (2) Paul was not commissioned by the Jerusalem church (1:18–20). (3) Those Paul formerly persecuted glorified God because of the change wrought in him (1:21–24). (4) Paul’s apostolic work was recognized by church leaders at Jerusalem (2:1–10). (5) Paul defended the gospel against Peter’s vacillation at Antioch (2:11–14). Following this extensive historical excursus, Paul summarized the central theme of his letter (2:15–21) and then reminded the Galatians of how God had worked among them at his first preaching of the gospel in their midst (3:1–5).
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 113.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 113.
13-14절) 내가 이전에 유대교에 있을때 얼마나 하나님의 교회를 핍박하고 이를 무너뜨리기 위해서 노력했는지 너희가 들었을 것이다. 그리고 내가 우리 백성 동연배들중 누구보다 유대교를 깊이 믿었고 그래서 우리 조상의 전통에 대해 열광적이었다.
이 복음은 바울 자신이 가지고 있던 과거의 배경, 율법에 대한 지식이나 이를 지키려는 열심에 기인한 것이 아님을 증명하는 것이다.
그러면 왜 바울이나 기존의 유대교는 그리스도인들을 이토록 열광적으로 핍박하고 죽이려고 했을까? 당시 기독교는 아주 연약한 상황에서 예수의 십자가와 죽음과 부활의 메시지는 유대교안에 받아들여지지 않았다. 메시야가 십자가에 못박힌 다는 것은 하나님의 저주의 상징이기에 바리새적 유대교에서 받아들일 수 없는 내용이었던 것이다. 당시 마카비왕조에서 성전과 언약, 고향을 지키기 위해서 외적에 대항하는 상황속에서 이러한 열심은 매우 중요한 덕목이었다. 구약의 성경에도 이러한 열심이 등장한다.
15-17절) 그러나 내가 태어나기 전에 이미 나를 택정하신 하나님이 그분의 은혜로 나를 부르셨고 그의 아들을 나에게 나타내시기를 기뻐하셨는데 이는 내가 예수님을 이방인들에게 전하게 하기 위해서이다. 나는 누구와도 이것에 대해서 의논하지 않았고 나보다 앞서 사도가 된 이들을 만나려고 예루살렘으로 올라가지 않았고 아라비아로 갔고 다시 다메섹으로 돌아왔다.
바울은 자신이 사도롤 부르심을 받은 것의 주도권이 하나님께 있음을 힘주어 강조하고 있다. 이를 세가지로 묘사한다.
1) 바울을 택정하셨다.
- Paul was set apart. Paul used the word “set apart” also in Rom 1:1, where he described himself as being “set apart for the gospel of God.” Literally the word means “to determine beforehand,” “to fix a boundary, a frontier, to cordon off for a special purpose.” The rendering of the KJV, “God, who separated me from my mother’s womb,” conveys the idea of a physical procedure related to the birth process. But Paul had in mind something far antecedent to the occasion of his birth, namely, God’s eternal predestination and good pleasure by which “he chose us in Christ before the creation of the world” (Eph 1:4). Thus we may paraphrase the expression in this way, “God, who set me apart, devoted me to a special purpose from before my birth, and before I had any impulses or principles of my own.”60
60 K. S. Wuest, Wuest’s Word Studies from the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1966), 1:49.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 117.
60 K. S. Wuest, Wuest’s Word Studies from the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1966), 1:49.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 117.
2) 바울이 부름을 받았다.
- Paul was called. Not only was Paul chosen from eternity and set apart from his mother’s womb, but he also was called by God at a specific point in his life. In Rom 1:1 his calling is mentioned before his predestination, following the sequence of the usual experiential appropriation of God’s grace. But here in Galatians, where Paul was stressing the priority of the divine initiative, the calling is placed after the setting apart, indicating that Paul’s coming to Christ was the consequence of God’s electing grace. As an early Baptist confession of faith expressed it, “Election is God’s gracious choice of certain individuals unto eternal life in consequence of which they are called, justified, sanctified and glorified.”65 “Calling,” then, refers to that whole complex of events, including repentance and faith, by which a lost sinner is converted to Christ. In this sense Paul could refer to all the Christians in Rome as those who had been “called to be saints,” just as Peter could admonish believers to “be all the more eager to make your calling and election sure” (Rom 1:7; 2 Pet 1:10).
65 These words are from the Abstract of Principles, the confessional standard of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky. On this doctrinal point they echo almost verbatim the Second London Confession of 1689. See W. L. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith (Valley Forge: Judson, 1959).
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 118–119.
65 These words are from the Abstract of Principles, the confessional standard of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky. On this doctrinal point they echo almost verbatim the Second London Confession of 1689. See W. L. Lumpkin, Baptist Confessions of Faith (Valley Forge: Judson, 1959).
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 118–119.
3) 하나님께서 그의 아들을 바울에게 드러내셨다.
- God revealed his Son through Paul. What is referred to by the revelation of God’s Son in Paul? Many commentators believe that Paul was here again referring to his encounter with the risen Christ on the road to Damascus. Thus “to reveal his Son in me” is just another way of describing the call Paul received at this decisive juncture of his life.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 119.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 119.
하나님께서 바울을 부르신 이유가 바로 하나님의 아들, 예수 그리스도의 복음을 이방인들에게 전하게 하기 위한 것임을 분명히 밝히고 있다. 바울은 자신을 이방인의 사도라 칭했다.(롬 11:13; 딤전 2:7; 행 9:15)
- Paul was converted in order to preach primarily to non-Jews (cf. Acts 9:15). This was revolutionary because God’s dealings in the OT had been focused on Israel as his chosen nation. Now, with the coming of Christ, there was no distinction (Gal. 3:28): all must come to faith in Christ.
Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2246.
Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2246.
바울에게 알려졌던 복음의 5가지 중요한 요소
- We will have to return to this theme as Paul develops his argument throughout Galatians, but let us note here five essential elements of the gospel made known to Paul. (1) God has raised from the dead Jesus, the crucified Messiah, vindicating his claim to be one with the Father. (2) Jesus has been exalted to the right hand of the Father but is still vitally connected to his people on earth. The shattering insight Paul saw on the Damascus Road was this: in persecuting the Christians, he was in reality torturing Christ himself. Paul’s doctrine of the church as the body of Christ undoubtedly grew out of this profound insight. (3) The risen Christ will come again in power and glory to fulfill all the messianic prophecies of the old covenant, bringing history to a climactic closure in a display of divine judgment and wrath. (4) In the meantime, God has opened the door of salvation for Gentiles as well as Jews. Paul himself had been commissioned to herald this good news to all persons, but especially to the Gentiles. (5) The basis for acceptance with God, for Jews and Gentiles alike, is justification by faith apart from the works of the law. The futility of legal righteousness is seen in a true appreciation of Christ’s atoning death on the cross. The revelation of Jesus as Messiah requires a radical reorientation in how the law is seen and applied in this “dispensation of the fullness of times.”
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 112.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 112.
바울이 전한 복음의 6가지 측면
- J. A. Fitzmyer has listed six characteristic aspects of the gospel Paul proclaimed: apocalyptic, dynamic, kerygmatic, normative, promissory, and universal.68 All six of these characteristically Pauline emphases are evident throughout Galatians.
First, the gospel is an apocalyptic revelation, the unveiling of good news previously unknown in the same way it has now been manifested. The whole argument of Galatians is in essence an unpacking of the confessional statement with which Paul opened the book: Christ “gave himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age” (1:4). The revelation “through” Paul is an integral part of the rescue mission of Christ himself.
Second, the gospel is a dynamic force in human history, not merely a doctrinal formula to be memorized or a code of ethics to be obeyed. The gospel has a life of its own, so to speak: it relativizes the old structures of human existence, liberates believers from the principalities and powers that tyrannize them, and creates a new community of love and forgiveness.
Third, the gospel is not merely a personal testimony but a kerygmatic message that conveys the good news of God’s salvific work in Christ. Several confessional texts are imbedded in Galatians reflecting the liturgical practice and worship patterns of the early church (cf. Gal 1:3–5; 3:26–29; 4:4; 6:18).
Fourth, the gospel had a normative role in Paul’s thinking as can be seen from the dreadful adjuration he hurled against those who would pervert it (1:7–9). The gospel is not information to be politely presented as one option among many. The gospel is to be listened to, welcomed, obeyed, followed, and lived out. For this reason it can brook no rivals and will not tolerate adulteration, contamination, or dilution.
Fifth, the gospel of Christ revealed through Paul, while truly a new unveiling, was not invented out of thin air. The promissory nature of the gospel is a major theme in Galatians as Paul showed in his discussion of the Abraham narrative and the Hagar and Sarah allegory.
Sixth, the gospel Paul proclaimed was universal in scope, not restricted to any one class, nationality, race, gender, or social grouping. “You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus” (3:26). The heart of the controversy in Galatia was related to this very characteristic. Paul stubbornly refused to accept that any one culture had a monopoly on the gospel or that any particular ritual, such as circumcision, could be made a prerequisite to its reception. The salvation Jesus has brought is intended for Jew and Gentile alike.
68 J. A. Fitzmyer, To Advance the Gospel (New York: Crossroad, 1981), 149–61.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 120–121.
First, the gospel is an apocalyptic revelation, the unveiling of good news previously unknown in the same way it has now been manifested. The whole argument of Galatians is in essence an unpacking of the confessional statement with which Paul opened the book: Christ “gave himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age” (1:4). The revelation “through” Paul is an integral part of the rescue mission of Christ himself.
Second, the gospel is a dynamic force in human history, not merely a doctrinal formula to be memorized or a code of ethics to be obeyed. The gospel has a life of its own, so to speak: it relativizes the old structures of human existence, liberates believers from the principalities and powers that tyrannize them, and creates a new community of love and forgiveness.
Third, the gospel is not merely a personal testimony but a kerygmatic message that conveys the good news of God’s salvific work in Christ. Several confessional texts are imbedded in Galatians reflecting the liturgical practice and worship patterns of the early church (cf. Gal 1:3–5; 3:26–29; 4:4; 6:18).
Fourth, the gospel had a normative role in Paul’s thinking as can be seen from the dreadful adjuration he hurled against those who would pervert it (1:7–9). The gospel is not information to be politely presented as one option among many. The gospel is to be listened to, welcomed, obeyed, followed, and lived out. For this reason it can brook no rivals and will not tolerate adulteration, contamination, or dilution.
Fifth, the gospel of Christ revealed through Paul, while truly a new unveiling, was not invented out of thin air. The promissory nature of the gospel is a major theme in Galatians as Paul showed in his discussion of the Abraham narrative and the Hagar and Sarah allegory.
Sixth, the gospel Paul proclaimed was universal in scope, not restricted to any one class, nationality, race, gender, or social grouping. “You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus” (3:26). The heart of the controversy in Galatia was related to this very characteristic. Paul stubbornly refused to accept that any one culture had a monopoly on the gospel or that any particular ritual, such as circumcision, could be made a prerequisite to its reception. The salvation Jesus has brought is intended for Jew and Gentile alike.
68 J. A. Fitzmyer, To Advance the Gospel (New York: Crossroad, 1981), 149–61.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 120–121.
바울이 예루살렘이 아니라 아리비아로 갔다가 다메섹으로 간 사건을 기록하는 본 갈라디아서의 기록과 사도행전을 기록한 누가는 모두 매일의 여정을 기록한 것이 아니라 각각의 목적을 가지고 여정에 대한 기록을 하고 있음을 기억해야 한다. 사도행전의 경우 교회의 세계 선교에 대한 그의 전략적인 역할을 강조했다면 갈라디아서는 바울의 사도적 사역이 하나님으로부터 유래했다는 것과 이것이 독립적이다라는 사실을 강조한다.
- Some modern critics have cast aspersion on the historical accuracy of Luke’s account because he nowhere mentioned Paul’s journey to Arabia. However, it is important to recognize that both Luke and Paul wrote their distinctive accounts with a clearly defined purpose in mind. Neither Acts nor Galatians was intended to be a day-by-day journal of Paul’s activities; each is a selective account of what Paul said and did, designed to show, in the case of Acts, his strategic role in the worldwide mission of the church and, in the case of Galatians, the divine derivation and independence of his apostolic mission. It is possible to affirm the total truthfulness and accuracy of the Bible in everything it describes without assuming that it purports to be totally exhaustive in every detail.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 123–124.
Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 123–124.
바울이 아라비아로 간 이유는 크게 두가지로 본다. 먼저는 사도직을 수행하기 이전에 기도와 묵상, 돌아봄을 통해서 영적인 준비를 하기 위해서라고 보기도 하고 둘째는 다메섹에서 이미 시작한 설교 사역을 아라비아에서 행하기 위해서라고도 본다.
'성경묵상 > 갈라디아서' 카테고리의 다른 글
| 갈 2:1-5 바울의 예루살렘 2차 방문 (0) | 2017.03.31 |
|---|---|
| 갈 1:18-24 바울이 전한 그 믿음 (0) | 2017.03.30 |
| 갈 1:6-9 다른 복음 (0) | 2017.03.28 |
| 갈 1:1-5 갈라디아 교회를 향한 바울의 인사 (0) | 2017.03.24 |
| 갈라디아서 서론 (0) | 2017.03.23 |