728x90
1 aPaul, Silvanus, and Timothy,
To the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ:
2 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
a For ver. 1, 2, see 1 Thess. 1:1
 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), 살후 1:1–2.
 
1 바울과 실루아노와 디모데는 하나님 우리 아버지와 주 예수 그리스도 안에 있는 데살로니가인의 교회에 편지하노니
2 하나님 아버지와 주 예수 그리스도로부터 은혜와 평강이 너희에게 있을지어다
 대한성서공회, 성경전서: 개역개정, 전자책. (서울시 서초구 남부순환로 2569: 대한성서공회, 1998), 살후 1:1–2.
 
데살로니가후서는 바울이 고린도에서 데살로니가 교회에 쓴 첫번째 서신에 이어 기록된 두번째 편지이다. 전서와 동일하게 후서에서도 세명의 발신자가 동일하게 등장한다. 
바울은 전서를 기록한지 얼마되지 않아서 데살로니가후서를 기록했는데 그 때에도 실루아노와 디모데가 함께 동행했다.(행 18:1, 5) 첫번째 서신 이후 불과 2-3개월 이후에 본 서신이 기록된 것으로 보이는데 데살로니가 교회가 여전히 잘못된 종말론으로 인해서 혼란스러워하는 것을 바로잡고자 후서를 기럭하였다. 당시 데살로니가 교회는 종말에 대한 거짓 가르침을 가르치는 이단의 무리들로 인해서 많은 이들이 혼란에 빠졌고 그들중에는 재림이 임박했으니 일할 필요가 없다며 무위도식하는 이들도 있었다. 이러한 소식으로 인해 안타까운 심정으로 바울은 기도하며 본 서신을 써서 보낸 것이다. 
 
1절) 실제로 원문에는 편지하노니라는 표현은 등장하지 않는다. 
발신자 : 바울, 실루아노, 디모데
수신자 : 하나님 우리 아버지와 주 예수 그리스도 안에 있는 데살로니가인의 교회
 
 
데살로니가인의 교회는 데살로니가에 있다. 하지만 교회는 건물이 아니기에 교회가 어디에 있느냐를 1절을 통해서 보자면 데살로니가인의 교회는 ‘하나님 우리 아버지와 주 예수 그리스도’ 안에 있다. 
우리 교회는, 나는 어디에 있는가? 우리의 아버지되신 하나님, 나의 주인되신, 반석이신 그리스도 안에 있을때에만이 우리는 은혜와 평강을 누릴 수 있는 것이다. 
 
2절) 한글 번역에는 ‘헤몬, our’가 번역되지 않았다. 하나님 우리 아버지와로 번역하는 것이 더욱 적절하다. 우리라는 표현은 하나님과 그를 믿는 백성들간의 긴밀한 관계를 표현하는 매우 중요한 표현이다.(롬 8:14)  
당시 1세기에는 로마의 황제를 주, ‘큐리오스’라고 칭하며 숭배했다. 하지만 그리스도인들은 나사렛 예수 그리스도를 주라고 칭했다. 오직 예수 그리스도만이 나의 삶의 주인이며 그분의 뜻을 순종하겠다는 신앙 고백인 것이다. 그렇기 때문에 우리는 예수를 주라고 고백하면서 그분의 뜻을 따르지 않는 것은 불가능하다. 
 
바울은 은혜와 평강을 구한다.  
은혜(카리스) : 하나님께서 기꺼이 그리스도인들을 자신의 백성, 자녀로 여기시며 용서와 같은 선물을 주시려는 마음, 받을 자격이 없는 이들에게 베풀어지는 호의
평강(에이레네, 샬롬) : 전쟁의 중단 또는 부재 하지만 바울은 사람 사이 또는 사람과 하나님 사이의 올바르고 조화로운 관계, 즉 하나님께서 친히 주시는 완전한 웰빙을 의미한다. 온전히 카리스, 은혜를 받고 누리는 이가 내면에 누리는 내적인 평화를 지칭한다. 
따라서 하나님의 은혜가 없이는 평강은 불가능하다. 죄로인해 하나님과 원수된 상태에 있던 이들에게 진정한 샬롬, 에이레네는 없다. 하지만 하나님의 은혜로 말미암아 하나님과의 막혔던 담이 무너지고 은혜의 보좌앞에 담대히 나아갈 수 있게 되었다. 이 안에서 인간은 죄로 가득찬 세상에서 느껴보지 못한 진정한 평강을 누리게 된다.(롬 5:1) 어거스틴은 그의 저서 참회록에서 이와 관련해 ‘하나님이여, 당신은 당신을 위해 우리를 창조하셨으므로 우리가 당신 안에서 안식을 얻기 전까지는 결코 평안할 수 없었습니다’라고 고백하였다. 영적으로 항상 갈증을 느껴 스스로 터진 웅덩이를 파는 데 몰두하던 자들도(렘 2:13) 하나님으로부터 내려오는 이 ‘에이레네’를 경험하게 되면 더이상 자신을 위해 터진 웅덩이를 파지 않고 하나님을 통해 완전한 부요함을 누리게 된다.(요 7:35) 바울은 이와 같은 축복이 데살로니가 교인들에게 임하기를 기원하면서 데살로니가전서와 동일한 문안인사로 후서를 시작하고 있다. 
 
 
1:1–2 The first difference between the salutation of 2 Thessalonians and that of the other letter addressed to the church at Thessalonica is to be found in the qualification of God as πατρὶ ἡμῶν (“our father”). The appellation of God as “our father” is common in the salutations of Paul’s letters and in fact is only lacking in 1 Thessalonians (cf. Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:3; Phil. 1:2; Col. 1:2; Phm. 3). It reflects Paul’s conception of Christians as forming the family of God in a metaphorical sense and is to be seen alongside those texts where believers are called the children of God (cf. Rom. 8:14–23; Gal. 3:26; 4:4–7).
The greeting of this letter is fuller than that in 1 Thessalonians. But it corresponds to those of every other letter of Paul except Colossians (and possibly Galatians, depending on how the textual evidence is assessed), if ἡμῶν (“our”) in ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (“from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ”) is part of the original text. The textual evidence is divided fairly evenly on this. Both the presence and the absence of the “our” are explicable in terms of normal rules of textual criticism. A copyist might have added it to conform to the standard greeting of the Pauline letters or omitted it for stylistic reasons since the same wording occurred in the preceding verse. Therefore the precise formula of the original text cannot be decided on with certainty. In any case this is not a significant factor since God has been described already as “our father” in the previous verse.
Trilling (35), who maintains that Paul did not write 2 Thessalonians, claims that the prescript itself provides evidence for his position. He argues that the prescripts of 2 Thessalonians and 1 Thessalonians are more alike than those of any other two Pauline letters and that certain peculiarities of 1 Thessalonians have been preserved in 2 Thessalonians. The unusual features include the naming of three senders (two of whom play no further part in the letter), the naming of the addressees as “the church of the Thessalonians” not “the church in Thessalonica,” the direct connection of the recipients with God and Christ, and the absence of Paul’s apostolic title. All this for him is a sign of inauthenticity as it reflects borrowing from the first letter in an attempt to create the impression of authenticity. He also believes that the expanded greeting in 2 Thessalonians (v. 2) is awkward because of the mention of “God our father and the Lord Jesus Christ” in v. 1. According to Trilling this may show an awareness of the standard greeting of later Pauline letters.
These arguments are questionable. The unusual details of 1 Thes. 1:1 might equally be used to argue for the inauthenticity of the whole of 1 Thessalonians. Moreover, the supposedly striking differences are not as striking as Trilling thinks. In both 1 Cor. 1:1 and Phil. 1:1 Paul associates others with himself in the writing of those letters. In the case of the former, Sosthenes, who is a co-sender with Paul, plays no further role in the letter, and in the case of the latter, Paul does not refer to his apostolic title, perhaps out of deference to his inclusion of Timothy as an sender of the letter. If Paul could address 1 Thessalonians to “the church of the Thessalonians,” there is no reason why he could not have done it a second time. With regard to the supposedly expanded greeting of v. 2, it is just as possible that the greeting of 1 Thessalonians should be viewed as attenuated over against the normal one employed by Paul in 2 Thes. 1:2 and most of his other letters. To the extent that the repetition of “God our father and the Lord Jesus Christ” is otiose and awkward in the prescript it would have been so as much for an imitator as for Paul himself, and so this proves very little.
Trilling’s treatment of the prescript must be rejected as an unconvincing attempt at substantiating his thesis regarding the inauthentic nature of 2 Thessalonians. If 2 Thessalonians is inauthentic, the prescript does not provide serious evidence for the thesis.
 Charles A. Wanamaker, The Epistles to the Thessalonians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 1990), 213–214.
저작자표시 변경금지

'성경묵상 > 데살로니가후서' 카테고리의 다른 글

살후 1장 10-12절 그 부르심에 합당한 자  (0) 2022.06.22
살후 1장 6-9절 하나님의 심판의 원칙  (0) 2022.06.21
살후 1:5 하나님의 나라에 합당한 자  (0) 2022.06.16
살후 1:3-4 바울의 감사와 자랑  (0) 2022.06.10
데살로니가후서 서론  (0) 2022.06.08
728x90
Justified by Faith
15 We ourselves are Jews by birth and not mGentile sinners; 16 yet we know that na person is not justified2 by works of the law obut through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, pbecause by works of the law no one will be justified.
17 But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we too were found qto be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not! 18 For if I rebuild what I tore down, I prove myself to be a transgressor. 19 For through the law I rdied to the law, so that I might slive to God. 20 I have been tcrucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives uin me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, vwho loved me and wgave himself for me. 21 I do not nullify the grace of God, for xif righteousness3 were through the law, ythen Christ died for no purpose.

 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 갈 2:15–21.

본문이 이신칭의, 갈라디아서에서 바울이 가장 강조하기 원하는 부분이다. 그것은 바로 구원, 하나님에 받아들여지는 것은 다른 어떤 것이 아니라 예수 그리스도를 믿는 단순한 행동을 통해서 영향을 받는다. 유대 그리스도인들은 율법의 행위를 통해서, 공로를 통해서 구원받는 것을 강조했다. 하지만 바울은 지금 안디옥의 그리스도인들을 향해서, 또한 베드로를 향해서 믿음으로 의롭게 되어진다라는 사실을 힘주어 선포하고 있는 것이다. 
- We should remember that the problem in Galatia was not the overt repudiation of the Christian faith by apostates who formerly professed it but rather the dilution and corruption of the gospel by those who wanted to add to the doctrine of grace a dangerous admixture of “something more.” In order to counter this tendency, Paul developed a series of daring contrasts throughout this passage.169 Thus “Jews by birth” are contrasted to “Gentile sinners”; justification “by observing the law” is contrasted to justification “by faith in Jesus Christ.” The rebuilding of the old structures of salvation by works is contrasted to their destruction by the gospel. And, finally, Paul’s “dying to the law” is contrasted to his “living for God.” All of this was intended to impress upon the Galatians the radical choice that confronted them. This is the reason Paul immediately, without so much as a break in his narrative, extrapolated the doctrine of justification from the incident at Antioch.
169 D. B. Bronson, “Paul, Galatians and Jerusalem,” JAAR 35 (1967): 119–28.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 188.

15-16절) 우리 자신들은 이방 죄인들이 아니라 날때 부터 유대인들이다. 우리는 사람이 율법의 행위가 아니라 예수 그리스도를 믿음을 통해서 의롭다 칭함을 받는 다는 것을 안다. 그래서 우리는 율법의 행위가 아니라 그리스도를 믿음을 통한 칭의를 받기 위해서 예수 그리스도를 믿는다. 왜냐하면 율법의 행위로는 그 누구도 의롭다 함을 얻지 못하기 때문이다. 

유대인들은 자신들이 하나님의 율법과 구약 성경 또한 언약의 징표로서 할례를 받았다는 사실을 특권으로 여겼다. 그래서 이방인들은 기본적으로 죄인으로 여겼다.
- “Justified” means “counted righteous” or “declared righteous” by God (see ESV footnote). If people were sinless and perfectly obeyed all of God’s perfect moral standards, they could be justified or “declared righteous” on the basis of their own merits. But Paul says that this is impossible for any Gentile or even for any Jew to do (cf. Romans 1–2). we know that a person is not justified by works of the law. Paul saw that Christ had taught justification by faith, and so he called God the one “who justifies the ungodly” (Rom. 4:5). Paul will soon show that this view was taught even in the OT (see Gal. 3:6–18), though it was not the view of most of first-century Judaism. (For example, a 1st-century-b.c. Jewish writing states, “The one who does righteousness stores up life for himself with the Lord, and the one who does wickedness is the cause of the destruction of his own soul” [Psalms of Solomon 9.5]). In Gal. 2:16, “works of the law” means not only circumcision, food laws, and Sabbath, but any human effort to be justified by God by obeying a moral law. faith in Jesus Christ. Some contend that the Greek means the “faithfulness of Jesus Christ.” But “faith in Jesus Christ” seems much more likely since “faith in Jesus Christ” is synonymous with the next phrase, “we also have believed in Christ Jesus.” “But through faith in Jesus Christ” is the opposite of depending on one’s own good deeds for justification, since justification comes through faith in Christ alone. We also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ implies that justification is the result of saving faith. The contrast and not by works of the law shows clearly that no human effort or merit can be added to faith as a basis for justification. (This verse was frequently appealed to in the Reformation by Protestants who insisted on “justification by faith alone” as opposed to the Roman Catholic doctrine of justification by faith plus merit gained through the “means of grace” administered by means of the Roman Catholic sacraments such as penance and the Mass.) Paul concludes decisively: by works of the law no one will be justified (cf. 3:10–14; Acts 13:39; Heb. 10:1–14). On justification, see also notes on Rom. 4:25; Phil. 3:9; James 2:21.
ESV English Standard Version
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2248.

- Given all these wonderful benefits of “life under the law,” why should Jewish Christians have moved beyond the law to faith in Jesus Christ? Obviously they should have because there was a fundamental disjunction between the best that could be obtained by observing the law and the gift of salvation freely offered through Jesus Christ. This is the point Paul was making in Gal 2:15–16. We can paraphrase his argument thus: “Forget the Gentile sinners. We know they are outside the covenant and hopeless before God. But even we Jews who could claim all the privileges of the chosen people, even we had to realize that no one could be justified by observing the law. We too, no less than the Gentiles, have been accepted by God through faith in Jesus Christ.”
What Paul came to realize in coming to faith in Christ was not so much God’s judgment against his wickedness, for that was a standard assumption of rabbinic Judaism, but rather God’s indictment of Paul’s goodness. For this reason he considered as garbage that which he formerly counted as the most precious cargo of life. That which was dearest and most precious to him, he came to realize, could not produce a right standing before God.

 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 189–190.

"율법의 행위로 의롭다 함을 얻을 육체가 없다.” 육체는 인간의 실존을 나타내는 표현이다. 하지만 육체 자체가 악한 것은 아니다. 왜냐하면 하나님께서 그 육체를 창조하셨기 때문이다. 하지만 죄의 결과로 우리의 본성이 악해졌고 죽음을 경험하게 된다. 

1) Justification. In its most basic meaning, justification is the declaration that somebody is in the right.177 A. E. McGrath observes that in Pauline vocabulary the verb dikaioō “denotes God’s powerful, cosmic and universal action in effecting a change in the situation between sinful humanity and God, by which God is able to acquit and vindicate believers, setting them in a right and faithful relation to himself.”178 In Pauline usage the term has both forensic (from Latin forum, “law court”) and eschatological connotations. Justification should not be confused with forgiveness, which is the fruit of justification, nor with atonement, which is the basis of justification. Rather it is the favorable verdict of God, the righteous Judge, that one who formerly stood condemned has now been granted a new status at the bar of divine justice.
177 I have borrowed this definition from the fine essay by N. T. Wright, “Justification: The Biblical Basis and Its Relevance for Contemporary Evangelicalism,” in The Great Acquittal: Justification by Faith and Current Christian Thought, ed. T. Baker et al. (London: Collins).
178 DPL, 518.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 191–192.

2) The works of the law. Galatians 2:16 is a stylistically convoluted verse because Paul repeated himself. Within the space of one sentence he said the same thing in three slightly different ways: We (Jewish Christians) know that a person is not justified by observing the law … for this reason even we have trusted in Christ in order that we could be justified by faith rather than by the works of the law … since (as the psalmist said) no human being can be justified by the works of the law. What did Paul mean by “the works of the law”?
The word “law” (nomos) is found 119 times in Paul’s letters, where it means variously the Old Testament Scriptures, the will of God, or a general principle or authority (cf. Rom 7:21). However, the law in Paul usually refers to “the sum of specific divine requirements given to Israel through Moses.”182 Paul claimed that the law is holy and righteous containing, as it does, the precepts of a holy and righteous God (Rom 7:12–14). However, the entire burden of Paul’s argument in Galatians was to show that the nature of the law is such that it cannot produce a right standing before God. As Paul showed in Gal 3, the law was given by God in order to play a special role in the divine economy of salvation, namely, to lead us to Christ, who is the “end [telos] of the law” (Rom 10:4). We must postpone until later a discussion of what continuing role, if any, the law has in the life of the believer. Concerning the text before us, three major interpretations have been put forth about what Paul meant here by “the works of the law.”
극단적인 율법주의에 대한 경고, 
182 S. Westerholm, Israel’s Law and the Church’s Faith: Paul and His Recent Interpreters (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 108.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 193–194.

3) Faith in Christ. This expression is a good example of the relationship between grammar and theology in the proper exegesis of a New Testament text. Paul said that we are not justified by works of the law but rather dia pisteōs Iēsou Christou, which the NIV translates “by faith in Jesus Christ.” This translation assumes the traditional view that Iēsou Christou is an objective genitive, so that the faith in question is that of those who believe in Jesus Christ. More recently, however, other scholars have argued that this expression should be read as a subjective genitive, referring to the faith or faithfulness of Jesus Christ.187 While the faithfulness of Jesus Christ is a prominent theme in Paul’s theology (cf. the kenotic hymn of Phil 2:5–11), what is being contrasted in Galatians is not divine fidelity versus human fickleness but rather God’s free initiative in grace versus human efforts toward self-salvation. Thus when Paul spoke of faith as essential for justification, he was thinking of the necessary human response to what God has objectively accomplished in the cross of Christ. At the same time, it is crucial to recognize the instrumental character of such faith. Paul always says that we are justified “by” faith (dia plus the genitive), not “on account of” faith (dia plus the accusative).188 Evangelical Christians must ever guard against the temptation to turn faith itself into one of the “works of the law.” Saving faith is a radical gift from God, never a mere human possibility (Eph 2:8–9). Faith is not an achievement that earns salvation anymore than circumcision is. Rather faith is the evidence of saving grace manifested in the renewal of the heart by the Holy Spirit.
187 The extensive literature on this hotly debated topic is summarized in Longenecker, Galatians, 87–88, who himself opts for the subjective alternative. Among other advocates of this view are E. Fuchs, “Jesu und der Glaube,” ZTK 55 (1958): 170–85; G. E. Howard, “On the ‘Faith of Christ,’ ” HTR (1967): 459–65; and especially R. B. Hays, The Faith of Jesus Christ: An Investigation of the Narrative Substructure of Galatians 3:1–4:11 (Chico, Cal.: Scholars Press, 1983), 139–224. The traditional view has been restated by E. deW. Burton (A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, ICC [Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1921], 121); Betz (Galatians, 118). See also comments by Westerholm, Israel’s Law, 111–12.
188 See the discussion of faith in R. Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament (New York: Scribners, 1951), 314–30.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 195–196.
이 그리스도를 믿는 믿음이 어떤 것이냐는 논란이 있다. 복음주의 그리스도인들은 믿음 자체가 율법의 행위중의 하나가 되지 않도록 주의해야 한다. 구원하는 믿음은 하나님이 주신 아주 극적인 선물로 인간의 가능성은 완전히 배제한다. 

본문 16절에서 거듭 강조하는 칭의, 율법의 행위, 그리스도를 믿음은 그 자체로 매우 중요한 신학적 표현들이다. 칭의는 법정적인 선포이다. 죄인의 노력으로 자신의 죄를 용서받은 것이 아니라 그리스도를 믿음을 통한 대속이 우리를 구원한 것이다. 
16절은 같은 내용을 세번에 걸쳐서 반복한다. 첫번째는 사람이 어떻게 의롭게 되는지, 율법의 행위가 아니라 예수 그리스도를 믿음으로 되는 줄을 안다. 두번째 그래서 우리가 그리스도 예수를 믿는다. 마지막으로 세번째 율법의 행위로 의롭다 함을 육체가 없다고 선포한다. 



저작자표시

'성경묵상 > 갈라디아서' 카테고리의 다른 글

갈 3:6-9 누가 아브라함의 자손인가?  (0) 2017.04.24
갈 3:1-5 율법의 행외로냐 혹은 듣고 믿음으로냐?  (0) 2017.04.21
갈 2:11-14 베드로의 외식을 책망하는 바울  (0) 2017.04.05
갈 2:6-10 이방인의 사도 바울  (0) 2017.04.04
갈 2:1-5 바울의 예루살렘 2차 방문  (0) 2017.03.31
728x90
11 But ewhen Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him fto his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, ghe was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing hthe circumcision party.1 13 And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. 14 But when I saw that their iconduct was not in step with jthe truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas kbefore them all, “If you, though a Jew, llive like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?”

 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 갈 2:11–14.

11-13절) 그러나 게바가 안디옥에 왔을때 그가 책망받을 위치에 있었기 때문에 내가 그의 면전에서 그를 반대하였다. 왜냐하면 야고보로부터 온 어떤 사람들이 이르기 전에 게바가 이방인들과 먹고 있었는데 그들이 도착했을때 게바가 할례당을 두려워하여 물러나 스스로를 분리시켰다. 그리하여 남은 유대인들이 게바와 같이 외식하였고 바나바 조차도 그들의 외식으로 인해 어찌할 바를 몰라했다. 

안디옥은 로마 제국의 3번째 큰 도시로 50만의 인구가 있었다. 로마 시리아 지역의 수도로 매우 중요한 정치적 요충지였다. 이곳에 신약시대 65,000명 정도의 유대인들이 거주했다. 안디옥은 팔레스틴 외곽으로 복음이 확장되는 베이스의 역할을 했다. 예루살렘에 대한 핍박으로 흩어진 유대인들이 안디옥으로 와서 이방인을 향한 복음의 전초기지가 되었고 이를 돕기 위해서 예루살렘 교회는 바나바를 안디옥으로 파송한다.(행 11:24) 바나바는 이에 바울을 초청해서 이에 동참시킨다. 
바울 이전에 이미 복음은 이방인들에게도 증거된다. 베드로에 의해서(행 10장)  
예루살렘은 성전의 존재, 강력한 바리새인들과 열심당의 영향, 토라중심의 유대주의등으로 유대 기독교의 진앙지역할을 했다. 반면에 안디옥은 지리적, 정치적으로 동과 서가 만나는 지역으로 다양한 인종과 문화가 만나는 용광로와 같은 장소였다. 우리는 이 안디옥 교회의 사건들을 보면서 예수와 문화, 기독교와 문화에 대한 주제를 고민해 볼 수 있다. 
- The Jewish community formed a significant segment of the city’s population, numbering some sixty-five thousand during the New Testament era. The Jews at Antioch were generally tolerated by the Roman overlords but were occasionally harassed and persecuted there as in other large cities throughout the empire. Less than ten years before the clash between Peter and Paul, the emperor Caligula (a.d. 37–41) had instigated a virulent attack against the Jews of Antioch. During this crisis many Jews were killed and their synagogues burned. The same kind of harassment was being carried out in Palestine as well and may account for the overly zealous attitude of many Jewish Christians there concerning issues of circumcision, food laws, and adherence to worship in the temple.
Not surprisingly, Antioch became the home base for the first major expansion of Christianity outside of Palestine. Acts tells us that the fires of persecution ignited against the first believers in Jerusalem had the effect of multiplying rather than squelching their witness. “They that were scattered abroad went everywhere preaching the word” (Acts 8:4, KJV). Some of these “missionaries by necessity” came to Antioch, where they witnessed first to the Jews but then also to the Gentiles of that city, winning many of both groups to faith in Christ. When the church in Jerusalem got wind of the spiritual awakening in Antioch, they sent Barnabas, “a good man, full of the Holy Spirit and faith” (Acts 11:24), to assist the new believers there. Barnabas in turn traveled to Tarsus where he recruited Paul, whom he had earlier introduced to the Jerusalem church leaders, to join him in the work of the ministry at Antioch. Thus Barnabas was a kind of personal go-between reaching out to Paul and the Gentile believers on the one hand and to Peter, James, and the Jerusalem church on the other. This fact may explain, although not justify, his disappointing defection from Paul during the height of the Antioch incident.
Before analyzing the events that provoked the incident between Peter and Paul, it will be helpful to identify several features of early Antiochene Christianity during this time. The first point to be made is that we are dealing with an event that occurred early in the history of the church. True, the gospel had already broken through to the Gentiles, and Peter himself had played a crucial role in this development (cf. Acts 10). However, the full implications of how Jewish Christianity and Gentile Christianity could together form a spiritual symbiosis was yet to be realized. Not even Paul’s agreement with the pillar apostles over respective missionary strategies for reaching Jews and Gentiles contemplated all of the difficult and dynamic possibilities of Jewish and Gentile believers living and worshiping together in a mixed congregation. The incident at Antioch was thus a necessary if painful stage in the development of a mature New Testament ecclesiology.
Furthermore, the church at Antioch existed in a missionary situation that called for a different contextual response from the one dictated by the Judean environment. Jerusalem was the epicenter for a kind of Jewish Christianity that was decisively shaped by the presence of the temple, strong Pharisaic and Zealot influences, and a Torah-centered interpretation of Christianity. Antioch, on the other hand, was far to the north of Jerusalem; it stood at the geographical and political crossroads of East and West, a veritable melting pot of diverse civilizations and cultures. Looking back from the distance of two millennia, we can see now that the controversy at Antioch was more than a clash between two apostles; it was a collision between two ways of being Christian. Thus it raises for us the ever-pressing question of the tension between Christ and culture.
Finally, it is not coincidental that believers in Jesus were first called Christians at Antioch. The designation of Palestinian believers as followers of “the Way” evidently was not transferred to the residents of Antioch who came to believe in Jesus as Messiah. Obviously a new reality had come into being with this new called-out company of Jews and Gentiles whose identity and self-definition centered neither in their Jewishness nor their Gentile character but rather in their common devotion to the one in whose name they shared a common meal. Thus they were called Christianoi, “the folks of Christ,” originally perhaps a term of derogation that soon came to be owned with pride by believers everywhere because it was so evidently appropriate.
Without idealizing the early Antiochene church—the fact that its fellowship could be so easily disrupted is a sure sign that it was far from perfect—we can say that part of what was at stake in the quarrel over table fellowship was nothing less than the unity and indivisibility of the body of Christ. What does it mean when the people of God, redeemed by the blood of Christ and sealed by the Holy Spirit, cannot share together a common loaf at a single table? In looking at what led to the conflict, let us consider the issue of table fellowship, Peter’s open-table practice, and his capitulation to pressure.

 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 170–172.

유대인들의 식탁 교제
- In the fast-food culture of modern Western civilization, it is difficult to appreciate the religious significance ancient peoples associated with the simple act of eating. This was especially characteristic of Judaism, as Jeremias observed: “In Judaism table-fellowship means fellowship before God, for the eating of a piece of broken bread by everyone who shares in the meal brings out the fact that they all have a share in the blessing which the master of the house has spoken over the unbroken bread.”141
141 J. Jeremias, New Testament Theology: The Proclamation of Jesus (London: SCM, 1971), 115, quoted in J. D. G. Dunn, “The Incident at Antioch (Gal 2:11–18),” JSNT 18 (1983): 12. I am indebted to Dunn for his thorough elucidation of the Antioch episode even if I cannot follow his conclusions at every point. For two important rejoinders to Dunn’s analysis, see D. Cohn-Sherbok, “Some Reflections on James Dunn’s ‘The Incident at Antioch (Gal 2:11–18),’ ” JSNT 18 (1983): 68–74, and J. L. Houlden, “A Response to James D. Dunn,” JSNT 18 (1983): 58–67. More recently E. P. Sanders has entered the debate. See his “Jewish Association with Gentiles and Gal. 2:11–14,” in The Conversation Continues: Studies in Paul and John in Honor of J. Louis Martyn, ed. R. T. Fortna and B. Gaventa (Nashville: Abingdon, 1990).
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 172.

예수님 자신도 죄인들과 함께 거하시며 그들과 식탁의 교제를 나누셨다. 뿐만 아니라 베드로는 부정한 동물을 먹으라는 환상을 보았고(행 10:14) 백부장 고넬료에게 부으시는 성령을 경험했다.(행 11:17) 이미 복음이 유대인에게만이 아니라 이방인에게도 임한다는 사실을 분명하게 경험한 것이다. 그럼에도 불구하고 지금 베드로가 안디옥에서 이런 실수를 하고 있는 것이다. 
- Clearly Jesus’ disciples did not immediately grasp the full implications of his practice of open table fellowship, nor did they easily imitate him in this regard. When in a vision Peter was told he could eat all kinds of animals, his reply reflected the typical practice of Jewish Christians at that time: “Surely not, Lord! I have never eaten anything impure or unclean” (Acts 10:14). This revelation was a critical breakthrough for Peter and for the early church. It meant that the door of salvation had been opened to the Gentiles and that a new basis of Christian fellowship had been established: not the observance of Jewish rituals but the outpouring of the Holy Spirit which, as Peter witnessed at the household of Cornelius, was given indiscriminately upon Jews and Gentiles alike. As Peter put it: “Can anyone keep these people from being baptized? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have” (Acts 10:47).
What happened with Cornelius at Caesarea sent shock waves through the church at Jerusalem. Peter was confronted and given a stern reprimand: “You went into the house of uncircumcised men and ate with them” (Acts 11:3). Peter explained what had happened and concluded, “So if God gave them the same gift as he gave us, who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could oppose God?” (Acts 11:17). Apparently the compelling logic of Peter’s reply stilled the objections of his critics, but, as we know, this was only a temporary calm before the next storm.
After the Cornelius incident apparently nearly everyone agreed that Gentiles could indeed be saved. But on what basis salvation was to be extended to them and under what conditions table fellowship was to be shared with them, remained matters of deep division and controversy. However, the crucial point for understanding Peter’s action at Antioch is the fact that he himself had pioneered the sharing of the gospel with the Gentiles and had already worked through to a position of Christian liberty concerning unbroken table-fellowship within the body of Christ.

 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 174–175.

본문은 야고보가 보낸 예루살렘 사절단의 도착, 식탁의 자리에서 베드로가 물러남, 이로 인해 바나바와 다른 유대 기독교인들이 영향을 받는 일련의 사건들이 연결되어서 일어나고 있다. 
본문에서 이 사절단이 어떤 사람인지는 명백하지 않다. 야고보가 예루살렘 교회의 지도자로 존경받는 인물이기에 의도적으로 게바를 시험에 빠뜨리기 위해서라기 보다는 교회 지도자들 안에 율법 준수를 중시하는 우파 지도자들이었을 것으로 보인다. 

본문의 떠나 물러난다라는 단어는 미완료 시제이다. 이는 천천히 물러났다는 것으로 베드로 개인만이 아니라 베드로의 행동을 보고 다른 유대 기독교인들도 영향을 받아 그 식탁의 자리에서 물러났다라는 것으로 보인다. 
- In the Greek text the verbs “began to draw back” and “separate himself” are in the imperfect tense, indicating that Peter’s action may have happened gradually as, little by little, he reacted to the increasing pressures of the Jerusalem visitors until finally “he drew back and began to hold aloof” (NEB). As if Peter’s pressured withdrawal from table fellowship with Gentile believers was not enough, all of the other Jewish Christians at Antioch were swept along with him in this shameful playacting.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 176.

그런데 바울을 더욱 놀라게 한 것은 바로 바나바까지도 베드로의 외식에 영향을 받았다는 것이다. 바나바는 매우 경건한 인물로 바울을 사도들에게 이끌고 이 이방인을 위한 사역에 동참하여 바울과 함께 했던 인물이다. 그런데 그마저도 외식에 빠졌다는 사실을 바울을 큰 충격에 빠뜨렸다. 

13절의 외식하다라는 단어는 ‘히포크리시스’라는 헬라어 단어로  연극, 극장에서 사용되는 단어이다. 이는 연극에서 배우가 어떤 배역을 수행하면서 가면을 쓰고 행동하는 것으로 자신의 본심을 숨기고 그런체 하는 모습을 보여주는 것을 의미한다. 부정적인 표현으로 사용된다. 

14절) 나는 그들의 행동이 복음의 진리를 거스르는 것임을 보았고 모든 사람들 앞에서 게바에게 이렇게 이야기했다. 네가 유대인임에도 불구하고 유대인처럼 살지 않고 이방인 처럼 살면서 어떻게 이방인들로 하여금 유대인과 같이 살라고 할 수 있느냐? 
음식, 할례, 절기등을 요구하면서 이방인들을 유대인처럼 살도록 요구하는 것이 복음의 본질을 손상시키는 행동임을 바울은 알고 있었다. 그래서 그는 이 문제에 대해서 베드로를 공개적으로 책망한다. 이것이 개인적인 죄의 문제라면 마 18장의 절차를 따라야 할테지만 그렇지 않고 공동체의 문제로 반드시 공개적으로 해결해야할 필요를 느꼈기 때문이다. 
- force the Gentiles to live like Jews. Peter was guilty of hypocrisy (v. 13) because, though he had been happily living like a Gentile (i.e., not observing food laws), he was now requiring Gentile Christians to observe Jewish table regulations if they wanted to eat with him. Such a requirement, however, would undermine the gospel itself by making justification depend on “works of the law” rather than “faith in Jesus Christ” (see v. 16). before them all. Because Peter’s sin was a public sin that was setting a bad example for the church, Paul confronted him publicly (compare the different procedure that Jesus commands regarding a private sin against an individual person, which hopefully can be corrected privately; cf. Matt. 18:15–20; James 5:19–20).
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2248.

- In the Greek text the verbs “began to draw back” and “separate himself” are in the imperfect tense, indicating that Peter’s action may have happened gradually as, little by little, he reacted to the increasing pressures of the Jerusalem visitors until finally “he drew back and began to hold aloof” (NEB). As if Peter’s pressured withdrawal from table fellowship with Gentile believers was not enough, all of the other Jewish Christians at Antioch were swept along with him in this shameful playacting.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 176.

본문의 바르게 행하다라는 단어는 ‘오르토포데인’이라는 단어로 바르게 행하다. 똑바로 걷다라는 의미이다. 
- The word translated “acting in line with,” orthopodein, literally means “to walk with straight feet,” thus to “walk a straight course.” Transliterating this word into a modern medical term, we could render Paul’s statement thus: “But when I saw that they were not walking orthopedically, that is, in a straightforward, unwavering, and sincere way.”150 Elsewhere in his letters Paul had much to say about the importance of the Christian’s “walk” (Eph 4:1, 17; Col 1:10; 2:6; Rom 13:13). Later in Galatians he also would admonish his readers to “keep in step with the Spirit” (Gal 5:25). Like Peter before Antioch, they too were “running a good race” until someone “cut in” on them and threw them into confusion (Gal 5:7–10).
150 Wuest’s Word Studies, 1:74; G. D. Kilpatrick, “Gal 2:14 orthopodousin,” Neutestamentliche Studien für Rudolf Bultmann (Berlin: Tüpelmann, 1957), 269–74. This word is found nowhere else in the NT, although a similar expression occurs in 2 Tim 2:15: ὀρθοτομοῦντα τὸν λόγον τῆς ἀληθείας, “Be straightforward in your proclamation of the truth” (NEB).
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 178.

결국 본 식탁의 교제에서의 문제는 할례냐 무할례냐, 정결예법에 따라서 음식을 먹느냐 아니냐의 문제를 넘어서 구원의 문제에 있어서 오직 은혜로 구원을 받는을 수 있는 가 하는 문제에 영향을 준다. 율법을 준수하고 이방인들과 멀리하는 행동을 해야만 구원을 받는다는 사인을 보여주는 이러한 행동이 나아가 구원의 복음을 약화시키는 영향을 주기에 이에 대해서 바울은 강력하게 경고하고 있는 것이다. 
- Though the circumstances were different, what was at stake in Antioch was the same principle for which Paul had contended against the false brothers in Jerusalem: God redeems Jews and Gentiles alike on precisely the same terms, namely, personal faith in Jesus Christ and him alone. That Peter’s vacillating and expedient behavior was a denial of this basic gospel truth is evident from two key words Paul used in this passage. By his withdrawal from table fellowship, Paul averred, Peter would “force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs.” The word “force” or “compel” (anangkazō) is precisely the same term Paul used earlier in this chapter (2:3) to describe the demands of the false brothers for Titus’s circumcision.153
The second word that indicates that the matter in Antioch was more than a simple controversy about social graces is the verb Ioudaizein, “to become a Jew,” “to turn Jew,” the full force of which becomes evident in the following verse when he contrasted those who are Jews by birth from Gentile sinners (2:15). The NIV renders the term “Gentile sinners” in quotations, indicating that it was likely a technical term in the Antiochene debate over table fellowship. What was so insidious in the separatism of Peter and his associates was the fact that they were acting as if their Gentile Christian brothers and sisters were still sinners while they, because of their ritual purity and obedience of the law, stood in a different, more favorable relationship to God. Yet Jews and Gentiles alike had been redeemed by the same Christ, regenerated by the same Holy Spirit, and made partakers of the same fellowship. Who then could dare say they should not come to the same table to partake of the same Lord’s Supper just as already they had been baptized into the name of the same one triune God? Who shall separate us from the love of Christ, or from one another? It is God who justifies … it is Christ Jesus who died (Rom 8:33–34).154

153 Betz points out that this word was prominent in the Maccabean period as a description of compulsory hellenization imposed upon the Jewish people (cf. 1 Macc 2:25; 2 Macc 6:1, 7, 18; 4 Macc 5:2, 27; Galatians, 112). If indeed Peter had succumbed to pressures originated in the context of zealous Jewish nationalism in Palestine, then there is great irony in Paul’s use of this particular term. By forcing the Gentile believers to “Judaize,” Peter is guilty of a kind of reverse discrimination: what the enemies of Israel did and were still doing to the Jewish people, Peter was in effect doing to his Gentile brothers and sisters in Christ. Ἰουδαΐζειν is a hapax legomenon in the NT.
154 See Dunn, who comments perceptively on this passage: “If Gentiles are ‘in Christ’ (v. 17) and yet still ‘sinners,’ then we who are with them ‘in Christ’ are thereby found to be sinners too, and Christ has become an ‘agent of sin’ (hamartias diakonos). But that cannot be right (v. 17). I cannot live my life ‘in Christ’ and at the same time give the law the significance it had when I was a Pharisee, for the law neither gives nor expresses life in Christ but simply shows me up as a transgressor” (“Incident at Antioch,” 36). Dunn further suggests that the Antioch episode was a breakthrough for Paul because through it he came to see for the first time the implications of justification by faith not simply as the basis of conversion but as a regulative principle for the whole of the believer’s life. While it is surely likely that his painful conflict with Peter reinforced this doctrinal principle as a nonnegotiable fundamental of the apostle’s life and ministry, the whole issue arose in the first place because justification by faith was already the theological lodestar in Paul’s body of divinity. On this controverted issue in Pauline theology, see Dunn’s, “The New Perspective on Paul,” BJRL 65 (1983): 95–122, and the magisterial study by P. Stuhlmacher, Gerechtigkeit Gottes bei Paulus (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966).
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 181.

본문이 주는 교훈
1. Great leaders can fall. 
There was every reason for Peter to resist the pressure to compromise his convictions in the face of pressure. He had been in the intimate circle of Jesus’ closest disciples. He was a primary witness to the resurrection. He had witnessed the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost. He had even been used by God as the instrument of evangelistic breakthrough to the Gentiles. Yet in a moment of crisis he failed and by the force of his example led many others astray as well. Paul’s warning to the Galatians is clear: what happened to Peter can happen to you! He “that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor 10:12, KJV). In recent years the church of Jesus Christ has witnessed the downfall of many greatly gifted and highly visible leaders. Their lapse is not only a matter of personal tragedy but also a blight on the body of Christ. May God help us to test every message we hear by the touchstone of his Word and save us from exalting any human leader above measure.
2. God’s grace means no second-class Christians. 
The withdrawal of Jewish believers from table companionship with their Gentile brothers and sisters precipitated a serious breach within the Antiochene church. Throughout the history of the church, and especially in missionary settings, the sharing of a simple meal has often symbolized the unity and fellowship implied in the message of salvation through Christ. When William Carey and his associates carried the gospel message to India, they confronted a situation very similar to that reflected in this passage. From the beginning Carey felt that the holding of caste was incompatible with faith in Christ. He thus refused to baptize anyone who continued to maintain caste distinctions that included the refusal to share together in a common meal. Yet for a Hindu to eat with a European in that culture meant the foreswearing of his caste. When Carey’s first Hindu convert, a man named Krishna Pal, became a Christian and decided to break caste by taking dinner with the missionaries, William Ward, one of Carey’s fellow workers, exclaimed in words that breathe the spirit of the New Testament: “Thus the door of faith is open to the Gentiles. Who shall shut it? The chain of caste is broken; who shall mend it?”156 Racism of any brand in any culture is incompatible with the truth of the gospel. Later in Galatians (3:26–29) Paul would spell out the implications of Christian unity in terms of the promise of grace fulfilled in Jesus Christ. Any religious system or theology that denies this truth stands in opposition to the “new creation” God is bringing into being, the body of Christ based not on caste, color, or social condition but on grace alone.
3. Standing for the gospel can be a lonely business. 

When the crisis became more intense, Barnabas sided with Peter in the confrontation with Paul. The Apostle to the Gentiles stood alone on behalf of the gospel. In the fourth century Athanasius stood contra mundum, “against the world,” when the deity of Christ was at stake in the Arian struggle. In the sixteenth century Luther stood alone at the Diet of Worms because, as he said, his conscience was captive to the Word of God. In victorian England Charles Haddon Spurgeon stood alone during the Downgrade Controversy to protest “the boiling mud-showers of modern heresy” that were beginning to descend on Baptist life in his day.157 Thank God for these brave warriors of the faith who did not flinch in the hour of temptation, who refused to flirt with the false gods of their age and thus have passed on to us a goodly heritage of courage and faith.

156 Quoted in T. George, Faithful Witness: The Life and Mission of William Carey (London: InterVarsity, 1991), 130–31.
157 C. H. Spurgeon, Autobiography (London: Passmore and Alabaster, 1900), 4:261–62.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 182–183.



저작자표시

'성경묵상 > 갈라디아서' 카테고리의 다른 글

갈 3:1-5 율법의 행외로냐 혹은 듣고 믿음으로냐?  (0) 2017.04.21
갈 2:15-21 믿음으로 의롭게 됨1  (0) 2017.04.06
갈 2:6-10 이방인의 사도 바울  (0) 2017.04.04
갈 2:1-5 바울의 예루살렘 2차 방문  (0) 2017.03.31
갈 1:18-24 바울이 전한 그 믿음  (0) 2017.03.30
728x90
6 And from those vwho seemed to be influential (what they were makes no difference to me; wGod shows no partiality)—those, I say, who seemed influential xadded nothing to me. 7 On the contrary, when they saw that I had been yentrusted with zthe gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised 8 (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles), 9 and when James and Cephas and John, vwho seemed to be apillars, perceived the bgrace that was given to me, they cgave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. 10 Only, they asked us to remember the poor, dthe very thing I was eager to do.

 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 갈 2:6–10.

6절) 영향력있어 보이는 사람들중에, 그들이 어떻든지 나에게는  차이가 없으며 하나님은 공정하게 보시기에, 저 영향력있어 보이는 이들은 나에게 아무것도 더하지 못했다. 
바울은 지금 갈라디아 교회 안에 있는 영향력 있는, 유력한 이들과 자신의 차별성을 강조하며 말하고 있다. 본문안에서 몇가지를 말하는데 
1) “Whatever they were makes no difference.”
- -Paul did not dispute the facts in this charge, but he did vigorously deny the inference his opponents drew from them. Paul’s opponents, like some modern biblical critics, preferred the “Jesus of history” to the “Christ of faith.”120 Paul refused to divorce the two. The risen Christ who appeared to him was none other than the same Jesus who walked the dusty roads of Galilee and died on a Roman cross outside the gates of Jerusalem. While Paul doubtless knew and cherished some of the early Christian traditions about Jesus’ earthly life, his teachings, and his miracles, he refused to relegate Jesus to the realm of the past. For Paul there could not merely “historical” interest in Jesus. For Paul, Jesus could never be an absent savior whose words and deeds, like those of Socrates, could be scrutinized and analyzed with dispassionate interest. No! Jesus Christ is Victor, the ever-living King of the church and Lord of the future.
120 See the classic statement of this issue by M. Kähler, The So-called Historical Jesus and the Historic Biblical Christ (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1964).
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 156.
2) God is not impressed with external credentials.
외모로 사람을 평가하지 않으시는 하나님. 
- God looks not on the outward appearance but on the heart; God does not honor outward symbols of status and privilege but rather true obedience and devotion; God expects justice to be meted out evenly to the poor and great alike (cf. Ps 51:16–17; Amos 3:13–15; Lev 19:15).
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 156.
3) No Addition to Paul’s Gospel.

7-9절) 반면에 그들은 내가 이방인들에게 복음 전함을 맡았음이 마치 베드로가 할례자에게 복음전함을 맡았음과 같이 보았다. 베드로를 통해서 그의 사도직의 사역을 할례자에게 역사하게 하신 분이 나를 통해서 이방인에게 역사하셨다. 그리고 기둥과 같은 야고보와 게바, 그리고 요한도 내게 주신 은혜를 인지하였다. 그들이 나와 바나바에게 교제의 약수를 청했다. 우리는 이방인에게로 그들은 할례자들에게로 가기로 했다. 

바울은 무할례자에게, 베드로는 할례자에게 복음 전함을 맡았다는 이 주장은 베드로는 할례자를 위한 사도, 바울은 이방인을 위한 사도로 불려지게 했다. 하나님께서 바울을 그런 이유로 부르신 것이 사실이고 유력자들도 그렇게 보았고 나아가 초대교회의 기둥과 같았던 사도들, 야고보와 게바와 요한도 이를 인정한 것이다. 본 7-9절은 계속해서 이들의 사역의 대상을 구분하는 것에 집중하고 있다. 하지만 그렇다고 해서 이들이 각각의 대상에게 전하는 복음의 내용 자체가 다른 것은 아니다. 그 본질의 내용은 같으나 대상의 차이로 인한 전달의 방식은 달랐을 것이다. 
- As an apostle, Paul was in no way inferior to Peter. It was merely a division of labor, with Paul assigned to evangelize the uncircumcised (Gentiles) while Peter was sent to the circumcised (Jews). What Paul wants to establish for the Galatians, however, is that his own apostleship is just as genuine as Peter’s, and therefore the Galatians should not view themselves as inferior to any other group of believers.
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2247.

- Paul referred here to the positive reception given to his ministry by the Jerusalem leaders who “saw” and “recognized” (2:9) the unique role he had been called to play in expansion of the gospel message. The pluperfect tense of the verb “had been entrusted” (pepisteumai) is crucial for Paul’s argument here. Paul was not entrusted with this assignment by the twelve apostles or by the Jerusalem church. What they recognized and affirmed was something that had already occurred in Paul’s life, namely, the divine commissioning he had received from Christ himself.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 160.
- 1. The Gnostic interpretation. Many of the early Gnostic teachers latched on to Paul as their favorite apostle. In their view he had been entrusted with the “pneumatic” gospel of uncircumcision, while Peter was laden with the “psychic” gospel of the Jews. The radical dualism of Gnostic soteriology thus split the gospel into two irreconcilable parts, the true gospel being the secret gnosis conveyed by the secret writings and esoteric doctrines of the Gnostic teachers, the other gospel being the doctrine of Christ proclaimed by the orthodox Christian community and summarized in the Apostles’ Creed.
2. The Hegelian interpretation. In the nineteenth century F. C. Baur and his disciples interpreted the history of the early church in terms of the Hegelian dialectic. According to this view, Peter and the church at Jerusalem represented the traditionalist pole in early Christianity (thesis), while Paul and his circle stood at the opposite progressivist pole (antithesis), with the emergence of an orthodox Christian consensus in the second century seen as a kind of convergence between the two (synthesis). Galatians 2:7 is a key text for imposing this kind of bifurcated grid onto New Testament history.
3. The Ultradispensationalist interpretation. Dispensationalism, in its extreme forms, is a way of dividing the history of salvation into various epochs, each with its own distinct requirement of salvation. According to one dispensationalist line of argument, the gospel of circumcision that Peter preached on the Day of Pentecost was in fact a message of grace plus works (e.g., “Repent and be baptized … for the forgiveness of your sins,” Acts 2:38). However, with the calling of Paul, this message was superseded by the gospel of sola gratia. On this reading, Gal 2:7 reflects a transitional period between the dispensation of law under the old covenant and the new dispensation of sheer grace that was inaugurated primarily through the preaching of Paul.

 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 160–161.

8절) The decision to divide the missionary task of the church into two major thrusts, one led by Peter to the Jews and the other by Paul to the Gentiles, was a matter of practical necessity and wise stewardship. It would be a mistake to press the distinction too far, as though Peter and the apostles with him would be allowed to witness to Jews only, while Paul and Barnabas could speak to Gentiles only. “It was not that the apostles said, ‘All right Paul, you preach the noncircumcision gospel to the Gentiles, but stay away from the Jews, that’s our territory.’ The language rather suggests that they said: ‘Right, Paul, you go to the Gentiles with the noncircumcision gospel, and we will go to the Jews with the circumcision gospel.’ ”129 We know in fact that the gospel had first broken through to the Gentiles through the witness of Peter in his preaching to the household of Cornelius. Likewise, Paul continued to preach to the Jews, finding in their synagogues many God-fearers and proselytes who responded to his message and who frequently became the beachhead of a new Christian community in their city. Thus the missionary strategy worked out at this conference should not be taken as a “religio-political restriction on either side.”130 It was a decision taken in the interest of the maximal fulfillment of the Great Commission that Jesus had given to the entire church.
129 G. Howard, Paul: Crisis in Galatia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 40.
130 Ibid.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 162.

9절) 
- If the church is God’s temple (e.g., Eph. 2:21), some had apparently made Peter, James, and John the pillars. Significantly, these “pillars” had given the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and Paul, signifying that they approved the message of the gospel as preached by Paul as well as his ministry to the Gentiles. Thus they validated Paul’s apostleship by putting him on an equal footing with these other apostles in Jerusalem. This is significant, because it shows that neither Paul nor the Jerusalem apostles had to change their gospel message, but they were fully in agreement, and this “right hand of fellowship” gave clear expression to that agreement.
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2247.

10절) 단지 그들은 우리에게 가난한 자들을 기억해달라고 부탁했다. 그 일은 우리도 열망하던 것이었다. 
사역에 대해서 입장의 차이를 보이던 이들이 가난한 자들을 돕고자 하는 일에 대해서는 같은 마음을 품고 있다. 사도들도 가난한 자들을 부탁했고 바울도 이미 이 일에 관심을 가지고 행했음을 밝히고 있다. 하나님의 일을 하면서 이렇게 다른 입장 차이를 보일 수 있지만 그러면서 또한 일치를 보여야하는 부분이 있음을 기억해야 한다. 이 부탁은 지금 우리에게도 동일하게 요청되는 내용이라고 할 수 있ㄷ. 
- Verses 7–9 mark out the division of labor between Peter (to the Jews) and Paul (to the Gentiles). But there was one area of overlap: Paul was to organize collections for the poor, probably referring mainly to poor Christians in Jerusalem, who were Jewish. It is recorded elsewhere that Paul did, in fact, undertake a major relief effort on their behalf (see Rom. 15:25–26; 1 Cor. 16:1–3; 2 Corinthians 8–9). Paul’s concern for the poor as evidenced here is in accord with the broader principle demonstrated throughout Scripture that genuine preaching of the gospel in every age must be accompanied by the meeting of physical needs as well, just as Jesus healed the sick and cast out demons along with his preaching ministry.
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2247.

본문은 복음의 진리와 교회의 연합이라는 매우 중요한 주제를 다룬다. 바울은 거짓 복음을 가르치는 자들과 함께 하지 않았다. 하지만 자신의 형제들, 그리스도인들과는 최선을 다해 연합을 시도한다. 우리들도 주변의 거짓복음을 전하는 자들과는 구별되면서 복음의 형제들과 함께 연합을 노력해야 한다. 또한 바울은 선교 사역을 적절하게 나누었다. 자신은 이방인의 사도로, 베드로는 유대인의 사도로 역할을 할 것을 말한다. 지금 이시대에 많은 교회와 선교사들이 자신들의 자원을 이미 복음화된 지역과 대상을 향해서 사용하고 있는 것을 보면서 최선을 다해서 같은 현장에서 싸울 것이 아니라 미답지를 향해서 나가는 것에 대한 고민을 할 필요가 있다. 미완성 과업을 성취하기 위해서 함께 우리 교회는 고민해야 한다. 마지막으로 바울은 가난한자들에 대한 관심을 표한다. 이는 복음이 명제적인 선포일뿐만 아니라 삶의 정황속에서 완성되어야 함을 말하는 것이다. 개인구원과 사회정의, 이는 복음의 양 측면으로 마땅히 함께 강조되어야 할 부분이다. 물론 한면을 강조할때 개인 구원에 치중되는 것이 사실일지라도 온전한, 총체적인 구원을 위해서 이 긴장을 늦추지 않아야 할 것이다. 
- The two key themes in this passage are the truth of the gospel and the unity of the church. In a moment of crisis Paul found it necessary to stand adamantly, stubbornly, uncompromisingly against the heretical doctrine and illicit demands of the false brothers. It would have been easy for Paul to say:“Oh, come now; circumcision is no big deal. Let’s compromise on this issue in order to save face and win friends here in Jerusalem.” By such an approach he might well have spared himself a confrontation, but he would thereby have forfeited the cause of Christian freedom. At the same time, Paul greatly valued the unity of the church and sought to strengthen it in every way possible. We have much to learn from this episode in the life of the early church as we seek to be faithful stewards of the missionary challenge confronting us today.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 166–167.

 At the same time, Paul greatly valued the unity of the church and sought to strengthen it in every way possible. We have much to learn from this episode in the life of the early church as we seek to be faithful stewards of the missionary challenge confronting us today.
First, we can develop a pattern of cooperation around the truth of the gospel. This is not an ecumenism of convenience; Paul could not work together with the false brothers, even though they claimed to be fellow Christians, because their theological position was antithetical to the gospel message itself. However, Paul was eager to work closely together with other Christian leaders who shared with him a common commitment to the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ.
Second, the apostles found it necessary to distribute the work of evangelization by a practical division of labor. Today 1.3 billion persons in the world have never heard the name of Jesus for the first time. Evangelical, Bible-believing Christians cannot afford to fight turf wars over comity agreements and missionary zones. No one person, ministry, missions agency, or denomination can cover all the necessary bases. We must be ready to stand together and work collaboratively with Great Commission Christians everywhere in the unfilled task of world evangelization.
Finally, the word about caring for the poor points to the dual necessity of both a propositional and an incarnational dimension to the life and mission of the church. Paul steadfastly refused to divorce conversion from discipleship. His mission included both a social and an evangelistic responsibility. If he gave priority to the latter over the former, it was because he sensed so keenly the eternal destiny of every person he met and shuddered to think of the dire consequences of spurning Christ’s invitation to eternal life. Still, he knew, as we must, that the gospel he preached was addressed to living persons, soul and body, in all of their broken humanity and need for wholeness.

 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 167.


저작자표시

'성경묵상 > 갈라디아서' 카테고리의 다른 글

갈 2:15-21 믿음으로 의롭게 됨1  (0) 2017.04.06
갈 2:11-14 베드로의 외식을 책망하는 바울  (0) 2017.04.05
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 1:10-17 이방인의 사도 바울  (0) 2017.03.29
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.

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.

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.
- 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.

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.

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.

- 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.

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.

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.
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.
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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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. 


저작자표시

'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
728x90
No Other Gospel
6 I am astonished that you are lso quickly deserting mhim who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to na different gospel— 7 onot that there is another one, but pthere are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or qan angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, rlet him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, rlet him be accursed.

 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 갈 1:6–19.

6절) 너희를 그리스도의 예수안에서 부르신 분을 그렇게 속히 떠나서 다른 복음을 향한 것에 내가 매우 놀랐다. 

- Paul used a strong word to describe the crisis that had befallen the churches of Galatia. The word translated “deserting” in the NIV is metatithesthai, which means literally “to bring to another place.”22 The word is used in this literal sense in Heb 11:5 to describe Enoch’s translation from earth to heaven. It occurs eighteen times in the Greek Old Testament, where it translates a variety of Hebrew words meaning “to transplant,” “to set in another place,” “to alter or change.” From these meanings it was extended metaphorically to one who had changed allegiance from one country to another, a political traitor, or one who had switched sides in an armed conflict, a military deserter. Paul claimed the Galatians were spiritual turncoats! That he used this verb in the sense of a continuous present, “you are deserting,” “you are in the process of leaving,” indicates that their apostasy is not yet complete. Obviously the false teachers had made great inroads among them; the situation was desperate, but not beyond hope. Paul was “hard pressed on every side, but not crushed; perplexed, but not in despair” (2 Cor 4:8). Later in the letter he expressed confidence that they could be recovered, and he reminded them that they would “reap a harvest if [they] do not give up” (Gal 5:10; 6:9).
22 See C. Maurer, “Μετατίθημι,” TDNT 8.161–62.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 91.

그리스도의 은혜로 너희를 부르신 이가 누구인가에 대한 여러 견해가 있다. 먼저 바울, 예수님, 하나님으로 설명된다. 
- What is the referent of the expression “the one who called you”? Three answers to this question have been given in the history of interpretation.
It could refer, of course, to Paul himself since he, along with Barnabas, was the human instrument God used to awaken faith in the Galatians. Yet as Paul would make abundantly clear in v. 8, he himself was not the standard by which the situation in Galatia was to be judged. Something far greater than personal prerogative or pastoral loyalty was at stake in this struggle. Another possible interpretation, adopted by Calvin and many scholars since, holds that “the one who called” refers to Jesus Christ. This is certainly a possible reading since many of the earliest and best manuscripts do not contain the qualifying genitive “of Christ,” following the word “grace” in the next phrase.23 It is true that by following the way of the false teachers the Galatians had contradicted the finished work of Christ, making him and his cross “of no value to you at all” (5:2). However, as drastic as that error may be, Paul linked it to an even more serious one: the Galatians were guilty of nothing less than deserting God himself. In Paul’s writings “he who calls” is synonymous with God, as can be seen in Paul’s two other uses of it in Galatians (1:15; 5:8; but see also Rom 4:17; 9:12; 1 Thess 2:12; 5:24). The Galatians were deserting the God who calls—the God who called the world into existence by his creative power, the God who raised Jesus from the dead, the God who wrought the miracle of conversion in the Galatians themselves. True, they also were deserting Christ, Paul, and the gospel he had preached

23 See B. M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (London: United Bible Societies, 1971), 589–90.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 91–92.

사도바울이 강조하는 은혜, 이 은혜가 보라 갈라디아서 전체를 관통하는 중요한 주제이다. 
- Already we have encountered the word “grace” in the salutation (1:3); it is the operative concept in Galatians and runs like a scarlet thread throughout the epistle from start to finish (1:15; 2:9; 2:21; 3:18; 5:4; 6:18).
There is not a wasted syllable in Galatians; we must not imagine that Paul here threw in one of his favorite words as a kind of theological grace note to soften his otherwise harsh rebuke. No, grace is what Galatians is all about. Both here and in Romans, Paul set grace and faith together over against law and works as the basis of justification (Rom 6:14; 11:6; Gal 2:21; 5:4).24 At the end of his explication of the doctrine of justification by faith, Paul would summarize his verdict against the Galatians thus: “You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated by Christ; you have fallen away from grace” (5:4). Here at the beginning of the letter he wanted them to realize that the God who called them out of pagan idolatry to salvation and new life in Jesus Christ did so on no other basis than his own good pleasure and gratuitous favor. To forget this is worse than betraying an army or a country; it is to betray the true and living God.

24 H. Conzelmann, “Χάρις,” TDNT 9.372–415. Cf. also D. P. Fuller, Gospel and Law: Contrast or Continuum? (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980).
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 92–93.

본문의 다른 복음을 말할때 6절과 7절에 사용된 헬라어 단어가 다르다. 6절에서는 ‘헤테로스’가 7절에서는 ‘알로스’라는 단어가 사용된다. 
- This is a difficult expression to translate into English as the awkward wording in most modern versions indicates. The AV reads “another gospel, which is not another.” However, Paul used two separate words in Greek for “another.” The first is heteros, which connotes a difference in kind between one thing and another. For example, Heb 7:11 poses the question of why, if perfection were possible through the Levitical priesthood, there still was need for another (heteron) priest to come, that is, a priest of a different class or kind from that of the old order of Aaron. The other word, allos, on the other hand, means “another one of the same kind.” We are familiar enough with this usage from everyday life; it is used when the waitress asks whether we would like another cup of coffee, meaning a second (or third) installment of our original drink.
So here in Galatians Paul asserted that his fickle followers had embraced a heteros gospel, one drastically different in kind from that they had received from him, for there is, in fact, no other (allos) genuine gospel to be placed alongside the real thing. Perhaps the NEB comes closest to the original: “I am astonished to find you … following a different gospel. Not that it is in fact another gospel.”25

25 While heteros and allos carry the distinction referred to above in the Galatian passage under review, they are sometimes used synonymously (cf. Matt 16:14; 1 Cor 12:10). See the discussion in E. deW. Burton, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, ICC (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1921), 420–22. See also J. H. Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Associated, 1963), 254. For the adverbial use of heteros meaning “otherwise, differently,” see Phil 3:15.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 93.

7절) 다른 복음은 없고 어떤 이들이 너희를 어렵게해 그리스도의 복음에서 멀어지게 하려고 하는 것이다. 
바울은 갈라디아 교인들을 혼란케 하는 것과 복음을 변질시키고 전복시키려는 것이 거짓 교사들의 문제이다라고 말한다. 
- Paul leveled two charges against them: one, with reference to their disturbance of the Galatians; the other, relating to their subversion of the gospel. The Greek verb translated “to throw into confusion” (tarassō) means to “shake,” “agitate,” or “to excite to the point of perplexity and fear.” Here again is an indication of how vulnerable the new Christians of Galatia were to evidently impressive presentations of the false teachers. Paul’s second charge against them was that they were perverting, or rather, wanted to pervert, the gospel of Christ. As J. Stott has wisely observed: “These two go together. To tamper with the gospel is always to trouble the church. You cannot touch the gospel and leave the church untouched, because the church is created and lives by the gospel. Indeed the church’s greatest troublemakers (now as then) are not those outside who oppose, ridicule and persecute it, but those inside who try to change the gospel.”28
28 J. R. W. Stott, Only One Way: The Message of Galatians (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1968), 23.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 94–95.

갈라디아 교인들이 다른 복음에 관심을 보인 이유가 무엇일까? 바울이 그들에게 전한 복음 자체에는 문제가 없었다. 하지만 그가 떠난 이후에 아직 말씀에 깊이 뿌리 내리지 못한 이들에게 거짓 교사들이 찾아와 복음에 무언가를 덧붙이기 시작한 것이다. 복음을 말하지만 결국 거기에 그들의 전통과 율법을 첨가하기 시작했고 결국 그것은 다른 복음이 된 것이다. 
- We know that most of the Christians in the churches of Galatia came from a Gentile background, though some were likely Jews and others “God-fearers” attached to the local synagogues. Some may have dabbled in the mystery religions that were well represented in the cities of Southern Galatia, while others perhaps bowed at the shrine of the imperial deity.
In any event, there was likely a deep hunger and thirst for spiritual reality that the religious marketplace of “this present evil age” could not satisfy. To these people Paul and Barnabas preached the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit was poured out in miraculous power, the new believers were baptized, local churches were formed, and the missionaries departed. Soon thereafter, before the first wave of enthusiastic ardor had been dampened, the false teachers arrived with their new message of how the Galatians could perfect the good beginning they made and so move on toward complete salvation.
Christ was still prominent in their preaching, but only as an adjunct to the law. Grace was a word they used as well, but grace for them meant simply one’s natural ability to obey the laws and rites required in the Torah. This kind of “gospel” Paul saw as a total perversion. But the Galatian Christians, naive and immature, were intrigued by its promise of an even more elevated spiritual status. What the false teachers offered the Galatians was a way to enhance and elevate their already robust spirituality. Luther masterfully captured the genius of their appeal in his summary of their message: “ ‘Christ’s a fine master. He makes the beginning, but Moses must complete the structure.’ The devil’s nature shows itself therein: if he cannot ruin people by wronging and persecuting them, he will do it by improving them.”31

31 Ibid., 54. cf. LW 26.50.
 Timothy George, Galatians, vol. 30, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 96.

8-9절) 그러나 우리 혹은 하늘로 부터 온 천사라도 너희에게 우리가 너희에게 전한 것 에 반하는 복음을 전한다면 그는 저주를 받을 것이다. 우리가 말한 것처럼 지금 내가 다시 말한다. 만약 누군가가 너희에게 너희가 받은 그 복음에 반하는 어떤 복음을 전하면 그는 저주를 받을 것이다. 
가장 단순하고 순전한 복음, 예수 그리스도의 십자가와 부활, 이것을 믿는 것 외에 다른 어떤 것들을 첨가하고 전하는 것은 바로 다른 복음을 전하는 행위가 된다. 그렇기에 바로 그 복음을 바르게 아는 것이 무엇보다 중요하다. 







저작자표시

'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 1:10-17 이방인의 사도 바울  (0) 2017.03.29
갈 1:1-5 갈라디아 교회를 향한 바울의 인사  (0) 2017.03.24
갈라디아서 서론  (0) 2017.03.23

+ Recent posts

티스토리툴바