하나님나라를 꿈꾸며(Kingdom of God)

지적대화를 위한 넓고 얕은 지식(현실 너머편, 채사장)

저자는 현실너머의 진리를 추구하는 영역을 5가지(철학, 과학, 예술, 종교, 신비)로 분류하고 이를 절대주의, 상대주의, 회의주의의 세가지 영역으로 단순화한다. 너무 복잡하고 어려워서 감히 이해하기를 포기했던 영역들을 이렇게 단순화시키니 큰 그림 속에서 그 내용이 조금 보이는 듯하다. 

0부. 진리

진리의 속성 : 절대적, 보편적, 불변적 속성

절대주의(진리는 있다)-상대주의(절대적 진리는 없다)-불가지론(모르겠다)-실용주의(상관없다, 유용한것)

* 각 시대의 진리

- 원시의 자연신-고대의 신화-중세의 유일신-근대의 이성

* 근대 합리성의 붕괴(=>포스트모더니즘 : 근대적 속성들을 붕괴, 해체함)

- 외적 요인 : 1,2차 세계대전, 산업화 부작용

- 내적 요인 : 수학(괴델-불완전성 원리), 과학(하이젠베르그-불확정성 원리), 철학(파이어아벤트-인식론적 무정부주의)

1부. 철학

- 소크라테스(산파법): 산파가 산모로부터 출산을 유도하듯 적절하고 적합한 질문이 개인으로 하여금 스스로 진리를 도출하게 한다.

- 스콜라 철학

1) 실재론(기욤) : 보편이 실제로 존재한다. 개별적인 것은 보편의 모사, 모방이다(플라톤).

2) 유명론(로스켈리누스) : 보편은 실제로 존재하지 않는다. 개별적인 것만이 실제로 존재할 뿐이고, 보편은 언어이고 이름일 뿐이다.(아리스토텔레스)

3) 종합(아벨라르) : 보편논쟁을 종합하여 마무리짓고 아퀴나스와 오캄의 등장을 준비했다. 

- 근대 철학 : 근대의 절대주의와 상대주의는 합리론과 경험론의 논쟁으로 인식론과 관련된 논쟁이다. 근대 이전 고대의 관심은 존재론적인 것에 관심이 많았다. 

존재론 : 진리가 무엇인가에 대한 답변

인식론 : 진리에 도달하는 방법에 대한 답변(이성을 통해-합리론 vs 경험을 통해-경험론)

합리론 : 합리주의, 이성주의(데카르트, 가상디, 스피노자, 라이프니츠), 데카르트 : 진리를 발견하기 위해서 모든 것을 의심(나는 생각한다. 고로 나는 존재한다)

경험론 : 경험을 중시(베이컨-중세의 신중심주의를 끝내고 근대 이성중심주의와 근대과학을 탄생시키는데 중요한 역할을 함, 4가지 우상(종족,동굴,시장,극장의 우상)을 비판

절대주의-실재론-합리론

상대주의-유명론-경험론

칸트의 관념론 : 합리론과 경험론을 종합

하이데거는 존재, 비트겐슈타인은 언어를 탐구한다. 

2부. 과학

오캄의 면도날 : 같은 현상을 설명하는 서로 다른 두 이론이 존재할때 더 간단한 이론을 선택하는 것이 더 효율적이다라는 사고방식

절대주의 : 고전물리학(인과법칙) / 뉴턴, 아인슈타인

상대주의 : 현대물리학(확률) / 양자역학

-코펜하겐 해석 : 물리량(위치와 속도)의 동시 측정 불가능, 물리량은 관측의 영향을 받음

3부. 예술

- 고전주의(절대주의) : 조화, 균형, 비례, 법칙을 강조

- 낭만주의(상대주의) : 화가의 주관적 표현 방식을 중시

- 현대미술(회의주의) : 예전 것들에 대한 거부, 새로운 것들에 대한 추구

르네상스 : 중세와 근대 사이에서 신 중심 세계관에서 인간 중심 세계관으로 변화가 시도

현대미술은 미의 추구라기 보다는 새로움의 추구에 가깝다. 그래서 예술의 대상, 주체, 의미중에 무엇인가를 흔들고 있는 것이다. 

4부. 종교

아담과 하와 & 릴리트(아담의 첫째 부인??)

불교 : 기원전 6세기 고타마 싯타르타 / 고집멸도(고통을 직시, 고통의 원인을 이해, 집착을 제거, 집착 제거를 위한 수행), 사성제와 팔정도(바르게 보고 생각하고 말하고 행동하는 것)

A. 절대적 유일신교 : 구약 - 유대교, 그리스도교, 이슬람

B. 상대적 다신교 : 베다-힌두교, 불교, 티베트불교

C. 회의주의 종교 : 없다.

5부. 신비

비트켄슈타인(논리-철학 논고) : “말할 수 없는 것에 대해서는 침묵해야 한다."

• 죽음 이후의 삶의 가능성 

1) 완전한 끝 : 과학적 사고

2) 영원한 삶 : 절대적 유일신교의 사고

3) 윤회(삶이 순환의 고리를 이룬다) : 상대적 다신교의 사고

4) 영원회귀 : 니체의 견해

• Paul discloses a mysteryto the Gentiles to prevent them from being proud. The word “mystery” does not necessarily refer to something puzzling or difficult to grasp, but to something that was previously hidden and is now revealed. The mystery here has three elements: (1) at this time in salvation history the majority of Israel has been hardened; (2) during this same time the full number of Gentiles is being saved; and (3) God will do a new work in the future in which he will save all “Israel” (v. 26).
•  Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2177.

•  mystery.A word Paul uses for an element in God’s plan that the OT does not clearly reveal (16:25; 1 Cor 2:1, 7; 4:1; 13:2; 14:2; 15:51; Eph 1:9; 3:3, 4, 9; 5:32; 6:19; Col 1:26, 27; 2:2; 4:3; 2 Thess 2:7 [“secret”]; 1 Tim 3:9 [“deep truths”], 16). Thismystery is the process by which God is using Israel’s “hardening” and the salvation of Gentiles to save all Israel (vv. 25b–26a).
• OT Old Testament
• vv. verses in the chapter being commented on
•  Douglas J. Moo, “The Letters and Revelation,”in NIV Zondervan Study Bible: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2015), 2314.

• A great deal has been written about the word “mystery,” whose Greek equivalent occurs in one setting only in the Synoptics (Mark 4:11 and   p 224  parallels), not at all in John’s Gospel, but some twenty times in Paul’s writings. In the mystery religions the term was used of secret information that was revealed only to the devotees who underwent initiation into the cult. Paul used the word in reference to something that was formerly hidden but now is revealed by God so that all may understand.114In the present context the mystery referred to “God’s saving activity toward Israel.”115God had not gone back on his promises made to his ancient people. There was a future for Israel if it did not persist in unbelief (v. 23). Paul wanted the Gentiles to understand this so they would not become conceited and think too highly of themselves.116The hardening that Israel had experienced was limited in scope and in time.117It was “in part” in that some (the believing remnant) had not become callous toward God. It was also “until” the full number of Gentile believers had come to Christ—that is, the hardening was temporary (cf. Luke 21:24).118
• 114G. Bornkamm defines μυστήριον as “the eternal counsel of God which is hidden from the world but eschatologically fulfilled in the cross of the Lord of glory and which carries with it the glorification of believers” (TDNTabr., 617). H. C. G. Moule speaks of “this mystery” as “this fact in God’s purposes, impossible to be known without revelation, but luminous when revealed” (The Epistle to the Romans[London: Pickering & Inglis, n.d.], 307). See Dan 2:18–19, 27–30 for the concept of “mystery” in the OT.
• 115H. Kramer, EDNT, 2.448. Kramer goes on to note that “the traditional apocalyptic expectation of the restoration of Israel is altered in that the partial hardening of Israel creates room for the conversion of the Gentiles.”
• 116Cf. Prov 3:7, “Do not be wise in your own eyes; fear the Lord and shun evil.”
• 117πώρωσις belongs to a word group “used medically for the ‘hardening’ or ‘thickening’ of the bone” (TDNTabr., 817). Barclay says that it means callusand writes that “when a callus grows on any part of the body that part loses feeling. It becomes insensitive” (Barclay, Romans, 146). Robertson understands the term in context as “obtuseness of intellectual discernment, mental dulness” (WP4:398).
• 118The order of God’s redemptive activity in history is reversed in the order of its proclamation: it is to the Gentile “first” and then to Israel.
•  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 223–224.

• in this way all Israel will be saved. Various interpreters have claimed that Paul is speaking of: (1) the salvation of the church of Jesus Christ, both Jews and Gentiles, throughout history; or (2) the saving of a remnant of Jews throughout history; or (3) the salvation of the end-time generation of the Jewish people in the future. The first view is unlikely since throughout chs. 9–11 Israel and Gentiles are distinct ethnic entities. Furthermore, in 11:25 Israel refers to ethnic Israel, and it is difficult to see how the referent could suddenly change in v. 26. Finally, v. 28 indicates that ethnic Israel is still distinguished from Gentiles, for “they” in v. 28 clearly refers to ethnic Israel. The third view, that Paul refers to the salvation of Israel at the end of history, seems most likely because: (1) it fits with the promises of God’s future work in vv. 12 and 15; (2) it is difficult to see how the salvation of a remnant of Jews all through history would qualify as a mystery; (3) the future salvation of ethnic Israel at the end of history accords with the climactic character of this passage; and (4) it demonstrates finally and fully how God is faithful to fulfill his saving promises to his people (9:6). “All Israel” does not necessarily refer to every single Jewish person but to a very large number, at least the majority of Jews. The Deliverercoming from Zion probably refers to Christ (cf. 1 Thess. 1:10), suggesting that the Jews will be saved near or at the second coming.
•  Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2177.

• When Christ returns, he will turn godlessness away from Jacob.In the context of Romans 11, this must be the unbelief of verse 23 and the hardness of verse 25. This refers to the conversion of the people (turncan also mean “remove,” so Dunn [1988b:683] via Bauer et al. 1979). In so doing Christ would renew my covenant with them,which is from Isaiah 59:21 but might also include the new covenant of Jeremiah 31:31–34 (so Murray 1968; Morris 1988; Schreiner 1998; contra Moo 1996), in which God will “put my laws in their minds” and “forgive their wickedness” (the passage is quoted in Heb 8:8–12). The old covenant led to the new covenant of grace established by Christ (in his first advent), and here that new covenant is finalized with respect to Israel. Here once more we have the already-not yet tension so endemic to Romans. The new covenant was inaugurated in Christ’s first coming (especially in his death and resurrection; see Rom 4:25), and it is seen now in the Gentile mission. But it will be consummated in the restoration and conversion of Israel at the second coming.
•  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 307–308.

• Israel will be saved because God never revokes his saving promises. Gifts(Gk. charisma) means things freely given by God, and the word can be used to refer to different kinds of gifts. Sometimes the word refers to spiritual gifts for ministry (as in 1:11; 12:6; 1 Cor. 12:4) and sometimes to the gift of salvation (Rom. 5:15–16; 6:23), but the context here favors yet a third kind of “gifts,” namely, the unique blessings given to Israel which Paul mentioned at the beginning of this long section (9:4–5). calling(Gk. klēsis, using the same root as Gk. eklogē, “election,” in 11:28; also in 9:11; 11:7) refers here to calling to salvation (cf. 8:30; 9:11, 24).
•  Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2177.

• The unchanging faithfulness of God is found often in the Old Testament (Num 23:19; 1 Sam 15:29; Job 12:13; Ps 33:11; Jer 4:28). This of course does not mean that he will never reject those who have rejected him (see in v. 28 on enemies). Rather, he will be faithful to the nation even though he will have to condemn many within it. As Moo says (1996:731–32), the choice of Israel “does not mean salvation for every single member of the nation, but blessings for the nation as a whole.”
•  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 310.

• Verses 30–31 compare Gentile and Jew in terms of their disobedience and the mercy that follows.128The Gentile believers were at one time in a state of rebellion, but now they had received mercy as a result of Israel’s disobedience. In the same way, Israel’s present disobedience opened the possibility of their receiving mercy as a result of God’s present mercy to the Gentiles. Mercy was extended to the Gentiles because of Israel’s disobedience. Mercy would be extended to Israel because of the mercy shown to the Gentiles. The theological conclusion is that God has “locked up all in the prison of disobedience” (Montgomery).129Now he is able to show mercy to all alike.130Since “there is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (3:22b–23), no one can lay claim on the mercy of God. It is a free gift for all who believe regardless of ethnic background or ethical performance.131
• 128Dunn calls these two verses “the most contrived or carefully constructed formulation which Paul ever produced in such a tight epigrammatic form, with so many balancing elements” (Romans, 2:687).
• Montgomery H. B. Montgomery, The New Testament in Modern English
• 129συγκλείω taken figuratively means “to confine, imprison” (cf. Gal 3:22–23).
• 130Bruce comments that “there is an unmistakable universalism in Paul’s language here, even if it be … a representative rather than an individual universalism,” which is then defined by J. Munck as “a representative acceptance of the Gospel by the various nations” (Bruce, Romans, 210).
• 131Best calls v. 32 “the conclusion to the whole argument: God treats all men in the same way” (Romans, 133).
•  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 226.

• Paul then turns from the situation of the Gentiles to that of the Jewish people. Here I depart from the niv and see a three-part message: “So now they also have disobeyed for the sake of (God’s) mercy to you, so that they also may now receive mercy.” The first two parts sum up the message of verse 31 and therefore of chapter 11, that Jewish disobedience has resulted in the Gentile mission. Paul has reversed the order of verse 30 in verse 31 in order to create a chiasm. But there is a final step, and that is the theme of verses 25–32—Jewish conversion. While Jewish disobedience has led to God’s mercyshown to the Gentiles, Gentile conversion leads first to Jewish envy (10:19; 11:11–15) and then to their conversion (11:15–16, 25–32). Yet this is not the case in the present. Israel has now become disobedient,and the present is the time of the Gentile mission. However, Paul has probably added another nowin the final clause, and this complicates the message. It is possible to take this as adding a second implication: while one portion of Israel is nowdisobedient, another portion is nowbeing converted. But it is better with most commentators (Cranfield 1979; Morris 1988; Moo 1996; Schreiner 1998; with Michel 1966; Käsemann 1980; Dunn 1988b taking it as referring to an imminent “End” of history) to see this as referring to the imminent future as an “eschatological now”; that is, the conversion of Israel can occur at any time. It is also difficult to know whether this refers to the process of the Jewish mission (as in 1:16, “first for the Jew”; so Cranfield 1979) or to the final conversion of Israel (as in 11:25–26) as at any time in the now*future (so Moo 1996; Schreiner 1998). The first view makes more sense; it is simplest to take this in an inaugurated sense, so that the ongoing Jewish mission is a proleptic anticipation of the final harvest at the end of the age.
• *11:31The second nowin the last clause of verse 31 is disputed because it is missing in p46, codex Alexandrinus, two corrections of codex Bezae, the Majority Text and several others. However, it is found in codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, the original codex Bezae and several others. While the manuscript evidence is fairly balanced (perhaps slightly stronger evidence for its inclusion), it is also the more difficult reading, since on the surface it seems to contradict the nowin the first clause. Therefore, it is likely that it should be seen as original (see also Cranfield 1979; Dunn 1988b; Fitzmyer 1993b; Moo 1996; Schreiner 1998).
•  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 311–312.

• This provides a natural conclusion for the whole of chapters 9–11, not just for chapter 11. The question all along has been the justice of God and the destiny of Israel. In chapter 9 the issue was the possible failure of God’s promises to Israel and his justice and faithfulness. Paul answered that God is sovereign (9:6–29) and that Israel had failed to believe (9:30–10:21). Then in chapter 11 the theme of God’s faithfulness continues in terms of the national future for Israel. There is currently a remnant (vv. 1–10), and even the “stumbling” of Israel unleashed the power of God, which led to a three-stage salvific purpose—the conversion of the Gentiles led to making Israel envious, which will lead to the salvation of Israel (vv. 11–24). This section then concludes the process by detailing the certainty of this future salvation of God’s people after the Gentile mission (vv. 25–26) and then grounding it in Old Testament promises (vv. 26–27), the irrevocable nature of God’s call (vv. 28–29) and God’s mercy to the disobedient (vv. 30–32). Thielmann (1994:179–80) argues that there is no contradiction between the rejection of Israel in 9:6–13 and her future salvation in 11:25–32, as some have said (e.g., Sanders 1983:192–98). Rather, Paul teaches that Israel’s salvation is based not on human ethnicity but on divine choice (9:6–13).
•  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 303.

• Verses 28–32 thus summarize the themes of chapters 9–11: Israel rejected the gospel (9:30–10:21) and thus was rejected by God (9:6–29). Moreover, this was done “for the sake of” (niv, on your account) the Gentiles. This goes back to 11:11–15, in which the “rejection” of the Jews meant “salvation” and “reconciliation” for the Gentiles. When the natural branches were broken off, the wild shoots were grafted in (v. 17). This is part of God’s plan of salvation—the rejection of the Jews led to the inclusion of the Gentiles, and that in turn will lead to the jealousy of the Jews and through that to their conversion as well. This latter part is the message of the second clause—as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs.Election is the major theme of chapter 9, and it speaks of God’s control of salvation history. God has chosen to reject some and to accept others, as in the quotation of Exodus 33:19 in Romans 9:15, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” God’s gracious choice of Israel is a hallmark of biblical truth (11:5–6). Throughout the Old Testament, Israel is the chosen people because of God’s unswerving love for them (2 Chron 9:8; Ps 102:13; Is 14:1; 41:8–9; 44:1), so even though many have rejected Christ and become his enemies, God’s love is still upon the nation. It is interesting that this love is with them on account of the patriarchs.This does not mean the patriarchs have done anything to merit the divine love or to produce it for the people; God’s love is by grace, not works (11:6). Rather, the patriarchs are mentioned because the covenant promises were given to the nation through them (Gen 12:1–3; 13:14–17; 15:1–21; 17:4–19; 22:16–18; 26:3–5; 28:10–15). They were the source of God’s covenant blessings, and it is those promises that are the basis of his elect will.
•  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 309.