728x90
The Parable of the Sower
4 Again vhe began to teach beside the sea. And a very large crowd gathered about him, wso that he got into a boat and sat in it on the sea, and the whole crowd was beside the sea on the land. 2 And xhe was teaching them many things in parables, and in his teaching he said to them: 3 “Listen! yBehold, a sower went out to sow. 4 And as he sowed, some seed fell along the path, and the birds came and devoured it. 5 Other seed fell on rocky ground, where it did not have much soil, and immediately it sprang up, since it had no depth of soil. 6 And zwhen the sun rose, it was scorched, and since it had no root, ait withered away. 7 Other seed fell among bthorns, and the thorns grew up and choked it, and it yielded no grain. 8 And other seeds fell into good soil and produced grain, growing up and increasing and yielding thirtyfold and sixtyfold and ca hundredfold.” 9 And he said, d“He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”
예수님께서 비유로 가르치신 이유. 예수님은 비유를 통해서 대적하는 이들은 심판하시기 위해서, 따르고 배우기 원하는 이들을 위해서는 믿음의 메시야 공동체를 새롭게 형성하기 위한 교훈을 위해서 사용하셨다. 이처럼 비유는 완악한 이들에게는 경고를, 열린 마음을 가진이들에게는 하나님나라의 메시야적 다스림에 대한 원리를 제시해주는 역할을 했다. 이는 이야기와 연관되어 내재된 메시지로 구성된다.
- Jesus teaches in parables both as judgment against those “outside” and as a means of instruction for those “inside” his newly formed messianic community of faith.
4:2 Mark provides several examples of Jesus teaching in parables. To the hard-hearted, parables are a warning; to those who are open-hearted, parables illustrate principles of the messianic rule of God. A parable consists of a story and its corresponding intended message.
당시의 농사법은 이처럼 땅을 먼저 개간하고 좋은 땅에 의도적으로 심는 방식이 아니라 바람의 힘에 의존해서 흩뿌리는 방식이었기에 이처럼 다양한 토양에 씨앗이 떨어지게 되었다.
비유(parable)라는 단어는 헬라어 ‘파라볼레’에서 나왔다. 이는 공관복음에서 48번, 히브리서에서 2번 나타난다. 헬라적 의미에서는 이 비유가 중요하지 않았는데 예수님의 비유는 헬라가 아니라 구약의 ‘마샬림’과 관계가 있다. ‘마샬’이라는 히브리어는 다양한 의미를 가지는데 비교, 잠언, 풍자, 속담, 동화, 예언, 도덕적 격언, 지혜의 말, 욕설, 형태, 신비, 경구, 직유, 은유등으로 사용된다. 쥴리처라는 학자 이래로 비유와 풍자에 대한 예리한 구별이 있었다. 그는 비유는 오직 한가지를 비교, 나타내고 나머지는 중요하지 않다라고 여겼다. 그러면서 예수님께서는 풍자는 사용하시지 않는다고 주장했다. 그래서 복음서의 비유가 풍자적 요소를 가지거나 그 해석이 풍자적인 것은 예수님께서 직접 의도하신 거싱 아니라 이후 초대교회의 주장이라고 여겼다. 하지만 요즘은 이렇게까지 생각하지는 않는다. 먼저 히브리어 마샬이 풍자를 의미할 수 있고 예수님 시절에 풍자가 합법적인 문학양식으로 여겨졌으며 최근의 문학비평을 통해서 예수님의 비유가 오직 하나의 의미만을 가진다는 것은 도전을 받았고 이러한 은유의 재발견은 예수님의 풍자 사용에 대한 개방성을 가지게 하였다.
- The English word “parable” simply transliterates the Greek word parabolē, which appears forty-eight times in the Synoptic Gospels and twice in Hebrews and means that which is placed beside, presumably for the purpose of comparison. The meaning of the Greek word is not significant, however, because the parables of Jesus are not related to Greek parables but to the mashalim of the Old Testament. The word mashal has a variety of meanings: comparison, proverb, allegory, riddle, fable, oracle, ethical maxim, wisdom saying, byword, taunt, type, mystery, aphorism, simile or metaphor, similitude, etc. Therefore one should not expect all of the parables of Jesus to represent the same oral or literary form, and that is certainly the case.
Following A. Jülicher, many contemporary scholars make a sharp distinction between parables and allegories. A parable, they say, has only one point of comparison so that the details are unimportant. In an allegory, however, all or most of the details represent something.
They claim further that Jesus never used allegory. Therefore when a parable in the Gospels has allegorical features or when the explanation of a parable is allegorical, they claim the parable or explanation could not have come from Jesus but was the invention of the primitive church.
Though long popular, Jülicher’s reductionistic view has increasingly come under fire on a variety of fronts. First, the Hebrew word mashal can refer to an allegory: Ezek 17:2–10; 20:49; 24:3–5. Second, allegory was recognized as a legitimate literary form in Jesus’ time. There is no a priori reason why Jesus could not have used allegory, i.e., a story with multiple comparisons as opposed to a story with only one. There are too many parables in the Gospels with allegorical features for none of them to be authentic. Third, recent literary criticism of the parables has challenged Jülicher’s corollary that each parable can be reduced to a single, “universal truth” consistent with nineteenth-century liberalism. The rediscovery of metaphor has led to renewed openness to Jesus’ use of allegory.24
It is now possible to define the word “parable” as it is used in the Gospels. In addition to referring occasionally to a proverb (Mark 3:23–26; Luke 4:23; 6:39 [cf. Matt 15:14–15]), a metaphor (Mark 7:14–17; Luke 5:36–38 [cf. Mark 2:21–22; Matt 9:16–17]), and a similitude (Matt 13:33; Mark 4:26–29 [cf. v. 34]; 4:30–32; 13:28–29 [“lesson,” NIV]; Luke 15:3–7, 8–10), the predominant use is to refer to a story from nature or human life to illustrate spiritual truth.25 Whether there is one point of comparison or several must be determined from each parable. Common sense must play a large role in such determination.26 About thirty figures of speech and stories, many in more than one Gospel, are explicitly called parables. Of course many other parables are not referred to as such. There are at least seventeen of these and perhaps as many as forty-five.
According to the Synoptic Gospels, therefore, the parable was the most common and distinctive form of teaching employed by Jesus. He used parables not simply to illustrate spiritual truth but to provoke reflection and decision. His parables confronted his hearers with a challenge to submit themselves to the reign of God. In fact, the parables in Mark 4 tell what the kingdom of God is like (vv. 11, 26, 30). This fact must be kept in mind in interpreting them.
24 P. R. Jones, The Teaching of the Parables (Nashville: Broadman, 1982), 14–18.
NIV New International Version
25 C. H. Dodd’s definition is classic: “The parable is a metaphor or simile drawn from nature or common life, arresting the hearer by its vividness or strangeness, and leaving the mind in sufficient doubt about its precise application to tease it into active thought” (The Parables of the Kingdom [New York: Scribner’s, 1961], 5).
26 The contemporary rejection of all allegory is no doubt an overreaction to the ancient and medieval practice of excessive allegorization of the parables. The most notorious example is Augustine’s treatment of the parable of the good Samaritan in his Quaestiones Evangeliorum 2.19. In addition to the obvious identification of the Samaritan with Jesus, the traveler is Adam; Jerusalem is heaven; Jericho is the moon, which symbolizes mortality; the robbers are the devil and his angels; the stripping of the man is depriving him of his immortality; the beating is persuading him to sin; leaving him half dead is the effects of sin; the priest is the Jewish priesthood; the Levite is the prophets; binding the wounds is restraint of sin; the oil is comfort and hope; the wine is encouragement to work for Christ; the donkey is the body of Christ; the inn is the church; the two coins are the two commandments to love; the innkeeper is the apostle Paul; and the return of the Samaritan is the resurrection of Christ! Such interpretation is preposterous, but a similar view was still held by R. C. Trench, Notes on the Parables of Our Lord (1841). The work that did more than any other to put a stop to such nonsense was A. Jülicher, Die Gliechnisreden Jesu (1888). Jülicher insisted that each parable had only one point of comparison and that it was a general moral truth. Contemporary scholarship has accepted the former but rejected the latter because people are not put to death for teaching simple moral truths. A most judicious treatment of the subject is R. H. Stein, An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1981), and some of the above is indebted to his work. (Stein is the author of the commentary on Luke in the NAC.)
James A. Brooks, Mark, vol. 23, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1991), 77–78.
1절) 예수님께서 바다에 떠있는 배에 오르셔서 바닷가에 모여있는 무리를 향해서 가르치셨다. 예수님께서 배에 오르셔서 말씀하신 이유는 무리가 많아서 예수님을 바라볼 공간적인 여유가 없었기에 배에 오르셔서 이를 강단 삼아서 가르치신 것이다.
3절) 이 비유는 예수님의 들으라라는 훈계로 시작된다. 주의깊게 신경을 써서 들으라는 것으로 9절도 이런 의미로 반복된다. 이 비유는 다른 공관복음에서도 반복되는데 마 13:1-9; 눅 8:4-8로 이 비유에 대한 설명이 있는 유일한 가르침이다. 도마복음에도 이 내용이 등장한다.
- The parable begins and ends (v. 9) with an admonition to listen thoughtfully, which shows that the meaning of parables is not always self-evident (cf. the comments on vv. 11–12). This admonitory feature, the place of the parable at the beginning of the discourse, its being the only one with an explanation, and its presence in all three of the Synoptic Gospels (Matt 13:1–9; Luke 8:4–8) and in the Coptic Gospel of Thomas 9 shows the importance it had in early church thought. James A. Brooks, Mark, vol. 23, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1991), 79.
4-8절) 이 비유에는 4종류의 땅이 등장한다.
1) 길가 : 새들이 와서 먹어 버림
2) 흙이 얕은 돌밭 : 흙이 깊지 않으므로 곧 싹이 나오지만 해가 돋은후에 타서 뿌리가 없어 마름
3) 가시떨기 : 가시가 자라 기운을 막음으로 결실하지 못함
4) 좋은 땅 : 자라 무성하여 결실함. 30, 60, 100배의 결실을 맺음
당시의 농사법을 생각할때 이러한 결과는 당연히 예견된 것이다. 그런데 한가지 이상한 것은 좋은땅의 결실의 결과가 엄청나다는 것이다. 고대농사법의 평균 수확량은 많아야 7-8배이고 기껏해야 10배를 내지 못했기 때문이다. 그런데 하나님나라의 셈법은, 수익율은 차원이 다른 것이다.
과연 이 비유가 가르치고자 하는 것이 무엇인가? 혹자들은 이후에 나오는 이 비유에 대한 설명이 예수님께서 직접하신 것이 아니라 초대교회의 설명이라고 말하기도 한다. 만약 이 비유가 하나 이상의 해석이 가능하다면 이 해석에 대한 언급없이 비유를 해석하려고 시도하는 것은 매우 중요합니다. 많은 해석의 제안들이 가능한데 첫번째 얼마간의 씨앗의 손실에도 불구하고 수확의 풍성함이 있다는 것은 그리스도인들이 그들의 실패에도 불구하고 더욱 정진할 것을 격려합니다. 두번째 계속되는 실패에도 불구하고 하나님의 왕국은 마침내 임할 것이다. 세번째 복음이 왜 그렇게 많이 거부되는지, 다음은 이 비유는 듣는자들로 하여금 그들의 복음에 대한 반응을 점검할 것을 촉구하며, 이 비유는 반대에도 불구하고 설교자들의 성공을 보장합니다.
- What does the parable teach? Inasmuch as it is often claimed that the explanation in vv. 13–20 comes from the early church and not Jesus,27 and since the parables are capable of more than one interpretation (cf. Matthew’s and Luke’s varied use of the parable of the lost sheep), it is important to try to interpret the parable without reference to that explanation. Many suggestions have been made: The abundance of the harvest despite the loss of some seed encourages Christians despite their failures; despite repeated failures the kingdom will come at last; contrary to appearances the kingdom has already come; the parable explains why the gospel was rejected by so many; the parable forces hearers to examine their reactions to the gospel; the parable assures preachers of success despite opposition, to name a few.
27 It is interesting that few questions have been raised about Mark’s accuracy in recounting the parable itself.
James A. Brooks, Mark, vol. 23, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1991), 80.
본문을 씨뿌리는 자의 비유라고 말하지만 중요한 점은 씨뿌리는 땅 말하자면 말씀을 받아들이는 대상들의 차이를 강조한다. 중요한 것은 말씀은 소비되지만 그것이 좋은땅에 뿌려지기만 하면 놀라운 결실을 맺게 된다는 것이다. 한사람의 중요성을 말한다.
'성경묵상 > 마가복음' 카테고리의 다른 글
| 막 4:21-25 말 아래 or 등경 위에? (0) | 2017.08.28 |
|---|---|
| 막 4:10-20 씨뿌리는 비유에 대한 예수님의 해석 (0) | 2017.08.25 |
| 막 3:31-35 예수의 어머니와 형제들 (0) | 2017.08.23 |
| 막 3:22-30 성령 훼방 죄 (0) | 2017.08.22 |
| 막 3:13-21 12제자를 부르시는 주님 (0) | 2017.08.17 |