지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 저널정보
- 대한성서공회 성경원문연구 성경원문연구 제48호
- 발행연도
- 2021.4
- 수록면
- 151 - 175 (25page)
- DOI
- 10.28977/jbtr.2021.4.48.151
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
ύπόστασιϛ has been employed as a term for a person in the doctrine of the Trinity. Therefore, it is a word that plays a critical role in the history of Christian doctrine. However, in the Bible, this word may be one of the most challenging terms to translate. In the New Testament, this word hasn’t been translated identically, despite its a few examples. Religious reformers have translated this word as trust and confidence, reflecting their theological perspectives.
For an accurate and consistent translation ofύπόστασιϛ, we need to take a look at the conceptual history of ύπόστασιϛ in ancient Greek documents. The fundamental problem in ancient Greek ontology was that the Transcendental Being could not enter the limited individual due to its substantial nature.ύπόστασιϛ resolved the problem in the ontology of this ancient philosophy by enabling a connection between the Transcendental Being and the limited one while keeping the essential nature of the Transcendental Being. In ancient Greek philosophy, the reason why ύπόστασιϛ was able to play a role as a link between the Transcendental Being and the limited one was that the word had the meaning of continuance(Bestand) and existence(Wirklichkeit) at the same time. These two meanings are likely to have been driven initially by different schools. But the two became a unified concept when Poseidonios, one of the main figures of the Middle Stoics, combined the ideas. Thus, the ontological possibility, which means the Transcendental Being keeping its nature could exist in the limited individuals, was made possible through ύπόστασιϛ.
The meaning of ύπόστασιϛ found in conceptual history can be used for the translation of ύπόστασιϛ in the New Testament. In the New Testament, ύπόστασιϛ is employed five times by two authors (2 Corinthians 9:4; 11:17; Hebrews 1:3; 3:14; 11:1). However, ύπόστασιϛ was not translated identically in other foreign language Bibles as well as the KRV. Although sense-for-sense translation benefits the audience’s understanding, the translation’s purpose to carry its original denotation should not be lost. Consequentially, contextually liberal translation poses the threat of misunderstanding of the author’s intention.
Most of all, in the texts of the New Testament, it is important that ύπόστασιϛ was used to bridge opposing points that are difficult to reconcile contextually in the texts of the New Testament. Contrary to the author of Hebrews, Paul used ύπόστασιϛ to personally imply conflicts within the church whilst the author of Hebrews used ύπόστασιϛ within the theological scope. Paul applied ύπόστασιϛ to describe his situation instead of theological perspectives, while the author of Hebrews applied u`po,stasij in the meaning of the theological subjects. The actual aspects of Paul himself in his situation is delicately expressed through ύπόστασιϛ, and Paul prepares lessons and encouragements for the status of the church through this. In Hebrews, the revelation of the existence of God in the present day has been portrayed through ύπόστασιϛ. Hebrews 1:3 has an almost perfect theological agreement with the example used by Trinitarianism, which is the final purpose of studying this word.
Therefore, the fundamental ontological meaning of existence should not be weakened or alienated within all these examples. The translation should be attempted within the range containing the fundamental meaning of existence in line with the context and authors’ intent. The uniform translation of ύπόστασιϛ in the New Testament based on the conceptual history provides the very ground for the interpretation of the text itself and a decisive contribution to the whole history of Christian doctrine.
For an accurate and consistent translation ofύπόστασιϛ, we need to take a look at the conceptual history of ύπόστασιϛ in ancient Greek documents. The fundamental problem in ancient Greek ontology was that the Transcendental Being could not enter the limited individual due to its substantial nature.ύπόστασιϛ resolved the problem in the ontology of this ancient philosophy by enabling a connection between the Transcendental Being and the limited one while keeping the essential nature of the Transcendental Being. In ancient Greek philosophy, the reason why ύπόστασιϛ was able to play a role as a link between the Transcendental Being and the limited one was that the word had the meaning of continuance(Bestand) and existence(Wirklichkeit) at the same time. These two meanings are likely to have been driven initially by different schools. But the two became a unified concept when Poseidonios, one of the main figures of the Middle Stoics, combined the ideas. Thus, the ontological possibility, which means the Transcendental Being keeping its nature could exist in the limited individuals, was made possible through ύπόστασιϛ.
The meaning of ύπόστασιϛ found in conceptual history can be used for the translation of ύπόστασιϛ in the New Testament. In the New Testament, ύπόστασιϛ is employed five times by two authors (2 Corinthians 9:4; 11:17; Hebrews 1:3; 3:14; 11:1). However, ύπόστασιϛ was not translated identically in other foreign language Bibles as well as the KRV. Although sense-for-sense translation benefits the audience’s understanding, the translation’s purpose to carry its original denotation should not be lost. Consequentially, contextually liberal translation poses the threat of misunderstanding of the author’s intention.
Most of all, in the texts of the New Testament, it is important that ύπόστασιϛ was used to bridge opposing points that are difficult to reconcile contextually in the texts of the New Testament. Contrary to the author of Hebrews, Paul used ύπόστασιϛ to personally imply conflicts within the church whilst the author of Hebrews used ύπόστασιϛ within the theological scope. Paul applied ύπόστασιϛ to describe his situation instead of theological perspectives, while the author of Hebrews applied u`po,stasij in the meaning of the theological subjects. The actual aspects of Paul himself in his situation is delicately expressed through ύπόστασιϛ, and Paul prepares lessons and encouragements for the status of the church through this. In Hebrews, the revelation of the existence of God in the present day has been portrayed through ύπόστασιϛ. Hebrews 1:3 has an almost perfect theological agreement with the example used by Trinitarianism, which is the final purpose of studying this word.
Therefore, the fundamental ontological meaning of existence should not be weakened or alienated within all these examples. The translation should be attempted within the range containing the fundamental meaning of existence in line with the context and authors’ intent. The uniform translation of ύπόστασιϛ in the New Testament based on the conceptual history provides the very ground for the interpretation of the text itself and a decisive contribution to the whole history of Christian doctrine.
목차
1. 여는 말
2. 그리스 문헌들 안에서 ὑπόστασις의 간략한 개념사 (Begriffsgeschichte)
3. 신약성서 안에서 ὑπόστασις
4. 닫는 말
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
Biblical Hebrew and Modern Hebrew : How Much Do They Understand?
성경원문연구
2016 .04
-
구약성서 속 작은 자 배려와 그 적용
신학과 목회
2019 .05
-
히브리어 고대 시가의 번역 : ‘모세의 축복’의 서두(신 33:2-3)
성경원문연구
2018 .10
-
구약성서와 신약성서의 관계 : 다니엘서와 요한계시록을 중심으로
구약논단
2018 .12
-
Is the Old Testament Too Old for Christian Ethics?
성경원문연구
2020 .10
-
The Japanese Translations of the Hebrew Bible: History, Inventory and Analysis (Doron B. Cohen, Leiden: Brill, 2013)
성경원문연구
2022 .04
-
Retranslations of Holy Scriptures: Why Keep Translating the Bible?
성경원문연구
2019 .10
-
〈관용적 번역〉의 서문
성경원문연구
2019 .10
-
히브리서에 나타난 거룩한 대화 연구
신학지남
2021 .12
-
바울 서신의 ‘마음’ 번역에 대한 제안 : 로마서를 중심으로 한 의미론과 신학적 고찰
성경원문연구
2017 .04
-
『새한글성경』의 번역 배경과 주요 특징 — 신약을 중심으로 —
성경원문연구
2022 .10
-
아펜젤러의 성경 번역, 1885~1902년 - 서울 번역, 비평 본문 도입, 구약 번역의 선구자 -
성경원문연구
2024 .10
-
구약성서와 인문학 : 역사, 문학, 철학으로 읽는 구약성서
구약논단
2017 .09
-
『새한글성경 신약과 시편』의 ‘역사적 현재’ 번역에 대한 평가와 제언 — 마가복음을 중심으로 —
성경원문연구
2022 .10
-
선교적 해석학과 천국의 서기관: 신약성경의 구약성경 해석에 비춰본 선교적 해석학
주안신학논단
2024 .08
-
기독교 교부들의 히브리서 저자에 관한 논쟁
신학과 사회
2017 .08
-
로마서 12-15장의 바울의 구약 인용
신약연구
2016 .06
-
‘번역문학’이라는 불가능성의 가능성 : 개념 정의에 대한 고찰을 중심으로
코기토
2016 .02
-
번역사(飜譯史)와 번역사 연구의 개념
T&I REVIEW
2016 .06
-
중역과 직접번역의 비교 ?그리스인 조르바의 차용어 분석을 중심으로?
통역과 번역
2022 .04
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0