예레미야와 바스훌의 갈등의 역사적 배경 연구 = On the Conflict between Jeremiah and Pashur

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study is to show the reasons of the conflict between Jeremiah and Pashur (Jer. 20:1-6) in the light of historical developments of prophecy in ancient Israel. In the Old Testament, the main religious leaders who had maintained the religious system of the ancient Israel, and led the Israelites, were priests and prophets without a doubt. Generally speaking, the office of priests who primarily worked in the temple, was hereditary and consecrated, on the other hand, the prophets who were called by God regardless of social position and origin, would not limit their activities to the temple itself. Ironically, such differences in the activity area mean that the prophets and the priests could share the minimum area that all of them could serve. That area was the temple, because the prophetic activities would not rule out that area.
It is therefore, estimated that the conflict between the prophets and the priest is not unusual. In this study, the conflict between the prophet Jeremiah and the priest Pashur who was also the chief governor in the house of the Lord, was not only a episode caused by the comtemporary political and religious differences in perspective, but also a result from changes in the prophetic system in the end of the kingdom of Judah.
Comparing with similar cases in the Old Testament, Pashur’s beating and detaining Jeremiah, based on the authority of his own, is an exceptional one. In the case of the conflict between Amos and Amaziah, the priest of Bethel(Amos 7:10-13), what the priest could do was to report to the king and only to demand that the prophet leave Bethel. In 1 Kings 22, a similar conflict happened between Micaiah and Zedekiah, but the offensive action against the prophet Micaiah was based upon the authority of the king Ahab.
In contrast, the conflict between Jeremiah and Pashur(Jer. 20:1-6) confirms the chief governor’s own authority. נָגִי ד , one of the components of term, ‘chief governor’ and the presence of prison in the temple Pashur could independently use, point out his authority. This authority with which Pashur could punish Jeremiah the prophet suggests the process of change in the religious leaders’ dynamics that was organized around the temple in the end of kingdom of Judah. That means the formal process of the priest’s accepting the prophetic functions. Such a process can be discerned in the text relating to Asap and his posterity in the Chronicles. In conclusion, the conflict between Jeremiah and Pashur can be understood in the light of the historical developments of prophecy in ancient Israel.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론
• Ⅱ. 충돌의 원인 : 신학적 정치적 견해의 차이
• Ⅲ. 충돌의 원인 : 예언제도의 변화와 그 결과
• Ⅳ. 결론
• 〈Abstracts〉