인간실존, 초월 그리고 죄에 대한 생태학적 재구성 = 라인홀드 니버와 마조리 수하키를 중심으로

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

As a way of being co-creators of Earth, this paper will reconstruct the classical Christian understanding of human self-transcendence and sin from an ecological perspective. Christian Theology has defined sin as rebellion against God which stems from the failure of self-transcendence in humanity as spiritual beings. This is defined as the prime sin, stressing the human capacity for vertical self-transcendence in the human spirit. This paper claims that this classical Christian view tends to exacerbate and accelerate our ecological problems and then attempts to establish a theological foundation on which we can primarily confess our prime sin as unnecessary violence against creation. For this theological project, this article first reviews Reinhold Niebuhr`s theological anthropology focusing on the following questions: How does Niebuhr explain the dynamic relations between human self-transcendence in spirit and human finitude in nature, based on the psychological structure of human existence? How does he locate the root of sin in human existential anxiety, which is derived from the ambiguous nature of existence? How does the sin of pride come into existence through the path of spirit and the sin of sensuality through the path of nature? And how does he see the sin of sensuality as an extension of the sin of pride and then subordinates the former into the latter? Why does he subordinate nature to spirit and the sin of sensuality to the sin of pride and then defines pride as the prime sin? The metaphysical reason why Niebuhr subordinates nature to spirit is to emphasize rebellion against God as the prime sin by recognizing that self-transcendence is only possible in spirit and Gcd as the absolute transcendent spirit, is only the source of value, meaning and norms of life. Based on the process philosophy of Marjorie Suchocki, who penetrated into the metaphysical reason for Niehur`s subordination of nature to spirit, this paper tries to find the possibility of a form of transcendence in nature. If each existence transcends other existences through its own uniqueness in the network of ontological interdependence of all forms of life, then this ecological meaning of sin with its horizontal and relative transcendence in nature can provide us with the possibility of meaning, value and norms for life in the world. This paper also examines how horizontal transcendence comes into existence in nature. How does Suchocki locate sin in the failure of self-transcendence in the network of interdependence in nature? This failure of self-transcendence in nature results in the destruction of creation. Then we can lay a theological base on which we begin to define rebellion or violence against creation as the prime sin and directly hold us accountable for the detenomtion of nature.