earticle

영어

Biblical Infallibilism in a Pitfall: A Mommonist Twist of the Parable of the Unjust Steward Moon, Kyung Hwan (Yonsei University) This paper centers around the parable of the Unjust Steward appearing at Luke 16:1-13 of the Bible, which strikes one as approaching sheer nonsense, dangerous nonsense at that. How is it that an unfaithful steward, about to be relieved of his position, wins praise from his employer when he carries out his sly plot to steal more from the latter? Biblical infallibilists would maintain that the Holy Scriptures are divinely inspired from beginning to end and therefore are nowhere spotted with any mistakes whatsoever. It is none of their business how one should wade through a murky maze, grappling with the nonsense quiz just mentioned. The crux of the matter, I will argue, has to do with the agelong practice of taking for granted the 'declarative' sentence pattern of Clauses 8 and 9, when they are really questions—'rhetorical questions,' to be more specific—that are pointed at the steward's unfaithfulness, his mammonist attitude. The interrogative reading cracks the puzzle, sending everything back to its place. What we have here, though, is not merely an issue about 'sentence patterns.' We are dealing with a grave situation in which the declarative reading at issue is being capitalized on imprudently—or rather, impudently—by some churchmen who wish to warrant their own earthly purposes. The 'question mark' that this study unearths and retrieves at the ends of the sentences under consideration hopes to bring to a full stop the familiar sorts of mammonist subterfuge that a careless or mindless soul would habitually and conveniently resort to.