구약 인용의 수사학

Rhetoric of Old Testament Quotation -A Comparison between Christopher Stanley and John Calvin

In this article, we try to compare Christopher Stanley (representing a post-modern voice) with John Calvin (representing a pre-modern voice) in regard to Apostle Paul's use of the Old Testament. Christopher Stanley, depending on Gillian Lane-Mercier's view of 'parodic use of quotations,' argues that the deconstructive and reconstructive act of quoting is led by a strategic purpose to reinforce the authority or reputation of the quoting author. So the author tries to assert power over the audience as well as the source text. To illustrate this process clearly, Stanley distinguishes the audience into three supposed groups of informed audience, competent audience and minimal audience. The effect of quotation is different in force and in manner according to the capability of the audience. Stanley's view, however, does not properly distinguish between the effect of perlocutions and that of illocutions. Or more technically, he does not consider how the concealed strategic speech-acts (perlocutions) operate by means of illocutionary successes, as J. Habermas clearly shows. Paul does not just impose his power (or concealed strategic purposes) by quoting the Old Testament verses, especially over the uninformed Gentile audience. He is very careful about the propositional content of the quoted texts, as he respects the author of the word and so tries to be responsible for both the author and the text. When we examine specific cases in which Stanley's view is applied, we can see more clearly the shortcomings of his view. So we select 1 Cor. 10:1-11 and 2 Cor. 3:6-18 and compare Stanley's assessment of Paul's rhetorical success in Old Testament quotations with Calvin's focus on the scope or consilium of the quoted texts. For Calvin, he is very keen in rhetorical contexts of Paul and the effects of the quoted texts over his audience, but not in expense with the propositonal, exegetical-theological content of the texts. In this way, he examplifies a model of a hermentutic of respect, which includes the respect of authorial communicative purpose, the respect of propositional content of the text, and the respect of illocutionary effect for the audience. In the context of post-modern literary criticism, the issue of intertextuality could be both an ally and an enemy for the biblical interpretation. It could prove to be a help for us if we do not exclude the old voices like John Calvin to focus more on the purpose of God with respect, not just on the human rhetorical purposes.