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.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The purpose of this study is to clarify the evaluation of King Asa’s achievements in the deuteronomistic history. Asa’s achievements are recorded in various traditions(pre-dtr, dtr¹, dtr²) of the deuteronomistic history, and their evaluations are different in each traditions.
First, the tradition of King Asa in the pre-dtr stage of the deuteronmistic history evaluates him as one of the few kings of Judah who acted honestly before Yahweh like David and the first king of Judah who carried out religious reform. Although the historian is very sorry for his failure to completely remove the high places, he finally reported that “his ancestor David was buried in the city,” so King Asa, like King David, was praised by God.
Second, King Asa, who appeared in the first compilation stage (dtr¹) of the deuteronomistic history in the King Josiah era, complements the traditions of the previous era(pre-dtr), which evaluated him positively, and continues to have a good evaluation. Compared to the Chronicler’s history, many parts of the evil deeds of King Asa have been deleted, but the facts are not evaluated, but through short allusions, the positive but regretful actions of King Asa are recorded.
Third, King Asa, who appears in the second editing stage (dtr²) of the deuteronomistic history during the exile, did not rely on God and tried to rely on Benhadad I, the king of Syria, despite his past achievements in carrying out the religious reform task, did not get good ratings by historians. And King Asa’s act of building several cities to defend the country with his own power, not with God’s power, also did not allow historians to evaluate him positively. However, the historian only reports his faults objectively and refrains from negative evaluation of him, so that we can see that the evaluation of King Asa is finished in a very similar way to Solomon’s evaluation.
In conclusion, since King Asa in the deuteronomistic history is one of the few kings who carried out religious reforms, the evaluation of him is very positive and he is evaluated as a king comparable to Josiah and Hezekiah, However, it can be seen that the historian expresses great regret for his wrong actions in his later years and finishes the evaluation of King Asa in a way that records the wrong actions but does not evaluate them.
First, the tradition of King Asa in the pre-dtr stage of the deuteronmistic history evaluates him as one of the few kings of Judah who acted honestly before Yahweh like David and the first king of Judah who carried out religious reform. Although the historian is very sorry for his failure to completely remove the high places, he finally reported that “his ancestor David was buried in the city,” so King Asa, like King David, was praised by God.
Second, King Asa, who appeared in the first compilation stage (dtr¹) of the deuteronomistic history in the King Josiah era, complements the traditions of the previous era(pre-dtr), which evaluated him positively, and continues to have a good evaluation. Compared to the Chronicler’s history, many parts of the evil deeds of King Asa have been deleted, but the facts are not evaluated, but through short allusions, the positive but regretful actions of King Asa are recorded.
Third, King Asa, who appears in the second editing stage (dtr²) of the deuteronomistic history during the exile, did not rely on God and tried to rely on Benhadad I, the king of Syria, despite his past achievements in carrying out the religious reform task, did not get good ratings by historians. And King Asa’s act of building several cities to defend the country with his own power, not with God’s power, also did not allow historians to evaluate him positively. However, the historian only reports his faults objectively and refrains from negative evaluation of him, so that we can see that the evaluation of King Asa is finished in a very similar way to Solomon’s evaluation.
In conclusion, since King Asa in the deuteronomistic history is one of the few kings who carried out religious reforms, the evaluation of him is very positive and he is evaluated as a king comparable to Josiah and Hezekiah, However, it can be seen that the historian expresses great regret for his wrong actions in his later years and finishes the evaluation of King Asa in a way that records the wrong actions but does not evaluate them.
목차
Ⅰ. 들어가는 말
Ⅱ. 아사왕 시대(왕상 15:9-24)의 역사적 배경
Ⅲ. 신명기 역사 이전 시대(pre-dtr) 전승에 나타난아사왕: 왕하 15:11-12a, 14a. 24
Ⅳ. 요시야 시대 첫 번째 편집(dtr¹) 전승에 나타나아사왕: 왕하 15:9-10, 13, 14b-15, 23
Ⅴ. 포로시대 두 번째 편집(dtr²) 전승에 나타난 아사왕: 왕상 15:12b, 16-22
Ⅵ. 나오는 말
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
신명기 역사에 나타난 예루살렘 선택구절 연구
신학과 목회
2016 .11
-
신명기 역사에 나타난 예후 -왕하 9:1-10:36-
신학과 목회
2019 .11
-
신명기 역사에 나타난 단지파
신학과 목회
2017 .11
-
신명기사가에게 요시야가 갖는 의미에 대한 고찰
구약논단
2021 .03
-
신명기 역사에 나타난 여호야긴 석방구절(왕하 25:27-30) 연구
신학과 목회
2015 .11
-
역대기 역사에 나타난 예루살렘
신학과 목회
2020 .11
-
신명기 역사에 나타난 여로보암 2세 - 왕하 14:23-29 -
신학과 목회
2025 .01
-
공공역사로서의 구술사와 지역사
역사비평
2022 .05
-
공공역사가로서의 역사교사를 말하다
역사비평
2022 .05
-
21세기 문명전환과 직업으로서 역사가
역사학보
2022 .12
-
‘공공역사’에 기초한 학교 역사교육으로의 변화 가능성 탐색
역사와교육
2021 .11
-
국사를 넘어선 역사교육
대구사학
2016 .01
-
한국 공공역사 연구의 흐름과 논의 지점
역사학보
2025 .03
-
공공역사 논의의 한국적 맥락과 공공역사가들
역사비평
2021 .08
-
열왕기하 23장 13절의 역사 연구
구약논단
2021 .03
-
한국사 연구와 역사교육에서 정체성과 역동성, 공동체 정신
역사교육
2016 .06
-
공공역사: 개념, 역사, 전망
독일연구 - 역사·사회·문화
2016 .01
-
바빌로니아 포로 시대 이후 이스라엘에서의 제의중앙화규정: 신명기역사서 이후 역사서에서의 제의중앙화규정의 역할에 대하여
구약논단
2023 .09
-
학교에서 학습하는 역사 지식의 생활 맥락으로 전이 가능성 - 중학교 역사 교과서의 ‘역사의 의미’와 ‘역사학습의 목적’ 분석을 중심으로 -
역사교육
2024 .09
-
가족사 프로젝트를 통한 초등학생의 역사 인식 형성
역사교육논집
2015 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2023-230-001478191