Yong-mo Yu (1890-1981) was a supporter of religious pluralism in Korea, advocating for a syncretistic conception of God; and for interfaith spiritual renewal, during a period marked by the rejection of these concepts. A study of his work enriches our conception of the 20th century Korean Christianity. The main goal of my dissertation is to first analyze Yu's theological understanding of God and examine it in relation to the three East Asian major religious traditions as well as a Western ontological understanding of the ultimate reality; and second, through such analyses, to discuss the significance and challenges of Yu's pluralistic theology and spirituality. Yu's own definition of God as Opshi-gyeshin-Haneunim (God who exists as Non-Being) is an ontological understanding of the ultimate reality, which is very different from conservative Korean Protestantism's understanding of God. Yu's understanding of God is very similar to Robert C. Neville's understanding of God as the creator in that both of them define the ultimate reality as absolute Nothingness or Emptiness transcending both being and non-being. Yu's understanding of God was also based on the East Asian religious traditions which are Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism. Therefore, Yu defines Christian God as T'ai-chi and Wu-chi, nothingness, and Tao which are concepts that Yu borrows from the East Asian religions. Yu's concept of God as Opshi-gyeshin-Haneunim was formed and developed based on his own spiritual experiences, for example, his experience of spiritual union with God. At the same time, his theological reflection on the ultimate reality also had great effect on his spirituality. In the same tenor, the pluralistic characteristics of Yu's theology and spirituality are the result of Yu's creative combination of his ontological understanding of the ultimate reality transcending various religious contexts and the East Asian spirituality focusing on spiritual discipline to develop the divine power given to human beings. Yu's creative integration of the ontological analysis of God and the East Asian spiritual tradition can provide a new perspective to Korean conservative Protestantism in understanding other religions, and suggest a new type Christian spirituality in plural Korean contexts. / 2017-01-12T00:00:00Z

Systematic Theology, like all other disciplines, are subject to basic assumptions about its first principles, which is determinant for the way the discipline understands itself and does its work. The consequential perception the discipline has of knowledge acquisition and method of research in turn determines its interpretation of the knowledge acquired. The three areas of understanding (metaphysical assumptions, epistemological theories and ethical praxis) together form a cycle that builds the basis of a paradigm. Paradigms are continually present and are by nature developmental. The development from the macro-, to the messo-, and micro-levels in the structure of a paradigm is described through the three areas of understanding, providing a method for analysing paradigms. Using a developmental method of observation (affective awareness), analysis (ontological way of understanding), theorising (a different way of thinking) and application (ethical responsible living) suggests a fundamental reconsideration of the task of all disciplines, including systematic theology. / Systematic Theology & Theological Ethics / M. Th.(Systematic Theology)

Systematic Theology, like all other disciplines, are subject to basic assumptions about its first principles, which is determinant for the way the discipline understands itself and does its work. The consequential perception the discipline has of knowledge acquisition and method of research in turn determines its interpretation of the knowledge acquired. The three areas of understanding (metaphysical assumptions, epistemological theories and ethical praxis) together form a cycle that builds the basis of a paradigm. Paradigms are continually present and are by nature developmental. The development from the macro-, to the messo-, and micro-levels in the structure of a paradigm is described through the three areas of understanding, providing a method for analysing paradigms. Using a developmental method of observation (affective awareness), analysis (ontological way of understanding), theorising (a different way of thinking) and application (ethical responsible living) suggests a fundamental reconsideration of the task of all disciplines, including systematic theology. / Systematic Theology and Theological Ethics / M. Th.(Systematic Theology)