December 07, 2007
by: jovial_cynic

image: genesis decay (cc) YanivG

I've started another section on my blog: theology. It's officially titled "Cynical Theology," because it's meant to challenge assumptions about the Bible in a critical but respectful way. This is a bit of a passion of mine, because I feel that there's a difference between believing the scriptures (which I do) and believing particular interpretations of scriptures, which may or may not align with reality. Aligning with reality bears a great deal of importance if you plan on taking the text seriously -- otherwise, the Christian faith is an arbitrary faith.

So this is a starting point. My current bible study group is trekking through Genesis right now, and there's a ton of stuff that we've dug out that has opened my eyes to new ways of looking at the text. I figure that Genesis is a good place to start here as well.

np category: theology


Preston said:
Hoping to read more of your "trekking" through Genesis and the "Cynical Theology."
December 08, 2007

jovial_cynic said:
Thanks. I'm looking forward to writing it.
December 09, 2007

Wonder said:
I'm looking forward to your take on this...

I'm at the beginning of (what will probably be a lifelong) process of reconsidering how i approach scripture...

I hold the Bible to be True-with-a-capital-T but I take it too seriously to assume that every single letter of every book was intended to be taken at literal face value for all eternity.

and i'm starting to wonder about what's included and what's left out... how did we get THIS bible, and not another one...?

December 11, 2007

jovial_cynic said:
I'll touch more on this in the actual post (I'm in the process of drafting it up), but the key piece that changed everything for me is understanding that the term "scriptures," as understood by the Old Testament audience AND the New Testament audience was strictly the Torah (first five books), the books of the Prophets, and some of the Psalms (David functioned as king and prophet). And those are the book that Jesus quoted exclusively.

That's not to say that we throw out the rest... but rather that we understand that the bible doesn't reference *itself* as a whole book. The epistles in the NT referred back to the "scriptures," as the audience understood the term.

I'll expound more on this soon; probably in the next couple of days, once I get the post finished.

December 11, 2007

Luke said:
Please do Sensei
December 13, 2007

add comments. you are limited to 5,000 characters:

<< your name
<< your email (won't be displayed)
<< your website / location
<< type these numbers: 220079 (plus 0NE)

(html -enabled- / no scripts)

<< Comments temporarily disabled >>

Rules: Don't spam. Don't harrass. Don't be a jerk. Your IP address ( will be logged.