nakedpastor: Bible History December 29, 2011

nakedpastor: Bible History




Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Rudis

    Unfortunately, most people stop at panel 2.

  • Rudis

    Unfortunately, most people stop at panel 2.

  • Rudis

    Unfortunately, most people stop at panel 2.

  • Hitch

    I think panel 2 should be applied to everything on the shelf of panel 4. The Jeffersonian approach is quite brilliant. Cut out the crap so to speak.

  • Nena

    I think panel 3 should be applied to everything in panel 4.

    I kind of don’t get nakedpastor. Is he still religious? If so, how does he justify it with all of the cognitive dissonance he obviously sees?

  • I love it! This is sort’ve like it happened to me too. a whole bookshelf is full of superstition books, including those above as well as books on ghosts, astrology, new-agey stuff, astral projection, Nostradamus predictions, and so forth.

    Right above those books are my science textbooks from college (which I reference all the time). After the superstition books are my fantasy novels.

    I think it’s important to not throw away stupid philosophies, but to remember them and why they’re wrong and/or dangerous. When you forget what they were, then it becomes easier to be hoodwinked by whatever stuff takes it’s place.

  • Panel 4 seems quite alright to me, so long people read the books and think about them, rather than leaving them on the shelf.

  • Former Thumper

    Thank you, so it’s not just me.

  • Patrick

    I don’t quite get this one, either.  The “last” panel does not appear to follow the preceding ones.

  • Ha, that reminds me of my first semester of university – the dormatories had bibles in each room. When I moved out, all that was left was the covers, everything in between had gone up in smoke.

  • I was confused at first too, thinking that it’s supposed to be physically the very same Bible in each panel. But now I think it’s four different ways he has related to the Bible as a work. 1, worshiping it, 2, critically analyzing it and dissecting it minutely to shreds, 3, dismissing, “trashing” the whole thing, and 4, considering it as one of several works by human beings on the subject of deities and religion that he keeps as references in his on-going investigation of himself and humanity.

    It’s a very intimate story of his still-in-progress journey. I so love his work because he is so courageously honest and self-revealing. “Naked” is the right title.

    My apologies to David if my interpretation is not correct.

  • In my experience, most people skip panels 2 and 3 and go straight to 4.

  • Reginald Selkirk
  • Florian Blaschke

    Where’s the difference between the religious texts and the fantasy novels? I tend to think of them as a single category: Literature, works of fiction. Just think of it: Bible, Koran, Bhagavadgita, Mahabharata, Hesiod/Homer, Aeneid, Mabinogion, Cattle Raid of Cooley, Edda, Kalevala, Silmarillion/LOTR (which was expressly intended as a mythology for England, just like the Kalevala is for Finland, and is of the same grand scope as the national epics, not to mention how it was informed by Tolkien’s devout Catholic faith). The Bible is a collection of works of literature, both prose and poetic. This is the proper context into which it is to be placed academically. As a historical monument, documenting an ancient culture, there is nothing wrong with the Bible.

  • I separate the fiction books from the religious books by whether they have been considered historically accurate by otherwise normal people.

    That makes those books more dangerous and worthy of close study than books like the Dragonlance series. The later can be read casually, while eating pizza or cheetoes. 

  • That’s the way I interpreted it too. In the last panel, he doesn’t believe the various beliefs anymore, but keeps them for reference.

  • I think that most people look at 4 in the same way he’s looking at 1, putting them on a throne with glowing effects.

    If you take the context of his 4th panel, he’s considering them as non-holy, non-scriptural literary works among the tons that he has on his bookshelf. The first panel is a bible glowing on a throne.

  • Patrick Dunn

    Okay – that’s probably accurate.  The “My” Bible is I think the confusing element, as it suggests a single “protagonist” involved with each “action”.  I was picturing the same book being taken off the throne, cut into pieces, thrown away, then being reconstituted and placed on the shelf.

  • Brian Macker

    Just so long as they don’t act on them.

  • The major difference is that the fantasy novels usually have better characters, better plot lines and better prose. 😉

  • Nazani14

    He’s missing a few books- the ancient beliefs that were the prequel to the Bible.

  • Anonymous

    The bible rose again on the third day! Hallelujah!

  • Pseudonym

    There’s a huge difference between mythology and fiction, though fiction can follow the norms of mythology (fantasy and sci fi often does). You might like to read some Joseph Campbell, who explains it very well.

  • Florian Blaschke

    The Bible historically accurate? I don’t think so. Same for the other collections of mythology/sacred texts. I’d like to know which “normal people” think that they are.

    Not every work of speculative fiction (the lines between science fiction and fantasy are often blurred) can be read casually. (Well, they can, but the Bible can also be read casually …) Your insinuation that such books could never have value as serious literature does not reflect favourably on your knowledge of the genre.

  • Florian Blaschke

    Well, you could simply try to explain the difference in a nutshell, in your own words, instead of sending me to Campbell. If it’s really that huge and glaringly obvious, it should be an easy job. Personally, keeping the examples I’ve quoted in mind, I fail to see the big difference – in fact, I fail to see what exactly qualifies epic tales such as the Ilias or the Odyssey as being non-fiction.

error: Content is protected !!