Prompt 1 (A): The human experience and theology interreact to create our understanding of religion while helping us to make sense of the world around us. From people’s experiences, they develop different interpretations of religion and different ways they feel it should be studied and reflected upon. Gustavo Gutierrez and Soren Kierkegaard, although differing in their approach to understanding, maintain the same purpose in reflecting upon the study of theology— to develop a connection between the human experience and the study of theology. Kierkegaard maintains an existentialist view of the world, seeing the human experience and its relation to theology as an uncertain, and almost inexplicable connection. Kierkegaard credits three sources
…show more content…
In general, Kierkegaard maintains a more flexible relationship between the human experience and theology. For him, the human experience is seemingly purposeless, and meaning can be found through God and the study of theology. Gutierrez, on the other hand, has a stricter, more concrete, view of the human experience in relation to theology. When stating that theology should be a reflection of a “clear and critical attitude,” Gutierrez establishes his reflection of theology as a definite and critical view of the world around us. This sharply contrasts the beliefs of Kierkegaard, such that he claims theology is subjective, often referring to the “objective uncertainty” surrounding the human existence and the study of theology. With this, Gutierrez claims theology is concrete, while Kierkegaard states that theology can never be definite, and is in a constant state of change with new objectives being brought to its practice. Despite these differences, both Kierkegaard and Gutierrez maintain the concept that theology is, in some manner, impacted and changed through the human …show more content…
Humans are responsible for sharing their own theology and being open to the theologies of others. With differing experiences for every person, everyone’s personal human experience shapes how theology is presented. For example, Delores Williams rejects the common theological understanding of the Cross as a cite of redemption, as she see’s it as a place of defilement of Jesus. This perspective comes from the idea that Jesus’ crucifixion on the cross often categorizes him as a surrogate, which also refers to the forced pregnancy of many African American women in the pre-Civil War and post-Civil War era in the United States. Being an African American woman, Williams feels connected to these women, and thus her view on theology has been created. With this, humans can also create theology, so it benefits them, corrupting the nature of religion and the study of theology. This is described in Religion—Why Bother, when discussing
With the different views of Kierkegaard and Gutierrez on the relationship between the human experience and theology, it can be determined that, although everyone has different views on this relationship, there is the common concept that the human experience and past experiences do have an impact on the way in which theology is viewed. In this sense, theology does become an extremely subjective matter. However, the study of theology can still be viewed through a critical and examining lens,
In general, Kierkegaard maintains a more flexible relationship between the human experience and theology. For him, the human experience is seemingly purposeless, and meaning can be found through God and the study of theology. Gutierrez, on the other hand, has a stricter, more concrete, view of the human experience in relation to theology. When stating that theology should be a reflection of a “clear and critical attitude,” Gutierrez establishes his reflection of theology as a definite and critical view of the world around us. This sharply contrasts the beliefs of Kierkegaard, such that he claims theology is subjective, often referring to the “objective uncertainty” surrounding the human existence and the study of theology. With this, Gutierrez claims theology is concrete, while Kierkegaard states that theology can never be definite, and is in a constant state of change with new objectives being brought to its practice. Despite these differences, both Kierkegaard and Gutierrez maintain the concept that theology is, in some manner, impacted and changed through the human …show more content…
Humans are responsible for sharing their own theology and being open to the theologies of others. With differing experiences for every person, everyone’s personal human experience shapes how theology is presented. For example, Delores Williams rejects the common theological understanding of the Cross as a cite of redemption, as she see’s it as a place of defilement of Jesus. This perspective comes from the idea that Jesus’ crucifixion on the cross often categorizes him as a surrogate, which also refers to the forced pregnancy of many African American women in the pre-Civil War and post-Civil War era in the United States. Being an African American woman, Williams feels connected to these women, and thus her view on theology has been created. With this, humans can also create theology, so it benefits them, corrupting the nature of religion and the study of theology. This is described in Religion—Why Bother, when discussing
With the different views of Kierkegaard and Gutierrez on the relationship between the human experience and theology, it can be determined that, although everyone has different views on this relationship, there is the common concept that the human experience and past experiences do have an impact on the way in which theology is viewed. In this sense, theology does become an extremely subjective matter. However, the study of theology can still be viewed through a critical and examining lens,