30th March 2012

“Religion, n. A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the nature of the Unknowable.”

Ambrose Bierce1842 – 1914

12 Responses to “30th March 2012”

  1. R J Says:

    a…puke
    b…puke
    c…puke
    d… all of the above

    please choose the answer you feel best sums up the quote
    …….then briefly explain your choice .

  2. Greg Says:

    Religion makes me want to puke. So… D; all of the above!

  3. Andy Says:

    I also like his “Pray” definition :

    “Pray, v. To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy.”

  4. Atheist MC Says:

    Religion, n: The progeny of pride and ignorance, explaining nothing whilst feigning omniscience.

  5. Sinjin Smythe Says:

    The ‘sons of God’ are generally said by those who hold this view to be the godly men of the Sethite line.

    The ‘daughters of men’ are thought to be the daughters of the ungodly Cainite.

    The Nephilim are the ungodly and violent men who are the product of this unholy union.

    QUESTION: Who comes up with this nonsense?

  6. The Heretic Says:

    I don’t know who came with it, but it would have been much more interesting if JRR Tolkien had written it.

  7. poky Says:

    This quote is from The Devil’s Dictionary, a paper published off and on from 1881-1906 and is probably representative of the language of that time. Like all quotes, either is says something to the reader or it does not. In order to make any sense to readers of this day, it would have to be translated into language that is more contemporary. Having done this, the quote makes some sense to me.

  8. Sinjin Smythe Says:

    The Sons of God and the Daughters of Men (Genesis 6:1-8)
    http://bible.org/seriespage/sons-god-and-daughters-men-genesis-61-8

  9. Sinjin Smythe Says:

    Does the bible make sense to you poky?

  10. poky Says:

    Sinjin,
    If I try to read it literally, absolutely not! But if I look for the subtexts or general messages, I often find something interesting. Like today’s quote, the Bible is a product of its historical time, and I have to read it as such. It may have some relevance to today, but certainly NOT as a rulebook as fundamentalists would have it be.

  11. Sinjin Smythe Says:

    Poky what would you offer as an general example? Something relevant to today? I’d be interested to open whatever you offered up with the group.

  12. poky Says:

    In many ways I believe the Bible may be a record of how humans during that time in history fashioned their realities to be consistent with how they viewed what they perceived to be sacred to them. What they perceived to be sacred was based on their interpretations of their immediate realities, such as how their crops grew etc. They constructed deities to explain these realities and set up rituals to appease and influence the deities.

    You don’t have to dig too deep to see how many persons and groups in our current societies do the same things today. The concepts of “God,” “Allah,” etc. are constructs that persons and groups have fashioned to make sense of their worlds. They pray to these created concepts with the hope that their athletic teams will win, their children will be safe, or they will be spared from catastrophic natural disasters, etc.

    When we read the Bible, we are in many ways reading about US, because it is another historical record of man’s experience in the world, but I believe that it has more anthropological value much more than it has historical value.

    It’s really hard to answer your question with just a few words….