Then I looked at the comments and (not surprisingly) found quite a bit of "back and forth" between people with differing views on religion. Of particular interest to me was a post by someone clarifying the nature of the passage in the Bible mentioning unicorns and a response by someone dismissing the clarification as merely a crutch to help someone grapple with the inconsistencies of their source of faith. I wanted to respond, but instead I decided to post my initial response here to allow it to mellow like I do when I have an emotional reaction to such things. So here, for your edification, is my initial response:
Especially when viewed from a scientific standpoint, understanding the history of the words in any particular translation of any book is important regardless of whether it is religious in nature. Of the dozen or so most popular Biblical translations currently available in English, the word "Unicorn" is only used in the one most poetic of all - the King James Version.Now I will take a few deep breaths and see if I want to post this to their comments section later today.
It's honestly not a matter of sleeping well at all (I have Sonata to help me with that). I welcome open discourse on religion and faith, but if we do so assuming we are undeniably correct and everyone else is hopelessly wrong, the only result can be to thoughtlessly gainsay ideas you didn't bring to the table. This helps nobody.
The bottom line for me is that this site is funny, but it's also pretty juvenile. Literalism in any discipline deserves a healthy dose of humor, but belligerent ignorance can be ugly when professed in public regardless of spiritual inclination. I get it - you think people with religious faith are stoopid. Unfortunately, this site responds to someone else's ridiculousness (i.e. the Creationist Museum) with their own wrapped in the convenient, flame-resistant robe of satire. Like so much humor in that vein, this ends up just sounding shrill and smug rather than truly funny.
No comments:
Post a Comment