Home Page

Buy a Book

Post a Book for Sale

Motorcycle into the Sunset

Arredondo's Finger

Starving-Writers Presents

The Holey Bible

According to Snopes

The Holey Bible, According to Snopes
Snopes? Snapes? What’s the difference?
Snopes – Deposed - Finally

I don’t know if this is true or not, but I heard that Soaps, or Snopes (whatever) is working on its own translation of The Holy Bible (International Edition). Yes the translation is English to English – why bother learning Greek or Hebrew when one can pontificate freely on any subject or when it is well known that the person was born knowing everything, or thinks they were.

“To begin with, goddesses created. Did the heavens. Did the Earth.” How’s that for a literal translation of the opening lines to Genesis? Oops? Did Soaps use the actual Hebrew language?

It seems that Snopes has as a Prime Directive, to Never, Ever Allow anyone to have any fun. History, believe it or not, is fun. The story, for example of King Henry V’s October invasion of France in 1415 and subsequent birth of the single digit salute, can’t be called. All the eyewitnesses have moved on, but Snopes, in its infinite ability to pontificate, announces the story to be FALSE on the basis of some insulted French Monk attributing the sign of the bird to Caligula or serendipitous use of it by Aristophenes. But no one can remember seeing him actually do it. This allegedly nullifies the proud legacy of the Yeomen of Henry V.

Virtually, all we know about Caligula is from writings of Roman Catholic Monks and they clearly didn’t like him. As a result, Caligula is history’s most defamed ruler of Rome. To attribute vileness to Caligula (origin of the bird) is not surprising, although, I believe the story that Caligula had subjects kiss his middle finger instead of the back of his hand or ring is probably an understatement. If Caligula was as vile as the Church would have us believe, it’s far more likely that Caligula had people kissing the actual fact instead of its symbol.

It is true that the symbol of “the bird” loosely resembles the human male genitalia. It is not true that earlier cultures (Rome and others) viewed this image to be vulgar. The reverse may in fact be true in view of the fact that so many early cultures sprang up (no pun intended) around phallus worship. Most religions grew out of fertility cults. Most fertility cults are rife with phallus symbolism, central to their most sacred rituals. Even Christianity clings to a remnant of that symbol of fertility in the form of the Christmas Tree, the steeple and its unshakable addiction to candles - a phallus with a symbolic flame of life on its end. In context with these religions, the phallus is regarded as a sacred symbol not a symbol of insult or of baseness.

In the days of Caligula and Aristophenes, many fertility religions were still strong in the world. One case in point in Caligula’s part of the world was the worship of Ishtar, a.k.a. Astarte, a.k.a Inanna. So the Caligula analogy doesn’t work. Sorry Snopes.

This writer would like to further point out that the use of the middle finger salute, on the part of the yeomen of Henry V, had nothing whatsoever even vaguely to do with genitalia, sex or vileness. It was a straight forward “in your face” statement of “See? I still have my finger!”

Snopes is standing on its head when it comes to cultural history and many other things as well. I wish Snopes the best of luck and success in their perpetration of the Holey Bible According to Snopes on the ignorant masses. Even God’s Holy Word could use some correcting, I guess. The Snopes Dopes and Snopes Snorters who blindly follow these ex-cathedra pronouncements from Snopes on High are to be pitied, not obeyed. Snapes (or Snopes – whatever), this purveyor of potions and poisons, should be avoided. Instead of assigning the right to think to others, i.e., Snopes, one should learn to think for one’s self.

As an aside, I will mention that I agree with Snopes in their position that the word “Fuck” did not evolve from the word, “Pluck” (pluck yew). That, however, does not mean that Snopes or I am right about that. The fact that Snopes can bandy about cutsey linguistic jargon only means they consulted a phoneticist whose opinion is now well documented as that of Snopes. I’m not offering an opinion as to the origin of the word, “fuck,” because I really don’t care (or give a flying fuck) when or where it originated, but I must acknowledge that Snopes is dead fucking wrong when it says “fuck” alludes to sex. (Trust me. It takes a former trucker driver to be able to use the word “Fuck” four times in one sentence!)

The endless versatility of the word, “fuck,”is rarely used to indicate sex. It is usually a statement of contempt, or “in your face.” There ARE exceptions. I asked a friend of mine if he knew a woman I was curious about and he said, “Yup.” She sure do [sic] love to fuck.” In this case, the use of that word indicated sex but connoted admiration instead of contempt. The expression, “let’s fuck,” generally reflects contempt, usually against the woman, even when it is used by a woman. “Fuck you,” is a clear statement of contempt, but only in English. As an example; in Spanish, I’m told that calling a person estupido (stupid) is equally insulting as the English, “fuck you,” and it clearly has nothing to do with sex. Snopes is wrong, yet again. Any native English speaker, even Snopes, can confirm that this is true. Generally speaking, I think Snopes should avoid fucking with the English language, or for that matter, history.

As a second footnote: in refutation of Snope’s Phoneticist’s opinion. According to Grimm’s Law (pertaining to evolution of enunciation), in Germanic Languages, the voiceless stop, ‘p,’ in time becomes a voiceless spirant ‘f.’ This is according to The Development of Modern English Second Edition, the tenth printing, by Stuart Robinson and Frederic G. Cassidy, University of Wisconsin, Published by Prentice-Hall, Inc. in Englewood Cliffs New Jersey in 1964. CopyRights are recorded for 1934, 1938 and 1954 (a copy of which I just happen to have. It’s on page 29. Read it, Snopes). You’re wrong about the “P.” I have no explanation for the “L”. I agree that Fuck did not come from Pluck, but your explanation doesn’t wash. Don’t try to snow people. Was it Snopes who first said, “When you can’t dazzle ‘em with brilliance, baffle ‘em with bullshit?”
I may have used the technique myself, from time to time, but don’t even think about trying that on me.

P.S. For a full discussion of “fuck expressions” and the origin of the word itself, I recommend Folger’s Encyclopedia of American Slang (if you can find it…) or NTC's Dictionary of American Slang and Colloquial Expressions (2000) (http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3401803884.html )

Good Plucking, old chap.

A Famous Modern "Bird"

Video regarding the versatility of the word "Fuck" (by Monty Python)


Home Page   Buy a Book

  Post a Book for Sale   Enlightened Motorcycle Adventures  Restaurant Reviews