Seraphita wrote:
(snip)
As intuitions are personal isn't Barry making a fair point to stress that
you can't compel
others to adopt your view so it's counter-productive to rabbit on about it.
Sure, it's a fair point in a vacuum, as I said. But entirely irrelevant to my
conversation
Re When the Portuguese and Spanish missionaries arrived in Japan and found
that the heathens had no fuckin' interest in what these smelly furriners were
trying to sell them, they *often* resorted to violence. The Portuguese
missionaries occasionally killed people to make an example of them, and
Seraphita wrote:
Re Judy and I assent to the ideas because I have the feelings; I don't have
the feelings
because I've assented to the ideas,
(I was quoting Spufford, in case that isn't clear.)
and Spufford refers to Christians making truth claims,
That contrast between ideas
Barry wrote:
(snip)
But one wonders what Empty believes in that someone who
*does* or even *might* believe such things gets his panties
all in a twist. :-)
One wonders what sort of weird sexual trauma Barry underwent
as a child that causes him to have these repeated fantasies of
people
Seraphita wrote:
Re Atheists, you'll be happy to know, is spelled correctly in the
article.:
Indeed - but only after a reader's comment alerted the sub editor to the
error!
Yes, I understand Francis Spufford's exasperation with Dawkins and co. Of
course, part
of the problem
Second thought:
Seraphita wrote:
(snip)
Yes, I understand Francis Spufford's exasperation with Dawkins and co. Of
course, part
of the problem Christians have with the New Atheists is that they - the
Christians -
have insisted on a literal interpretation for so long that it seems
Nobody's doing that here, Barry. You don't actually read the posts, so you have
no idea what it is we've been discussing. And you didn't read the article
Seraphita and I were talking about. Your little rant is being made in a vacuum;
it's irrelevant to anything currently going on. And not for
