He was dishonestly portraying my comments as a response to his book. They weren't. I was addressing what James said.
-
-
Replying to @MABOOMShow
But you're expecting him to defend his points at length when he's done this. You need to read the book.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @MABOOMShow
If what he said on the podcast wasn't clear to you & it seems it wasn't. Everyone else seems to get it. Go for the long version.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
I get what post-theism is. I have no questions about it. I find nothing new or unique in it. I find it therefore worthless.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MABOOMShow
And yet you also see that many atheists already do it & said that like its a good thing.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
YES! Which makes post-theism worthless and nothing new.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MABOOMShow
They should stop? You think James claimed its newer than the ppl already doing it?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
No. I don't. He didn't say that and I didn't say he did. I said post-theism is worthless as it offers nothing.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MABOOMShow
Then I suggest you write something explaining why atheists shld stop treating religion as an idea yet to prove itself.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @MABOOMShow
Why they should instead engage with it on its own terms & legitimate it & ignore the psychology underlying it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
If you do that well enough, you can expect someone who's spent three yrs researching psych of religion to take you seriously.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.