“Nonfiction » Religion and Spirituality » Biblical Studies / History & Culture”
Ah, of course. The typical Christian kneejerk that using science as a tool to learn about the universe instead of blindly accepting whatever their 2000-year-old work of fiction says is the same as being closeminded.
FYI – Something is classified as “Biblical Studies / History & Culture” is not the same thing as “Christian.” It could be Kabala Jewism, or some other mystic viewpoint. It could even be a Muslim take.
Are Smashwords’ categories really that terrible? Wow.
In any case, there’s only one religion whose adherents I’ve seen call the modern world “close-minded” for not assuming their spirituality is 100% accurate, and it’s not Judaism or Islam.
Given that Mr./Ms. Wolfsmasher calls his/her book “a delightful experiment in fiction,” I certainly wouldn’t put too much stock in the designated choice of category.
I hate it when people don’t know what they have written and list it under some random category. Well, I may have now divested myself of need to ever, ever read any self-pubbed books again, but it still leaves the problem of Fifty Shades… and Dan Brown listed under ‘books’.
I have read the chapter on two factions vying for the dog catcher’s office, traditional Net-ists versus neo non-Net-ists. Both sides held closed meetings where each stereotyped the other. It was told kinda like a parable, so, yeah, it’s in the genre of religious writing.
From a quick read I got the impression he could have been writing about close-minded sects within a church. Or he was provoking open-ended questions about close-mindedness, stereotyping, factional identity, partyism in general.
Well, at least the author used the correct version of “its.”
But the nom de plume? Yeah, WTF. Really…
True, cats tend to have closed minds. They all know that curiosity can kill them.
Oh, section six is entitled “6. Curiosity Does Something To (what else) The Cat”.
That’s no cat. That’s the wolf that got smashed.
“Nonfiction » Religion and Spirituality » Biblical Studies / History & Culture”
Ah, of course. The typical Christian kneejerk that using science as a tool to learn about the universe instead of blindly accepting whatever their 2000-year-old work of fiction says is the same as being closeminded.
Wow. Let’s leave the “atheist kneejerk railing against Christianity at the least provocation” stuff out, shall we?
I’m an agnostic, actually, but thanks 🙂
FYI – Something is classified as “Biblical Studies / History & Culture” is not the same thing as “Christian.” It could be Kabala Jewism, or some other mystic viewpoint. It could even be a Muslim take.
Are Smashwords’ categories really that terrible? Wow.
In any case, there’s only one religion whose adherents I’ve seen call the modern world “close-minded” for not assuming their spirituality is 100% accurate, and it’s not Judaism or Islam.
Given that Mr./Ms. Wolfsmasher calls his/her book “a delightful experiment in fiction,” I certainly wouldn’t put too much stock in the designated choice of category.
I hate it when people don’t know what they have written and list it under some random category. Well, I may have now divested myself of need to ever, ever read any self-pubbed books again, but it still leaves the problem of Fifty Shades… and Dan Brown listed under ‘books’.
I have read the chapter on two factions vying for the dog catcher’s office, traditional Net-ists versus neo non-Net-ists. Both sides held closed meetings where each stereotyped the other. It was told kinda like a parable, so, yeah, it’s in the genre of religious writing.
From a quick read I got the impression he could have been writing about close-minded sects within a church. Or he was provoking open-ended questions about close-mindedness, stereotyping, factional identity, partyism in general.
Somewhere, Wolfie is looking at this nom de loon and thinking “Bring it.”
*Like*
Oh, wait. This isn’t Facebook.
I originally read “nom de loon” as “bacon”. With Wolfie and a dead cat frying on the sidewalk, it makes sense somehow.