--- cornel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Mario
> As often, you seem to miss the point being made. I
> asked if, because Gilbert had not personally found 
> the evidence about Hindu temples, he was happy to 
> accept that there was no such destruction?
> 
Mario responds:
>
It would help if you avoided wild claims about
"arrogant displacement" without having any credible
evidence, which you have admitted you do not have, and
then resort to absurd rhetorical questions when
challenged.
>
It is entirely possible that this may have happened
during Goa's deplorable Christian-fascist period,
a.k.a. the Inquisition.  However, it may also not
have.  A temple may have been demolished without a
church being built in it's place.
>
Regardless of how you may want to spin it now, here is
what you actually said to Gilbert, "However, my
understanding is that in Goa, some Hindu temples were
demolished and Catholic churches were built in their
place in a spirit of arrogant displacement. Have I got
this entirely wrong according to you? Are you saying
that it is not acceptable to say that Catholic
churches were built following Portuguese destruction
of Hindu temples as you have not found firm 
historical evidence for such a claim? I regret I do
not have the hard evidence which would be appropriate
as I have been busy doing other things!"
>
Of course it is not acceptable to make such
inflammatory claims of extreme religious intolerance
without credible historical evidence.
>
Cornel writes:
>
> I have come across material in texts and I am sure 
> Gilbert must as well that, there were Hindu temples 
> destroyed for the construction of Catholic churches 
> in Goa. However, I have not done such research 
> myself and do not know how hard is the evidence 
> that I encountered.
>
> I hope you have now understood something quite
> simple that I was saying.
> 
Mario responds:
>
It's not quite that simple when making such an
inflammatory allegation, especially when it comes from
someone I believe is hostile to religion while trying
to hide that fact.
>
The kind of evidence that is relevent here does not
necessarily mean that you have to go and personally
dig under a Church to see whether there was a Hindu
temple there.  Hard evidence includes credible
findings by reputable archeologists and historians and
reports or writings by credible people who may have
personally witnessed such atrocities or interviewed
someone who had.
>
An equivalent of The DaVinci Code would not qualify. 
So, it depends entirely on what texts you have been
reading.  
>



_____________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list.
Goanet mailing list      (Goanet@goanet.org)

Reply via email to