Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You really believe that is what Chesterton meant? I have no idea what he meant. I do not have ESP, and given that Chesterton is long dead, it probably wouldn't be effective even if I did. All I know is what the text says. > First, if that is true, then how can you so vehemently deny something (the fact of sin) that you claim hasn't even been defined? I deny that there exists a single Fact of Sin that is so privileg…
> I have no idea what he meant. I do not have ESP, and given that Chesterton is long dead, it probably wouldn't be effective even if I did. An author writes to convey information and meaning. One of the main responsibilities a reader has is to find out what the author meant by his words. [1] I don't think one needs ESP or to interview the author personally to find out the meaning he was trying to convey in his writin…
No, it is the responsibility of the writer, if they are advancing a factual claim (as opposed to, say, providing entertainment), to convey their meaning clearly and unambiguously, which Chesterton did not. A reader has no responsibility to a writer of nonsense beyond calling it out as nonsense.