On Tuesday, June 15, 2004, at 11:40 AM, Carrol Cox wrote:
> Jeffrey Fisher wrote:
>>
>> long post and probably not very interesting to most of you, but i
>> think
>> it's important when we talk about american religion and in particular
>> american christianity to get a better handle on what we're talking
>> about. even those with "literalist" beliefs often don't know the text
>> that they claim to believe "literally" -- and it *doesn't matter* to
>> them, because they *believe* they know it . . .
>
> Jeffrey is describing an ideology (in one important sense of the term)
> rather than a doctrine.
exactly. this is why a lot of the time it doesn't help to argue with them about the meaning of the text (ie, as carrol says, you can't refute the doctrine). BUT . . .
> Doctrines or propaganda can be refuted; ideology
> can only be countered with a powerful counter-practice. -- Carrol
. . . i do find in classes that, while many will ultimately dismiss my points, there are also more than a few who realize that the disconnect between their beliefs, on the one hand, and the text on which those beliefs are ostensibly based, on the other, is a very real problem.
that is to say, i think that you CAN sometimes reach people by pointing to this disconnect. how they deal with that disconnect is a separate question. i think the greatest difficulty is in the context of the conversations.
but i don't want to overemphasize that as a practical program. and i think carrol is more or less right, here. more to say on this, but have to get on to some other things.
j