On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Jeffrey Fisher <jeff.jfisher at gmail.com>wrote:
> yeah, it's true, we've had the discussion before. sometimes i'm tired of
> it, and sometimes it feels fresher than that.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Chris Doss <lookoverhere1 at yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>> Jeffrey, we've had the same thread 100 times before. You're not missing
>> anything.
>>
>> Although that inspired vs. actual distinction would go right over the
>> average New Atheist's head.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Jeffrey Fisher <jeff.jfisher at gmail.com>
>> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>> Sent: Wed, March 24, 2010 11:53:00 PM
>> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Americans and the bible
>>
>> i can't believe i've been missing the other thread altogether, and i have
>> no
>> time at the moment to catch up on it in a way to be really helpful, but it
>> really is worth looking at all the data in this link, i think, because you
>> see the split between protestants and catholics on the "actual word of
>> god"
>> question, and very much the same split between born-again and
>> not-born-again
>> protestants. to say that the bible is the actual word of god is a vastly
>> different thing than to consider it "inspired," which allows much more
>> room
>> for interpretation. even the term "inspired" can be construed in a variety
>> of ways, some more exclusivist, but most more inclusivist and pluralist,
>> and
>> even with something like a modern historical orientation.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___________________________________
>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>>
>
>