As Chistains (and this a wonderfully informative discussion about an amazing man and philosopher ) , how do you account for the loony evangelical zealot’s insistence that it’s the unerring word of god. ? It all confirms an agonistic view.
It’s a really interesting question! I think that this dynamic a product of the Enlightenment, where skeptics made the case that the Bible needed to conform to modern historical and scientific standards, and many evangelicals accepted that line of thinking. They haven’t abandoned it, which means that even having conversations like this is impossible for many people. Like you, I wish we could have a better conversations about these complex issues. Thank you for listening!
Great conversation, Alex!
Thank you sir!
As Chistains (and this a wonderfully informative discussion about an amazing man and philosopher ) , how do you account for the loony evangelical zealot’s insistence that it’s the unerring word of god. ?
It all confirms an agonistic view.
It’s a really interesting question! I think that this dynamic a product of the Enlightenment, where skeptics made the case that the Bible needed to conform to modern historical and scientific standards, and many evangelicals accepted that line of thinking. They haven’t abandoned it, which means that even having conversations like this is impossible for many people. Like you, I wish we could have a better conversations about these complex issues. Thank you for listening!