DM: So 'merely' has no purchase does it? That's why Rorty's talk of redescriptions is better than such dismissals.
Your Bible point is interesting. But do we understand the Bible as a bible when we read it as history and literature? Part of its history is its claim to divine status. Is there any way to dismiss someone else who chooses to read it as divine? More important I'd suggest is the right to have a choice about how to read it. So the right I assert not to read it as divine grants the same freedom to another to do so. Do we not need such a pluralist approach to our problems of difference and conflict? [Krimel] While I am happy to grant that people do have a right to read it anyway they choose, I personally find the inerrancy claim ludicrous, pernicious and blasphemous. Or to put a happier face on it: I choose not to read it that way. As for Rorty, others would have to speak to that, I am still enjoying Ecclesiastes. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
