"But what about the moderates?"

[Vicki Q]

...
"Moderates" within a faith, I would argue, are those who have watered down their religion with foreign elements such as science or personal conscience. These accommodations to modernity and compassion are difficult if not impossible to square with scripture or, in some cases, with the very tenets of the faith...

For example, a Christian might accept evolution but then he/she must explain what the story of Eden was all about. If it was just a metaphor, then what is Jesus dying to save us from, since the "fall" must also be metaphoric. If Eve was a real person, produced by evolution, then how can we square this with the Christian tenet that death entered the world by sin, which happened by Eve. If Eve brought sin and therefore death into the world, how did evolution produce her without death (a key component in the process of evolution). And what are we to make of passages of the Gospels where Jesus expressed a literal belief in a literal Adam and a literal Noah's Ark?

Either the Bible IS the Word of God or it is NOT the Word of God.
Either the Koran IS the Word of God or it is NOT the Word of God.
There is no "sorta kinda" option with divine revelation.
....

I wonder if I might open certain questions here, without wishing to self-apply any labels.

Firstly, the suggestion that 'moderate' beliefs are “watered down” religion. If I believe that a particular worldview that includes non-fundi religion best represents reality, then that is a 'full strength' religious belief, surely. A weather forecast that doesn't include record shattering weather predictions isn't a watered down weather forecast, but a best attempt at describing partly unknowable reality.

The story of Eden is probably the beginning of the biblical meta-narrative of sin-exile-forgiveness-restoration that runs through both the OT and NT like letters in a stick of rock.

The death of Jesus was to enable the restoration of God's creation through Israel and humanity. When you say “death entered the world by sin, which happened by Eve”, you return to a literalist reading that wouldn't be subscribed to by 'moderates'.

Either the Bible IS the Word of God or it is NOT the Word of God....There is no "sorta kinda" option with divine revelation.

Why not? Why is there an excluded middle? The Church Fathers believed that the Bible was true, but it would never have occurred to them to ask whether or not the events 'happened as written'. They were interested in what the truth of the passage was, and that is perhaps an approach Xians should rediscover...