"I will take for granted the fact that Lisp is commonly acknowledge to be a FP language, so I will not explain why Lisp is a FP language." Oi. Time to figure out where this is commonly acknowledged (and why Rich Hickey didn't think it was all that common when he made #clojure an FP lispy). https://tilde.town/%7Eramin_hal9001/articles/emacs-unix-04_lisp-does-fp-better-than-bash.html
@eqf00 Thanks for the good reply! "Functional" deriving from mathematics (esp. Church) makes sense, and then I can see how that term could be adopted. I think your intuition about Rich Hickey wanting Clojure "more functional" makes sense. I can see that there are several senses of the term. Calling Lisp functional might be using an older sense of "functional" that predates the OOP vs FP contemporary discussions