Why are some Christians anti Evolution?

[2PhiloVoid]

Can you give some examples of these “Epistemological problems”?

Yes, I can. There's a horde of them. But, rather than having me spend a lot of time laying out example after example ad naseam, how about you google "Lessing's Ditch" as a starter.

If that doesn't get you to thinking about the kinds of problems we all have to face when reading and attempting to come to grips with the Bible, then you might move onto "The Documentary Hypothesis" as a second topic.

The great thing about these first two problems is that even with these two topics alone, as significant as they both are in and of themselves, we haven't even begun to scratch the surface of the study of the field of Epistemology, with all of its competing conceptual modes and complications that can be found therein.

Anyway, I can dole out more if you like. I just don't think it's going to benefit you at the present moment. I also wouldn't want to simply drop kick you into the Abyss of Despair all on the first outing. No, I'd rather avoid that if possible.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The reception of this will depend upon how a person defines the nature of the term "Evidence." There's a whole field of study for this singular topic alone, with various interdisciplinary implications.

You need to know this; they need to know this (if they don't already). Otherwise, all of this talk about "evidence based" conclusions ends up becoming a form of double-talk for everyone involved.

Evidence isn't a synonym for proof, and all evidence, or nearly all evidence, is open to interpretation.

Just keep this in mind.

Yes I know the difference between evidence and proof unfortunately many evolutionists don’t.

 

[Astrid]

We can. But having "due diligence" implies socially that each person the time, money, aptitude, placement in life, motivation--as well as interpersonal trusts--to study, study, study all that both you and I have respectively studied.

So, forgive me if I give some small amount of leniency to other people, even to other Christians with whom both you and I disagree.

At the risk of saying something comparably obvious, we note
that anyone with computer to post here has access to information.

 

[Astrid]

Yes I know the difference between evidence and proof unfortunately many evolutionists
Providing even one example would
indicate that you know what evidence is.

We very much doubt one will be provided.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Anyway, I can dole out more if you like. I just don't think it's going to benefit you at the present moment. I also wouldn't want to simply drop kick you into the Abyss of Despair all on the first outing. No, I'd rather avoid that if possible.

I appreciate your discretion given my complete ignorance on this particular topic. I’ll give those examples a look if I have the time.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Yes, I can. There's a horde of them. But, rather than having me spend a lot of time laying out example after example ad naseam, how about you google "Lessing's Ditch" as a starter.

Ok Lessing’s Ditch is an atheist approach to determining history and completely irrelevant to the scriptures which is a spiritual supernatural book.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Ok Lessing’s Ditch is an atheist approach to determining history and completely irrelevant to the scriptures which is a spiritual supernatural book.

ok. You've forced my hand, brother BNR32FAN.

Problem #3. What is the actual, real nature of human knowledge?

 

[BNR32FAN]

If that doesn't get you to thinking about the kinds of problems we all have to face when reading and attempting to come to grips with the Bible, then you might move onto "The Documentary Hypothesis" as a second topic.

The Documentary Hypothesis completely ignores the fact that Moses was a prophet.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The Documentary Hypothesis completely ignores the fact that Moses was a prophet.

ok. I agree (with qualification).

However, see my post above.

 

[BNR32FAN]

ok. You've forced my hand, brother BNR32FAN.

Problem #3. What is the actual, real nature of human knowledge?

What do you mean by nature? I think this could fall into several categories two of which I would say are observation and information.

Edit: both of these coupled with human reason as well.

 

[Astrid]

Ok Lessing’s Ditch is an atheist approach to determining history and completely irrelevant to the scriptures which is a spiritual supernatural book.

So you agree that likewise your book is completely irrelevant
to determining anything about such matters as astrophysics,
biology, chemistry, geology etc.

 

[BNR32FAN]

ok. You've forced my hand, brother BNR32FAN.

Problem #3. What is the actual, real nature of human knowledge?

I edited my answer to this question just wanted you to see it.

 

[AV1611VET]

" that are said to have taken place"

Which came first? the event, or academia denying the event?

 

[AV1611VET]

LOL! In fact that snake trick is a good one. I've seen it done in Middle Eastern souks.

By someone standing in front of the highest ruler in the land and using it to make a demand that could very well cost him his life?

 

[AV1611VET]

We can always fault those of sound mind who ail at anything resembling due diligence.

What does the Deepwater Horizon have to do with this?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I edited my answer to this question just wanted you to see it.

Ok. Thanks for the heads up, and I'm going to stop here. I don't actually expect to get into an Epistemological discussion with you at the moment. This excercise I'm briefly providing you is to demonstrate through your answer that you're presently unfamiliar with the field of Epistemology.

That's all I want to clarify at the moment. You also gave short shrift to the first two problems I mentioned and you essentially hand-waived them away without fully understanding them.

Now, I don't blame you for not taking intenstive time to research either of these first two problems in depth. I know that you have to be in a frame of mind to want to research these topics in order to fully understand them.

However, what this excercise shows is that you have a tendency to assume the certainty of doctrines that often accompany the Christian faith. You begin with them as axioms, which in and of itself is understandable on some level, but this causes you to all too quickly dismiss and ignore, to hedge out, any counterfactuals or contrary data. This means that your epistemic position will be seen as being unreasonable by skeptical inquirers, and not simply because the Holy Spirit might be ignored by them.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Which came first? the event, or academia denying the event?

The event of the Flood as recorded in The Epic of Gilgamesh came first, of course!

The deniers of the nature of that Flood, whether right or wrong, came after this.

 

[AV1611VET]

The event of the Flood as recorded in The Epic of Gilgamesh came first, of course!

Hmmm.

I made up this conversation to exemplify a good point:

Shem: What's this trash you wrote, Nimrod; are you okay!?
Nimrod: Don't start on me again, uncle; you've always looked down on us Hamites.
Shem: That's garbage too! You used to be a mighty hunter before the LORD, what went wrong?
Nimrod: You think you Shemites are so much better than us, just because my grandfather was cursed for what his father did to your mother in that tent that day.
Shem: I watched you grow up, Nimrod, and how you used to love the LORD so much; but somewhere along the line you went astray and broke away from the rest of us and went and formed your own little empire. Well ... you do what you want, but as long as I live, I'll make sure my eyewitness testimony trumps your lies.
Nimrod: And what makes you an authority on the Flood over me?
Shem: I was there! Remember??? I was on the Ark ... you weren't!
Nimrod: Oh, that's right ... somehow I forgot ... what with there being no evidence and all.
Shem: [facepalms]

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Hmmm.

I made up this conversation to exemplify a good point:

Shem: What's this trash you wrote, Nimrod; are you okay!?
Nimrod: Don't start on me again, uncle; you've always looked down on us Hamites.
Shem: That's garbage too! You used to be a mighty hunter before the LORD, what went wrong?
Nimrod: You think you Shemites are so much better than us, just because my grandfather was cursed for what his father did to your mother in that tent that day.
Shem: I watched you grow up, Nimrod, and how you used to love the LORD so much; but somewhere along the line you went astray and broke away from the rest of us and went and formed your own little empire. Well ... you do what you want, but as long as I live, I'll make sure my eyewitness testimony trumps your lies.
Nimrod: And what makes you an authority on the Flood over me?
Shem: I was there! Remember??? I was on the Ark ... you weren't!
Nimrod: Oh, that's right ... somehow I forgot ... what with there being no evidence and all.
Shem: [facepalms]

That would be a good point, AV, IF you were a prophet, AND IF it was countering the point I was actually making. The problem is, it's countering a different point than the one that I was making.

Remember, I'm not a full-fledged 'flood denier.' So, the ancient literary essence of some early massive flood or flood(s) isn't my focal point. No, my point is that the Biblical flood account was likely written after the Babylonian flood account; the latter seems to have been written as a counter-cultural polemic against the former, previous account or other similar previous accounts.

Moses (or some writer like him) played the role of 'academic' of his time and place.

 

[Astrid]

That would be a good point, AV, IF you were a prophet, AND IF it was countering the point I was actually making. The problem is, it's countering a different point than the one that I was making.

Remember, I'm not a full-fledged 'flood denier.' So, the ancient literary essence of some early massive flood or flood(s) isn't my focal point. No, my point is that the Biblical flood account was likely written after the Babylonian flood account; the latter seems to have been written as a counter-cultural polemic against the former, previous account or other similar previous accounts.

Moses (or some writer like him) played the role of 'academic' of his time and place.

What is a full fledged flood denier