Honestly, I didn't bother to read all of that, Philo."My" epistemology? Necessary discussions like those I've already engaged in here for the last few years?
Do I have to repeat, in intricate detail and ad nauseum that I don't have a systematic epistemology for my faith? Obviously! I only approach epistemology in a more systematic, maybe even foundationalistic manner (of whatever level of Foundationalism is most real and relevant) if and when talking about either science and/or technological marvels ...
... but for Faith, it should be obvious that it's a whole different epistemic game that everyone is falsely requiring to be the same one we'd play when doing science. the problem with this is that IF God is a required element in the whole---and the Bible says He is---then the overall process of any one person's coming to faith in Christ, won't be one that enables us to fully comprehend the process of that faith since some aspects of it are and will remain purposely hidden and controlled by God.
So, as far as the Christian faith is concerned, and very much UNLIKE when any of us might want to build an efficient cell phone, car, plane, or rocket ship (or produce the latest pharmaceutical drug for the supposed 'health' of the masses), we will only, and only EVER WILL be, able to get at something like half of the picture of Christianity all by our own human ingenuity.
So, this is what I've been saying all along, even if I've done so with the allusions I've made to Pascal and Kierkegaard and the Philosophical Hermeneuticists (and some others I haven't yet mentioned; and even if I did, I think most of whom would just get ignored around here anyway .... .... since these epistemic theorists I rely on won't tell us that we can just all cough up the evidential "beef" for Jesus that many are seemingly so hungry for.)
Basically, you just bring up epistemology whenever there's a direct question you know you can't answer. That's all we need to know.
Upvote
0