(January 3, 2018 at 9:03 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(January 3, 2018 at 6:46 am)curiosne Wrote: Sorry for the long delay, been on a break and just coming back now. My reply to your post:
1) Agreed on this. The evidence for existence of the gospels is not in doubt but there is no epistemic value on the gospels existing.
2) Agreed on this but again there is no epistemic value in the gospels being intended as historical.
3) Which witnesses? This is where the evidence becomes more substantial.
4) There is no epistemic value in this. There are many religions and each one has changed many people's lives.
5) I don't understand this. Please explain.
No problem on the delay. I was rather busy myself with the holidays (I hope yours was good).
It seems like you are just saying a lot, that there is "no epistemic value" a lot. I obviously disagree, but this doesn't give me much to work with, unless you are more specific in your critique, or give an example what you might be looking for. Do you think that the testimony of others has epistemological value? Do you think that the study of history has epistemic worth? Do you think we have to have absolute certainty in order to have knowledge or epistemologically valid belief?
Apologies on this, I'd been rushing as well. I'll re-post my answer with better replies.
