Regarding the meaning of the word evidence or facts, may I refer you to a dictionary as I did above?
The debate around what constitutes evidence, facts and information is ongoing. Specialists in a field will have a greater grasp of information pertaining to that field and are persuaded differently to non-specialists, hence there will always be differing perspectives on what constitutes evidence or fact and how much is required to be swayed thereby.
Having delved heavily into the natural sciences I am persuaded that the highly correlating data from many diverse fields reveals a highly consistent picture .
Is the picture complete? Far from it, but I am significantly persuaded to entertain the prospect that the earth is very old and therefore evaluate the Biblical creation account to see if it can accommodate that prospect.
I am happy to entertain two seemingly conflicting perspective in the effort to find any middle ground should it exist.
I realize I'm late to the party, but I wrote this as a direct response to this article, and so much ignorance within the youtube comments sections concerning videos with any sort of controversial ideas. I'm not on steemit to make money so rest assured this is not a shameless plug to get more upvotes. I'm sharing because based on what you have said, you may enjoy it and be able to add to or critique it if necessary.
https://steemit.com/creationist/@ryeis1/science-vs-religion-you-re-doing-it-wrong
Your slides are classic!!!
Thanks! I admit I was snickering under my breath as I was making them.
Thank you for the somewhat detailed response. I appreciate it. I wonder what your worldview is?
Do you consider yourself a Christian?
Would you agree that evidence can't be anything else than an interpretation, controlled by the presuppositions or fundamental believes of ones worldview?
Yes I am a Christian and I think it would be accurate to say evidence is in the eye of the beholder, but that does not prevent me from exploring for common ground between seemingly contradictory worldviews.
To the Christian there is Biblical "evidence" the the earth etc. was created by God. To the Scientist there is "evidence" that the earth was formed through natural and increasingly more understood processes.
Is it possible that God used natural processes to create the earth and left a record for us to discover through our own effort? We are promised that all things will be revealed, does all of the revelation have to be divine or can some be discovered by or own efforts, like for instance flight and many other technical advances.
I see no "evidence" to refute that possibility besides perhaps a few narrow interpretations of the scriptural account.
I think it is beneficial to broaden our minds, after all we can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Sometimes we should try that intellectually and challenge ourselves a little.
Ok, I see. What would you say is your highest authority especially regarding epistemology? By that I mean, how do you know what is true or, maybe better, what your standard of truth is.
For me learning the truth is an eternal discovery that will continue long after we have passed beyond this mortal sphere.
In the here and now we see through "a glass darkly" and so the truth has many facets, I am prepared to explore all angles since they are facets of the same diamond.
When I learn something new it is both shaped by and shapes my existing knowledge and beliefs.
I can't say that I have a "highest authority" since what I learn from the physical modifies the spiritual and visa versa.
Truth in my opinion remains true and is not threatened by new knowledge but is enhanced and also enhances.
I suppose my standard would be does this expand the understanding or shrink and shrivel it?
I hope you are not bored by my ongoing questions. :) But I wonder, since I know it's impossible not to have a highest authority in matters of knowledge and forming a life and worldview, wether you can see and would admit that you yourself are your highest authority and arbiter of Truth?
I tried to determine your standard of truth, that is by what standard do you know you have gained "new knowledge" or true believes? You mentioned the expanding of understanding, but I'm afraid that can't be the standard of truth. Actually, your standard of Truth is by what you know that you have expanded you understanding via new knowledge.
What do you think of Joh 17,17?
How is the word received?
I don't know what exactly you mean by that question. Do you ask how one personally comes to know what is written in the bible or how it was revealed to the prophets and apostles?
To believe what the bible says about itself is not an act of blind faith as some would have you believe. I have found that most Christians are unaware as to how the canon of scripture as we know it came to be. The reason for this is because it would be difficult for "Pastor Dan" to do a sermon on how the Roman Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon, but, uh, they uh, did put the bible together for us so we could use it to denounce them, A-amen??? Here is a decent account of the canonization process:
http://www.catholicapologetics.org/ap030700.htm