Faith writes:
CAN, but excuse me if I have to say that I find the Flood sufficient explanation for the landscape changes you mention.
Yes, I know. But there is simply no evidence for a global flood ever occurring. Only the a priori demands of literalist Biblical faith can keep the idea alive at all.
And I have no problem at all explaining the fossils and the extinct species by the Flood, and the new "species" by microevolution.
I thought all creatures were aboard the Ark? Am I confused about that?
I see you are using quotes around "species"...do you not take the word to mean animals who only breed with others like them, and not with others?
There are many creatures in the fossil record that are not represented today: okay, they missed the boat. But when you say, 'and the new "species" by microevolution,' are you suggesting that microevolution produces change so great that the changed creatures cannot breed with their pre-change progenitors? If so, what is non-macro about that?
I know you guys think the evidence is there. I don't, and I didn't before I had a reason to "{reject} it out of hand for philosophical or theological reasons." Long answer but the point is no, I'm not dismissing it out of hand.
I understand what you say, but it seems to me that the correlation between your philosophical outlook, your prior doubts, and your present religious convictions remains clear.
Your skepticism is actually a radical skepticism of all science; no phenomena that require more than a human life span to transpire could ever meet your criteria. That you were the person who found the ToE incredible, and that you are the person who now finds a ~2000 year old book literally and perfectly true (even though you didn't before, and didn't witness the events it describes), are certainly connected.
Your current belief required a transcendent inner experience without external proofs; no external proof could ever persuade you otherwise, and no external proof will sway you with regard to the ToE.
But the connection between your early skepticism and your current frank disbelief in the ToE is not Christianity. It is you.
On another note, wondering if the experience of your mother's presence did anything to influence your ideas concerning the supernatural?
I remain agnostic about all things supernatural. I know what rich creations the mind is capable of under the influence of delirium, ascetic practices, drugs, etc. But the moment remains precious to me, whatever the source: she was a source of strength to me while she lived, and, whether because she lives on only in my heart or lives on elsewhere, she was again a source of strength to me after her death.
I suppose which is true matters, but the preciousness remains, whatever is true.