Conflict of interests

I've gone from anti-evolutionist to neutral on the issue. I can now easily accept both evolution and my faith though there are still some kinks in both evolutionary and religious paradigms (such as the flood)that I haven't worked out.But like you said, it wasn't easy for me to be accepting. I always thought trusting in God on faith alone was kind of a cop out and that everyone should believe because there was all this evidence and the greatest piece of undeniable evidence was the creation. I said on this website a few months ago that if I accepted evolution I would quit believing in God. And I wasn't kidding. 2 months ago I finally accepted evolution as a good possibility and consequently accepted the idea that God might not exist as a possibility. It was one of the most depressing times of my life.I questioned everything I believed, which as you said, is a good thing. God sort of allowed my faith, which rested on human arguments to be completely destroyed and rebuilt in complete trust in Him. In the end I've come out of it with a much stronger faith than before, a more humble attitude about what I know, and a greater understanding of the life God has created for us to live.So for me, this experience like all others was good for me. But as you say, at the time when a person is questioning everything they can easily be led astray by arguments against God based on unprovable premises. One of my friends has become somewhat of an agnostic as a result of this. For her sake I'm glad I've had all these debates on here because I would never be able to understand her viewpoint otherwise. What has helped me is to go back and read through the Bible with evolution in mind and see what does and doesn't make sense. I've only found a couple of passages that don't make complete sense, but I've found many more that make much sense. Viewing ourselves in light of evolution is a very humbling thing to accept and helps us see the dichotomy between the physical and the spiritual. Science deals with the How of the physical things, but the Bible deals with the why and how of the eternal things. The Bible is not a science textbook, so any scientific information should only be there to prove its authenticity.Its also helpful to look at the mistakes the religious establishment has made in the past. The Jewish establishment believed the prophecies of the first and second coming of Christ were one in the same. The Catholic church thought the earth was flat and the solar system geocentric... etc...I feel like I'm rambling a bit... kinda tired, but I hope I made some sense.ETA: there's a little book called The Luminous Web that I thought was really helpful. You might want to read it and recommend it to other Christians.This message has been edited by Hangdawg13, 09-29-2004 03:49 PM

Right. Since I'm a fairly scientificaly minded person I thought there MUST be proof. I realize now that there is no irrefutable proof of God, but there are some VERY strong indicators. I could never understand why God put so much emphasis on faith. I still don't completely understand, but I'm starting to see a little of the bigger picture now. I think one reason Jesus told the people to tell no one of the miracle he had performed even though he knew they would tell was to show his desire that the people live by faith. But I don't know... I don't have it all figured out and never will. I guess there comes a point when you finally get enough wisdom to know that you could never know enough to amount to anything more than a clanging cymbal, so you might as well just love everyone. I didn't grow up thinking it was one or the other. I don't really know why I got so into the creationism debate. I guess I liked rebelling against the scientific establishment (and like I said, I still don't believe EVERYTHING in the current paradigm). I guess it was so tantalyzing and exciting to think that it could be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that God created everything. I've encountered a couple of those. What really bugs me are the ones who dogmatically state that their interpretation of a scripture that they are vaguely familiar with which casts God in an evil light is THE CORRECT interpretation. But most of the time atheists are usually explaining why they don't believe in God or why God couldn't exist, which is fine. I have found that their reasons why God couldn't exist are usually based on a simplistic one-dimensional old-man-like character who is bound by the very universe he supposedly created. I think most honest atheists who have understood the argument fully know that atheism IS a belief system. I also find it really hard to get an atheist or agnostic to admit that there is no real external meaning/purpose to life without God. The thought is too depressing. I think she may have regained some faith lately. She was the one who recommended The Luminous Web to me. She said it helped her a lot. I just did a search for it on Amazon and it is about 8 bucks. I don't know whether you would find it in a library or not. Its an obscure short (100 or so pages) little paperback book by Barbara Brown Taylor. I thought it was very helpful when I was doubting everything.

Isn't this kinda what Rubystars has been talking about? Now you sound like the fundies you so hate. The "I feel sorry for you cuz yer going to hell" kinda thing. I have.

Thanks for your reply. This, I think I agree with. This is the message of Job. Right. I should strike "system" from my statement. However, our beliefs relating to God do have a large impact on our worldview. ...but it's not like that. I had a big debate with Holmes about this. I had to admit that temporary meaning can be found within life, but Holmes had to admit that there is no overall lasting external meaning to life without God. ...And if you've ever lived through the average person's share of misery, sorrow, and oppression you might not think the internal meanings of life make life worth living. ...And I feel like I'm spinning this a little off topic here. We probably shouldn't start this debate up again.