[Miss TTU Runner-Up]

For me, in the end, it was just a decision. No sign from heaven, no prophetic vision, no sudden illuminating thought that caused it all to make sense. I still believe in God, because it makes sense to me that some intelligent force caused the universe to be. As for the rest? As in the "Jesus is God, born of a virgin, performed miracles, died for our sins, rose from the dead, coming again stuff"? I choose to believe it and live with the gray areas. I am fortunate to be in a church where questions are encouraged, so that helps.
For most of my Christian life, there was this kind of emotional thing we expected. If you didn't have it--didn't "feel" close to God--it meant there was something wrong spiritually, and it was your fault. Now I know that the feelings come and go.
On the intellectual side, for every argument I might make about the truth of Christianity, someone will have a counter-argument. And some other Christian will have a counter-argument to their counter-argument, and on and on, so reasoning alone won't cut it.
That's why I have come to the conclusion that I have to make a choice: choose to believe the crazy, paradoxical, frustrating, messy, supernatural message of Christianity, or choose to stop wrestling with it and let it all go. If I choose the former, I do it without any proof that it is true. That's why they call it "faith" I guess. I made the choice to believe because, like you, FTC, I didn't want to give up on it all.

[Workin' Mama]

(06-02-2017, 06:12 PM)First Time Caller Wrote: I have been "here" for almost a year.  And even in that short time, when it's so quiet here, I DO see the slippery slope that we were warned about.  I see that most here eventually lost God somewhere along the way.  

I don't want that for myself.  I have little else besides God to hold on to.  But He often feels so far away, like he's slipping through my fingers. I have given up on him before, but somehow he didn't let go of me. I am not sure how long that will last.

FTC, I can relate. A few months ago, my ideas about nearly everything were changing so fast that I felt like I was on a slippery slope. By everything, I mean all things theological and political, and even the meaning of life itself.

Several things have reassured me.

One was a sermon at my new church about Thomas. Yes, the one we always call "Doubting Thomas." Jesus didn't rebuke Thomas for his doubts. He accepted Thomas and showed him grace, despite his doubts.

Another is the quote by (I think) Peter, who said, "Lord, I believe, but help my unbelief."  I really appreciate the candid acknowledgement of doubt here.

Another thing that really inspired me when I felt like I was floundering in my faith was an essay by illustrator John Howe and fantasy writer Robin Hobb. It's not about so much about faith or religion or even spirituality, but about magic and enchantment.

I'll let the article speak for itself.

http://www.john-howe.com/blog/2016/03/15...chantment/

John's writing is deep and intriguing, but if you don't have the patience to wade through his ramblings, you can scroll to the bottom half of the page and read the part by Robin Hobb, which is more concise.

[Dr. Jezebel]

I enjoyed​ Robin Hobb's writing, but I'm missing the connection. Is Robin saying faith and fantasy/enchantment are two sides of the same coin?

[Workin' Mama]

I don't think that's exactly what she is saying.

I think one of her main points is that we can enjoy the benefits science, religion, and enchantment all at once, and not have to sacrifice one for the other.

I think it is summed up pretty well in this quote:

"There is a strong tendency, at least here in the US, to believe that you have to choose. Science. Religion. Enchantment. Take your pick.
  Divesting youth of enchantment is seen as a necessary step in their growth.  .  .  .  why?  You don’t have to give any of it away. I can solder an electronic circuit, go to Mass on Sunday, and cure your wart by buying it from you for a piece of silver. My parents gave me all those things, and never asked that I surrender any of them for the sake of another."

I think that to accept all three -- Science, Religion, and Enchantment, you may have to learn to be OK with some amount of cognitive dissonance.

In modern Western thought, we are locked into the illusion that we can eliminate cognitive dissonance -- that we if we can just gather enough facts and analyze them intelligently enough, we can make our world nice and neat of coherent. We think that A cannot equal B and non-B at the same time. We want everything black-and-white.

Far Eastern thought is not like that. I don't know much about Far Eastern thought, but what little I know fascinates me. I was first exposed to it at a seminar about Traditional Chinese Medicine (acupuncture and related techniques, commonly abbreviated as TCM). I work in the medical field, and my education is based almost entirely on modern Western biomedical science. TCM has been proven in that we know that it works for certain things (such as pain relief), and there are various scientific theories as to why it works (none of which really seem to make sense and/or fully explain it). But TCM has its own theories and explanations. Theories like meridians and "the flow of energy" and "yin and yang" and the viewpoint that disease represents a state of imbalance or disharmony. None of this makes sense to the modern Western mind, and yet there it is.

Interestingly, karate and related martial arts use the same theories such as meridians, yin and yang, balance, and pressure points in order to inflict injury on one's opponent, and it works quite effectively

Now I'm not saying that TCM and karate prove the existence of the supernatural. They don't. By definition, I don't think the existence of the supernatural can be either proven or disproved. I'm just saying that Eastern thought opened my mind and gave me a glimpse of a different way of thinking.

If anything comes close to proving the existence of the supernatural, I think it is the existence of the human imagination and our universal longing for all things otherwordly.

I know that this is way off-topic from the original post, and I do apologize.

Thanks for reading!

[Miss TTU Runner-Up]

Over the last few years, I have thought a lot about how "truth" means something different now than it did before the Enlightenment. In our current thinking, if something is true, it must be proven scientifically. But in the past, "true" and "factual" were not always synonymous.

[Dr. Jezebel]

Really great thoughts here, all. Thank you!

[First Time Caller]

There's a lot of good stuff here. Struggling to think through it all at the moment; it's been an overwhelming few days. I appreciate it though, and I'll come back and read it when I can focus on it better.

And welcome WM. Glad to have you here.