Really? Ok, so I have a few questions, then.
How does your (collectively) acceptance and study of christianity in relation to science and discovery NOT mean that the faith itself is floundering? Not to say that any fewer people believe in it, but the basis of christianity is melting. The very actions of the church in the past and present are hypocrytical and ass backwards. For years and years and centuries the church held a solid stance against the scientific discoveries of the times. Then, again and again, the church was proven in their errors. And then changed. (ie- heliocentricism. witches. evolution. etc.)
One way I've heard of explaining it is that the church itself is 'evolving.' That the scriptures hold the truth and we are only just unlocking some of the secrets over time. But couldn't that also be explained by generalizations and ambiguities? I mean, it says the end is near, AND that time is a blink of an eye and an eternity to God (who supposably 'said' the end was near). Much is told in parable. The abstract will be interpreted different ways by different people in different times. I have heard the argument, 'but how could PEOPLE write something that stands throughout so much time and be interpretable in all of them?' Well, there was also that one guy (his name escapes me for now) who made all those predictions and stuff... very ambiguous and easilly interpretable for many situations. Was he a profit? Was he good with words? Is the church a miracle throughout time? Is it a cult gone out of hand?
And, what I wanted to kinda say before:
So you think that people are on their way to evolving more and more in the likeness of god? That seems a bit self glorifying to me. Like 'I'm the closest thing there is in the history of time to being like God!' or something.
