#690 in Books
Use arrows to jump to the previous/next product

Reddit mentions of Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search For Common Ground Between God And Evolution (P.S.)

Sentiment score: 18
Reddit mentions: 29

We found 29 Reddit mentions of Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search For Common Ground Between God And Evolution (P.S.). Here are the top ones.

Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search For Common Ground Between God And Evolution (P.S.)
Buying options
View on Amazon.com
or
    Features:
  • Harper Perennial
Specs:
Height8 Inches
Length5.31 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateApril 2007
Weight0.62611282408 Pounds
Width0.83 Inches

idea-bulb Interested in what Redditors like? Check out our Shuffle feature

Shuffle: random products popular on Reddit

Found 29 comments on Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search For Common Ground Between God And Evolution (P.S.):

u/WyMANderly · 154 pointsr/todayilearned

Bingo. Stephen Jay Gould called this "Non-Overlapping Magisteria":


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Non-Overlapping_Magisteria


As a religious person, I view religion as a way of understanding the meaning behind it all, and science as a tool for exploring God's creation. Science is about the pursuit of truth, and God is Truth. How could there be any conflict? If religion has held some view (generally for lack of any better explanation at the time, as it was with Geocentrism) that has since been disproven by science (done correctly, that is), then what is a religious man/woman to do but rejoice? Knowledge is a good thing. If God created the universe, then to study the universe is to learn more about His handiwork.


EDIT: I just wanted to take a moment (since this post has gotten a wee bit of exposure and because this will be extremely relevant to a lot of the response comments) to suggest a book that has been instrumental in shaping my views on evolution and the relationship between religion and science. The book is called "Finding Darwin's God", and it's written by Kenneth Miller. Anyone use the green dragonfly Biology textbook in high school? Yeah, that Kenneth Miller.


http://www.amazon.com/Finding-Darwins-God-Scientists-Evolution/dp/0061233501


Anyway, this is the book that changed my mind (as a Christian raised with the "evolution is antithetical to our faith" mindset) on evolution. Miller (himself both an accomplished Biologist and a Christian) spends the first 2/3 of the book utterly demolishing every single common argument against evolution. Just... destroys them. "Irreducible complexity", young earth creationism, etc. You name it, he brings it down with logic and relevant examples. Great source for anyone looking for some well-sourced material and examples to bring to a (respectful, let's keep it classy) debate on the subject. Then, with the last 1/3 or so of the book, Miller talks about how embracing science (including evolution, obviously) is actually the only responsible choice for a person of faith. He discusses how the "God of the Gaps" philosophy is really and truly detrimental to belief in a glorious God who created the universe, and talks about how a Christian should not be afraid of new scientific discovery but should instead embrace it.


Anyway. Great book. If I were to list the 5 books that had had the largest impact on my life and views, this one would definitely be in the top 5. Plus it changed my mind on something. It's not often that that happens, especially to pre-college me (I've mellowed out a bit since then). I'd recommend it to anyone, whether you are a person of faith or not.

u/AngelOfLight · 17 pointsr/DebateReligion

Francis Collins who headed the human genome project is one. Also Kenneth Miller, who appeared for the plaintiffs in Kitzmiller v. Dover. I highly recommend his book Finding Darwin's God.

u/astroNerf · 17 pointsr/atheism

If I had to pick one, it would be Finding Darwin's God. It's not the best book for understanding evolution, but it is probably the best book to convince a fundamentalist Christian that scientists are not wrong about where species come from.

u/gomtuu123 · 10 pointsr/science

Biologists virtually all agree that life on this planet has evolved over a period of about 3.7 billion years and that humans and modern fish share a fish-like ancestor (and a single-celled ancestor, for that matter). They have reached these conclusions because they're the best explanations for the evidence we see in the fossil record and in our DNA, among other things. Creationists deny these conclusions because they're not very well-informed or because they're unwilling to let go of a Genesis-based explanation for the existence of life on this planet.

I'm not trying to bash you; it sounds like you have an open mind and that's good. But the "battle" you describe isn't really a meaningful one. The people who know the most about this sort of thing consider the question settled.

I'd encourage you to read up on the subject if you're curious. Richard Dawkins recently released a book full of evidence for evolution. And although I don't recommend it as wholeheartedly, Finding Darwin's God was written by a Christian for Christians to make the case for evolution.

u/octarino · 9 pointsr/Christianity

> I think I'd like to learn more about it.

Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution is a 2000 book by the American cell biologist and Roman Catholic Kenneth R. Miller wherein he argues that evolution does not contradict religious faith.

u/prudecru · 8 pointsr/Catholicism

For your own sake and curiosity, I recommend reading how Kenneth R. Miller argues that the randomness of quantum mechanics is actually how God interacts with the Universe. There's literally no rational explanation for what happens at the quantum level which is why we rationally conclude that it's just meaningless and random. And yet that's how the entire Universe exists in the state that it does - and how every biological mutation occurred in evolutionary theory.

https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Darwins-God-Scientists-Evolution/dp/0061233501

As for your sister, though, she's screwed. She's a liberal and a women's studies major at a secular university. Most people in that demographic suffer from the Dunning-Kruger Effect. She also has strong ulterior motives and you're arguing against her dopamine reward system (living with her boyfriend).

This may help you understand her rather than wasting your breath arguing with her.

u/Capercaillie · 7 pointsr/evolution

Most of the books that people are recommending on here are great, especially Jerry Coyne's. If you're going to read Dawkins, his best for explaining the basics of evolution is Greatest Show on Earth. If you want to read a book by a devout Christian who does an outstanding job of explaining evolution, then explains how he reconciles his understanding of evolution with his religious beliefs, try Finding Darwin's God by Ken Miller. Good luck on your search, and I salute your hunger for knowledge!

u/NukeThePope · 6 pointsr/atheism
  • Why Evolution is True is said to be the "best" layperson-oriented book available on the topic. I haven't read it because I learned this stuff in High School 40 years ago, so this is one of my few recommendations not based on my own reading.
  • I bought The Magic of Reality for my mother and read it out of interest. It's extremely well written, in a warm friendly tone, with lots of pretty pictures and great explanations. It's aimed at kids as young as 12, but it's not condescending or down-talking at all. Very enjoyable for a factual book on science - recommended!
  • As a Christian, you may be interested in this book written by Christian biologist Ken Miller: Finding Darwin's God. Can't accuse this guy of being biased against God! Also a great explainer, considered a classic. It's not 100% up to date but most of the information remains valid.
u/KlugerHans · 6 pointsr/Christianity

Francis Collins, former head of the Humane Genome project.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Language-God-Scientist-Presents/dp/1416542744

Interesting book.

Here's another good one by the cell biologist Ken Miller.
http://www.amazon.com/Finding-Darwins-God-Scientists-Evolution/dp/0061233501/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1427248419&sr=1-1&keywords=finding+darwin%27s+god+by+kenneth+miller

He was also an expert witness in the Dover District school board trial where they tried to introduce Intelligent Design.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zi8FfMBYCkk

u/Rhizobium · 5 pointsr/evolution

Ken Miller wrote a book called Finding Darwin's God, where he does what you're looking for. He starts with young-earth creationism, moves onto old-earth creationism, and then to intelligent design. It's the best book on evolution I've read so far.

u/Deradius · 5 pointsr/AskReddit

> I feel like we're getting pretty close to the end game in this field

Not by a long shot. There were people saying the same thing five hundred years ago. It's incomprehensible how much remains to be learned. Our models of everything - the physical world, the functioning of biological systems, the nature of the universe - are fairly crude next to what actually goes on.

To put things in perspective, we learned what the pancreas does less than one hundred years ago.

We figured out how to fly a smidge longer ago than that.

We haven't even left our own solar system yet, and we (humans, not robots) have only ever been to one body other than the earth.

You carry computers in your pocket now that are about the thickness of a deck of cards and can accurately track your location to within a few feet, automatically order a sub sandwich for you at the touch of a button, and will allow you to place a telephone call to Shanghai. Ten years ago, that would have been witchcraft. Today it's commonplace.

In biology, astronomy, chemistry, physics, computing science, and a hundred other fields I'm too dumb to even know about... we're still learning.

>The synaptic structure of the brain does NOT explain the mind

Note that you're contradicting yourself here - you just said we're 'nearing the end game' and now you're launching in to how much we don't know.

The synaptic structure of the brain alone doesn't explain the mind. There are neurochemical and other factors to be considered.

It's a highly complex processor, and we don't know what we need to know to accurately model or reproduce it.. yet. But that doesn't mean it won't happen.

Be careful you don't fall into an argument from ignorance fallacy here.

>You trying to convince a christian that a quark behaves depending on whether or not its being observed is about as likely as them trying to convince you that you should act righteous because god is watching.

Are you saying people of faith can't be reasoned with? I'm sure there are a few examples, but by and large... I disagree.

>The only two choices are not science and faith, and I hate to break it to you, but all the arrogant little atheists on reddit come across just as closed minded as somebody who really believes the earth was created in 7 days.

I don't disagree that it's not a dichotomous choice. If you haven't read Ken Miller, I recommend this.

>We need to get faith and science back in bed together.

Erh, I don't think it's so much that as we need to recognize that they're independent and ought to remain as such.

u/JourneymanGM · 5 pointsr/TraditionalCatholics

What convinced me of the truth of evolution was hearing a talk from Dr. Kenneth Miller, author of Finding Darwin’s God. He’s a Catholic biologist who not only soundly explains the science of evolution and refutes scientific explanations for creationism, but also believes that rather than conflicting faith, an understanding of evolution enhances faith.

u/doofgeek401 · 3 pointsr/Christianity

Absolutely. Actually, the correct way to say this is “Is it possible to be a Christian and accept evolution?” We don’t “believe” scientific theories; we accept as (provisionally) true based on the evidence.

Most Christians do accept evolution. (and it is “most” in that the number of Christians who accept evolution is > 50%) Here is a list of statements by various Christian denominations accepting evolution: Statements from Religious Organizations, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/vie...

The way that this is done is very simple and was summarized back in 1890:

"Christians should look on evolution simply as the method by which God works." Rev. James McCosh, theologian and President of Princeton, The Religious Aspect of Evolution, 2d ed. 1890, pg 68.

Christians have always held that God has two books: scripture and Creation.

"To conclude, therefore, let no man out of a weak conceit of sobriety, or an ill-applied moderation, think or maintain, that a man can search too far or be too well studied in the book of God's word, or in the book of God's works; divinity or philosophy [science]; but rather let men endeavour an endless progress or proficience in both." Bacon: Advancement of Learning

So what happens when there is an apparent conflict between the two books? Christians decided that in 1832:

British evangelicals wrote in the 1830s that "If sound science appears to contradict the Bible, we may be sure that it is our interpretation of the Bible that is at fault." Christian Observer, 1832, pg. 437

What we have today are some people insisting that their interpretation of the Bible must be paramount. IOW, unless you accept their interpretation and reject evolution, then you can’t be Christian. That’s not the core belief of Christianity. Those core beliefs can be found in the Nicene and Apostle’s Creeds. Nicene Creed - Wikipedia .

They state “We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker heaven and earth” or (Apostle’s) “I believe in God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth;” Apostles’ Creed: Traditional and Ecumenical Versions - The United Methodist Church

Those statements of belief do not specify how heaven and earth was made. Thus, as Rev McCosh has pointed out, evolution is simply how God made the diversity of life on the planet.

So the issue becomes: do Christians want some current people to require an additional belief —a belief in their interpretation of scripture contrary to God’s Creation — in order to be “Christian”?

​

Several of the most famous evolutionary biologists, who made significant contributions and additions to the theory of evolution were religious.

For example Theodosius Dobzhansky (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/...), who actually is one of the fathers of the modern synthesis (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/...) and who coined the phrase "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution". Dobzhansky believed in a personal God who had created though the means of evolution.

Another famous evolutionary biologist was paleontologist Pierre Theilard de Chardin (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/...). He participated in the discovery of Homo erectus in Asia. He was not only religious, he was a Jesuit priest.

Francis Collins, who lead the Human Genome Project at the NIH, and is fervent evangelical Christian, thinks God chose evolution as the mechanism to generate life's diversity, and speaks against Young Earth creationism.

These are just some examples. The erroneous view that religion and the theory of evolution are incompatible views largely stem from a particular flavor of Christianity present in some communities in the USA

But in principle, nothing prevents biologists from believing in God, and there is nothing special about the theory of evolution that denies the existence of God.

I also suggest the following books: Finding Darwin’s God by Kenneth Miller. A Christian (Catholic) and a biologist. Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution (P.S.): Kenneth R. Miller: 9780061233500: Amazon.com: Books

and Can a Darwinian be a Christian?: The Relationship between Science and Religion - Kindle edition by Michael Ruse. Religion & Spirituality Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com. Michael Ruse is an agnostic, therefore his analysis is more objective and more critical. But his result is the same: absolutely a Christian can accept evolution.

u/el_Dookerino · 3 pointsr/exmormon

'------------
TL;DR Sorry about the book review. Check out the linked book if you're interested in a rational and well-thought out exploration of the absurd implications of new earth/creationist theories on the nature of God.
'------------

For anyone interested in further reading on this topic, check out the book "Finding Darwin's God" by Kenneth Miller. (www.amazon.com/dp/0061233501/ref=cm_sw_r_sms_c_api_9o7szbXJJD182).

The author -- a practicing Catholic -- goes through several popular new earth/creationist theories and summarily dismantles them as being inconsistent with any notions of the Christian God's character. A chapter titled "God the Charlatan" addresses the theory that God created the earth 6,000 years ago and intentionally left behind false evidence (I.e., fossils, carbon dating, light particles from galaxies not yet created but still placed midway between their apparent point of origin and the earth, etc.) solely for the purpose of hiding his role in the creation.

This book became an early shelf item for me when it was assigned as required reading in my Biology 110 class at BYU. Like most TBMs, I "knew" that evolution was nothing more than a theory created by mankind to explain away God, but I had never stopped to think through the ramifications of worshiping such a deceitful God.

The author ultimately comes to a "faithful" conclusion that leaves the door open to the existence of a divine being by applying a "God of the gaps" approach to the apparent unpredictability of sub-atomic particles. Although I can't say I'm ready to endorse his theory, my agnostic-but-not-quite-atheist self can at least acknowledge that it is a lot less crazy of a theory than anything else I've ever heard.

Edit: fixed formatting

u/atomicmarc · 3 pointsr/atheism

I suggest you do what you're telling others: follow the evidence and educate yourself. In particular, I would recommend Finding Darwin's God" by Kenneth R. Miller. He's a scientist as well as a Christian and does an excellent job of explaining the details which seem to trouble you.

u/craiggers · 3 pointsr/Christianity

Finding Darwin's God is a book by a Brown University cell biologist who's unapologetically Christian.

u/redsledletters · 2 pointsr/TrueAtheism

>Why not just call your religion Science or Darwinism?

As mentioned before, this really depends on the definition of religion. We need to be able to use this term without capturing political parties, sport team fans, charity groups, or hobby clubs.

Your question creates a false dilemma too. There are millions of Christians who agree with the general scientific consensus and Darwin's theory of speciation through natural selection (evolution).

While a majority of atheists tend to support Modern evolutionary synthesis (not "Darwinism"), there's no rule that demands the odd atheist cannot reject evolution, by positing something like space aliens.

Besides that, do you really want to place science and religion on opposition? To say that the scientist is a priest? Consider which "priests" creates reliable cures to disease. Which "priests" sends men to the moon and machines to mars?



>
I've also made it my personal business to seek out arguments on both ends.

This statement is too vague. Which ends? The existence of god(s)? The veracity of Evolutionary theory? The strengths and weaknesses of the Scientific Method?

Please list the books/topic you're talking about and perhaps readers here can comment better on this subject.



>Anything that's provable. I get it! I love me some science.

Well, that's not wrong, but I think you're pushing this a bit too far. A better way to put it is that for any given number of statements about the world, those with repeatable, verifiable evidence for those statements we can place a greater confidence in.



>
One must choose to believe pretty much all things or basically be nihilist.

This doesn't sound right and reads in my mind as a sloppy statement (and another false dilemma). But I'm not a philosopher, so I can't exactly point out where you go wrong.

As a layman I'll try to at least mention there's a middle ground to be found between absolute gullibility and absolute skepticism. We can grant Fallibilism and move towards creating a system of thought that attempts to filter out statements that are meaningless or false, and hone statements we think are true to better model and predict the world around us.

That's why a lot of atheists appreciate the Scientific Method. Plagued as it is by certain philosophical problems (like induction), the Scientific Method tries to at least reach soundness by testing predictions of a certain hypothesis against the actual world itself.

See Richard Feynman on the Scientific Method for more.



P.S. I'm mostly a Humanist. I say "mostly" because I don't go to Humanist meetings, or tithe donations to Humanist organizations. Their listed values just seem the closest to what I'd describe to someone.

Edit: P.P.S. I think you may be interested in the book Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution.

u/bitfundun · 2 pointsr/atheism

Apart from highschool (No one should count highschool lol) I've had two years of science studies, both from classes from biology to chemistry so I know a bit about both. I also regularly talk to science teachers I've had as well as frequent science forums when I can. For fun I read things such as

“Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution”
http://www.amazon.com/Finding-Darwins-God.../dp/0061233501
This was written by a scientist who is a Christian.

To:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B001QEQRJW/ref=redir_mdp_mobile

Why Evolution is True By Jerry A. Coyne

& then I also peruse news networks because every so often people make claims about evolution which leads me down the path of looking at their sources and how they reached that conclusion :)

So I'm stupid but not THAT stupid lol I just have honest questions that confuse me :)

u/ChristianityBot · 1 pointr/ChristianityBot

Logged comment posted by /u/ThisIsMyRedditLogin at 08/22/13 13:11:51:

> > or how even now basic science education is decried as sinful by many sects.
>
> All this does is cause kids to leave Christianity once they start reading about science on the internet. The evolution deniers are losing their most precious resource - it's young people - by continuing to argue that evolution is wrong. The exodus of young Evangelicals is already starting to leave many Churches looking like old folks homes.

... in response to comment posted by /u/GreyWulfen at 08/22/13 03:52:57:

> Its a nice read and is factual, regarding the beginnings of science. However, as science has pulled back the curtain, and explained more and more of what was supernatural, religion has had to ceed more and more ground.
>
> Lightning rods were against God's power, not they are normal. Earthquakes and plagues were God's punishment. Now they are moving plates and bacteria/viruses.
>
> Look how the claim that AIDS was a plague from God, or how even now basic science education is decried as sinful by many sects.

____

Logged comment posted by /u/ThisIsMyRedditLogin at 08/22/13 13:16:12:

> Was it this one?

... in response to comment posted by /u/namer98 at 08/22/13 13:06:11:

> I don't remember. :(
>
> Not a textbook. It was for a "science and religion" class.

u/jdfoote · 1 pointr/mormon

Finding Darwin's God is an introduction to evolution by a Christian scientist. It's a great option.

Richard Dawkins is also very good. He's a militant atheist, but his writings on evolution are wonderful, clear, and beautiful. The Selfish Gene or The Greatest Show on Earth are both very good options.

u/SuperC142 · 1 pointr/todayilearned

It's been a long while since I've read this book, but I remember this subject being at least a major part of it:

http://smile.amazon.com/Finding-Darwins-God-Scientists-Evolution/dp/0061233501

As a science-loving Christian, this is the book I had always wanted to write before realizing someone already had. There's a lot of speculation, of course, but I remember it provoking a lot of thought, at the very least.

u/WodenEmrys · 1 pointr/atheism

> Creating technology is a biological thing.

>My beard example is by definition an adaptation. You adapt to a cold environment by growing your beard.

"Adaptation, in biology, process by which an animal or plant species becomes fitted to its environment; it is the result of natural selection’s acting upon heritable variation."

It is not the relevant definition of adaption though. You are equivocating. Using 1 word but different definitions of it to muddy the waters. Adapting with technology or growing beards is NOT the evolutionary examples you read in here that you dismissed as mere adaption and you damn well know that.

>The entire reason evolution was latched onto was because people wanted a way to explain life without the need for a super natural Creator.

Another lie, the vast majority of Christians accept evolution.

Even within the religion creationism is a minority position. The evidence led to evolution.

>People want to feel like they don’t have to answer to a higher power like God.

Accepting reality has absolutely nothing to do with this.

https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Darwins-God-Scientists-Evolution/dp/0061233501

A Christian Biologist wrote that. The entire point is that the ToE is compatible with gods and I assume specifically the Christian god.(note: I've never actually read it. [Edit: but I have seen it recommended to people who couldn't reconcile the two]. It wasn't until after I left Christianity and theism altogether that I first discovered people actually rejected the ToE for a literal reading of two contradicting stories in Genesis, so I never had a reason to) On his wikipedia page it lists "Criticism of creationism" as what he's known for.

>You said that there are tons of examples of “missing links.” What are they? As far as I’m aware there are like 2 somewhat viable organisms

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

u/DRUMS11 · 1 pointr/atheism

A book for them: Finding Darwin's God by Kenneth Miller

Miller is a legitimate scientist and science education advocate. There are a few chapters of him attempting to merge evolution into his christian faith; but, it's otherwise a good in-depth explanation for the evolution ignorant.

Also, this.

u/Kusiemsk · 1 pointr/Catholicism

I can't add much to what has been said by others in this thread, but I had similar experiences and feelings to you for a long time from a young age and did eventually get over them. I feel like you need to develop a more sophisticated understanding of both Catholic doctrine and the arguments for it and praxis - let me tell you, Christian praxis goes well beyond "being a decent person" to a wholesome life-view that strengthens you as an individual, as a member of your community, and in relation to God, and is inexorably linked with sound, devout doctrine. I would advise reading some Catholic apologetics or theology to start. Since you're trained in Biology you may find Kenneth Miller's Finding Darwin's God a good starting point. Also, if you're not already, make a sincere effort to attend Mass at least weekly, go to Confession regularly, and following the Church's moral and spiritual guidelines even if they don't seem to be directly related to "being a decent person". It may feel like you're only "going through the motions," but you never know what benefit you might find! The final author I'd recommend is Søren Kierkegaard - let me be clear, his books aren't easy reads and I take issue with a lot he says, but I found his presentation of Christian praxis and ethics (particularly Either/Or) one of the most beautiful I've ever read and I credit him with giving the death knell to my doubts. I don't have the link handy, but Julia Watkin's book on him in the Outstanding Christian Thinkers Series is an excellent place to start if you find him interesting.

u/rhuarch · 1 pointr/latterdaysaints

If you are interested in a religion friendly review of evolution that is 100% on board with the scientific consensus on evolution, I highly recommend Kenneth Miller's "Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution"

He is a devout catholic, molecular biologist, and textbook author. He spends the first half of the book explaining why scientific consensus views evolution as a fact, and why they are right about that. He spends the second half of the book explaining why that shouldn't threaten anyone's belief in God.

I read Dawkins' book on evolution, "The Greatest Show on Earth" and liked it, but I think Miller is actually more convincing and intelligible on the truth of evolution in probably a third of the space. He also has the added benefit of not being an evangelical atheist or a retarded young earth creationist.

u/neveragainjw · 1 pointr/exjw

Hey, well I would expect them to biased towards the Bible, as people who believe the Bible want to support it :) Just as atheists want to tear it down. Do you think an atheist would want to explain the contradictions in the Bible? Of course not, they want to find theories that will discredit it. (confirmation bias, we all have it, I know atheists say they don't but I can see how mad often they are at God, that is a bias in itself.) Perhaps the Bible is just mankind's way of trying to understand God, by assigning him human qualities.

I think this is a pretty comprehensive summary of the contradictions:

http://www.biblicalcatholic.com/apologetics/bible.htm

http://www.comereason.org/bible-contradictions-explained.asp

Ok, I wish I could address all of this but I am pretty new to the subject myself! I just try to keep an open mind and I am always reading and researching. I don't 100% believe the Bible is true, I think I will always have questions, but right now God makes a lot more sense to me than that the universe came into being out of nowhere. I too have trouble comprehending the evil and suffering in the world, but the fact that there IS evil doesn't mean that there isn't a God. A God who can create all this knows a lot more than we do, and maybe he has a much better plan than we can comprehend. I recommend The Privileged Planet (book and DVD) which describes the extreme fine tuning of our planet and our universe.

Finding Darwin's God by Ken Miller is on my (ever growing) to read list.

https://www.amazon.com/Finding-Darwins-God-Scientists-Evolution/dp/0061233501/ref=pd_sim_14_1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=8MWM3P3QW7V54VQ94S6F

https://www.amazon.com/Only-Theory-Evolution-Battle-Americas/dp/0143115669

Here is a good interview, make sure you read page 4 where he talks about the Bible.

http://www.godofevolution.com/interview-with-biologist-ken-miller-part-1/

I really do recommend John Lennox also

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=john+lennox

Have you attended any churches? I've found them to be so very different from the Kingdom hall. It gives you an entirely different idea of what it is to be a Christian and worship God (I find church enjoyable, uplifting and encouraging).