On the subject of evolution, the science vs religion debate is a deeply
polarized one. However, there was not always this schism between the two. Unfortunately today the more man grapples with trying to understand even a fraction of the cosmos he seems to get no further from the rather basic ‘Is there a God or not?’ debate. A more saner debate may be “This universe is amazing and we seem not really to be able to understand it but lets keep our hearts and minds open” – discuss.
Examining something very complicated and still coming away with the conclusion that we cannot understand it does not mean it has no creator. Rather it is better to realise we have limited capacity to understand things that are by their nature, much bigger than us with our empiric methodologies.
Maybe we do not have the appropriate devices to see God, as we are not looking through the eyes of faith, but merely a blunt microscope?
Why then do we still then expect to see Maha-Vishnu at the heart of the atom – using only these crude instruments?
I guess, the theory of evolution is half right but this is where it is dangerous. As Mary Midgley pointed out in her excellent book ‘Evolution as a Religion’ where she calls the theory “an inert piece of theoretical science”, the elevation of this theory into the domain of canonical fact has obscured some of the real issues.
Personally I believe in God, and I also believe in evolution. in the sense that life does, in a general sense, progress and move forward. However when we talk of evlotion we are talking about the evolution of what?
Is it mere atoms or dead matter?
There is no place for the eternal soul in this scientific evolutionary equation but the soul is what is actually missing from this equation. As an aside many scientists seem to want to push God out of the equation and fill that gap with themselves.
This is modern scientific atheism. Everything that is created in this world has a designer or architect. Cars, computers, operating systems and planes don’t make themselves. It is therefore sensible to abstract this knowledge out by saying that this observed logic can also apply to our universe and everything in it. Even more so when science shows us just how complex, elegant and astounding our world is. It is therefore more reasonable to say we don’t understand the architect, rather than there is no architect.
As a final note. I also don’t believe that the architect left us abandoned in this world with no clue of who he is or how to get back to him. But each buys in the market in accordance to what he can afford. We must therefore with faith move from baby infants before higher things can be understood. The state of our world is surely a plain indication of just what class mankind is currently in.
This post was sent to the Pat Kenny show during March 2008 in response to a discussion on this topic.
[Please note that I generally view doing this kind of thing as the premature onset of middle age.]
11 Comments
i am gonna show this to my friend, guy
this is great dude major kudos but i wonder what do you mean when you say i believe in God and evolution? are you talking or micro or macro evolution?
@Jeff:
I don’t really know what the terms micro or macro evolution mean. What I mean is that I don’t see a dissonance between the existence of God and the idea of life being in a state of constant evolution. I just don’t believe that our creation was a random accident, or to put it another way; that we live in a merely mechanistic universe, though in many ways nature seems like a machine.
However, everything rests on consciousness, all life is conscious in some way. So before this universe there was consciousness. I believe that this is divine consciousness and this source is the architect of all that is. I also believe that he is a person.
Our capacity to understand these things is limited but we do have /some/ capacity to do this. This is the boon of a human birth as other animals do not have this ability. Therefore our energy to some degree must be put to this task to make best use of the opportunity we have been given.
One of my problems with theoretical evolution (as an ideology) is that it does not satisfactorily explain consciousness. Its existence, source etc. We talk about life just somehow evolving and improving, but how? On a cellular level? Is all life sharing a collective knowledge that informs how it should develop, and if so how does this happen? Why does this happen?
Lets set the bar a little higher rather than using poor reductionist logic to take on a world view that is mechanistic, devoid of compassion (as this is an aberration in the framework of theoretical evolution) and does not fit with the wider harmony that we can see in nature. I have a sense that true picture is rather more beautiful, if the patterns in nature are to be believed or indeed the finer sensibilities of the human heart are to be listened to.
Or are they only an accident?
Maybe we aren’t conscious enough to prove what we believe, so maybe we shouldn’t believe at all.
Somehow i missed the point. Probably lost in translation
Anyway … nice blog to visit.
cheers, Chest!!!
To Josh:
I think what you have said about your beliefs is valid and you have every right to belief what you do. I am not writing this to argue or PROVE that I am right, I too have a belief though. My belief is in science, and I think it is a beautiful thing just as you think your creation to be beautiful. I only ask that you take an evolution course to understand better how science explains evolution before you judge.
Thank you
I’m amazed at how naive people are who believe religion. They think that they are going to heaven and (sit around little white clouds in heaven – - – and do what?) Where are all the dead people doing – playing harps — sitting on Little clouds singing and playing harps all day? It’s all a fantasy!
Wtth all this going on for eternity.
How can anyone not looking out into a clear night sky and not see the vastmess of the universe. The vastness of space and space of Earth
I find the PBS program (Evolution/change/deep/index.index.html.) very puts a graphic picture of the ecolution of the species and that led to man. It shows a very graphic illustrations
I think that is so hard tor most poiple to understand the enormas amout of time that has occurred from 4.6 Billion years since the beging. If this time were compressed into a 12 hour clock it gives it a special perspective.
Formation of EARTH began at 12 Noon – 4.8 Billion years ago – - – Noon
Life begins in the form Bacteria at 3.5 Billion Years ago – - – - – - – 3:40
Multi-Celled plants and animals appear at 1 Billion years ago – - – -9:24
Crustaceans appear at . . . . . . . . . . 650 Million years ago – - – - -2:48
Insects appear at . . . . . . . . . . . . 380 Million years ago – - – - 11:00
Reptiles appear at . . . . . . . . . . . 340 Million years ago – - – - 11:07
Mammals appear at . . . . . . . . . . 213 Million years ago – - – - 11:27
Humans appear at . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Million years ago – - – - 11:59:41
Religion appears at . . . about 2 Thousand years ago – 11:59:59.9999996
All of the above information, except religion, has been proven through scientific research. There is, however, no scientific evidence to support religion, plus it occupies and extremely small portion of time commpared to the age of Earth. It is my opinion that religion is based in the fear of the unknown and fantasies.
@John C Burritt:
Thanks for the post. I can’t vouch for going to heaven or sitting around on little clouds for eternity but I find it very interesting that you describe the above cycle of time and then outline an evolutionary ontology (sic). This cycle of time is indeed vast but lets expand your idea and compare it to a different viewpoint, the Vedic conception.
The Vedic conception also provides a cyclic chronological frame that is vast in scope and actually, on closer examination, quite similar to the traditional western Judeo Christian view of creation but for the purpose of illustration lets consider them for now as separate. In this Vedic ontology the universe has been created by a personality called Lord Brahma. His has both a day and night, like us that are in a relative sense the same, but in terms of time are vastly different. Each of his ‘days’ are according to Vedic calculation approximately 4.32 billion of our years. On of these ‘days’ of Brahma is known as a Kalpa, During this time partial creation and destruction takes place. Therefore in this conception the day and night of the Gods operate in a vastly superior time frame that the Vedic conception is quite explicit about. Note that his night is also equally long.
According to the Vedic conception the duration of the life of Lord Brahma, is 100 solar years, which is approximately 36,000 of these Kalpas, this translates to roughly 311 trillion of our years. Then then he also dies. Lord Brahma is traditionally depicted as an old man with a beard, which may sound familiar.
I am outlining this (as I find it interesting) to illustrate a separate and distinct model. This is also a very old conception which posits that actually all things came from him (as the first created person, though he also in turn, has a creator, but that’s a discussion for another day). Lord Brahma is also described as the most intelligent being in the universe and all Arts and Science come originally from him, so the traditional evolutionary view of intelligence or human consciousness as being developed gradually as we raised ourselves (somehow) from the slime, it very much challenged by the Vedic conception. It’s a complete reversal actually.
This conception of time is nicely illustrated on Michael Cremos website, (I also highly recommend his books ‘Human Devolution’ and ‘Forbidden Archeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race’), and even Wikipedia gives a nice overview of this conception of Vedic time as a logarithmic scale. [1] [2] [3] [4]
[1] http://www.mcremo.com/vedic.htm
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_units_of_measurement
[3] http://www.humandevolution.com/
[4] http://www.forbiddenarcheology.com/
@anthropology major:
Thanks for the post. I am also very interested in Science and I consider my own inner evolution to not be exclusivly to based on faith, but also on logic, scientific reasoning and parsing the combined work of great thinkers, artists and seekers. As far as an evolutionary course goes, I am pretty familiar with this model. It’s very hard to escape! It does however require as much of a leap of faith to believe it as the idea of a Divine higher consciouness. I guess that is the point I am making.
What is interesting is when you come across confounding variables, or disruptive data that does not fit neatly into the evolutionary model, such as possible evidence for the antiquity of man that goes back to hundreds and thousands of years. In fact there may be much of this this that is actively discredited, filtered out and even destroyed if it challenges the current evolutionary mantra too much. The current scientific edifice has too much to loose, but at what cost should it be maintained if it is wrong?
Religion and Evolution does not matter. Here is what matters.
In 1973 the world’s population was 3.9 Billion people. In 2009 the world’s population is 6.8 Billion people. Experts predict that by the year 2050 the world’s population will be 9.1 Billion people. As you can clearly see the population is constantly increasing. Japan has already cut their people back to one child per family. And even then their population will still continue to increase. If there’s poverty, starvation, global warming and a hole in the ozone layer now, what do you think it will be like in 500 years? In the future the entire earth will be nothing but one big giant New York City. Your generations will cross the entire United States without seeing a single blade of grass or a tree. When this happens and the ozone layer is completely gone your generations are going to suffer hell like they’ve never suffered hell before. In the future on Christmas Day your generations will have a human body on the table for food because there won’t be anythingelse to eat. They will resort to cannibalism to survive. If you don’t want this to happen then I suggest that you stop creating and tell your children when they grow up not to create. Save your generations from pain and misery by not creating them. I am 100% sure they will appreciate not being created. Spread this message to the entire world. JC
http://eptiler.blogspot.com/ check this out, LoL
)
One Trackback/Pingback
[...] The ’survival instinct’ appears to have originated from human misconceptions about evolution, where they think that the prime motivation of evolution is to produce ’survivors’ and [...]