It’s hard to know where to begin with a sadly confused book like ‘The Evolution of God’, by Robert Wright, much less the fawning, theologically ostrich-like, logically sloppy, cleverly arrogant, islam-endorsing NYT Sunday review of it that turns Genesis 1:27 (“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.”), completely on its head.
God has mellowed. The God that most Americans worship occasionally gets upset about abortion and gay marriage, but he is a softy compared with the Yahweh of the Hebrew Bible. That was a warrior God, savagely tribal, deeply insecure about his status and willing to commit mass murder to show off his powers. But at least Yahweh had strong moral views, occasionally enlightened ones, about how the Israelites should behave.
In his brilliant new book, “The Evolution of God,” Robert Wright tells the story of how God grew up. He starts with the deities of hunter-gatherer tribes, moves to those of chiefdoms and nations, then on to the polytheism of the early Israelites and the monotheism that followed, and then to the New Testament and the Koran, before finishing off with the modern multinational Gods of Judaism, Christianity and Islam… [this accepts the muslim view that islam is a refinement of Christianity]
In sharp contrast to many contemporary secularists, Wright is bullish about monotheism. In “Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny” (2000), he argued that there is a moral direction to human history, that technological growth and expanding global interconnectedness have moved us toward ever more positive and mutually beneficial relationships with others. [the 20th century would beg to differ]
In “The Evolution of God,” Wright tells a similar story from a religious standpoint, proposing that the increasing goodness of God [!?!] reflects the increasing goodness of our species. “As the scope of social organization grows, God tends to eventually catch up, drawing a larger expanse of humanity under his protection, or at least a larger expanse of humanity under his toleration.” Wright argues that each of the major Abrahamic faiths has been forced toward moral growth as it found itself interacting with other faiths on a multinational level, and that this expansion of the moral imagination reflects “a higher purpose, a transcendent moral order.”
It’s hard to know where to start with something like this without sounding pedantic or shrill because, premise on premise on premise, it has been built up from so many wrong ideas that it would take pages to point out every one. It also seems clear that the writers are determined to avoid accepting, returning to or humbly learning about any God they can’t understand, describe, domesticate and/or force to conform to their instinctive, intuitive quasi-Darwinian, New Age notions of some vague cosmic life force and a corresponding morality (begging the question of where they obtained those notions in the first place, much less why they are authoritative if God changes or bends to their will.)
It’s sort of like the quote apocryphally attributed to Mark Twain to the effect that when he was 18 his father was a dolt but when he turned 21 he was surprised to see how much the old man had learned in three years… except in reverse. The culture seems surprised by how stupid God has gotten in the last 100 years, not realizing that the irony is on them. God never changed. We did.
It’s hard to know where to begin with a piece like the NYT review unless we look to a passage like Hebrews 13;8-9b and remind ourselves that this phenomenon is not new and that the truth is in fact very simple: “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings, for it is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace…”.
Or if that isn’t sufficient, let’s allow God the last word here, as recounted via the prophet Malachi (3:6-7c), pointing out that if God were capricious — if He were constrained within time; if He did ‘grow up’ and evolve and change — then it would be very bad news for us all, (“For I the Lord do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed. From the days of your fathers you have turned aside from my statutes and have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you, says the Lord of hosts.”)
Well, in response to “Where to begin?” y’all have gone pretty deep. For my part, I’ll just begin with something simple, because I am pretty simple. Muslims claim that they are an improvement upon Christianity. However, they also insist that they are returning to the pure faith and worship of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. One does not ‘convert’ to Islam. One ‘reverts’.
Part of the richness, the fullness, the irritation of my life has been to know and work with people who were rather insecure about their lack of “book-learning.” I have observed them, so many times, construct a kind of schematic of reality, so schematic, indeed, that it was not real. They reinvented the wheel, and this time it was square. I can easily imagine those desert Arabs, on the periphery of a decaying but very, very sophisticated Byzantine Empire, coping as best they could with the climate change of their day, with their increasing poverty, and diminishing sophistication, by robbing caravans and raiding isolated villages, taking heart when they encountered that charismatic bi-polar, with his ideology, and eventually, theology that said, “I’m OK/You’re OK.” Scripturally, we know that’s wrong, that we ought to “test the spirits.” We ought to be suspicious of what the Greeks called “flatterers”. Our knowledge of our own sinful natures and impulses tells us that something like this was bound to happen. Given a human idea of time span, it ought to have happened every few thousand years, this disharmonic convergence of drought, famine, and bipolar affective disorder. Instead, it happened less than seven centuries into the Christian era. Bad luck, maybe? No, bad luck peters out. It does not last. Still, the malignancy of Islam persists. It serves God’s purpose. Their evil is not unique to them. We have plenty of pride and intolerance and violence in our own hearts, sometimes even enthroned in our institutions. So far, however, it has not been the dominant force in our very culture. It’s the foreshortened time frame, and the huge scale, that make me see this as the final act in the Divine drama.
[Re. reverting to Islam, this is interesting from an e-mail correspondent and friend of the blog. People don't realize that once the Christian God is out of the picture, our system crumbles and with it many things we take for granted, including a reverence for the Constitution as well as a reverence for truth. Our confusion and anger about why the latter seem to be falling apart is amply explained by the fact that the former already has. -ed.]
By: Michael on July 3, 2009
at 12:44 pm
And if people must misinterpret God’s actions and misunderstand His commands, they might as well do it in an amusing manner, e.g., this highlight. [author link embedded. -ed.]
“God promised never to erase mankind again but there is no mention that He won’t screw with us. God led the Israelites out of Egypt to the land of cannon[sic], so they could make scarifeces [sic] in the woods. God wreaks havoc on the Egyptians in a fairy tale manor [sic]. I really like interrupting the scriptures in class.”
By: Jean on July 3, 2009
at 11:22 am
I recognized this bit: calling God “tribal, deeply insecure about his status and willing to commit mass murder to show off his powers.” I read something similar in a book about “believers” that gave the most twisted interpretation of The Good Samaritan story. (In a nutshell: The parable is about the superiority of the Jews; it was right and just for a non-Jews to go into debt in order to help a Jew.)
The more I run into those interpretations, the more I think that our own experiences make us unable to see. Ask a child to interpret the way society works, and he might get many things right, but there also would be a broad range of actions and consequences that he couldn’t foresee. The small child might think “I wanna drive the car” is a reasonable request. The only reason he can’t is because his parents are showing off their power over him. They thwart his longing to “Do it myself” because they’re insecure in their power; maybe he’ll drive better than they do!
Even teens do this: Some have an idealistic view of what freedoms they will have, what comforts they will enjoy – until they work long hours in a soul-sucking job to pay rent.
I myself didn’t understand the limitations of our ability to understand His actions until I asked a friend to explain to me something about physics. (His area of expertise.) He tried. I understood the idea of light waves, but I didn’t get the curvature of space. I could have ranted and raved that it made no sense. But it does – just not to me.
[Great analysis, Jean! I didn't really begin to 'get' how God might feel about me until someone helped me to put it in the context of the deep love and deep frustrations I know from being a parent myself... yet another reason why God wants us to be fruitful and multiply. -ed.]
That’s why I find all these coincidences fascinating but not yet alarming. Let’s see how that Papal/Presidential meeting goes. Let’s see what happens next week.
[Indeed. I find my joy increasing precisely when, by the world's rules, it should not be. And when I try and hint at even a tiny bit of this to my non-believing and lightly-believing friends (e.g., "I think we're in for some bad times very soon", the reaction is a combination of horror and withdrawal (the latter to damp down the former). Only Christ can enable us to confront the fullness of what is coming with deep inner peace. -ed.]
By: Jean on July 3, 2009
at 10:55 am
amazing…
[yeah... or at least interesting. especially twelve days before this. -ed.]
By: Vickie on July 2, 2009
at 8:11 pm
Speaking of New York, these clouds over the city were very strange.
[yes. here also. author link embedded. -ed.]
By: Vickie on July 2, 2009
at 5:36 pm
Mat 13:3-9 KJV And he spake many things unto them in parables, saying, Behold, a sower went forth to sow; (4) And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up: (5) Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth: (6) And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away. (7) And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them: (8) But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold. (9) Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.
Mat 13:18-30 KJV Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower. (19) When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side. (20) But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it; (21) Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended. (22) He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful. (23) But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.
(24) Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: (25) But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. (26) But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. (27) So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? (28) He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? (29) But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. (30) Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.
Matt 13:3-9; 18-23 — This shows us the difference in point of view between G-d and man. We see the result, while G-d sees the root cause.
Matt 13:24-30 — Show us something that G-d sees clearly but that we often miss. While we might wish for the ability to change the core of some thing. Remember that tares are called tares because they are empty. In the parable one of the reasons that G-d waits until the end is the possibility that the tares could become fruitful wheat.
By: tigger23505 on July 2, 2009
at 5:25 pm
Re: we are supposed to help with the final harvest
Can’t make ‘em drink. Just gotta leave the water out for ‘em. Its that whole “pearls before swine” and “shaking of the sandals” motif. IMO [in mine too. -ed.]
Agape
By: archangel on July 2, 2009
at 1:30 pm
These are obvious points but they tend to be forgotten. Man has always tried to re-make God into his own image. The pendulum swings much like the one in Poe’s classic, but in this case humanities fools have put themselves on the table. The God made-man has always battled the man made-god and it’s a mismatch.
On one side, the latter has gone through many transformations in the hands of humanity, from an expectant earthly ruler to the hippy-surfer dude with the personality of Barney the Purple Dinosaur. People like the latter because, amazingly, he looks like ourselves, soiled and debased… thus guaranteeing “salvation” and “forgiveness” because we’re not so bad after all. Besides it’s all the same God… right? Allah is Buddah is Vishnu is Jehova is YHWH… its all the same. And so what if Jesus is God, he’ll understand we’re only human right. He was one of us before he got promoted, right? Besides he’s never talked to us directly… it’s not OUR fault. How are we supposed to figure it out, there’s just too many rules. And who said God has to be a man; that would be insulting to women. We’ll just have to call it, the great IT. That’s how it goes, right? So, since we invented it, we can get rid of it. TIME TO PARTY… woo hoo.
THEN REALITY HITS LIKE THE PENDULUM
Man attempts to bring God to our own debased level in the latter and in essence humanity sells itself way to short and in the process diminishes our own value.
Problem is the former LOVINGLY didn’t operate that way. He doesn’t fit in our human notion of what a “divine being” is… or should be in our eyes. His way takes humanity and elevates it to His level. As such, the way is a narrow passage the size of the needle’s eye (the reference is more about the gate in the ancient wall which was really narrow and was called ‘the needle’s eye’ because it was tiny… even if one wants to think of it as a real needle’s eye it works either way). His way is an easy burden, “My yoke is light”… but guess what; its still a burden. The thing that strikes me is that the more humanity changes and tries to change God into its own image… the more I realize things haven’t changed at at all. The wise are still wise, and the fools are still fools. The only things that have changed are the faces.
As the song goes, “same as it ever was, same as it ever was”. I’ve never been the evangelistic type, and I’m not sure I ever will be. Those who have eyes to see and ears to hear realize what has been said by Him and will heed. The others are simply fools and I am fully content at this late hour to leave them in their foolishness.
[nicely done; fools or not, we are supposed to help with the final harvest -ed.]
By: archangel on July 2, 2009
at 10:30 am