The Evolution of God?

Op-Ed Columnist - The Religious Wars - NYTimes.com: "This year is different, with a crop of books that are less combative and more thoughtful. One of these is “The Evolution of God,” by Robert Wright, who explores how religions have changed — improved — over the millennia. He notes that God, as perceived by humans, has mellowed from the capricious warlord sometimes depicted in the Old Testament who periodically orders genocides."

As I wish you a Happy Thanksgiving, I conclude, not so surprisingly, that others also concern themselves with the possible improvement of God. This sounds strange, but I am of course talking about our conception of God. As we celebrate the 150 year anniversary of Darwin's The Origin of Species I guess calling it "the evolution of God" is alright.

As I have discussed elsewhere, I argue for a change to a non-personal God concept for the reason that the earlier versions of God change as our knowledge of social psychology improves. I want to leave the dualism of Descartes behind and bring God with me into the materialistic realm. This solves the debate of faith versus science. Science is the way we search for God or Nature.

Using a non-personal God, however, leaves the problem of the way most people interact with God in for example prayer. Social media is of course a development that takes care of some of the need we have to relate to others and health care and social services takes care of the needs the church has traditionally performed and which have been cornerstones of the rituals. The Japanese are forefront in developing robots that will serve as companions of the same demand free nature. They are aided in this by their native Shinto faith. It is of course possible to pray before a non-personal God.

Another function that probably is undergoing a change is that of the priest. Such functionaries will have to become proficient in psychology and the priests in the religion I have named for my God concept, Religious Humanism, will have to derive from this scientific field. I call it a humanism because it would need relevant moral and ethical principles once originated in the Abrahamitic religions.

My God concept is not new. People like Baruch Spinoza, Aguste Compte and Einstein have also viewed God as Nature. Compte even tried to launch a religion but made the mistake of setting up a hierarchic Church. Setting up a church today would of course mean that optimal democratic means were utilized. Living rules and creed would best be limited to that of the law of the state in which a member is living.

In honor of Judaism, the originators of monotheism, which I regard as the prerequisite for evolving into a non-personal God concept I am utilizing the concept of sabbath. I celebrate Friday evening contemplating scientific issues reminding myself of why we are here today. This is why I think Religious Humanism will have a future. It will in essence write a new scripture with more meaningful content. Society is now based on new types of victories on another type of battlefield than that of the Old Testament tribal fights.

I enjoy communicating this information now and then because it stimulates people to give me pointers for which I am grateful. Yes, there will be a book published eventually.