RELIGION AND EVOLUTION ARE TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN
by Mark Abraham
Religions fragment humans into hostile spiritual tribes and also divide them into theists and atheists, which cause arising debates among all groups to continue. I argue that the debates, largely focused on the mystical aspect of faith, remain superficial, as no group has been able to prove its argument conclusively. However, asking truly relevant questions brings religion from its mystical realm to our material world for a sober and objective examination. To understand faith as a phenomenon, we need to identify what practical human needs compelled humans toward religion. This can never be achieved by studying it through whether or not God exists, or through the mystical aspects of religion. For instance, if Jesus, Moses and Mohammed were never born, would over 3,000,000,000 of their followers go without faith for millennia, or would they, too, create other religions as did the people in China, India, Korea, Japan, America, and most parts of Africa? Obviously, as no human community has lived without religions, the followers of monotheist religions too, would most certainly choose other religions. Thus, the answer being rather obvious, what was the role of these three great leaders in the larger picture of faith and even the God they introduced to the masses? Did these leaders create faiths, or was it humans’ natural inclination toward faith that demanded leadership and these leaders emerged to lead? Does religion create morality, or is it humans’ strong sense of morality that precipitated faith, which formulates ethics and mass-produces it for mass consumption for a harmonious social coexistence? If religion creates morality, then why do we have so many unethical believers and ethical atheists? On the other hand, atheists perceive faith as being unscientific and useless and, therefore, dismiss it as even unworthy of consideration. Interestingly, they worship art that is equally as unscientific. They also dismiss faith for being archaic and useless for modern time, but they spare the concept of government from this challenge of being archaic and useless that is just as old. Thus, the logic on both sides is hugely lacking. Having said that, one can prove that not only religion, (not creation), and evolution are not irreconcilable contradictions, but that they are the same and one can make a strong argument that not only religion is not useless, but it has hugely contributed to the survival of our species. Identifying the practical needs that compelled religion millennia ago and have sustained them ever since, makes this clear and that can only be understood through knowing how human instincts and intellect interact. Understanding the human condition in social standings helps us to identify what first precipitated religion and then perpetuated it. The following four strong forces coerce humans to live in societies: 1- Living socially satisfies one of humans’ strong instincts, the instinct of being social, as humans profoundly enjoy each other’s company, thus when deprived of it they suffer abject emotional and psychological pain and damage. Thus, solitary confinement is used worldwide to punish people. 2- Living socially allows division of labor, as people specialize in supplying societies with their endlessly needed goods and services most efficiently. It is the most efficient system and has been practiced from the inception of societies. 3- The creativity of each person in a society incites more creativity by others and enables individuals and humanity at large to reach their ultimate potential. 4- Living socially enables each to take from his or her society a great deal more than any one can contribute to it as compared to living in solitude. This provides all with the relative prosperity and comfort that all humans so cherish….
© Copyrights 2012-13 Mark Abraham