Wednesday, September 8, 2021

Considering God as a creation of our own human minds. (workbook #c)

This comes from a conversation over at CenterForInquiry discussion forum under the far ranging thread headed: Why Did You Choose Atheism?  It’s part of my workshop.

©2021 citizenschallenge

post #117 - Sep 4, 8:33 PM

Write4u comments: “Evolution is established science.”

I offered a slight adjustment.

Citizenschallenge:  Evolution is established by scientific evidence.    : -)

Now if only we really let that lesson soak in, as we think about who and what we are.

As for God, I would suggest that the evidence points to God being the product of our minds. And where did that come from you ask?

We people, every one of us who was nurtured through an umbilical cord and born from a woman, carry hundreds of millions, actually billions of years worth of biological tricks and tools and such within ourselves. Our body is aware of the echos of millions and hundreds of thousands of years worth of hominid, then human generations.  We are the sum total of their collective journey.  It’s not some abstract notion, our DNA is proof of that. 

Each of us has grand parents of grand parents reaching back to the dim dawn of evolution.

If God be anywhere, why shouldn’t she/he be found within ourselves, resonating through the creatures that became us, the echos of deep time?

I keep wondering, how do people justify constantly looking for God, out there?


Write4u responded with:

 Wishful thinking ? The assumption of a spiritual existence in the heaven of God.

The end has no end, but is a new beginning apart from physical existence and if you have been a good boy it is for an eternity of bliss.

Actually it is just an extension of the same evolved impetus that drives us to stay alive.

Good comeback, fair enough, though it does represent the believer's perspective more than the spectators.  Still I’m going to have to chew on it a bit, not that it changes my conviction that our gods do indeed come from within ourselves, rather than from up above.

©2021 citizenschallenge


Post #112 - Sep 4, 3:03 PM


Evolved emergent complexity is the observed tendency for the universe to develop through time more elaborate structures of increased complexity beginning with matter itself.

I like that. The same can be said for our layered brains which were evolved over ions of creatures trying to survive through their day to day, eat, stay healthy, procreate, rest, live, seek, learn to survive as things change. That imperative starts at the beginnings of complexity within biological systems.


Now enters the idea of “universal consciousness.” This concept implies that consciousness is not produced by the human brain but is present in the universe as one of it’s primary and original attributes and it’s not consciousness that is produced by the brain but it’s the brain and more specifically the human mind that enters consciousness, a universal consciousness that existed prior to the brain and prior to the evolutionary process that brought the human brain into existence.

What’s wrong with recognizing consciousness is the result of our body’s functioning biology and sensory inputs from the world we happen to find ourselves in?

Opposed to what you are saying, there are a number neuroscientists pointing out that our consciousness is basically the inside reflection of our biological bodies dealing with life.

That outlook feels consistent with the experience of my own day to days. I’m aware of the evolutionary heritage that lies within my body, and the impulses that drive it and help it survive. It makes sense from my Earth Centrist perspective.

©2021 citizenschallenge

Michael, You offer universal consciousness, others offer the geometry of consciousness, yet others offer us the end of space and time altogether - how any of it relates to our actual human lives I still can’t fathom, though I keep trying.

Evolution and having a general appreciation for the strands that make me, myself and I, along with where they originated, having a glimpse of the huge spectrum of creatures this Earth provided a home for, and that made me possible. Life and drama on the grandest scale. 

That stuff positively informs my days and makes a real difference in my appreciate and dealing with the sturm und drang of my own days and how I deal with the creatures I interact with, human as well as animal, even botanical.

©2021 citizenschallenge


Not Trampis said...

you seem to think evolution means anything in the bible is wrong.
Alas you are wrong.
Benjamin Warfield of the fundamentals fame saw no contradiction between it ( when Darwin's book was released ) and the bible.
Nor do I.
some biblically literate evangelicals ( not always the case in the USA ) are fervent environmentalists because we have been given dominion of the Earth.

citizenschallenge said...

N.T., thanks for leaving a comment worth posting. Not that I agree, or even fully understand what you're point is, at least your making an effort.

No, Evolution and the Bible have nothing to do with each other.

As for the Bible, I think it's a collection of ancient tribal stories and texts. People trying to grapple with creating societies and order and staying alive. It was written by wise men and politicians, and has nothing to do with divine enlightenment reaching down from heaven.

The Bible is a product by humans for humans. It don't interest me much anymore, because I find too much of it abhorrent. Too much Lord/master obsessed and over the top ego-centric, jealous, and lordie lordie such pettiness, and all negativity I try to keep my distance from.

Evolution doesn't need the permission from any religion, it is based on human curiosity, evidence and honest study by a community of experts, who are dedicated to the notion that we need each to keep ourselves honest.

I'll have to look up Benjamin Warfield to try and figure out what you are talking about there.

citizenschallenge said...

Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield (November 5, 1851 – February 16, 1921) was professor of theology at Princeton Seminary from 1887 to 1921. (Mind you, still in the 'dark ages' of our Evolutionary history understanding - so why would he relate to today's arguments anyways - well, okay, perhaps the religious arguments haven't changed a bit. But the science sure as Earth has!)

B.B. Warfield, Biblical Inerrancy, and Evolution
By Mark Noll On August 22, 2011

I found it difficult to wrap my head around the concept of his "defense of evolution", while clinging to the inerrancy of the Bible.
But then word games is the name of the theology game, so more power to him.

Interestingly I also found this, that takes exception to the conclusions drawn by Noll:

B. B. Warfield on Creation and Evolution

"This view of Warfield is widely accepted, perhaps the “canonical” understanding, and Livingstone and Noll are often cited, uncritically, in support. I am persuaded, however, that this understanding is mistaken. Warfield did claim to have accepted the theory of evolution in his youth, but he then rejected it early in his career. Thereafter he remained open to the possibility of it and affirmed that Scripture could accommodate it, if it were to be proven true, but he himself continued to reject the theory. To demonstrate this, ..."


It's an example of what I refer to as: "Getting lost within our mindscape." It's study in human stubbornness more than anything else.

Long way of saying; Warfield and his pronouncements have nothing to do with understanding Evolution, one way or the other.