One of the most popular types of websites these days are those that provide genealogical records. They help people to find their ancestral roots. We are not sure who we are. We seek identity. Where we come from? What are our human origins?
Religious view of human origins
Until about two centuries ago, the religious view prevailed in Western culture. So, people assumed that they were created in the image of God with an immortal soul. They were aware of their designated place, in the grand scheme of things, as somewhere between angels and animals. In short, this Christian worldview gave life its meaning, a sense of our human origins, and a perspective that people could try to live with.
However, today, in our secular times, we have lost the consciousness of transcendence and the sense of the sacred. Some people even think that humans are descended from aliens who visited Earth. But even if it were true, this would not explain how the aliens came into being.
Most people give the scientific way of knowing the place of honor. Consequently, the question, ‘Who made us, God or evolution?’ the answer is firm in favor of the latter. In Darwin’s theory there is no place for divine guidance or design.
“We are the only people who think they have risen from the savages; everyone else believes they are descended from the gods.” (Marshall Sahlins)
Christian fundamentalists who advocate creationism are doing religion no favors. They have a literal understanding of the biblical account of the 7 days of creation. So they see this as a factual story. (An alternative view they don’t like is that the book of Genesis is a myth that conveys a useful psychospiritual message relevant to personal growth.) Consequently, ‘creationists’ make false scientific claims. Not surprisingly, anyone with any common sense makes fun of them easily. As a result, it has become nearly impossible for the idea of design within our human origins to gain any kind of fair audience.
Evolution and our human origins
Today it seems that Darwinian evolution is the only possible explanation for the beginning and development of life. However, Huston Smith in his book ‘Beyond the postmodern mind‘presents the case for further consideration of a’ grand origins’ concept.
Fossils found in the earth’s crust show that there have been changes in the constitution of plants and animals, and with the help of radioactive and potassium-argon dating, these have been placed in a historical sequence.
Furthermore, the higher and more complex life forms (such as human beings) appeared later than the simpler ones. All species of life on earth can be traced through their genealogies to the simplest forms in which life initially appeared.
Darwin proposed how all this happened saying that he did it through the natural selection of the fittest to survive working on random mutations. Darwinism is popular in science because natural selection is purely mechanical and the mutations it works on do so only by accident. In other words, biology sees the origin and development of human life as an automatic process with no place for divine providence.
Perhaps this is not surprising, since all branches of science prevent natural phenomena from having any design. This is because there can be no scientific instruments to observe purpose and meaning. What he might claim is beyond the ability of science to judge empirically.
Criticisms of Darwinian evolution
We need to ask questions about any fossil evidence of incremental change.
“Geology … does not reveal … a finely graded organic change and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and most serious objection that can be raised against (my) theory.“(Charles Darwin)
Also, there is the question about the lack of fossil evidence of intermediate forms between species.
“Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them.” (David Kitts Professor of Geology at the University of Oklahoma)
A third concern has to do with the lack of functionality of changes that only later result in useful new parts of the body. How can natural selection explain the appearance of complex organs? Those that are made of many parts that only when they work together after thousands of generations have any use for survival? In the short term, what good is half jaw or half wing? The brain module that governs language ability has no counterpart among nonhumans. It has appeared in humans suddenly in its current form.
Huston Smith points out that Darwin’s theory of evolution is quite weak, but it seems strong because there are no other contenders to understand our origins.
Non-naturalistic views of human origins
I would suggest that if science has a restricted kind of knowledge, then perhaps we need to reconsider other ideas to find an idea of who we are and where we come from. The problem with a naturalistic perspective is that it assumes that nothing can exist that lacks some material component.
This way of thinking prevents us from considering all kinds of less tangible phenomena, those that involve subjectivity and cannot be seen with any kind of precision, prediction or control. To illustrate, we can sometimes gain intuitive insight, notice lucky coincidences, and recall dreams. In addition, we can be surprised by amazement and amazement at the vital force within nature. We can be willing to surrender to the growth of life and the healing power.
Subjective truth may prove nothing, but it may offer reason to believe. Beliefs about who we are and where we come from. And as such, it can guide our decisions and behavior.
Spiritual consciousness and our human origins
I would say that perceiving in non-naturalistic ways is a kind of spiritual awareness. According to the 18th century Swedish philosopher Emanuel Swedenborg, the spiritual flows into the natural. The divine is spiritual and strives to flow and give life to the natural. Divine energy is one of love that wishes to share its life in human action.
Swedenborg thought that educated people who study natural science are more likely to deny any divine reality because they focus on natural forces. In addition, he thought that for the rest of us any negative state of mind is associated with a materialistic and self-centered attitude. What he wrote is opposed to a deeper understanding.
“The force or effort within action or movement is, of course, something spiritual within something natural; because thought and will are spiritual activities, while action and movement are natural.” (Emanuel Swedenborg, spiritual philosopher)