Walk Your Talk

Practical spirituality in a complicated world.

I've received several letters lately asking me to write about the controversy between those who believe in creationism, and those who believe in evolution and the Big Bang. I've written about this before, but only briefly. Today, the entire column will be devoted to this subject.

One of my favorite little sound bites is this: Believing that the complexity and organization of the Universe resulted from a big bang is like saying the Encyclopaedia Britannica resulted from an explosion in a print shop. I heard that years ago, and I've loved it ever since. Yes, of course, I hold that the universe was brought into being by the Creator. I call this Creator by the name "God." However, I must also say that I do not believe in the literalness of any of the creation accounts of the various religious traditions. Therefore, when I use the term "God," I do so with the understanding that the Creator, or God, is much grander, far larger than any one religious tradition can encompass. There are bits of truth in all religions, but generally religions are tribal/ethnic/racial accounts of a people's experience with God.

Most people in this country come from a Christian tradition, which itself grew out of the religion of Judaism. These two traditions share sacred scriptures, which the Christians call the Old Testament. The creation account in Genesis, the first book of the Old Testament, has deep, ancient roots in religious traditions which predated the Jews by thousands of years. In fact, the Genesis account actually has elements of two different stories. The myth of a beautiful, lush paradise, filled with fountains, fruit trees, rivers, etc, is an ancient image, indeed. It is a common element in the creation stories of the ancient people of the Tigris-Euphrates valley, modern day Iran and Iraq. Throughout history, people have always had creation stories, meant to explain how they came into existence, as well as to justify how they came to possess their homelands. Myth making seems to be an essential cultural component of all eras, encompassing all groups of people.

When we discuss creation or God today, there are several elements we need to consider. First among these elements is that of religion. Usually, this controversy involves that which is to be taught to students in government schools. Some people complain that "we've taken God out of the schools." This is, of course, rubbish, utter nonsense. Humans cannot remove God, or put God any place. This is simply arrogance. God, the Creator, is everywhere, independent of humans and their current political or religious controversies. What these people are actually saying is that their particular religious teaching has been taken out of schools. When most Americans say, "Let's put prayer and God back into the schools" what they really mean is, "Let's put our interpretation of God (fundamentalist Christianity/Judaism), and the scriptures we believe in (Bible) back into schools." By the way, as long as there are math tests, there shall be prayer in schools!

I feel fairly confident in stating that most of those pushing for teaching "creationism" do not favor teaching about how Lord Brahma creates universes, or how the Ancestral Puebloans emerged into this world from below. We need to keep in mind that this subject is multifaceted, and remain aware that people use the same terms to mean different things.

The political dimensions of this discussion are central to any intelligent discussion of the subject. Some say that to mention God or to pray in schools, or to have a connection between government and God is a violation of separation of church and state. Actually, this is not true. When Thomas Jefferson wrote the words "a wall of separation between church and state" he wasn't using esoteric language. He meant exactly what he said. He was writing about keeping churches, or organised religious groups, from gaining government sponsorship. He used the term "church," never mentioning "God" or "spirituality." He certainly never intended that people abandon their spiritual or moral values in order to be involved in government. Jefferson, himself, never did that, although he was, by all accounts, a Deist, a product of the French inspired Enlightenment. Therefore, I think we can conclude that there is a difference between establishing a government supported church and mentioning God in public life.

Here is the rub: If we're going to teach creationism in schools, which creation story shall we teach? There are literally hundreds upon hundreds of creation stories. Teaching creation stories in science class doesn't seem to be appropriate. Perhaps it might be best to teach various creation stories in philosophy classes in schools. If students are being taught how to put on condoms, I doubt a little philosophy would scar them for life. The fact of the matter is that the government schools are utter failures, whether they teach creationism or not. That, however, is a separate topic for another day.

Now, let's talk about the Big Bang. As theories go, it's not a particularly good one. Actually, it sounds a bit silly, and I'm sure scientists of the future will smile indulgently when they see it mentioned. If there was a primal big bang, what went bang? What exploded? Was there some primal matter? Well, who created the primal matter which went bang? Explosions result in chaos, yet the universe is ordered, following observable laws, and is anything but chaotic or random. In addition, why aren't things exploding now and bringing new creations into being in the process? As far as scientists know, nothing new is being created. All matter is simply being recycled. For all their accomplishments, scientists have never created even one atom. An intelligent person would admit that despite our inability to understand the how's and why's of the universe, it stands to reason that there is some sort of intelligence underlying creation. Call it "God," or the "Unmoved Mover," or the "Creator," or the "Divine Intelligence," or the "Uncaused Cause," it really doesn't matter. Neither one scientific theory, nor any one religion can contain this "Original Energy." We should be excited about exploring and discussing this topic! Instead, people on both sides of the controversy are trying to silence those who disagree with them. Like it or not, science has become very religion- like, very intolerant of dissent.

Finally, a few words about evolution: The theory of evolution does seem to have some validity, but also a lot of deficiencies. Some creatures do seem to have evolved, yet other creatures seem to have evolved little in millions of years. Some creatures seem to have suddenly appeared from out of nowhere, with no previous presence in the fossil record. This is a subject that requires much more study. In any event, life didn't come from nothing. Whether it evolved from the primordial ooze of ancient seas or not, the ooze and the seas were there, brought about by the Divine Intelligence, by the Creator. Humans aren't nearly as central to the Universe as they sometimes like to believe. Perhaps a bit of humility is in order? If this is a subject that interests you, do some reading and investigation on your own. Don't take my word, or the word of the creationists, religionists, politicians or scientists.

OM



To ask Robert a question, visit his Web site, RobertOdom.com, e-mail him at desertrj@msn.com , or write him at PO Box 33, Santa Fe, NM 87504.

Letters to the Editor

Mail letters to PO Box 4910 Santa Fe, NM 87502 or email them to editor[at]sfreporter.com. Letters (no more than 200 words) should refer to specific articles in the Reporter. Letters will be edited for space and clarity.

We also welcome you to follow SFR on social media (on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter) and comment there. You can also email specific staff members from our contact page.