Comments on: Progressing revelation

By: On Wright’s Reconciliation of Religion and Science: An unseen order: Baha’i Views

Mon, 24 Aug 2009 04:27:50 +0000

[...] Progress and revelation | Jeune Street [...]

By: John Rager

John Rager — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 02:03:00 +0000

One way to view this evolution is to recognize that it is in fact the “evolution”, or perhaps more accurate development, of Humanity’s understanding of ourselves. The innate “anima” of being alive sees “spirits” everywhere; the verbal young child creates concepts (names) for things and imagines things that have names – like God. The child reaches logical maturation around age twelve and God appears to him as a lawgiver. In adolescence, it is all about identity and fierce loyalty (Islam). Man is beginning to realize the ultimate mystery of his own nature and potential and our understanding of God therefore requires a release from former ideas and we need to develop a new relationship with the unknown – God, ourselves, and the future.

By: Jason Snyder

Jason Snyder — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:06:23 +0000

I have been reading “The Evolution of God” and have been watching his interviews, and have come to the same conclusion about Wright. It is fascinating as a Baha’i to see a secular person coming to a very similar worldview purely through reason and science.

Probably the main superficial difference is that we see the evolution of religion taking place through the means of revelation, whereas he does not. I think we also take the idea of a personal, yet unkowable God, more seriously. He allows for the value of belief in a personal god, but he ultimately thinks it is a delusion, albeit a usefull one.

On the other hand, if we are too look closer at these differences, I think they are more conceptual than substantive. What is revelation but directionality and purpose, which he believes in. What is a personal god but an image we can use to feel closer to the unkowable essence.

By: G Cameron

G Cameron — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:13:40 +0000

Actually, Wright uses the same analogy. He says that our conception of God is a bit like the scientific conception of electrons. We don’t even know if electrons *really* exist, but the idea that they do exist actually helps to build a whole body of knowledge that pertains to the real world. Similarly, he argues, we ultimately fail to fully apprehend the reality of God, but by attributing certain characteristics to God we are able to construct a moral order that advances civilization. God is ultimately unknowable, but through religious texts we come to an approximation of divine reality that helps us to be better at living on this earth.

By: LizKauai

LizKauai — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:08:51 +0000

The power of attraction/love is also a mystery to science. Yet most people acknowledge the existence of the unseen in scientific circles. They call it “electrons”.

One can DO a lot more with one’s life as a “believer”.