History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

The religious right as evidence of the dissolution of xtianity

May 11th, 2018 · No Comments


The religious right causes consternation in mainstream culture, not surprising, but over the long term the phenomenon is evidence of the long term decline and dissipation of christianity, which looks to have been abandoned by the larger domain of religious evolution (which is what?). Let us not forget that ancient xtian theologians foresaw the problem of religious entropy and created a papal theocracy to forestall the corruption of its core values (not that the ‘dogma’ core was much more than myth). After the reformation it is therefore not surprising that ‘xtianity’ drifts into derelicts remnants.
The trend of modernity is to pass beyond religion, but that is not necessarily an ‘historical inevitability’. Part of the problem is the core idiocy that was always characteristic of ordinary christian beliefs. But the original movement had an historical momentum that is hard to understand outside of the context of the sudden decadent onset of the roman empire.

To be sure, the modern transition generates a ‘reformation’, but in the long view that reformation initiates a steady progression beyond the religion altogether.
But the problem is that while xtianity seems to have been captured by fundamentalism, secularism has been captured by a fundamentalist scientism that allows no consideration of the meaning of ‘spirituality’. No distinction of spiritual/material is really necessary to do this. But the point is that a larger dimension of man and the universe lurks behind the orientation of basic physics which is not equipped to produce successor sciences of man, evolution, and psychology. The consequence is a flood of alternative religious movements, e.g. the new age movement, which is itself limited and archaic with respect to the questions raised by secularism…

A look at the eonic effect shows a way out: we can see that the emergence of judeo-xtian monotheism is bound up in the dynamics of larger history: the proposition that ‘god’ acted/acts in history is shown to be a false interpretation of the mysterious ‘eonic effect’ of larger history, in particular the era of the so-called ‘axial’ age: we see that israelite monotheism is one aspect of that larger transformation which includes the massive innovation of archaic/classical greece, indic spiritual revolution and the core of the chinese classical age. If this diversity is a relationship of parallels in a global movement of history. The israelites spoke of an age of revelation and they were strangely right, but not about their almost impoverished monotheism compared with the immense ‘revelation’ (not really the right term) seen in the parallel and synchronous field of axial regions. The larger point here is that the successor transformation amplified the net equivalent of the greek transition, thus creating postpolytheistic hellenism in an upgrade, while damping our the isrealite/xtian, its task accomplished, leaving behind a quite empty ‘theology’ of the ‘one god’. This effect to a larger view is almost ‘clever’ and a transparent ‘tactic’ to rescue the confused outcome of proximate antiquity, especially in the occident.

From this perspective we see why christianity has historical persistence but is not likely the wave of the future. But by the same token the ‘secular’ sphere has lost the richness and diversity of the early modern (transition) although its basics are the only real candidate for a future civilization. The answer is that it is an incomplete formation in a state of developing integration. Science is (blessedly) stuck with its crudities of bootstrap scientism approximating but still fumbling the ball on the kind of ‘stale pastries’ of ‘religious’ and new age ideologies able to pontificate to dumbfounded scientists on a host of issues, such as consciousness…

The point here is to insist to xtian traditionists that the modern transition is far more worthy of being called an ‘age of revelation’ and one far richer in content than the primitive (yet truly remarkable for all that) era of the ‘axial’ era israelites.

In considering the eonic effect we must not forget that it shows a system that, while it directs a larger history, only induces man up to a point: the larger effect stops and man is left to ‘make himself’. This is the only way to understand the strange combination of fumbling primitive outcomes in the context of a larger profundity that is a such a curse to later history.

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment