Sure enough, Christians unequivocally believe in God, the Father almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lordwhowasconceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried; he descended; on the third day he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty.
And we could say that in light of the evidence that has been presented, here, over the last several months, Christians are rationally warranted to believe in such things based upon the considerable, and compelling evidence that exists. Nevertheless, the Bible skeptic Michael may still be unmovedbytheargumentspresented thus far. To the Michaels of the world, I say; “okay, fair enough.” After all, mostnaturalistsandatheistsconsider religious belief in general, and those beliefs mentioned above in particular, to have evolved as part of human evolution itself. I find nothing shocking in that. If one holds to evolution then one sees evolution as the necessary answer to everything. If a person’s worldview is grounded in Darwinian evolutionary processes, then the phenomenon of religious belief must itself have an evolutionary grounding, it cannot be another way.
In the 19th century scientist and naturalist Edward Tylor put forward a compelling theory about how religion evolved“outofnothing”inhuman society.ItturnsoutEdwardsobserved four progressive stages of religious belief beginning with the idea of human beings possessing an immaterial soul. Tylor suggested that primitive man imagined they possessed a “soul” and it is from this idea of a human soul that all other religious beliefs then evolved. “Proof” of the soul, according to Tylor, was found in that primitive manrecognizedthatindreamingthey sawthemselvesinplaces,andindoing things upon waking, they knew had not happened. Tylor hypothesizes further that primitive man noticed their reflection in water as a nonphysical extension of their own bodies. From there, man began to consider that other aspects of their world may be similarly endowed. This, Tylor said, was the first form of religion which he termed “animism.”
Later, as the evolution of both man and his religious beliefs continued, society progressed toward social stratification based upon a class system. Aristocrats ruling over the peasant class indicated that there were gods who ruled over the souls of men. Thus, polytheism (the worship of many gods) became the next in the evolution of religion. Still later religious belief continued to parallel human society in that eventually one aristocrat became elevated above the rest in society as a monarchial king. This evolutionary advance, then, representedthesingularandsupreme God of monotheism.
It was 1871, and Tylor’s theory of the evolution of religion became all the rage in scientific circles. Finally, they say, a scientific theory that explained the religious impulse common to all men. Not only that, but Tylor’s theory, and Darwin’s; On the Origin of Species (1859), were complementary and synergistic. Anthropologist Don Richarson writes: “At least four notions were implicit in Tylor’s evolutionary model. First, science had fully explained the religious impulse in man and therefore religion had lost all of its mystery. Second, since monotheism marked the final maturity of religion’s evolution, religion was now to face natural extinction. Third, the next evolution of religion in society was to recognize that God and the spiritual world were nothing more than myths (laterpromptingGermanphilosopher Fredrich Nietzsche to proclaim “God is dead.”). Finally, Tylor’s theory was testable in the field making it a true scientific theory. If Tylor were correct, the most primitive societies would be animists, followed by polytheists, followed by monotheists. Therefore, there would be no monotheism in primitive societies.
It was reported that Tylor had so clearly laid the groundwork, and so thoroughly researched the topic that his theory “left no room for opposition.” Indeed, Tylor’s theory ran uncontestedforthenextthreedecades and gained a firm foothold that is still very much present today. That is, the theory that religious belief “evolved” as human society evolved. Now, this is all well and good except for one thing: Tylor’s theory is not true. The rest of the story tells of a different tale.
It turns out a researcher and student of Tylor named Andrew Lange eventuallyranuponsomeinformation that would change everything. Over the next few years Lange collected extensive information concerning the religious beliefs of several ancient southeast Australian tribes who were not polytheist as Tylor’s theory suggested, but they believed in one Supreme Being. But it wasn’t just the Southeast Australians, the same evidence appeared over and over again from primitive people groups like the Bushmen, Hottentots, Zulu, Yao, West African peoples, as well as North American Indians.
The conclusion was clear, religion did not evolve as Tylor had argued. On the contrary, the idea of a monotheistic Supreme Being is an ancient concept; it is a concept as old as man himself. In fact, Richardson argues that there is “startling evidence of beliefintheOneTrueGodinhundreds of cultures throughout the world.” Unsurprisingly, this is exactly what Christians have argued all along, and this is exactly what is observed in the cultures of the world. So no, religion is not an ancient myth that evolved as men evolved. Join us next time as we look into why there are so many ancient flood stories from around the world. Or, is Christianity just a copycat religion? Until then; is God dead?
Gloria in excelsis Deo! Ty B. Kerley, DMin., is an ordained minister who teaches Christian apologetics, and relief preaches in Southern Oklahoma. Dr. Kerley and his wife Vicki are members of the Waurika church of Christ, and live in Ardmore. You can contact him at: dr.kerley@isGoddead.com.