The Evolution of God: Robert Wright’s Salon.com Interview

In today’s online issue of Salon.com there is an interesting interview with Robert Wright, a well-known American journalist. Wright is the author of a new book “The Evolution of God,” which approaches its subject from the logical standpoint that, more often than not, we have created our Gods to match our own evolving self-image and needs. Wright refers to himself as a materialist in that he thinks that the answers to religious questions, including the evolution of God, lie in the facts on the ground.

All good so far. But a problem arises in how Wright discerns what is fact, and what he chooses to include and not include in forming his opinions.

For example, when it comes to Jesus and what kind of person he was, Wright argues that Jesus probably wasn’t the great prophet of peace and love that we all think:

The fact is, the Sermon on the Mount, which is a beautiful thing, does not appear in Mark, which was the first written gospel. And these views are not attributed to Jesus in the letters of Paul, which are the earliest post-crucifixion documents we have. You see Paul develop a doctrine of universal love, but he’s not, by and large, attributing this stuff to Jesus. So, too, with “love your enemies.” Paul says something like love your enemies, but he doesn’t say Jesus said it. It’s only in later gospels that this stuff gets attributed to Jesus. This will seem dispiriting to some people to hear that Jesus wasn’t the great guy we thought he was. But to me, it’s actually more inspiring to think that the doctrines of transnational, trans-ethnic love were products of a multinational, imperial platform.

Wright then goes on to tell the ugly story where Jesus initially refuses to heal the daughter of woman not from Israel, basically telling her that we don’t serve dogs here. Wright ultimately feels that Jesus was a typical messianic Jewish preacher who thought God was going to come down to Earth and straighten things out.

So, where to start? Well the doctrine of universal love was not left out of the Gospel of Mark. In Mark, Jesus says that whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother (3:35); he criticizes John for trying to stop someone from doing the work of God simply because the guy wasn’t one of their followers (9:38-40); and he states that loving our neighbor as ourselves is the second greatest commandment (12:30). That Jesus was a prophet without borders is clearly demonstrated when he laments, “A prophet is not without honor, except in his own country, and among his own relations, and in his own home.” (6:4).

The anecdote where Jesus compares a mother and daughter to a dog appears as a distinct anomaly when viewed within the context of Mark’s entire Gospel, which is why its authenticity must be questioned. Considering the strong racist attitudes that Jesus had to overcome among his followers and how notoriously slow to learn they were (6:52, 8:17), it seems more reasonable to assume that this episode was made up.

As to the Kingdom of God, one would be hard pressed to say that Jesus thought this meant God was literally coming down to straightening things out here on Earth. If that were so, why do we find him using obscure parables and metaphors for the Kingdom of God, at one point likening it to a farmer who scatters seed but who doesn’t know how the seeds grows (Mark 4:26-27). Surely if God were coming down to sort us all out, he would know how he was going to do it.

While examining his “facts on the ground” on the evolution of God, Robert Wright ultimately stumbles for two reasons:

1) Wright does not always take into account the prejudices and weaknesses of the people who passed down the story of Jesus, and who by human nature would manipulate Jesus’s message to match their own self-image and needs, just as we’ve done (as Wright well notes) with our perceptions of God.

2) Wright undoubtedly held the personal belief that it is more inspiring to think that the doctrines of transnational, trans-ethnic love were products of a multinational, imperial platform prior to writing his book “The Evolution of God,” and consciously or unconsciously discerned “the facts” in a way to match that supposition.

——

Gain fresh insight into the Lord’s Prayer. Read our free online book The Lord’s Prayer for Daily Life. The prayer’s hidden teachings will enrich and inspire you. Click the following link to begin reading the Living Hour book now: The Lord’s Prayer.

Happiness: Brando & Money

Vanity Fair recently issued a press release on its new interview with actor Johnny Depp. By association Depp aligns himself with the likes of Jack Kerouac, Bob Dylan, Hunter S. Thompson, and especially Marlon Brando, who (like Depp) once owned an island.

One thing that celebrities share with regular folks is that we all like to associate ourselves with people whom we admire, and fancy the notion that we’re a little like them. Yet in reality we often are not like our idols. We often display neither the courage nor the insight of those who have become our icons–for if we did, we would turn our attention away from them and turn it inward to listen for the Christ within.

This fact is clearly revealed in Johnny Depp’s recitation of an old adage on happiness that sounds profound but really isn’t.¹ Depp justifies his pursuit of wealth by saying, “Money doesn’t buy you happiness. But it buys you a big enough yacht to sail right up to it.”

One can’t help but feel that Depp’s idols would be shaking their heads at such talk, especially his old colleague Marlon Brando. Among all of the actors of his generation, it was Brando who best personified Kerouac’s recognition that money (and fame) could neither buy happiness nor the yacht to sail up to its banks.

Brando in his later years became the ultimate “fool,” the jester of the celebrity court of Hollywood (who can forget his eccentic barefoot interview with Larry King), and all of his excesses were ways of escape, as well as modern day parables on the trappings of ego and pride. At the same time he held steadfast to his own sense of right and wrong (career be damned): principles that dramatically revealed themselves in 1972 when Brando rejected his Academy Award and sent Sacheen Littlefeather to explain why.

It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God, said Jesus of Nazareth. Of all the actors of the 20th century, none understood that better than Marlon Brando.

—

The Living Hour’s SBNR motivational series combines history, literature, philosophy, religion, and pop culture to help bring about new perspectives on Progressive Christianity and spirituality. Sign up by entering your email address into the “Opening the Small Gate” box in the right corner of this web page.

1. Studies have shown that individuals typically get richer during their lifetimes, but not happier. According to happiness studies, it is family, social and community networks that bring joy to one’s life. Once people have enough money to cover the necessities of life, money has little impact on happiness. [↩]