|
Chapter 17.
Revitalizing Religion through
Transcending the Illusion of Free
Will
With religion, at least in America
and probably throughout the world,
as each decade goes by there are
fewer and fewer people who gravitate
to it – that have it as a part of
their everyday life. That’s somewhat
unfortunate because while some
religions continue to propound
certain beliefs that are outdated,
divisive or otherwise harmful, there
is one aspect of religion that is
very beneficial to society and to us
as individuals. Modern cities,
suburbs and metropolitan areas are a
relatively new aspect of
civilization. Before that, there
were mainly small towns, and before
that, tribal, or other, small
groups, that created a true
community. One could see and relate
to the same people each day, whereas
in many of our cities one can walk
for hours seeing only strangers.
As our civilization evolved from
small towns to the cities and their
suburbs, we lost a great part of
that cohesion. Television and other
media help bring us together in a
certain way, but churches and
synagogues, and other religious
institutions, have traditionally
been our principle means of creating
communities. From that perspective,
it’s unfortunate that religion is
waning as it has been during recent
decades. The problem is dire for
many congregations. For example, the
cost of maintaining their property
has become so burdensome that many
congregations are now forced to
share their building with one or
more other congregations. That’s a
nice idea in a sense, but the
salient point here is that because
of their dwindling membership, these
religious institutions are
threatened, and the vehicle for
community they create is threatened.
There are various reasons why so
many people have moved away from
religion. In Christianity, and much
less so in Judaism, there is the
idea that if you do certain wrongs,
you’re going to be punished for the
rest of eternity. As we evolve as a
species, and become more intelligent
and knowledgeable about our world,
we think to ourselves “why would an
all-loving God do this?” or “if
we’re here on Earth for about eighty
years, how can one justify being
condemned to suffer an eternity –
trillions of years, at the very
least – for an act done in a day?”
Sometimes churches are seen as
hypocritical in the sense that they
profess to champion the rights of
the poor, but, when it comes to
politics, many churches and other
religious institutions will support
policies and legislation that oppose
the interests of poor populations.
And it’s not just about poverty.
It’s also about children’s rights,
women’s rights, and various other
kinds of issues. Another reason for
this exodus from religion is that
the traditional mythology doesn’t
seem to work anymore. It’s actually
counterproductive in many ways.
Consider, for example, the creation
story of Adam and Eve. The standard
account is that Eve, the first
woman, was formed from the rib of
Adam, the first man. That account is
derogatory to women. Lastly,
relatively speaking, very little in
religion has changed over the last
two thousand years. So much of it
does not make sense to people, and
that may account, in part, for why
so many of us have left religious
congregations and communities. My
hope and expectation is that a major
change in theology – in what
churches and synagogues believe and
teach – might actually help bring
people back to the flock, and to a
religious community that is based on
doing good, and being good, and
improving the world. That’s, to a
great extent, what religion is
about.
Before going through how the idea
that we don’t have a free will can
help congregations bring people
back, I just want to go briefly
through what this idea of free will
means in religion. In Christianity,
most people take free will to be a
premise, but when you look through
the Bible, you’ll find that the
issue is far from clear. For
example, the first Christian
documented to have questioned and
challenged free will was Paul in his
letter to the Romans, which is dated
about 58 A.D. At 7:15, Paul writes,
“I don’t understand myself at all,
for I really want to do what is
right, but I can’t. I do what I
don’t want to do – what I hate.”
Here Paul is explaining that if he
had a free will, he would be good
all of the time. He knows that with
a free will he would do the good
that he wanted to do, and not do
that evil that he doesn’t want to
do. Paul had this understanding in
58 A.D.! What many people don’t
realize is that the term “free will”
is actually not in the Bible. It
doesn’t appear in Christian theology
until about 380-90 A.D. when
Augustine grappled with the question
of human will. It was in relation to
God’s qualities. Augustine was
trying to reconcile evil and justice
with the premise that God is
all-good, and wrote a book titled
De Libero Arbitrio, which is
translated as “on free will.” He
actually coined the term free will.
He writes, “Evil deeds are punished
by the justice of God. They would
not be punished justly if they had
not been performed voluntarily.”
This conclusion is based on a
misunderstanding – or one
interpretation – of God. One
conception of God is that s/he is
omni-benevolent, or all-good. The
reality is that God Her/Himself in
Isaiah said that he creates both
good and evil. From that
contradicting evidence, you can see
how Augustine’s premise, upon which
he based his need for a free will,
is actually false, at least
according to the prophet Isaiah.
The notion of free will is not
central to the Bible. It’s something
that is not even mentioned as a
term, and is alluded to very
infrequently. Many religious
congregations could very
realistically and authoritatively
look at the question of human will,
and reach a new conclusion. Many
congregations now understand that
the world was not created about
6,000 years ago, as the Bible would
have us believe. Most congregations,
I would imagine, accept the standard
scientific understanding that the
universe is, as far as we know,
about 13.7 billion years old. It’s
not uncommon for churches,
denominations and congregations to
look at the world through the eyes
of modern science, and amend or
change certain beliefs that seemed
reasonable back when they were
created, but no longer seem
justifiable. Let’s say churches
began to promote the idea that free
will is an illusion. They would
begin to teach that the truth is
that we human beings do not have a
free will, and free will is nothing
more than a myth. But at the same
time they would say, very rightly,
that knowing this does not give us
license to do as we please. Just
because we’re not the authors of our
acts – of our thoughts and decisions
– doesn’t mean that we can shirk
responsibility. What we do has
consequences and we have to maintain
order, rule of law, and
civilization. When we are judging
others and ourselves, we should
remember that we were all born with
faults, and that we all sin. Sin,
incidentally, in its original Hebrew
form, literally and simply means
“missing the mark,” as when one is
shooting an arrow at a target.
Religions very rightly teach that
because we’re all flawed in various
ways, it is wise to forgive each
other and ourselves for the
invariable mistakes that we will
make. But to the extent that we
understand that we are not the
authors of our thoughts, what
churches and synagogues could teach
is that we’re instruments of God.
That would certainly fit within
their theology. Because we are not
the authors of what we do, we now
have every rationale to be more
understanding toward each other and
ourselves, and hold each other and
ourselves innocent. That’s major. If
what we do is not really up to us,
we’re all fundamentally innocent. If
we’re just basically manifesting the
will of God or fate, then when we do
wrong there is not even a need to
“forgive” others or ourselves. We
might want to forgive God, or the
universe, for compelling us to do
wrong. That’s certainly a question
to be explored. But, there is no
longer any justification or
rationale for blaming others or
ourselves, and wanting us to be
punished retributively.
A new causal will perspective would
be epochal for religion. It would
revitalize religion for many who
long ago left the flock. When Jesus
came around about 2,000 years ago,
that was a major change from the
very legalistic tradition of the
Jewish Pharisees. Christianity was
supposed to be more about acts of
compassion and mercy than scrupulous
adherence to a multitude of laws.
Since that time, there was Mohammad
with Islam, and others with other
religions transforming regions of
the world. But within the
Judeo-Christian context, nothing as
major as our collectively overcoming
the illusion of free will has
happened over the last two thousand
years, or perhaps ever. Overcoming
the illusion of free will would
represent that sea change people
need, and want, if they are to
return to religion. Many have moved
away from conventional religion
because, in too many ways, it
doesn’t make sense to their lives
any more. It’s unfortunate. Much of
religion is ennobling; it helps
people to understand the difference
between right and wrong. Much of
religion is very good, and very
useful. The communities that
religions create through the world
are an invaluable service to
humanity. It’s a shame that
congregations are dwindling, and
it’s a shame that some very
important ideas that these
congregations hold are so out-dated.
Considering that the notion of free
will is not central – remember that
a term for free will is not even
found in the Bible – to any biblical
teaching, and it was simply
Augustine’s answer to his conclusion
that God can’t be blamed for
anything, it is something we all
could perhaps fare much better
without. Often in religion, when we
humans do something that is really
good, we’re taught to be modest, and
humble, and thank God. We’re taught
that we could not have done the good
we did without God’s allowing us to
do it. We praise God for the good
that we do, and feel gratitude for
his help. But, when it comes to our
doing wrong, we’re taught by
religions that we shouldn’t blame
God; it has to be our fault. You’ll,
of course, notice the inconsistent
logic in praising God when things go
right, but blaming humans when they
don’t. Religions teach us to blame
each other and ourselves. It’s not
just religion. Our legal system, our
educational system, and, in fact,
our whole civilization, is based on
this myth, this illusion, of free
will.
To overcome the free will illusion
would be a complete paradigm shift
in what churches, synagogues,
mosques and temples teach. This
could be a global movement. It no
longer makes sense to believe that
human beings have a free will. The
belief in free will leads to so much
unnecessary conflict and aggression.
If overcoming this belief and
adopting a new understanding of our
causal will – that we are basically
instruments of God – would help
revitalize religion, and help bring
people back to congregations so that
we can restore our lost sense of
community, that would be wonderful.
Challenging the notion of free will,
a belief we’ve held for as long as
we can remember, could not but
attract the keen interest and
attention of congregations and
people who have left churches and
synagogues, and may now wish to come
back, if for no other reason than to
explore this brand new perspective
on reality – to see how their lives
could change as a result of their
not blaming the people in it for
what they do wrong, and not feeling
the pain of guilt for what they do
wrong. This certainly does not mean
that we will abandon morality,
because we are hard-wired to seek
what we believe is good, and we’re
hard-wired to seek pleasure and
avoid pain. We’re not going to
abandon these values and our
morality. But, we no longer have to
blame people, and when we no longer
blame people for what they do wrong,
we feel closer to them. When we
don’t blame ourselves for what we do
wrong, we feel better about
ourselves, and self-esteem is one of
the four personality traits most
closely correlated with happiness.
Considering how science, logic, and
experience so completely refute it,
the notion of free will is ripe for
overcoming and transcending. As
religious institutions recognize
that they can overcome the illusion
of free will, and still promote
morality, the existence of God, and
the rest of their theology,
religions can help create a new
world.
Our world has many problems. Climate
change, the global economic crisis,
overpopulation and much more is
going on, and we need new answers.
The answers that have been coming
out of politics and religion for
centuries are just not suited to the
reality we now face. With climate
change, for example, as the world is
challenged in various ways, the last
thing we want to do is be at odds
with each other, not doing what we
need to do because we are so busy
blaming ourselves and each other for
what went wrong. I hope that
ministers, pastors, rabbis and other
clerics throughout the various
religions and denominations will
understand the importance of this
issue of human will, and how rightly
addressing it can bring people back
to their congregations.
Next chapter |
