My theory of personal evolution: Part 1 – The calm before the singularity.

“Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, then that of blindfolded fear.”
~Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787

I’ve carefully avoided this topic because I have always felt it improper to wear it on my sleeve, unlike some others who throw it in others faces, or display it like a badge of honor. However, the intense proliferation of religion as an apparent litmus test in the political arena, combined with he science vs. creationism debate regarding evolution, the beginning of the universe,, has driven me to vent – at least in this forum – my own views on what I believe or rather don’t believe in.

I am an atheist. I have been one for some time, but let me clarify what exactly I mean when I use that word.

In the traditional definition, an atheist is someone who does not believe in the existence of a deity. I don’t say “God,” as this is normally meant to mean the god of Judeo – Christian – Islamic theology. I think it’s safe to assume that most, it not all atheists do not believe in the existence of any higher deity, irrespective of the religious dogma that accompanies it. For me, I define atheism in my lack of belief of a literal “God.” I came to his conclusion after becoming acquainted with the books and lectures of the comparative mythologist Joseph Campbell. His work opened me up to a new way of thinking about other religions, as well as addressing the conflicts I felt with the one I was brought up in.

I was raised in a Reform Jewish home, and while I never considered my parents particularly religious, they were very much in tune with the cultural aspect that accompanies Judaism. They were raised during the depression, and in predominantly Jewish neighborhoods in the Bronx and Brooklyn. Their identity as Jews were shaped by both their parents, and the peers they associated with. My mom’s parents in particular, who escaped the pogroms of Tsarist Russia and the fledgling Soviet Union, had a deep Jewish identity.  My father served in WWII in the Navy, in the Pacific theater, and my mother lost aunt’s and uncles to Nazi concentration camps.

By the time I came along, secular Judaism in this country was pretty well entrenched. I went through all the motions expected of a Jewish lad; I attended Hebrew school starting at age nine, learned Hebrew not necessarily out of a need to speak it, but in order to be able to read it well enough by the time my bar mitzvah arrived in September of 1972. I then breathed a sigh of relief, as I no longer had to go to Hebrew school anymore after that momentous life event. All the while however, there was the nagging doubt in the back of my mind as to whether or not there was this all knowing, all seeing, all judgmental old bearded man, of not very pleasant temperament, who resided beyond the mind of humans. The literal nature of this creator deity was not to be questioned. I however, had questions about his existence, questions that were not getting answered. Even the most basic one, “How do we know God is a man?,” was not forthcoming by the rabbis I encountered in Hebrew school.

I suppose I could say that during most of my teenage years, post-bar mitzvah and into young adulthood, I was more agnostic than anything else. I left open the possibility of the existence of God, only because I wasn’t certain in my own mind the he didn’t exist. At the same time, I was expanding my knowledge of science, not through schooling really, but through my own reading of things related to astronomy, the space program, a smattering of physics, and through my involvement in EMS, human biology, and yes, evolution.

Then came Carl Sagan and his incredible “Cosmos” series. it was a television classroom that blew open my mind to concepts and ideas that were never really presented in junior and senior high science classes the way they were presented here. Sagan brought ideas to life for me that before while interesting, were being given in a dry, straightforward, didactic manner. Sagan’s approach brought alive that sense of wonder I had inside of me for things that I felt, but couldn’t express. it brought my nerdiness to the forefront, and didn’t make me feel bad about it. It fed the sci, in my sci-fi innards.

Also in the world at this time, was the ongoing Middle East conflict of Israel vs. the nation du jour. The Yom Kippur War was just a few years prior, but the conflicts that had been playing themselves out since 1948 (and before, if you really thought about it) seemed to go on and on without end. All this time, I kept hearing how it was every Jew’s duty to be loyal to Israel, support her, and if possible, make an aliyah, a pilgrimage that resulted in a permanent move to Israel. It was the duty aspect of it that bothered me. Duty to whom? Why? I wasn’t born there, had no family there, and while I understood the basic politics of what was happening there, and why the US had an interest there, the religious/spiritual/cultural part didn’t ring home with me, as it did for some friends, and many relatives. I also had reservations about moving to a place where a rocket attack, or a bus bombing was a reality, something that we had yet to face here in this country at that time with any frequency.

The religious conflict, Jew vs. Muslim, one interpretation of God over another, also began to fester inside of me. Here we have two religions that use different names for the same creator deity, and because those interpretations are taken so literally, they have been the cause of suffering, and death, and hatred for decades and centuries. Throw Christianity into the mix, and you’ve got a religious gumbo that is non-edible to any sane person.

So there I was, still with no questions to my most basic questions about God, but with science and practical common sense beginning to take a larger role in my own evolution as a person. However, what was to come during the 80’s would truly push me over the wall towards realizing that the idea of a literal God was something I could no longer accept….. (To be continued)


4 thoughts on “My theory of personal evolution: Part 1 – The calm before the singularity.

  1. Dave I just started my own blog on WordPress which highlights or will after I write more, the Jewish connection to spiritual life around the Desert Tabernacle. Since you regard yourself as a Atheist and coming from a Jewish background, I am interested in your thoughts and understanding in these areas.
    You acknowledged Carl Sagan but I would love hear more of your personal moral standing, because “I believe no one can live as though the world were completely amoral.” (Dr. Francis Schaeffer) Cheers 🙂

  2. Hi there…You didn’t leave a name, so I’m not sure how to address you, but you did bring up an interesting question. When it comes to morals, I’m of the feeling that they are not something that religion – any religion – can lay claim to being the sole source of morality for human behavior. I think that morals are something that come out of both an individual and social context. There are those that constantly trumpet the notion that without religion, there can be no morality, yet what constitutes moral behavior varies so much from religion to religion, that I find this idea, at the very least, disingenuous.

    I think that there are certain ways of thinking that seem to come naturally to humans who form social groups, and amongst these things are what is considered proper, and improper behaviors within these groups. In Judaism, you have the Mosaic code, and the Talmud, which dictates all the proper ways of behaving, dressing, preparing foods, etc. These grew out of a religious tradition, but they also reflect the nature of a social structure. In the secular arena, we have the US Constitution, and all the requisite state laws and regulations that perform the same function as what we see in the Talmud. Yet secular laws, at least here in this country, grew more out of the drive for recognition of the individual, and individual rights, as compared to those imposed by a church or religion. When Jefferson made his first draft of the Declaration of Independence, one of his original passages read, “We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable.” In the edits made by Ben Franklin, and John Adams, Franklin had crossed out “sacred and undeniable,” and wrote “self evident.” Franklin expressed the thought that using the word “sacred,” smacked of the pulpit, which was something that was deliberately being avoided when it came to the idea of freedom and individual rights, and governmental authority. (

    The long and short of it for me is that I do not believe that religion is a necessary component for the development of morals. I think they come out of the individual, and let’s be honest here: What’s considered good morality in one belief system can be considered bad morality in another. I think that being an atheist has no bearing on whether one is a moral, or amoral person. I think it’s how one chooses to view the world around him or her, and how to act accordingly. It will eventually come down to the society they live in to make those judgments, based on that person’s actions. In that sense, both the religious and the secular codify moral behavior. It’s still up tothe individual to recognize right from wrong.

    “Do not be too moral. You may cheat yourself out of much life so. Aim above morality. Be not simply good; be good for something.” – Henry David Thoreau

  3. Thanks for your long careful response Dave and by the way call me Rob.

    This being so as you stated, “I do not believe that religion is a necessary component for the development of morals”, suggests to me or I am receiving from you that firstly morals are not restricted to religion and/or that there is no real religious basis of morality since it changes within the individual’s view and social context? Morality has developed within the cultural laws, regulations and traditions of different belief systems such as the Mosaic Code or the secular US Constitution. I am summarising but if I am wrong let me know Dave.

    Being an Aussie I watch the USA from a far off and your Constitution I regard as foundational though imperfect but still the Declaration of Independence is based on the difference between good and bad (or evil).
    Your leaders or Fathers wrote it as Representatives of the USA being careful to put in just the right wording but the morals it dictated for people’s behaviour has not changed, though somewhere along the timeline their words were twisted somewhat to obligate the population’s lifestyle or morals.

    Dave I agree that government and religion should not be joined at the hip as if having the same authority and I also agree that every human at some time as you rightly said, “Its still up to the individual to recognize right from wrong”. I am still presupposing that morals have their existence originally from a source outside ourselves and I am not referring to aliens. That we needed someone or someones to break into to our matrix and reveal to us the truth.
    cheers 🙂

    • Rob – Sorry for the delayed response. Some health issues over the last few weeks have kept me away from the blog. Yes, you summarized my view correctly. As for morals having “their existence originally from a source outside ourselves,” I tend to still think of them as an innate part of the evolution of the human psyche. Each to their own “beliefs.” 😉

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s