Religion and evolution
By Jimmy Henderson
The whole idea of evolution has always been a contentious issue between religionists and scientists. Yet the evolution of the human being also links up with the idea of spiritual evolution. For instance, everything seems to point to the fact that the universe is geared towards growth and that in terms of human development this evolutionary process usually takes place naturally as the result of our day-to-day learning and growth experiences. But does this growth and development necessarily imply that we have descended from apes?
Even from a scientific viewpoint, there are major problems in trying to prove that we descended from apes. For instance, there are clear genetic distinctions between apes and humans. And from a common-sense point of view, if apes have evolved into humans, why are apes still around today? The fact that they (the apes) have been reproducing offspring for millions of years, suggests that the gene patterns of apes and humans have been separate since the beginning.
Second, the offering of a few bones as a missing link from the past does not really provide proof of an entire species of what should have been millions of individuals. Ape-men (half-ape, half-man) are presently simply nowhere to be seen, and at least some of them should still be around if all apes were in the process of slowly evolving into men.
However, does this support the religious argument that evolution did not take place at all, or is this whole process simply misunderstood? I believe the latter is true. For instance, from the standpoint of reason, we will still need to concede that even scientific or logical arguments that we have not evolved from apes does not necessarily imply that we were created in our current form, although this seems to be the most popular religious argument. Even over a relatively short period of a few centuries, our bodies have changed and certainly our mental and scientific thinking abilities have improved exponentially, so there does appear to be a rapid process of development taking place.
Perhaps the key to reconciling science with religion with regard to the theory of evolution lies with human psychology. For instance, the emergence of a distinct individual personality in a sentient being can logically only take place when there is a degree of self-awareness. This suggests that self -consciousness can only emerge in an individual when the particular structure is sufficiently complex to receive it. This supports the idea that early man may have existed in some primitive form or another, but did not become a distinct personality until his body and nervous system had evolved to a point where it could sustain self-awareness, at which point he became a ‘living soul’ (Gen. 2:7). Also, much of the Bible is written using metaphors and parables and it is quite possible that the 6 days mentioned in Holy Scriptures is a metaphor for 6 periods or stages of development. (The Bible does say that to God, a day is like a thousand years) (2 Peter 3:8). And that the spirit (breath) of God may only have entered the human body when it was ready and sufficiently complex to achieve self-awareness (following a period of evolution) Scriptures are not clear on exactly when and how long it took for the spirit to enter the body and for man to become a living soul. (Gen 2:7).

The metaphor of the ‘Divine Mind’
‘We exist in the Divine Mind as mental patterns or forms. And what we experience as separation from God is only the result of a loss of consciousness’.
J. Henderson

Many older religious and philosophical texts have likened the creator to a universal Divine Intelligence or ‘Mind’. This can be seen as a metaphor for a state of Being and existence which even now, we do not fully comprehend. This idea of a single Intelligence permeating the universe, from which we derive our own consciousness, links up with recent research into quantum physics as well as recent approaches in cognitive psychology which suggest that our sense of reality is actually composed of subjective experiences taking place in our consciousness. Within this framework, the ‘Divine Mind’ would not actually create reality as we see or know it, but rather a ‘situation’, which we interpret as real in terms of our own symbolic processes.
‘As above so below’
Hermes Trismegistus
Our view of reality
The metaphor of a Divine mind has huge implications for our understanding of reality as well as of ourselves and our true role and purpose in the universe. To explain this further, I will use an example based on the functioning of our own minds. We already know that we, as human beings, can create complex visual images using our faculty of imagery and our imagination. With practice, these images can be very real, three-dimensional and have a powerful effect on our bodies and unconscious minds. This can be seen in our bodies’ responses to dreams or nightmares. Now imagine a universal Divine Mind or Intelligence able to create and sustain elemental forms and images so powerful they assume a tangible quality in our minds.
What are we, if not consciousness?
This leads us to the question of our existence, role and purpose within such a metaphorical ‘Divine Mind’. Once again, let us relate this metaphor to the present structure and processing of our own minds. The famous psychologist Dr.George Kelly developed a theory in which our mind and thinking is seen as being organised into ‘personal constructs’ or mental representations of the world based on all our past experiences and memories. He showed that this ‘internal packaging’ of the mind into different images, thoughts and ideas, is every efficient, in that it actually speeds up and improves mental processing. He also showed that these ‘constructs’ are dynamic and actually grow and develop, becoming more complex over time.
If we relate this research to the idea of a universal ‘divine mind’, it suggests that our own individual personalities and minds could, in a similar way, be viewed as ‘constructs’ of a single, superior, universal or divine consciousness. Our human actions, experiences, thoughts and emotions would then provide the structure, content and form to this universal consciousness.
Archetypal images
However, it does not end there. As I said earlier, ‘constructs’ can also take the form of images, which represent the content of the mind in which they occur. And religious texts have always stated unequivocally that we, as human beings, are created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26). Perhaps this can now make more sense when viewed within the framework of us being constructs or archetypes of the universal Divine Mind. Archetypes also occur naturally within our own minds. These can be described as clusters or patterns of unresolved drives, thoughts, emotions or aspects of our psyche which form sub-personalities and appear to have a life of their own. Well known examples of archetypes are our ‘inner child’, the ‘parent’, the ‘victim’, the ‘aggressor’ or the ‘hero’.
If we accept ourselves as self-conscious archetypes of a single universal Divine Mind and Consciousness, it becomes easier to understand how we could exist as an ‘image’, simply by being able to embody and reflect this consciousness to various degrees.
What is particularly interesting is that if we extend this idea, we can also see how other powerful archetypes could exist and function independently of ourselves, having also evolved within the universal ‘whole’ or ‘collective unconscious’, as Carl Jung describes it. In fact, in terms of this metaphor, all forms of life and consciousness, including ourselves and other celestial beings such as angels or archangels, could be viewed as archetypal images within the Divine Mind or Intelligence, expressing aspects of this transcendent personality to various degrees and all being part of one great plan of divine evolution or unfoldment.
The metaphor of the dream
Finally, this metaphor is also very useful in explaining what is meant when some esoteric writers refer to the world as one of illusion, delusion or a dream. We can all dream and there is no logical reason why a universal Divine Mind would not be able to dream as well. In terms of this ‘metaphor within a metaphor’ (the dream within the Universal Mind), every situation and event would be very real to us (such as is experienced during a particularly bad dream). However, as with a dream, these experiences would ultimately exist only in consciousness. The fact that we all share these same experiences (a shared dream) would suggest that we all form an integral part of this universal Divine Mind as well as the dream, and would explain why we can never view ourselves as separate from God.

Jimmy Henderson is a metaphysical teacher and the author of a number of books and articles on self-development. His latest book ‘Multi-dimensional Thinking’ (Kima Global, 2007) is available at selected bookshops. He is also a facilitator with Metavarsity and based in KZ Natal.
http://www.kimaglobal.co.za/cgi-bin/go.pl/author_books.html?author_name=Jimmy%20Henderson
www.jimmyhendersonbooks.blogspot.com