The real question is: After God created the universe, did he continually intervene so as to bring about the evolution of life and human beings, or did this happen as a result of natural processes such as genetic mutations and natural selection? Many Christians feel that the natural selection viewpoint implies that life and the evolution of humanity is something akin to a random occurrence or accident, and that given the complexity and special nature of human beings, such a viewpoint cannot possibly be correct. Furthermore, if each and every one of us has a soul, and the human body is a vehicle for this soul, how could it not have been designed? Other Christians, however, have seen the compelling evidence for natural selection as the driver of evolution, and feel that to disregard this evidence is to bury our heads in the sand.

So, can we believe in God, believe we each have a soul, believe in heaven, and yet not believe that God created and designed human beings? The answer is that we do not have to. As we shall see, whether we believe that evolution was driven by divine intervention, or by the forces of nature, it is still quite correct to say that God created and designed human beings. The reason is simple: if God is both omniscient and omnipotent, then when he created the universe, he knew exactly how life would evolve and how human beings would come about. It is similar to shooting an arrow at a deer: although our action may be to simply pull an arrow against a bowstring and subsequently release, anyone would agree that by doing so, we kill the deer. It would be absurd to argue that the laws of gravity and momentum killed the deer, and that we had no part in it. Similarly, for an omniscient God, creating the universe such that human beings would evolve, and directly creating human beings, amounts to the same thing.

Hence, the dispute is not over whether God created human beings. Instead, it is the less controversial question of whether the initial creation was enough to bring about human beings, or whether God subsequently intervened to bring them about. Those arguing for the latter viewpoint are effectively arguing for a less powerful god, because their viewpoint raises the question: “why did God have to intervene?”.

Returning to our arrow analogy, suppose that God were to shoot an arrow at a deer. We then ask, would the arrow take its course and hit the deer, or would God have to subsequently intervene to ensure that the deer is struck? Two possibilities that might require intervention are (1) if the deer were to move, or (2) if the wind were to change and blow the arrow off course. This implies that there are forces outside of God’s knowledge, such as the wind, or the will of the deer. Therefore, intervention is required if God is not completely omniscient.

Even if God is omniscient, intervention may still be required. Suppose that the deer is far away and the arrow cannot reach it. God may not be able to achieve the force necessary to strike the deer without breaking the string of his bow. The argument here is that, if God is bound by the laws of nature, then it may not be possible for him to create an initial universe in which human beings are guaranteed to evolve. This implies that God is bound by the laws of nature, and thus his omnipotence has limits.

So we are left with two cases in which intervention is required: The first is that God is not completely omniscient, and thus his initial creation may not lead to the results that he wants, necessitating later intervention. The second is that God is not completely omnipotent but is rather bound by the laws of nature, and that it is impossible to create a creation that leads to human beings within the bounds of these laws.

As a final point, we note that we can also disregard divine intervention as a possibility, and yet still not believe that genetic mutations and natural selection alone explain the evolution of human beings. To make a final return to the arrow analogy, the path of an arrow cannot be completely described without considering the phenomenon of air resistance. Similarly, there may be a third, completely natural factor, that has also contributed to evolution. Currently, scientists tell us that such a factor is unnecessary to explain the observed evolution of life, but perhaps that will change.

As always, the goal of this site is not to argue for one position over another, but rather to encourage people to think about why they believe what they do. For those who believe that God created human beings, we point out that such a belief can be perfectly consistent with natural selection. For those who insist upon subsequent divine intervention, we ask them why: is it because God is not completely omniscient, or because he is not completely omnipotent? Or perhaps you will come up with another reason, such as that he changed his mind about how the creation should look. Whatever your viewpoint, we encourage thinking about it, challenging it, and asking whether it really makes sense. It is sad that people become so emotional and caught up in this debate over intelligent design, and yet despite their willingness to attack the convictions of others, they have seldom investigated their own.

It is commonly said in psychology that the first step in progressing forward is acknowledgement - to be honest with ourselves. The same is true of spirituality. It is very difficult to make spiritual progress if we do not first admit our own beliefs. It is like using a map to find directions, but without knowing where we start from. We must be honest with ourselves, and we must also be honest with others. If we are not honest with others, then we usually end up lying to ourselves, and furthermore, our dishonesty may lead them astray. In addition, we must respect the right of others to be honest and open about their own beliefs without fear of judgement.

Religion is a major cause of people’s dishonesty about their beliefs. The reason is that many religions, particularly the theistic ones, tell us what we ought to believe. In fact, we are often told that believing some certain set of things is what will determine our salvation. This is a problem, because it leads people into trying to convince themselves that they believe something, whereas belief is not a choice. We cannot consciously change our beliefs. We can only question them with an open mind, and allow them to evolve of their own accord.

Hence, instead of trying to believe this or that, in accordance with society’s beliefs or what our religion tells us to believe, we should focus on discovering what we truly believe. When we learn to recognize these closely guarded beliefs, we open the door to change. We should never be ashamed of our beliefs, and nor should we try to make them one way or another. All we have to do is be honest about them, maintain integrity, and challenge them and question them on every step of the way.

When we get stuck in victim mentality, misery clings to us like a baby monkey to its mother. Our health and relationships deteriorate. There is bad luck wherever we look. We may be resentful of life in general (”Everything always goes wrong!”), or just one thing (”Life would be so perfect if it weren’t for such and such!”). Whatever the case, when victim mentality takes over, things go downhill fast.

People genuinely unhappy about something may argue that their attitude is valid. They will say that they are truly not to blame, and that they really do suffer through no fault of their own. Although this logic may seem reasonable, I have found it to be a very unhelpful attitude in life. I am not suggesting that we admonish ourselves with the rebuke that we deserve all the ill that we get, but we will find we have much lighter hearts when we take responsibility for our lives, and this includes those things over which we appear to have no control. There are several belief systems that are helpful here: One is the Indian and Buddhist notion of karma, which says that all that happens to us is a result of our earlier deeds. Another belief popular in the New Age movement is the idea that we attract the experiences that we most need to grow (including our parents, our surroundings, and our body). Hence, there is no point in resenting others, or in resenting situations, because they are exactly what we need right now. Another belief system is the idea that all that happens is the will of God, or the will of the Universe. While this last belief is useful, and the resulting sense of acceptance may be enough for some people, others will benefit more through a belief that includes the notion that they are personally responsible for what goes on.

Whichever belief system we use, it is essential that we escape this victim mentality. Tempered with a healthy sense of self-esteem, and the knowledge that we are doing the best we can, there is little doubt that our lives will become happier as a result. When we catch ourselves blaming others for our misery, or resenting that lingering illness or other misfortune, we would do well to stop being a victim, and instead accept responsibility for our lives.

The emphasis on belief is peculiar to theistic religions. The common question in the West is “what are your religious beliefs?”. It would seem that a more pertinent question would relate to one’s spiritual practices or views. After all, there is more to religion than sitting quietly in a corner and believing something. Surely it is more important to love thy neighbour, practise forgiveness, speak the truth and give generously. These things have a much greater effect in the world.

People hold many views on how the universe was created, how humans came about, and the role of God and whether he exists. Some of these views may be wrong, and they may be many different perspectives on the same thing. In Good Company, there is a story of an elephant who appears in a village inhabited mainly by blind people. Each wanted to experience the elephant, but of course each touched a different part.

The one who felt the foot said an elephant was a pillar, the one who had felt the tail said it was like a stick, and so it went on with the ears, trunk, tusks, fat belly, etc. Each person described it according to the type of experience to which they could relate it. Then they started arguing. ‘Yours was not the proper elephant, yours was illusion, mine is the only real one, etc.’ Later on the mahout told them, ‘You cannot have a complete picture of the elephant. All you can do is put together all your different experiences of “elephant”, and out of these experiences you can imagine a novel creature known as “elephant”. But it is the sum of all these parts and something more, which represents the wholeness of the creature known as “elephant”.’

Like the blind men and the elephant, it is easy for us to disagree about the nature of the universe or a concept such as God, even if we are all talking about the same thing. Does this disagreement matter?

At the end of the day, I do not think we will go to heaven based on our understanding of metaphysics. Our religious beliefs are not a strong indicator of our character. The Truth is beyond our comprehension, and there is no shame is saying that we do not know, or in saying, as Russell said, “Not enough evidence, God! Not enough evidence!” If we are to judge our character, it should not be based on our beliefs in God, a soul, or life after death. Instead, it should be based on who we are, how we treat others, and how we live our lives. It is qualities such as honesty, integrity, and love, that will determine our final destination.

Why must we always be entertained? Entertainment is defined as “an activity that is diverting and that holds the attention”. Why do we need activities to hold our attention? What are we trying to divert our attention from?

The sad truth is that many of us are uncomfortable simply being with ourselves. We hold within ourselves these anxieties that we are unwilling to face, and so we avoid stillness at all costs. It is similar to a student who may find all manner of tasks to do in order to procrastinate from studying. Paradoxically however, seeking entertainment only increases our anxiety. It creates a sense that we are avoiding something, which is in itself a cause of stress. Furthermore, by losing touch with ourselves, internal conflicts and emotions build up without us being aware of them.

Even a little time away from this entertainment mentality goes a long way in returning peace and stillness to our lives. There is a very simple method for achieving this. Between any two activities, we simply rest for a moment in stillness. If we wish, we can focus our attention by letting the mind rest with the gentle flow of breath in and out of our bodies. Initially, these pauses between activities may not seem still at all, because they make us aware of just how turbulent our minds are. However, with time, our minds become conditioned to these moments of rest, and they make an enormous difference to our days. Therefore, the next time we catch our minds jumping from one activity to another, craving some kind of entertainment, we should instead try to just sit still for a moment, and to gently observe what happens. The results may be pleasantly reassuring.

Steve strikes to the heart of spiritual inquiry when he declares that “a sound spiritual philosophy must be rooted in truth”, and that we must “strive to perceive reality as accurately as possible”. People so often choose their beliefs based on what is convenient and appealing, or by following their family and society at large. Yet beliefs can only be based on one guiding principle, and that is the principle of truth. Therefore, we must have the courage to strike out on our own and discover what we truly align with. We must recognize, as Steve says, that “there’s only one true authority in your life, and it’s you”. These principles - truth, courage, and authority - are just three of the seven principles described in the book, and together they empower us to tackle every area of our lives.

Steve also discusses the importance of exploring different belief systems and considering unfamiliar perspectives. When our goal is open-minded spiritual inquiry, it is clearly foolish to limit our perspectives to the few belief systems with which we are familiar. In the past, religions have sometimes warned against exploring other faiths. Such an approach is based on insecurity: we are afraid that by considering other beliefs, we will realize that our own beliefs are wrong. However, remembering that our primary goal is the pursuit of truth, this possibility should excite us rather than scare us.

Perhaps this fear of discovering our own beliefs are wrong results from a discordance from the principle of power. Our beliefs do not define us, and “one of the most empowering choices you can make is to decouple your spiritual beliefs from your identity”. As Steve points out, this does not only limit our ability to grow, but it also makes it harder for us to connect with people who hold different beliefs. Rather than holding to ideas such as “I am a Christian”, or an agnostic, or whatever, we must examine reality from multiple viewpoints, making it easier to see the big picture.

These lessons are not restricted to spirituality. They are representative of Steve’s approach to all personal growth. Be it our spirituality, our finances, our relationships, or our health, we are foolish to limit our thought to fixed preconceptions, and we must have the courage to be honest with ourselves and to seek out the truth. Steve challenges us to explore different viewpoints and to rethink every area of our life. More importantly, he teaches us how to do this rethinking.

There was a small village in the middle of India that was said to suffer from a strange disease called laziness. An American heard of this rare disease and set off to find this village and cure them of their ailment. After several days of travel, he entered the village, and soon came across a middle-aged man lying in a hammock. The man was sipping a drink with a contented smile on his face. Delighted to find a specimen of laziness so quickly, the American waved his hand in front of the man’s face and asked him what we was doing.

“I am lying in a hammock,” replied the man.

“Yes, but what do you do for a living?” asked the American.

“I fish,” came the reply.

“Have you caught any fish today?”

“Yes, I caught two big ones this morning.”

“Then why don’t you go and fish more?” inquired the American.

“What for?” asked the man.

“Well, because then you could sell your surplus fish at the market and buy a fishing boat, which would enable you to catch even more fish.”

“What for?” asked the man again.

“Well, with the profits from that, you would be able to afford a trawler, and then you could catch so many fish that you would be able to sell to the neighbouring villages as well.”

“What for?” repeated the man.

“Well, with the profits from that, you could build a bigger house, a gazebo and a swimming pool, and you could buy an expensive car to travel whenever and wherever you please.”

“What for?” repeated the man.

“Well, to be happy, of course!” snapped the American, losing his patience.

“I am happy already,” the man responded. “Why go to all that effort for something I have in abundance?”

We spend so much of our lives busily trying to achieve this goal or that. Usually, the goal we aim for is merely a stepping stone to another goal, which is in turn a stepping stone to something else again. If we were to stop and think about our final goal, we would often realize that there is a much more direct way to achieve it. The speed at which we move does not guarantee that we will progress the fastest. The direction is of the most importance.

If we are married, we probably do not see our spouse during the day. We say goodbye in the morning when we leave for work, we then do our daily work alone, eat lunch alone, and only reunite at the end of the day. Even then, we probably do not spend all our time together. Perhaps one of us watches TV while the other talks on the phone or prepares a meal. Yet despite all this time apart from our spouse, there is no sense of loneliness. Although we do our daily work separately, we know that the other is only a few miles away, that we will see them at the end of the day, that with a simple phone call we can hear their voice. This knowledge makes us content.

Now consider when our spouse needs to travel for a period, perhaps for a month or more. This could cause terrible loneliness. Suddenly, we eat our lunch and feel lonely. We do our daily work and feel lonely. We come home and watch TV and feel lonely. Even in those times when we would not have been with our spouse anyway, we still feel lonely, because there is this idea in our heads that our spouse is a long way away. Although our daily activities are largely unchanged, they are now imbued with sadness.

Thus, we can see that this notion of loneliness is just an idea in our head. We take an ordinary activity such as driving to work, and we attach this idea of “I’m lonely” to it. We may be lonely because our spouse is away, or it may be because we are single, divorced, widowed, or friendless. We may also be attaching ideas other than loneliness. Perhaps we spend our days thinking that we are broke, sick, unpopular, or old. These ideas seldom have any relevance to the present moment and the task at hand. They are just ideas that go around in our heads and serve only to make us miserable.

Therefore, to fight loneliness, or any other condition, we must learn to reside in the present moment. We must keep our attention with whatever we are doing, and not devote energy to these foolish ideas of being lonely, broke, sick, or anything else. This is not to say that we must ignore such problems. If we are lonely, we can make an effort to meet people. If we are broke, we can look for a new job. However, we must ensure that we only deal with such problems at the appropriate time and place. We must not let them consume our minds at every moment of the day - while eating breakfast, while watching a movie, or when looking after our kids. If we feed ideas with attention in this way, they will expand in our heads and take on more significance, and this will only make our problems worse.

Understanding assists love by helping us recognize ourselves in others, and helping us see that for all our superficial differences, we are of the same essence. Without understanding, it is all too easy to be judgemental. We see someone acting selfishly, and a barrage of anger and criticism arises within us. Understanding helps us see past their behaviour and to recognize that this seemingly selfish person seeks love and happiness, just the same as we do. Rather than judging that person as “bad”, we view their selfishness as ignorance, and we feel compassion for them. Understanding makes us more accepting, less judgemental, and thereby removes some of the impediments to love.

Love, on the other hand, is the quality that makes us try to understand another person in the first place. It is what makes us willing to reach out and touch them, to put ourselves in their shoes. Love is what stops us from rejecting or ignoring those whom we may otherwise recoil from. Whereas understanding is helpful for love, love is absolutely essential for true understanding. It is the faith in humanity that causes us, when we see someone acting nastily and we do not know why, to have compassion for them anyway. Only with this compassion can we even begin to think about why they act the way they do. Only with this compassion can we come to understand them and to love them completely.

Therefore, when we come to love and understand a person or thing, the first impulse is from the heart. The love comes before the understanding. However, from this point on, they each boost each other. Without understanding, there is a danger that the love will go away. Understanding is what maintains the love and helps it expand to encompass all. Yet without love, the understanding is empty. Love is not merely understanding a person, but feeling compassion for them, wanting to help them, and holding them in our hearts.