The influence of Darwinism and theosophy in Western society: new age philosophy
On November 24, 1859, Charles Darwin's book 'On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection', or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life, was published in London. The theory presented in the book was based on the concept that different animal species evolve over time through the process of natural selection. From this theory, the philosophy known as social Darwinism was developed in subsequent years.
On November 17, 1875, the Theosophical Society was founded in New York. The main founding partners were Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, Herny Steel Olcott and William Quan Judge.
Apparently, these two events are not related to each other. However, the large-scale spread of these philosophies, which are instead interconnected, influenced the entire Western world, even giving rise to new currents of thought (the new age).
Let us briefly analyze the theory of evolution and the subsequent Darwinian philosophy, and then concentrate on theosophical philosophy and its derivations.
First of all, it must be made clear that today, more than one hundred and fifty years after the publication of Darwin's book, the theory of evolution remains an unproven theory.
Let's see why: this theory is based on the absurd concept of spontaneous generation. By an incredible sequence of coincidences, life would have originated, from nothing, from inert matter and, therefore, from the single-celled being, all animals would have originated, also coincidentally, until reaching the human being, who would be “alone,” a more developed animal, with more intelligence than the others. From chaos, then, order would have been generated, through chance. However, according to the second principle of thermodynamics, there is a tendency to go from order to disorder, and not vice versa. Life cannot be generated casually from inert matter. Experiments have been done to try to demonstrate that by joining carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and nitrogen atoms, and then adding electric discharges, some elementary molecules could be generated, but so far they have not given any results. Some amino acids have been produced, but no proteins. And, furthermore, the casual passage of the protein into the cell with a membrane is inconceivable.
According to evolutionists, life would have been born from the inert elements produced after the Big Bang. However, this hypothesis is contrary to Pasteur's law of biogenesis, which maintains that life can be born only from life, and not from inert matter. Some evolutionists hold “by faith” that spontaneous generation happened only once, billions of years ago. But none of them have proven that it happened and none of them have explained why it can't happen other times.
The central message of Darwin's book, which to this day has not yet been scientifically proven, is that after chance mutations, some animals adapt better than others to the surrounding environment and, in the course of time, transform, giving rise to new species.
But natural selection, or the survival of the best, the most adapted, does not produce new species. There is a big difference between “adaptation”, “genetic mutation” and “evolution of the species in other species with different genetic heritage”.
Until now, genetic mutation is the only mechanism that some evolutionary scientists have proposed to achieve evolutionary change, practically to explain that the human being came from a single molecule. However, genetic mutation is a rare event, and it has not been proven to produce new genetic heritage.
Very soon, from this unproven scientific theory, a new current of philosophical thought arose, “social Darwinism” (1879), disseminated mainly by Herbert Spencer. This philosophy is based on the concept that the struggle for life would found human societies. Therefore, the “survival of the fittest” would be a concept applicable not only to the animal kingdom, but also to man, man being, in the Darwinian vision, a developed animal.
The Catholic Church immediately opposed this concept, highlighting that, according to Christianity, all men are equal before God, since Jesus Christ died on the cross for the salvation of us and that class and census differences should be reduced, not considered as the basis of competition between men.
Unfortunately, the concept of the claim of the most adapted developed widely in Western society and influenced people like Francis Galton, the sponsor of eugenics, that is, the science that deals with “improving the human race” (a concept later taken up by the Nazis).
Social Darwinism then spread as a theory that based a legitimation of the “pure race” and, therefore, the affirmation of an ideologized and totalizing political power.
From the beginning of the 20th century, “social Darwinism”, together with theosophical philosophy, served as a substrate for the dissemination of Ariosophy, Nazi mysticism and neo-paganism, concepts that later gave rise to the rise of National Socialism.
Let us now return to the 19th century. In 1875 the Theosophical Society was founded in New York. In reality, the word “theosophy” is very old and indicates a sapiential journey through which one could reach God.
Indeed, as early as the second century AD, Christian Gnosticism was a form of theosophy. Gnosticism was not an original faith, but an adaptation of the Gnostic view of the event of Jesus Christ. The Gnostics of the 2nd century AD believed that salvation was not achieved through repentance of one's sins and through faith in Jesus Christ, but rather they believed that they could unite with God through gnosis, or knowledge. Gnosticism had, therefore, an initiatory characteristic not open to everyone and a diverse Christological conception, since, according to the Gnostics, the Word (God) could not have become flesh, but rather manifested itself in the spirit showing an apparent material body. The Gnostic vision, therefore, was not an original faith, but an adaptation of Gnostic concepts applied to Christianity.
Also after the Renaissance, some theosophical philosophers maintained that the only way to reach God was through knowledge and not through repentance of one's own sins and faith in Jesus Christ. However, these ideas were opposed by the Catholic Church from the beginning and, therefore, had little diffusion. It was later the Enlightenment, that is, in the 19th century, when Gnostic, esoteric and theosophical ideas developed and began to take hold.
In the 19th century, the idea that all religions have a common origin began to spread, especially with the thought of the Russian-American occultist Helena Petrovna Blavatsky (1831-1891). It should be noted that H. P. Blavatsky was affiliated with Freemasonry. Blavatsky claimed to have traveled to Asia, particularly to India and Tibet, where she would have met the “masters of ancient teaching.” She was undoubtedly influenced by the Indian religions and, upon her return to the West, she effected a syncretism between them and the Abrahamic religions. Blatavsky maintained that Christianity would be an obstacle to achieving the Truth and she spread the concepts of self-deification and reincarnation.
Theosophy is, therefore, an esoteric philosophy that would lead man to the true knowledge of God through wisdom. This philosophy is therefore very different from Christianity, at the base of which are humility, repentance of one's own sins and faith in Jesus Christ, with the ultimate goal of achieving salvation.
Another basic concept of theosophy, which is very well illustrated by the symbol of the theosophical society, is the assimilation of different beliefs, all considered “true.” The theosophical symbol is, in fact, formed by the swastika (in turn a symbol of Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism), by the star of David (symbol of Judaism), by the ansada cross (axial symbol from ancient Egypt), by the Om (symbol of Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism, but also of Sikhism), all surrounded by the Ouroboros, the snake that bites its tail, the eternal return, which is a symbol, in pre-Abrahamic cultures, but also in cultures South American indigenous people, of life, of eternal regeneration.
Theosophy, therefore, is based on the relativistic concept by which it is maintained that all religions are equal, and that the Truth is in all the different beliefs. According to this concept, all religions would be true, because they all preach love and peace.
However, religions are not all the same; On the contrary, each one is different from the others.
For example, in Eastern religions concepts other than those expressed in Christianity predominate, such as that of nirvana, union with the absolute, or the very concept of pantheism, that is, of a god who is in all things.
This is how we begin to understand that for Deism, one of the basic concepts of Freemasonry, Jesus Christ would be assimilated to Krishna, Buddha or Zoroaster and, therefore, to a wise man, a great philosopher and thinker, or perhaps the greatest of all, but human after all and not, as in Christian belief, the “Savior of the World”, the “Word”, that is, “God the Son”.
Furthermore, with the spread of theosophical philosophy, the Neoplatonic idea of metempsychosis began to be affirmed, which substantially coincided with the concept of the reincarnation of souls in Buddhist and Hindu beliefs.
It is necessary to remember that in 1872 Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite by the American Albert Pike was published, the main work of Freemasonry, which influenced the esoteric HP Blavatsky and all the relativistic thinking of the 20th century.
We then see how at the beginning of the 20th century, fertile ground was created for the dissemination of Masonic and initiatory ideas, which contemplated the denial of Christianity and considered Jesus Christ as a wise man, but not as the incarnation of the Word. Other philosophers disseminated these ideas at the beginning of the 20th century, such as the Austrian esotericist Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925), founder of anthroposophy; the French freemason René Guénon (1886-1951) and the Russian occultist George Gurdjieff (1877-1949).
After the end of World War II, the United States of America and the Soviet Union asserted themselves as the world's only superpowers. A golden period was opening for the development of science and technology. Nuclear energy had been mastered, new jet aircraft had been built, new missiles would soon encompass the immensity of cosmic space and new medicines would solve the problem of disease, defeating suffering and pain. It seemed almost as if man had achieved total mastery over the forces of nature. Since 1930, Darwin's theory of evolution had been disseminated in schools in the Soviet Union. The majority of Soviet people had already been atheists since 1950. The communist Karl Marx's phrase had been forcibly installed among the masses of peasants and workers: “Religion is the opium of the people.”
Starting in 1950, in the Soviet Union, several concepts derived from nihilism even led to supranaturalism, that is, to cosmist philosophy, based on the concept that man, through science, could achieve immortality, resurrect their ancestors and colonize the universe.
Practically, man could become God. This is how the old Gnostic dream, that of union with God, would be put into practice, shortly, but not with spirituality, but with technique.
However, in all this was once again the denial of Jesus Christ and his sacrifice made for us on the cross. In all of this, man, with his utmost arrogance, claimed to be God himself, and turned his back on Jesus Christ.
However, later, in 1991, with the fall of the Soviet Union, Christianity re-established itself and, therefore, where it was thought that Jesus Christ had been defeated, the true loser was precisely Karl Marx and his communist ideology.
But let's go back now to 1950/60.
Both in the Soviet Union and in the West, despite the developments in science, ordinary people could not do without spiritual search. The concept of “life after death” and, therefore, of the soul, is so rooted in human beings that not even the sum of all these anti-religious philosophies can completely eradicate it. This is how, starting in 1970, a cultural movement called “new era” spread in the United States.
The origin of the new age movement can be recognized both in the affirmation of Darwinian philosophy and in theosophical philosophy. First of all, it is precisely the term “evolution” that begins to permeate the depths of Western society.
The theory of evolution is taught in schools and children are indoctrinated not only to believe that this theory is completely true, but they are even indirectly induced to assume the concept of personal “evolution” and, therefore, also spiritual, in their present and future lives. Everything revolves around a supposed evolution of which we must all be part. This is how the concept of spiritual evolution and personal improvement merge very well with the concepts expressed in new age philosophy. According to the defenders of the new era, the sun, according to the law of precession of the equinoxes, would be about to pass from the sign of Pisces to the sign of Aquarius. This is how a “new era” would begin.
The new age is recognized as a set of philosophies, many of which derive from Eastern religions, which are syncretized and opportunely Westernized. The Masonic and theosophical substratum allows us to consider that the truth is in each of these tendencies. But, as we have seen, the Truth by definition cannot be in opposing philosophies and religions, so here we already identify a strong contradiction.
The new era takes up the old Gnostic and Eastern concept by which the individual soul, present in each of us, would be part of the universal soul. With the overcoming of the self and with appropriate spiritual evolution techniques, each of us could become God!
The new era is presented as a set of Gnostic and pantheistic currents. The universe would be dominated by a force, sometimes called “cosmic energy.” To reach this energy, unite with it, it is necessary to rise and, therefore, evolve through the mediation of some minor spiritual forces. Man, for the new era, was not created by God with a direct action, but would be the fruit of constant evolution. Already here many points contrary to Christianity are observed. The evolutionary conception of man, derived from Darwinian influences, encourages arrogance, which leads to classism and esotericism. Only the initiated would be the pure ones, who achieve union with God or with cosmic energy. Salvation in this case would not be a possibility offered to everyone, but only to the wise. In Christianity, however, it is not man who must evolve to reach God, but it is God who became flesh to come to save man. The two concepts are, therefore, opposites.
As far as sin is concerned, many adherents of new age philosophy maintain that it does not exist. Since God is not, in the new age vision, a personal being, there is no “sin against God,” but only a non-perfect knowledge of the Absolute. In the new age there would be a self-redemption, but it is not explained, however, how a sinner could purify sin from him. Take a murderer for example. In no way can he bring back to life the person he killed. He can show repentance to the victim's relatives, dedicate his entire life to them to seek to compensate for his act, but he will never be able to bring the person he murdered back to life. According to new age philosophy, the subject who committed murder could achieve perfect knowledge of himself, and only then could he purify himself from sin. But the murdered remains murdered. And therefore, in the new age, no one can truly atone for a sin.
With Christianity, however, it is Jesus Christ who atoned for our sins on the cross. Therefore, by believing in him and in his atoning sacrifice, man obtains forgiveness of sins and salvation from him.
Other followers of the new age who pursue Eastern philosophies such as Buddhism and Hinduism maintain that sin is purified by the reincarnation of souls. But the belief in reincarnation does not solve the problem of evil either. Indeed, according to the law of karma, whoever murdered will be reincarnated in the next life as a person who will in turn be murdered. Only then will he pay for having committed a sin. But in order to be killed, that person in turn needs a new killer. So reincarnation, instead of solving the problem of evil, multiplies it to infinity.
In the new era, Eastern religions and philosophies spread, such as Buddhism, Hinduism, Tao, Yoga, Zen, Tantra, Reiki, Feng-shui and Transcendental Meditation, but also more Western concepts. such as anthroposophy, spiritualism and neo-paganism, and also new religions such as Scientology, the UFO creed and the Raelians. According to new age beliefs, each of these traditions can lead to enlightenment, to union with cosmic energy, with the force that invades the universe.
However, this cosmic energy is often conceived in opposition to God the Father, seen as patriarchal and Transcendent.
While in Christianity God is Transcendent, in the new era, universal energy is present in the immanent and invades the universe. In new age pantheism “everything is god.” But if everything is god, nothing is god.
For the followers of the new age, whoever knows how to channel this supposed divine energy towards themselves, achieves enlightenment or perfect knowledge and could then unite with cosmic energy. This divine energy is often called “Christ energy”: Christ is, therefore, anyone who obtains this cosmic energy and knows how to channel it.
For Christianity, Jesus Christ is the Word (God incarnate), died on the cross to take away the sin of the world, and was resurrected on the third day, conquering sin and death.
In the new era, Jesus Christ is demoted to a great sage, a person who knew how to concentrate “the Christ energy” within himself. For the new age, Jesus of Nazareth was not “the Christ,” but only a great sage, on par with Krishna, Buddha, and Zoroaster.
Now we realize how the new era, derived mainly from theosophy, took various concepts from Freemasonry, Deism and Eastern religions, syncretizing them and showing them as original, when they are not. And from this moment we can affirm that the new era cannot have anything to do with Christianity, since it denies it in its essence.
The new era is also identified with current ecological movements that use terms such as “mother earth”, “mother nature”, “gaya” or “pachamama”, to emphasize that nature would have a mind. According to this concept, the earth itself, conceived in its entirety, would be interconnected or could respond to external stimuli or attacks. Therefore, the earth, and with it nature, would have a mind.
However, nature cannot have a mind, since it is a set of elements that do not demonstrate intelligence. Nature cannot be the “first cause.”
The “first cause” is, by definition, the entity that no one created, that has always existed and that gave rise to everything created.
Another characteristic of the new era is the denial of differences. Good and evil, as well as masculine and feminine, would no longer be useful and would be outdated concepts. The human would merge with the divine, the soul with the body, and the immanent with the Transcendent. Let us note that the new era fits very well with today's society, individualistic and focused on the elevation of one's own self. The new era is also integrated into the global culture that various power groups want to impose on Western society. In the new era everyone can create their own spirituality. Since in this perspective there is no concept of a personal God, there is no concept of sin, and therefore, the elimination of the ethical norms that underpin Christianity is supported. For example, abortion, euthanasia, unions between homosexuals and even the adoption of children to homosexual couples are endorsed, in addition to abominable practices such as surrogacy (gestational surrogacy) and the denial of sexual diversities (gender studies). . It goes even further, and reconnecting with cosmism, so in vogue in the post-Soviet war, one begins to talk about eugenics and transhumanism, which would lead a restricted elite of people to even seek immortality, believing they could put themselves in the place of God.
In short, the new era, which sinks its roots in Gnostic, Masonic and Theosophical concepts, cannot coexist with Christianity. For the Christian, Jesus Christ is the only way to the Father:
Jesus said to him: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through me” (Gospel of John 14:6)
YURI LEVERATTO
