Dan Brown is an author who has made a nice living for himself writing made up stories. Keeping with that approach, Brown recently shared some of his best fiction to day, theorizing at the Frankfurt Book Fair that God won’t survive science. Don’t bother pointing out that the very concept of a Supernatural Being is one that transcends, indeed creates, the laws of this science Brown references. It’s not worth it because “The Da Vinci Code” author was on a roll:
Humanity no longer needs God but may with the help of artificial intelligence develop a new form of collective consciousness that fulfills the role of religion, U.S. author Dan Brown said on Thursday… “Are we naive today to believe that the gods of the present will survive and be here in a hundred years?” Brown, 53, told a packed news conference.
Frankly I can’t speak to the numerous false gods Brown may be referencing, but I’m going to go ahead and roll the dice on the proposition that in 100 years people will still be worshipping the true God and won’t even know Brown’s name.
This of course is the danger associated with the predicating your sense of identity and purpose with garnering the applause of men, as Brown has done. You must continually keep the attention focused on yourself, say something new and outrageous, demonstrate yourself to be a “profound” thinker.
But far from profound thinking, this is a mere modern repetition (albeit in slightly new clothing) of the age-old lie that man tells himself that he can be his own god. Nietzsche, Dawkins, now Brown. Yawn.
Brown said technological change and the development of artificial intelligence would transform the concept of the divine.
“We will start to find our spiritual experiences through our interconnections with each other,” he said, forecasting the emergence of “some form of global consciousness that we perceive and that becomes our divine”…”Our need for that exterior god, that sits up there and judges us … will diminish and eventually disappear.”
In case you aren’t picking up on what he’s laying down here, Brown is articulating in his own terms a philosophy he very much hopes will become the new spirit of the age. But rational minds, untethered and freed from the shackles of this futile attempt to dismiss or explain away our Creator, understand there is nothing new about this spirit.
It was present in the Garden of Eden, it was present in the days of Jesus, and it is present today. Brown can call his dream “collective consciousness” or whatever term he wants, but he can’t escape that he is merely another worldly conformist spouting a humanistic materialism that has led inevitably to sorrow and suffering whenever its been believed.
Humans can do better. We can move beyond these silly attempts to disregard the divine and marginalize the Moral Lawgiver if we have the courage. But that will require less listening to authors of fiction and more listening to the Author of Life.