Therefore, by Penn's own logic, the true religions are the ones that are constant and unwavering and are recreated exactly the same whenever they are lost. I agree, this makes perfect sense. But has he really investigated this to prove there is no religion like this like science would demand? I see Catholics as ever changing. I see Jews as ever changing. But I do know of one religion that has been around since the beginning, has been destroyed and lost from the Earth many times, and has been recreated exactly the same ages later many times. Will Penn consider it?
Okay, I won't worry about it. I at least enjoy where Penn is headed with his thinking. I doubt a conversation with him would be a waste of time for either of us.
Okay Matt, What Penn is getting at is scientific fact. Such as the moon goes around the Earth, which goes around the sun. That is a provable fact, and even if all knowledge of astrology were lost, somewhere, there would eventually be another Copernicus to discover that the Earth does indeed orbit the sun.
However, if all knowledge of Catholicism, or Mormonism, or even Buddhism were lost, there wouldn't ever be Catholics, Mormons, or Buddhists ever again. There may be some other cult, but it won't be the same cult.
Thanks, H3xx, you have restated well what I already understood from Penn. Still, the Church of Christ has been destroyed many times from the Earth from the time of Adam. Yet, it keeps popping up in various places over time and in various places around the world and is always the same as far as authority of how to exercise the priesthood is concerned. There have been many fakers to fill in the gaps but they are only fakers. After the birth of Jesus, the christ (the anointed) now had a name (besides his premortal name of Jehovah) and his church became the Church of Jesus Christ. Again, it was persecuted, perverted, and lost. It is now on the Earth for the last time and is known as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Most people have no interest in this information but, regardless, that is the logic behind it all if anyone is interested in how I think. So, yes, Penn's assertion that a religion could not possibly be real unless it really can reappear just as consistently as science is something I completely agree with. If I could not find such a religion, I too would declare myself an atheist. My logic really is as simple and as pure as that.
Rather than an eternal truth being revealed to select prophets at different times, I think it is more likely that charlatans from different ages revive the whole god/son of god myth in a form more relevant for their time period, the latest version containing stuff about UFOs and aliens and whatnot.
The fact that these myths keep popping up is not evidence they are true. It is evidence that the motivations for perpetuating them are timeless: control and exploitation, alleviation of fear of mortality, etc.
Join Think Atheist
Welcome toThink Atheist
Get Started Nowor Sign In
Or sign in with:
Started by Belle Rose in Society. Last reply by Belle Rose 3 hours ago.
Started by Belle Rose in Politics. Last reply by Belle Rose 6 hours ago.
Started by JadeBlackOlive in Small Talk. Last reply by Pope Beanie 6 hours ago.
Started by Viktor Oskin in Theistic Arguments and Debate Help. Last reply by Andrew Brown on Sunday.
Started by Pope Beanie in Church & State. Last reply by Gregg RThomas on Friday.
Sunday School February 19th 2017
Sunday School February 12th 2017
Sunday School February 5th 2017
Posted by Brad Snowder on February 18, 2017 at 5:45pm
Posted by Noon Alif on February 16, 2017 at 9:54am
© 2017 Created by umar.
Report an Issue |
Terms of Service
Please check your browser settings or contact your system administrator.