Does a religion have to be ancient in order for it to be true?

[Muffled]

There is no reason why God who revealed Himself through Abraham and Moses, could not reveal Himself through more recent prophets such as Christ, Muhammad or Baha'u'llah. Deuteronomy 18:18-22 makes provisions for a succession of prophets after all.

Adherents of the older religions have difficulty accepting the newer ones and each have their justifications and arguments to refute the new prophet.

There is no good reason why God of the entire Universe would not reveal Himself through non-Abrahamic Educators too.

i believe that is true if they are from God.

I believe Muhammad & the B man had no fulfilled prophecy that I know of but that only eliminates them as prophets not as messengers.

I believe Scientology is easy to eliminate because it is totally manufactured from the imagination of a man.

 

[Dawnofhope]

i believe that is true if they are from God.

I believe Muhammad & the B man had no fulfilled prophecy that I know of but that only eliminates them as prophets not as messengers.

I believe Scientology is easy to eliminate because it is totally manufactured from the imagination of a man.

Scientology we can both agree is man made. Ron Hubbard was no prophet.

Muhammad and Bahá’u’lláh are both serious contenders as prophets.

I have examined how Islam is outlined in the Bible, particularly Daniel and Revelation, in a recent thread.

I could easily provide an exegesis of over a hundred verses that establishes Bahá’u’lláh’s credentials.

 

[Segev Moran]

I do not know if it was Judaism or Zoroastrianism.

To my knowledge it is Judaism. But we can't be sure

 

[Segev Moran]

That is debatable. Akhenaten and Atenism would disagree.

No they will not

 

[blü 2]

Though some may dispute it the evidence is mounting for ceremonial burial in the Middle Paleolithic (~50,000-300,000 years ago) by both Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens ancestors.Evidence includes ceremonial use of red ochre on bodies and bones, burial with wild herbs, positioning of bodies, removal of flesh, and ceremonial burial of animals like bears,

As far as Neolithic cultures there are numerous isolated cultures found around the world sharing many of the cultural traits going back to the Middle Paleolithic.

Thanks for that. I'll check it out.

 

[Hawkins]

Atheist argument concerning the existence of any metaphysical deity (or deities) aside to make it clear what I'm asking is whether how "old" a religion is, is a requirement to make a religion true?

The question is very pertinent and relatable to the ongoing debate among theistic religions especially of the Abrahamic family. It appears to me (indirectly) in philosophical dialectical discussions I've been in that one proclaims to be true since it is the oldest, and therefore all others after that even the ones that remotely relate back to the original said religion are heretical. In addition to the question in the OP can't truth reinvent itself in latter generations due to change in time?

Edit: I extend the same question to non-theistic religions

A religion needs to be old in the sense that it contains an ancient message of warning to human kind, about what would happen in our afterlife.

 

[shunyadragon]

I believe most Christians believe in progressive revelation. On the other hand protestants today view the canon as closed.

Many churches and other religions like Judaism and Islam would agree with you, except whether Canon is closed. There are far too many different views as to what is canon and how to interpret it and what may be called Revelation or cannon beyond the Bible,

Truth comes from God. That is what He is. Anything He reveals is true but things coming from men are not likely to be true.

True for most Theistic religions, but there is far too much disagreement as to what is from God and true and what is from men and false.

Why should I be convinced what you believe is true and from God and everything else is from men and false?.

 

[shunyadragon]

Thanks for that. I'll check it out.

This is an okay general source to start. Paleolithic religion - Wikipedia

You mentioned 400,000 years which is in the grey area of what evidence we have for ceremonial ritual and burial.

 

[Unguru]

"old is true" is just appeal to tradition.

 

[blü 2]

This is an okay general source to start. Paleolithic religion - Wikipedia

Thanks, a useful read.

As to rituals for the dead, I'm surprised there seems to be no discussion of the role of biochemistry in bonding and unbonding, found also among chimps, elephants, some birds and some lizards. I suspect that grieving rituals are part of unbonding. We share with the chimps and elephants particular forms of grief conduct on the death of our alphas, too.

You mentioned 400,000 years which is in the grey area of what evidence we have for ceremonial ritual and burial.

That is, when we were 400,000 years closer to the chimps. What a curious privilege it is to be a human.

 

[Jedster]

"old is true" is just appeal to tradition.

Yes, I have often heard the phrase 'it is old wine in new bottles' used by many groups to attract people who are traditionalist(in their belief system)

 

[Shad]

The Jewish religion is the first monotheistic religion.

This is not a historical view but a religious one.

 

[Shad]

It appears to me (indirectly) in philosophical dialectical discussions I've been in that one proclaims to be true since it is the oldest, and therefore all others after that even the ones that remotely relate back to the original said religion are heretical. In addition to the question in the OP can't truth reinvent itself in latter generations due to change in time?

Edit: I extend the same question to non-theistic religions

To the OP question, no. Age is not an indication of truth. Such an idea is merely theological misapplications of history and accomplishments via a God's Will frame and religious "truth"

Truth can be rediscovered not reinvented.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

No they will not

Atenism is older than Judaism so yes they would disagree

 

[shunyadragon]

Thanks, a useful read.

As to rituals for the dead, I'm surprised there seems to be no discussion of the role of biochemistry in bonding and unbonding, found also among chimps, elephants, some birds and some lizards. I suspect that grieving rituals are part of unbonding. We share with the chimps and elephants particular forms of grief conduct on the death of our alphas, too.
That is, when we were 400,000 years closer to the chimps. What a curious privilege it is to be a human.

Like your response. I do believe that the ceremonial burial is older than the evidence, because the grieving unbonding is universal with intelligent animals, and humans have been naturally human for much longer than ~300,000 years ago,

 

[Segev Moran]

This is not a historical view but a religious one.

I'll rephrase that.
Jewish religion is the first religion to suggest that God is not a character rather an intelligent force that is the initiator of all.
This is also true historically as far as i have studied.
If you know otherwise I'll be thrilled to learn

 

[Segev Moran]

Atenism is older than Judaism so yes they would disagree

"Amenhotep IV initially introduced Atenism in the fifth year of his reign (1348/1346 BC), raising Aten to the status of supreme god, after having initially permitted continued worship of the traditional gods."

Atenism suggests Aten as a supreme god... not as the one and only god. Monotheism is about one and only one god.
No hierarchy

 

[Epic Beard Man]

"Amenhotep IV initially introduced Atenism in the fifth year of his reign (1348/1346 BC), raising Aten to the status of supreme god, after having initially permitted continued worship of the traditional gods."

Atenism suggests Aten as a supreme god... not as the one and only god. Monotheism is about one and only one god.
No hierarchy

Ok....

"This chapter argues that Akhenaten’s religion was monotheistic, defined as the exclusive worship of one deity and the rejection of or the denial of the existence of others. This understanding is demonstrated by the iconoclasm directed against images and writings and titles of the former chief deity, Amun, and other deities. After the move to Amarna, a final change to the didactic name occurred in which all vestiges of other gods were removed, specifically, Ra-Harakhty and Shu. During the final decade of his reign, even traditional solar images were banished, and only the sun-disc and its rays, along with Aten’s name, remain in the iconography at Amarna. This combination of factors, it is argued, points to a monotheistic faith."

Is Atenism Monotheism? - Oxford Scholarship

 

[Shad]

I'll rephrase that.
Jewish religion is the first religion to suggest that God is not a character rather an intelligent force that is the initiator of all.
This is also true historically as far as i have studied.
If you know otherwise I'll be thrilled to learn

Atenism.

Keep in mind I am talking about historical records not claims backed by no records. The Bible may claim X but evidence does not support it.

 

[Segev Moran]

Ok....

"This chapter argues that Akhenaten’s religion was monotheistic, defined as the exclusive worship of one deity and the rejection of or the denial of the existence of others. This understanding is demonstrated by the iconoclasm directed against images and writings and titles of the former chief deity, Amun, and other deities. After the move to Amarna, a final change to the didactic name occurred in which all vestiges of other gods were removed, specifically, Ra-Harakhty and Shu. During the final decade of his reign, even traditional solar images were banished, and only the sun-disc and its rays, along with Aten’s name, remain in the iconography at Amarna. This combination of factors, it is argued, points to a monotheistic faith."

Is Atenism Monotheism? - Oxford Scholarship

Ok... It doesn't sound as a defined monotheistic religion but I'll take your word for it