>Religious truth must be ancient and universal.>The older a religion is, the more likely it is to be true. If two equally ancient religions differ in certain regards, then it is because they are different aspects of the same truth rather than standing on their own. The gods of different pantheons are simply the same gods under different names.>Any one religion which claims to have an exclusive monopoly on the truth (especially one that isn’t ancient) ought to be dismissed.>If any Abrahamic religion was really the absolute truth like they claim, then their God would have revealed his message to the whole world all at once rather than to a handful of prophets in an irreverent and backwater region of the planet.What do you think? Do you think this makes more sense than our Abrahamic-influenced view of religion today?
>>18502650Roman Judea wasn't a backwater
Does making sense matter to abrahamic religion or does cultlike obedience? That's how this thing survived by being cutthroat.
>>18502738The druids were wiped out by Roman pagans.
>>18502650They all are reasonable except for the last one, which denotes a misunderstanding of what prophecy. And yes, there are extra-biblical prophets, although the bible is best among them. Also the standard way of looking at prophecy is wrong and Abrahamic religions as they presently exist are trash.
>>18502650>the pre-christian ROMAN view of religionfify.
>>18502650>What do you think?The "Truth" isn't hard to figure out if you look for it.
>>18502734big doubt
