Let's say I wrote a ridiculous book while having a chemically induced "vision quest", and I bury it in a cave. I sober up, and go on about my life and forget about it.
1,625 years from now, it is discovered by future humans. They think it is some holy text. Naturally, it has not "changed", aside from the elements and time affecting the integrity of the pages.
They regard my deluded writings as some sort of "truth", and begin a cult based on it, fused with choice beliefs of a few other established cults.
Does this make my book the "truth" simply because they want it to be, and because this book is relatively new and unaltered?
2007-08-05 04:43:53 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Obviously not; which is why the more rationally minded demand repeatable demonstrations of the assertions, peer review, admission of margins for error, etc. before accepting something as fact.
2007-08-05 04:48:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
You trying to make a point about something and I cannot quite put my finger on it.
I liked the definition of cult being any other religion that is not your own. Hard to get at the individuals on here because we align ourselves with neither religion or cults, one and the same.
2007-08-05 11:50:32 · answer #2 · answered by Part-time Antagonist 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't know, did you come back from the dead before you wrote the book?? Or did someone else write about your "vision quest" also during the period when you lived?
2007-08-05 11:47:30 · answer #3 · answered by askmeimightknow 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think it depends on the "vision" and whom finds it. There are a zillion books out there that people "live by". Soup for the soul, Bible, Koran, etc....diet books. Like I said depends on what it is about, history, myth, fact.
2007-08-05 11:56:11 · answer #4 · answered by cromeregal4 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why would some future humans think it was a holy text simply because they found it buried?
2007-08-05 11:52:29 · answer #5 · answered by Deof Movestofca 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the thing with that is, what would the book contain? What would be so special about it, to even be thought of as a holy text?
2007-08-05 11:48:09 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. they would be more likely to see it as an imposible delution. the bible has not been missing for 2000 years it has been around longer at least the Torah has been. the new testiment 1900 so why would you think any one would belive an unreported book just because it had been berried.
2007-08-05 11:50:24 · answer #7 · answered by Mim 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
There is a measure by which all holy writings are viewed and your's probably would meet the requirements.
2007-08-05 11:48:46 · answer #8 · answered by Fish <>< 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
interesting' theory'...i think i see where you're going with this-i'm not COMPLETELY ignorant, but if you start checking our how many different people are responsible for the writings that make up the bible, especially what is known as the new testament, you'd see that your 'simple question' falls into the realm of 'atheist fantasy'
2007-08-05 11:52:06 · answer #9 · answered by spike missing debra m 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sounds a lot like the Book of Mormon to me.... Jim
2007-08-05 12:05:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋