What if some ancient, obsolete religion turns out to be it. The afterlife, for example, will follow a system of rewards and punishments never revealed to anyone except for one tribe living long ago, whose belief system died out when they happened to have been conquered by a neighboring people. This sounds absurd and unfair. But then does that mean that a religion being widespread or currently practiced increases its chances of being true? Wouldn't this must be the most vulgar possible form of epistemological relativism?
***
Recently, some baptisms, performed over many years, were judged invalid because one particular priest had used we instead of I. It seems improbable that humans could know the pronouns preferred by the deity. This information would have to be revealed, and then to be preserved inviolate for centuries. Yet this grammatical problem is only a trivial manifestation of a much greater question...
No comments:
Post a Comment