The authority of any religion depends upon its origin. Who is pronouncing what is truth? If the origin is purely human, why should we take any notice? The opinions of any man, or group of men, are of no more authority than those of any other men. Though they may appear more logical and be founded upon more reasonable grounds, they are still the products of the human mind. They carry no guarantee of absolute truth.
The major religions of the world are founded upon the writings of men. Buddhism is founded upon the teachings of Buddha, who lived in India in the sixth century BC. It was some centuries later that his adherents made him a god. Hinduism, originating in ancient Vedism about 1500 BC, evolved through Brahmanism into early Hinduism in the second century BC, revering the gods Vishnu and Shiva. Confucianism arose from Chinese moral philosophy, which was systematized by Confucius in the fifth century BC. Confucius himself became an object of worship in the first century AD. In each of these religions the worship of the god arose centuries after the promulgation of the original principles. Islam is in a different category. It arose from revelations said to have been received by Muhammad in the seventh century AD, which were collected together into the Qu’ran shortly after his death. It has obvious connections with the ideas of Christianity, which existed centuries before Muhammad. All these widespread religions claiming millions of adherents, are based upon the original pronouncements of men. Despite all there subsequent philosophical refinements, they have originated in the human mind.
The Christian Religion
But is not the same true of Christianity? Are not its teachings accepted because they are found originally in the writings of men, which make up the Bible?
At first this appears a reasonable comment. But when we come to examine the writings …