What's the oldest known religion?

One of my friends has been trying to get me to convert to Christianity recently, but I'm hung up on how it seems to be derivative of older religions and not a sudden novel truth in itself. How far does the rabbit hole of religions rebranding themselves go in the Middle East?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holy_Science#Yuga_theory
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuga
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

magical thinking goes back well into prehistory, but the egyptian religion is probably the oldest one we have a full understanding of because it only went extinct in the 5th century AD, its well over 5000 years old.

I hate to break it to you user, but as a student of history I've come to the conclusion that there is no true religion. All of man's religions were created by men as a means to explain the world and stave off existential dread.

Probably some shamans or something in mesopotamia are the first or among the first to have gods. Reminder that religion is for people who are too afraid to accept death *tips fedora*

Animism

>Fedora
>What is Buddhism
I'm sure there are other religions that don't have afterlives as well.
Deism, maybe? Einstein believed in a god but not an afterlife.

Hinduism obviously.

Ancestor worship

>novelty
Fuck off, child
>derivative
It's an off-shoot of Judaism you stupid fuck, of course it's derivative.

Neopagans need to be chopped down with their forests.
Historians are irrelevant retards with no understanding of religion.

Buddhism just addresses it through you can't die because you don't exist.

>Reminder that religion is for people who are too afraid to accept death *tips fedora*
I think the ancient Jews who believed they were all going to Sheol whether they were good or not would have been more comforted to believe in the lack of existence after death.

Islam is the oldest religion in the world.

Not even twice as old as Christianity

Sumerian polytheism

There are no, "oldest" religions. Religions come and go in a cycle. Hinduism and similar forms of paganism are meant for the Satya Yuga because those are the most spiritual religions and therefore belong in the most spiritual age, but Hinduism is the only religion that does not die. If you need proof for this, look how India has seen countless waves of invaders yet Hinduism has always remained, even when other Vedic religions were more popular. Also it's the oldest known religion, and goes back well before written record.

Other religions like Christianity are also meant for specific spiritual ages, but they ultimately fade and die. The Kali Yuga is when they are formed and they fade out somewhere in the Dwapara Yuga and then go extinct somewhere in the Treta Yuga, most likely. Religions like Christianity are needed in these ages because the people of these ages are not spiritually inclined. They need a boost to be spiritual. They need a strict religion that tells them the truth instead of letting them form the truth around their own lives, which is what Hinduism does in a nutshell. It's difficult to be spiritual on your own, especially in a Yuga that is not very spiritual.

If you want to support a religion that actually holds all the truth, support Hinduism. It's meant for the Satya Yuga but if you are spiritual enough it will be fine for you even if we're in the Dwapara Yuga, according to Sri Yukteswar Giri's Yuga theory: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holy_Science#Yuga_theory

For a more general understanding of the Yuga theory, see: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuga

war

So deep...

>Satya Yuga
Where everybody is 30 feet tall and lives for 100,000 years? Totally plausible

There are different theories and different evidence for those theories. Wikipedia presents that theory for whatever reason and not another, more plausible one. Furthermore, scriptural evidence for that was most probably in metaphorical form.

Gobleki Tepe in Turkey is probably the oldest we know of, as in existing, but no idea what it was like.

>Stuff that's wrong in my religious texts are metaphors or purposefully exaggerated

O hey, any religious argument.

>Picking out outrageous sentences from a biased website that were clearly meant to be metaphorical but I'm too autistic to realize.

Oh hey, an atheist.

>Historians are irrelevant retards

You mean I used the information from the link the user posted for the subject. And what authority decided what is a metaphor and what isn't? What council decides this?

But please, link unbiased sources on Hinduism.

>Atheist

Ad hominem. You don't know if I'm religious or not. But your argument is weak anyways, might as well digress to that shit.

Shamanism is the earlist form of "religion" though not a systematised one.

>I hate to break it to you user, but as a student of history I've come to the conclusion that there is no true religion.
Except that's wrong, kiddo

The true religion was never preached to mankind, because most of mankind belong to the realm of hell as legitimate citizens and demons.

You may wonder if the bible is true since a lot of people swear by it, yet you see how christians are masters at seeking excuses not to adhere by its tenets, the answer is simple, yet many will not like it.
There's a heaven and a hell and the denizens of hell incarnate as normal humans, up until this part it is biblically accurate, and this is why the people of hell believe the bible to be true.
However god is draconic and there are other marked differences, like the requirement to attain gnosis (personal knowledge of god) to be saved that makes christianity false.
The devil and his people however think christianity is true and this is why "degeneracy" in the wolrd is biblical degeneracy, they push it. And this is why christians don't follow the bible to the letter, they are subverting it.
We are in a really dumb situation where the denizens of hell believe a false religion because the true one hasn't been preached to mankind, and they are assuming one false religion and fighting honest seekers of god with false assumptions and expanding what would be the degeneracy of the wrong religion, that is, sins that are not sins.
Imagine all these wasted lives trying to make christianity as unpleasant and fake as possible, all this effort on the false religion.

alright, what is the true religion and how can you prove it

I posted that link for a general understanding of the Yuga theory, and I also posted the Yuga theory that I prescribe to, which does not mention that people live 100,000 years during the Satya Yuga.

If me calling you an atheist is ad hominem then so is,
>O hey, any religious argument.

Already posted a pic

Hinduism is better.

>better
This is how the problem begins

>I posted that link for a general understanding of the Yuga theory, and I also posted the Yuga theory that I prescribe to, which does not mention that people live 100,000 years during the Satya Yuga.

So the general link of this belief describes it as such, but because you choose to not believe that part of it, it's not part of that belief. So how can what is meant to be true and what is meant to be a metaphor be objectively decided here, or are you just the judge of this?

>If me calling you an atheist is ad hominem then so is,
>O hey, any religious argument.

As hominem: adv & adj
"(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining."

Except it isn't. I'm just stating the how common it is for religious arguments to divert to, " well it doesn't matter if that was wrong, it's a metaphor anyways!!"

Not that dude, but I don't think you know what ad hominem is

Take some acid, user.

prove to me that it is a true religion while all other religions are false

The Yuga theory is exactly that, a theory. Some people have different opinions on what is true or what is not true. We are in a low Yuga, though, that much is certain. How can you expect to know the whole truth in such a low spiritual age when we have one or two good Swamis every like 100 years or so?

How do we decide what is a metaphor and what is not? We decide based on scriptural tendencies and exegesis from spiritual yogis.

I am calling you an atheist on the basis of your argumentation- not for no reason- which would be ad hominem. It's ad hominem to give a name to your argumentation and to use a METAPHOR to label you? Of course I don't know if you're atheist, but you sure seem like it based on what you say.

...

It's not a religion per se and can adapt to any local belief, even shamanism. As well buddhism imo is the only "religion" compatible with modern scientofic thought. We can learn that the universe is made up of dog shit and it's principles wouldn't change.

Basically unconditioned.

Hinduism on the other hand is PIE strate + BMAC strate + native (tantric) strate. Literally syncretism, nothing pure and therefore true at all

If Hinduism is syncretism then they did a pretty shitty job at it because there are hundreds of different sects. Combine all of them? Maybe then you have syncretism. A Hindu defines his own path, there is no one single path. Many lead to truth. That's not syncretism.

Wew lad
>Tips Zucchetto

that doesn't make it true

I think that particular rabbit hole goes as far back as ancient persia and zoroastrianism.
But trying to think of Religion as one absolute truth without knowing its history and the context of its creation and early practice is beyond stupid. If you think something sounds untrue, wrong or makes you sceptical then you should probably try to understand it better or just pass it up.

> A Hindu defines his own path, there is no one single path.
>6 official darshans
>caste system determines gods and rituals
The background is syncretist. IE gods + BMAC rituals (like soma) + native tantra (puja, mantra, yogas, etc).

Vedic religion is far closer to PIE (PIE gods, horses, war, obsession with caste and puritanism) while modern/mainstream has a mix of all.

the experience of love makes everyone whole

Here's the oldest religion known to mankind.

The very first man and the very first woman, both filled with the Breath of Life, the Holy Spirit of God, walking and talking and collaborating with God in the Garden of Eden.

Hinduism: 330,000,000 demons to choose from.

>The Yuga theory is exactly that, a theory. Some people have different opinions on what is true or what is not true.

So ya, completely subjective

>We are in a low Yuga, though, that much is certain. How can you expect to know the whole truth in such a low spiritual age when we have one or two good Swamis every like 100 years or so?

Prove we are in any Yuga or that Yuga exist.

>How do we decide what is a metaphor and what is not? We decide based on scriptural tendencies and exegesis from spiritual yogis.

So subjective opinions, got it

>I am calling you an atheist on the basis of your argumentation- not for no reason- which would be ad hominem. Of course I don't know if you're atheist, but you sure seem like it based on what you say.

Calling me an atheist as your argument is by definition an ad hominem. It's avoiding an actual argument by instead declaring the other person something in an attempt to debase their claim.

You're calling me an atheist because I don't believe what you believe. Sorry I'm not going to jump on the Yuga bandwagon when it's a completely baseless claim.

> It's ad hominem to give a name to your argumentation and to use a METAPHOR to label you?

Huh?

Yeah I get what you're saying but I still disagree. Hinduism is different everywhere you go. I have a hard time seeing that as a syncretism.

Besides, even if you are right, what makes a syncreticm less apt to be true?

Here's the (You) you wanted

Yes. They're fanfic writers

>it follows muh ideology so iz good

>Yes. They're fanfic writers

Don't you think your ideology iz good because it's your ideology?

I don't have one, I'm not caught up in humanism

Why are you on a history board thenm

Real answer without any memes: Zoroastrianism is the oldest "surviving" religion.

How if it didn't become a formal religion until 600bc?

I'd put Hinduism or Jainism (if you argue Hinduism has changed too much so isn't the a same) before it. Even Judaism is older or about the same.

This isn't a history board.

Do jews believe in heaven and hell today?

I think so. I'm not an expert though.

Wrong. Religion is just old science. They tried to understand the universe as best as they could, and that's what they came up with.

It's easy to say that your religion survived when it's actually a shitload of different religions and none of the modern ones is that old.

Most of them don't even believe in God.

Zoroastrianism is explicitly a reform of an older religion, Zoroaster doesn't even try to hide it much.

If religion starting off as folk shamanism and animism why did the Jews go full Autism and create a dogmatic and formal religion?

Not only the Jews did that, look Hinduism.
And

hindu / budium
find your inter self and know that you are god.
jews made Christianity to rule over those that fall to it.

Wrong. Fuck off back to Veeky Forums you anthrocuntbag.

Back to /r/eddit, new-ager

>Reform Judaism led to Mormonism

Yes the "religion" changes in form and adapts to new information. It's not a religion, that's the problem. It's a Dharma.

Wow. Idiocy

It's just a reformation of Manicheism, isn't it?
And, isn't that (just) surviving still?

Source: drunken discussions with a friend who's doing his Ph.D. on Manicheism atm

You're a moron. Manicheism is derived in part from Zoroastrianism, not vice versa.

In my defense, I was drunk at the time

"Hinduism" is a recent invention.
Vedism; Brahmanism; Hinduism; these things are very different.

Ancestral worship, undoubtedly, in one form or another.
Depends on what we accept as source.
See Fustel de Coulanges Ancient City for European antiquity.

>when you realise Christians were originally about the mass spread and use of cannabis and individualism

Shamanism is certainly older than ancestor worship. Shamans are found in all primitive cultures, ancestor worship is exclusive to settled agricultural peoples.

Also neither are religions.

Dreamtime technically

>Primitive
Speak for yourself, Untermensch.

T: European

the furthest back in religion that we know is basically specific animism and ancestor worship traditions that are really dependent on each family, tribe and group.

The Vedic religion/hinduism

Just because it's compatible with modern science doesn't make it true. The belief that aliens genetically engineered life on Earth is compatible but isn't necessarily true either.

A rough list I compiled that gives a general chronological outline of when religions began. Most early religions didn't have a /start date/ because they gradually came about but the dates used are when religions became something recognizable, distinct, and codified in art or text

>I don't have one, I'm not caught up in humanism

Probably shamanism like many others said.

>Shinto
Literally means the Way of the Gods, how would it have no religious belief component? You are looking at politicised Meiji era interpretations.

>Norse
Again, reductionist view. Needs to be considered in view of Indo-European religion. CF: Dumezil.
>Druids: left no written records due to religious prohibitions against writing, poster uses earliest written records as proof.
Why not check the archaeology beyond Stonehenge, ffs?

Also, no ancient Rome (see Fustel de Coulanges and Dumezil), no Balts (see Gimbujtas).

Otherwise helpful enough but too indeterminate for the ancient stuff.

oldest recorded temple is from a barely known culture in anatolia, 7000 BC

apparently, parts of iberia and anatolia where so bountiful that they attained hunter-gatherer sedentarism for a time, but those culture went extinct as they never achieved agriculture

by god what the hell is up with people's obsession with a centralised origin?

>indo-european polytheism
>3500 BC
>being a common origin for germano-slavic religions and fucking CELT RELIGION

thank you

ha, yeah, not like celtics and germanics are indo-european or anything

yes kid explain to me how the thuatha de baddiabinbaddabang relate at all to the germanic and slavic gods that actually share clearly similar roles and concepts and a common inhabited region.

Because god forbid european cultures being their own thing and adapting IE innovations, no, they have to be their direct descendants. Europeans have to be mute atheists who didn't know how to wipe their own ass before IEs taught them.

The whole concept of yanma religion relating to europe is because autistic hisotrians became obssesed with IEs being the source of all Europe and making up a religion to fit their narrative.

It's not like human peoples will adapt innovations from foreign cultures like nearly all Europe did with the Greco-Phoenician alphabet or the Indians did with practically every culture they ever met, right? No, they have to be assimilated.

The worst thing is that beyond the whole nostrism-IE origin retardation, that pic is a good way to see how modern religions developed across millenia.

Norse is in the NA section because it is so amorphous but I thought not putting it somewhere would seem like an omission. But i get you

All the non Indo-European Europeans are dead. Why should they even matter?

then why doens't europe look like homogenous west eurasaian horse archers then?

All religions recycle themselves into other religions over time.

If you're truly looking for spirituality and a sense of divine nature, get into the inner mystery of it all. Study the inner meanings all these religions have in common and see things for what they are, devoid of the socio-political religion is inflicting on mankind.

The only claim I hear is that the core of the religion is similar, brought by Indo-Europeans. They definitely deviated and most likely from the local population.

>All religions recycle themselves into other religions over time.

What exactly do you mean by this? Are you a follower of the Yuga theory?

>syncretism
>not objectively the best religious philosophy

Truth and consistency have no inherent value, especially regarding spirituality

Is it true all religions are founded just out of fear of death? I've heard this statement before but think it isn't the case since some religions still have you ceasing to exist after dying or have fates worse than death