Here’s a zinger in the sense that you can tell somebody that we know more now than Jesus did or the writers of the Christian bible:
“I don’t think that we can go back at all, either to the secularism of Odysseus or to the days of Mohammed or to the days of Christ or the days of Abraham. We know much more than any of these prophets and heroes and visionaries knew. We have accumulated more experience than they had. We are not closer to any universal truth than they are. We are not closer to anything transcendent than they were. We are simply more experienced, more able to see what will cause harm and what might do good. So I don’t think that it’s a question of returning, it’s a question of constantly attempting to make the future still more different from the past.”
An Ethics for Today
Richard Rorty
Excellent.
It follows we'll continue to know more as the years pass.
I've always thought people need a 'religion' of sorts, but it must always be updated as our knowledge increases...
Just because our current religions cling to the past doesn't mean we have to.
I think we are a lot closer to a universal truth than they were, if only by doubting there is a universal truth at all. Knowing at least the negative, that it is more difficult and complicated to find a universal truth, and therefore not being fulfilled by easy fake answers, is a big step towards universal truth. ( Especially if the universal truth is that there is not one. )
I think you are confusing universal truth with absolute truth, very different things in that one probably exists taken seriously by science and has lead to the discovery of the Higgs Boson while the other is a religious false abstract concept.
@LenHazell53 Yes, but science and the distinction between absolute and universal truth, did not exist in those days at least as a concept in human culture.