Proof that Most Priests teach False Doctrine

Proof that Most Priests teach False Doctrine

This is a very simple little proof and a little bit of a trick with semantics.   I believe it may be possible to extend the proof even more definitively, but I am still working on that derivation.

Proof that most Priests teach false doctrine:

1) Form a hypothetical group of Priests in your mind.   This is comprised of all the different Priests of all the different religions and faiths.

2) Add to this group all Catholic and Episcopalian Priests. 

3) Now, (and this is the tricky part) add ALL Priests of all other religions at ALL other times in history.  This includes ancient Jewish, Greek and Roman Priests.   Also include the many different Priests of Ancient and lost religions of Babylon, Egypt, Persia, Phoenicia, Sumer, and many, many others.  Include Shinto and Taoist priests also.  Include Meso American priests of the Aztec, Maya, and Inca.

4) Now you have a group of ALL the Priests of ALL the religions in the World at ALL times.

5) Select the one true doctrine that we all know to be true.   Specify this doctrine with as much explicit detail as necessary to guarantee truthfulness.  

6) Select the Priests from the group of all Priests that agree with the one true doctrine that we have agreed is true.

7) This group of Priests you select will be the vast minority of the group of all Priests.   It would be surprising if it was even 1% of the total number of Priests.

8) Therefore:  The vast majority of Priests [of ALL Religions at ALL time in human history] teach False Doctrine

Remarks:  

This is a clever and tricky little “proof” but it highlights a few interesting ideas.

A) The concept of Priesthood seems like a universal social role, or function, independent of culture, or religion, or time.   There are many religious concepts that seem to have universality in the human mind and the concept of the Priest is one.  We seem to recognize the need for supernatural ritual behavior and also recognize that some people are more adept at this practice than others.   The Priest, however, is unique in some sense because we have no way to judge the efficacy of his talents or abilities.   We must accept his word on the matter.

B) It is probably possible to extend the proof to state that ALL Priests teach False Doctrine, but that would be a little “off putting” and ruin the good natured philosophical fun of the exercise.

However, if we consider the fractal detail nature of truth and doctrine we see that we are on a “slippery slope.”  The more we try and specify the exact nature of a concept, the more difficult it becomes, the more effort is required, and the more prone to error we become. 

Therefore a thoroughly rigorous philosophical definition of “correct faith” might be hundreds of pages long.  If so, it is possible that the group of Priests that hold this doctrine is so small as to be negligible.  It is mathematically possible that there is no Priest that advocates the one true faith that we have decided on.

We are reminded of the fact that there are about 5,000 hand written copies of the New Testament that survived from the first few centuries of Christianity.  There are more errors between these copies than there are words in the New Testament itself.   There is no single definitive, or authoritative, ancient copy of the Bible.   Additionally, in the present day, there is no definitive copy, or translation, of the Holy Bible that all humanity agrees is correct.

C) This proof inverts the concept and understanding of the Priest in relation to ourselves.  In all societies the Priest is the special and chosen intercessor with God, or the gods.  The Priest, therefore, has a status above most all other members of society.  It is the Priest’s function to judge and interpret the will of God.  Usually, his judgment is above question.   In this exercise we, as commoners, are judging Priests, the Priesthood, and the social role of a “priestly character” in many human societies.   It feels a little uncomfortable.

This process highlights the concept that Morality itself is not derived from religion.  But that our Moral Sense is inborn and innate.  WE judge religion, and religious concepts, on the basis of our intuitive understanding of Morality.   This is the basis of religious conversion; we are consciously choosing religious concepts that we judge to be more true, that the ones we were previously exposed to.  The concepts themselves may be Divine, but WE are the judge. 

D) Ultimately, religious belief is a personal understanding.   In some way this is similar to the theory of General Relativity in Physics.   Speed of an object is determined in relation to our position and movement.  There is no absolute frame of reference in the Universe.   There is no Omniscient view.

Copyright©2014 William A Schaeffer