[peterspath]

Isn't that the whole point of religions... they offer something timeless, transcendent, or divinely revealed that stands above whatever the current culture happens to celebrate or condemn this decade.

The current, past, and future values and norms that are decided by societies are fleeting, old tomorrow, always changing.

[oivey]

No? Christianity, for example, has changed massively over time. You can pick any denomination, and it’s true.

You can also look at new religions, denominations, or sects popping up. The purpose of religion is at its core supposed to be spirituality.

[mistrial9]

yes, a quote from June Singer, a prominent Jungian analyst and author, has always stuck out for me.. Something about a stone, tumbled in a river over many, many.. many years.. specifically, passing through generations of people. If the content survives the fads and fashions, then it is an indicator of something with a deeper root.

[rsynnott]

No. This is being aimed, one assumes, at US evangelical Christians (as I mention semi-jokingly elsewhere, it blocking catechism 239 might be an issue for Catholics). That is, being very generous, only about 250 years old at most, but realistically the current version's only about a century old.

[mathgeek]

Religions generally stick to the standard “the old ways are whatever the last few generations taught, and the modern/liberal religions will be the old ways in a few generations”. Very few parts are not influenced by culture.