Let me ask a couple of questions, Lucas.
1. Have you read the Agganna Sutta? What I described is not a theory of mine, but the way it is described in that sutta.
2. You wrote: “If we follow this logically and not purely and solely based on a 2300 years text (that we are not 100% sure if is authentic and not modified)..”
– How confident are you about your theory?
– Also, have you found ANYTHING in the Pali Tipitaka to be inconsistent with ITSELF? If you have, please mention a couple of things so we can discuss them.
I have full confidence in the Agganna Sutta and also in the whole of the Tipitaka. Just because the Tipitaka is 2500 years old, does not mean that it has errors. The only way to contest that is to show evidence that it is not self-consistent. See, “Buddha Dhamma: Non-Perceivability and Self-Consistency.”
– I have so far not been able to find ANYTHING inconsistent with the Tipitaka.
– Furthermore, the description in the Agganna Sutta is consistent with most of the scientific findings except for a few. A major exception is the Big Bang model. It will be proven to be wrong in the future in the same way that many other scientific findings (which were inconsistent with the Tipitaka) were turned out to be incorrect or incomplete.