Bullshit. You've used a Christian filter to interpret all religion to be like Christianity. Christians have been doing it for millenea to convince themselves that everyone really is secretly a Christian. And this has bled into the beliefs of secularist post-Christians.
I have no idea where you got that from. I never said anything about Christianity or even Abrahamic gods. My remarks were about the belief in gods in general, which are obviously grounded in anthropomorphism. It isn't hard to see that gods are modeled on human beings. Polytheistic pantheons tend to have family structures--beings that behave like mothers, fathers, siblings, and relatives. Why else would they even care what human beings think or whether they survive or prosper? It isn't a sophisticated view of reality, but most people aren't sophisticated. The less anthropomorphic gods are (of God, in the case of monotheism), the less useful they are to human beings. If deities aren't swayed by love, loyalty, flattery, and other human emotional ties, then why even bother praying to them? What good are they? It is no accident that gods were invented in our image.
"our brains are evolved in such a way that belief in divine moral authority"
Did you not say that?
Did you read the rest of what I wrote? You can't interpret the meaning of a text snippet without looking at the context you found it in. I said that people instinctively see morality to be based on parental authority. The concept of "divine authority" is simply an extension of that instinct. Do you disagree with my claim? If so, why?
Yes. Because it only fits the Abrahamic religions. No, other religion has that theology.
You're doing the common mistake of extrapolating from the familiar. You're clearly the most familiar with Christianity. So you've taken what you are familiar with and assumed that this is the basic foundation for all religion. But it's not. Christianity is really really weird.
The (North Judean) Jewish concept of Elohim, ie an impersanal all-powerful all knowing and all good abstract diety is pretty unique in world history. That then was coupled with the South Judean Yahweh/Jehova, which was a more traditional paganism style storm god. Pagan storm gods are more embodiements of the forces of nature. If you had a storm god in your life the chances it would end well is not great. You absolutely did NOT want to have a personal relationship with a storm god. They're absolutely homicidal and psychotic. It's the kind of father figure you will try your best to cut out of your life. You want his money. But the less he's involved in your life, probaly, the better.
Storm gods are authorities in the way that they can fuck you up unless you do what they tell you to. But they're not an authority in the sense that they can give you valuable advice.
The pagan gods are swayed by correct ritual and the correct sacrifices. Maybe. You can do all the right things and still be screwed over by the whims of the gods. They don't care about us.
Hindu gods care about maintaining order in the universe. Only. They aren't swayed by shit.
Buddha isn't swayed by anything. He's not even paying attention anymore. We're on our own.
Ahura Mazda needs our help to stop chaos. It's almost like it's just a metaphor for life as an atheist.
I'm not going to try to argue you out of these opinions, which I don't really share, but I still don't see how they are relevant to my point about the why humans tend to prefer authority-based moral doctrines. Are you claiming that only Christians associate their religion with a moral code and other religious traditions do not? Even Hindus believe that a god (Brahma) created the universe. Dharma is essentially divinely prescribed law.
They're relevant because you are wrong. Just flat out wrong.
Yes, moral codes that come from the gods does exist, but it's pretty rare among world religions. Egyptian religion also had moral codes that came from the gods. But their highest value was Ma'at. Creating order and stability was more important than being a good person. They also have the rule about being good. But being good was not as important as doing your duty and maintaining order.
en.wikipedia.org
Dharma isn't prescriptive. It's not a set of rules for you to follow. And if you follow them you'll get a reward in the afterlife. That's only Abrahamic religions. The point of Dharma is that following the rules it makes you a better person, for you. Following Dharma is it's own reward. That's actually a very important and critical difference. If you follow Dharma because you want to be rewarded, you've already violated Dharma. Being good only has value if you don't exect a reward, and you're not doing it to be rewarded. Hinduism and Buddhism aren't life games to be played to score big in the afterlife. That's not at all how those religions work. If you think that they are you're just filtering Hinduism (and Buddhism) through the Christianity filter.
Both Buddhism and Christianity says that we should forgive our enemies. But the difference is that Buddhism says, that you should forgive your enemies because nurturing anger towards someone is spiritual poison, as well as a waste of time and energy. It's just the smart thing to do. Christianity says you should forgive your enemies because that's what God tells us to. That's a very big difference. Christianity is a paternal authority telling us to do, Buddhism argues and reasons, and wants to convince us that it's in our best interest to folllow Dharma. We can read Buddhist philosophy as if it is an authority and as if we are children to be educated. If we do that it's becuase we gained a trust in the wisdom of the teachings. Not because we're worried to displease any cosmic authority. Buddhism has no cosmic authority.
The Hindu Brahma is all knowing and all powerful, as well as wise. But Brahma doesn't care. Brahma doesn't care about anything. Or rather, Brahma acts through the universe. So all other gods, and everything, including you are facets of Brahma. You are your own father and child. That's not a paternal father figure guiding us and telling us what to do. It's a hell of a lot more sophisticated theological concept.
Just stop. You see the world's religion 100% through a Christian lens. Also, the dumbest and most shallow religion ever devised. By doing this you are reducing millenea of philosophical thought to childish nonsense. The danger of doing that is that you are inflating your ego, making yourself superior to religious people. Its arrogant.
Take a breath and calm down. You know nothing of what my background is or what I know about other religions. You are jumping to conclusions on the basis of ignorance about my background and knowledge. How many countries have you even visited where Hinduism, Buddhism, or Islam are dominant religions? I've visited quite a few. Can you read the Vedas in their original Sanskrit? I can (albeit with considerable difficulty). So please don't try to lecture me on what I know of these other religions.
I am listening to what you are saying and basing my views of you based of you on that.
Congratulations on trynig to pull the argument from authority card.
Christianity (and Islam) is anti-intelectual. It thinks deep philosophical thought and the questioning of religious dogma as threatening and harmful. No other world religion (including Judaism) is like that. They're all deep and reflective. Christianity is shallow and childish
Edit: just to clarify. The aims of Christianity isn't shallow and childish. Ie to check your ego and to keep us humble. Which is the same goal as Buddhism. I'm talking about theology. Christian theology is retarded. The practice of Christianity is infinitely wiser than the reasons Christian thinkers give us. Because it's a product of memetic evolution. Not the words of a prophet or saints
OK. I can see that you have some very strong opinions that I disagree with but don't want to try to argue you out of. I just wanted to express my opinion about the ubiquity of authority-based moral codes in human societies and why people tend to see atheists as lacking a basis for moral behavior.
And I thank you for sharing your opinion.
