Gods and morality

[BH]

There are many different gods worshipped around 5he world each with their own supposed objective moral standards that we, according to believers, have no right to question with out subjective objections.

Question. How could we discern who the true god or goddess or gods are goddesses are if we do not rely on our own subjective opinions, or somehow find some objective moral standard that exists seperate and apart from the deities telling us which is right. These gods and goddesses are theoretically good and define good and are supposedly more wiser and powerful than we ever could be. So, how do we know which one is right assuming one does exist?

 

[Bronzeage]

Why would any of them be right?

The question is based on a false premise. Moral codes and standards predate Gods and Goddesses. The problem is, authority, whatever guise it assumes, will portray itself as the source of morality, as well as its defender and enforcer.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

The invention of gods is a human behavior, it's best to think of gods as very personal psychological pets.

We've invented thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of gods because humans are a diverse group. These gods are primarily cultural vehicles by which we loosely codify a society's values and pass on information. Sometimes that information is valuable knowledge and sometimes it's superstitious nonsense, but it's us in our varied environments and experiences.

There isn't anything objective at all about gods and so we can never come to any objective resolutions by trying to ascertain what a god would want, or want us to do. We're simply examining our own behavior when we ask these questions.

 

[Politesse]

I would advise treating divine moral advice similarly to human moral advice. You must have some rubric for discerning the value of moral arguments.

 

[steve_bank]

I would state it a little differently. The Abrahamic god is neither moral or immoral.

He/she/it says humans he/she/it created must obey or else.

 

[ideologyhunter]

I think the multiplicity of gods in human history is the decisive argument for the atheist position. There are a crazy number of defunct gods and creeds -- the list is easily into the thousands, so the common denominator is the imagination and preoccupations of...guess who?

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I think the multiplicity of gods in human history is the decisive argument for the atheist position. There are a crazy number of defunct gods and creeds -- the list is easily into the thousands, so the common denominator is the imagination and preoccupations of...guess who?

If the believer is even aware of all the gods that have come and gone. Seriously, seen one god, seen 'em all.

 

[Politesse]

I think the multiplicity of gods in human history is the decisive argument for the atheist position. There are a crazy number of defunct gods and creeds -- the list is easily into the thousands, so the common denominator is the imagination and preoccupations of...guess who?

A plurality of gods, who often but don't always agree with one another?

 

[steve_bank]

Taking from Pogo.

We have met the gods and they are us.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

[h=1] “Man is certainly stark mad; he cannot make a worm, and yet he will be making gods by dozens.”
[/h] ― Montaigne, The Complete Essays

 

[Gun Nut]

I would advise treating divine moral advice similarly to human moral advice. You must have some rubric for discerning the value of moral arguments.

The goal of religion is to remove that rubric so as to gain the ability to manipulate. This is the source of the notion that subjectivity (and therefore, any criticism whatsoever) is off limits. What better way to prevent thoughtful discourse getting in the way of taking advantage of others than to prohibit thoughtful discourse by punishment of torture and death.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I would advise treating divine moral advice similarly to human moral advice. You must have some rubric for discerning the value of moral arguments.

The goal of religion is to remove that rubric so as to gain the ability to manipulate. This is the source of the notion that subjectivity (and therefore, any criticism whatsoever) is off limits. What better way to prevent thoughtful discourse getting in the way of taking advantage of others than to prohibit thoughtful discourse by punishment of torture and death.

Religion doesn't kill people. People with religion kill people.

(Sorry. I couldn't resist.)

 

[Politesse]

I would advise treating divine moral advice similarly to human moral advice. You must have some rubric for discerning the value of moral arguments.

The goal of religion is to remove that rubric so as to gain the ability to manipulate. This is the source of the notion that subjectivity (and therefore, any criticism whatsoever) is off limits. What better way to prevent thoughtful discourse getting in the way of taking advantage of others than to prohibit thoughtful discourse by punishment of torture and death.

Ok pastor.

 

[steve_bank]

The Christian argument is without an absolute morality based in the biblical god and scripture there is moral relativism where anything goes and can be justified.

 

[Gun Nut]

I would advise treating divine moral advice similarly to human moral advice. You must have some rubric for discerning the value of moral arguments.

The goal of religion is to remove that rubric so as to gain the ability to manipulate. This is the source of the notion that subjectivity (and therefore, any criticism whatsoever) is off limits. What better way to prevent thoughtful discourse getting in the way of taking advantage of others than to prohibit thoughtful discourse by punishment of torture and death.

Religion doesn't kill people. People with religion kill people.

(Sorry. I couldn't resist.)

Always true, that.

 

[Copernicus]

IMO, the belief that morality must be based on some kind of authority is quite natural for everyone, because we were all given moral guidance from authority figures during childhood. Gods assume parental authority as people become adults, so they tend to reflect the moral views of a self-organized society. After all, the function of moral codes is to ensure the safety and security of individuals when they deal with other individuals. Moral codes are all about interactions between individuals. If we were solitary creatures, there would be no need for moral strictures.

 

[Politesse]

IMO, the belief that morality must be based on some kind of authority is quite natural for everyone, because we were all given moral guidance from authority figures during childhood. Gods assume parental authority as people become adults, so they tend to reflect the moral views of a self-organized society.

Surely a mortal would, in fact, seem like a helpless child from the perspective of a deity.

 

[abaddon]

Surely a mortal would, in fact, seem like a helpless child from the perspective of a deity.

Humans don't compare well against fantasy beings. Food for thought, if you want to kill time on nothing.

 

[Politesse]

Surely a mortal would, in fact, seem like a helpless child from the perspective of a deity.

Humans don't compare well against fantasy beings. Food for thought, if you want to kill time on nothing.

Well, if you like. But my point is that this is more an ontological argument than a moral one, when you think about it carefully.

 

[steve_bank]

The American founders declared basic rights ordained by god.

A powerful statement. Aint no way no how anything but an all powerful god is going to take then away from us. There is a utility to a god.