If you believe morality requires a divine authority, have you not merely equated "obedience" with "morality"?

Answer 1

Wow...that's exactly what we're talking about in my Moral Dilemmas class. We're reading this book called "Being Good" by Simon Blackburn. There's a section about "the death of God", and how if God were dead, would all morals be out the window? He believes no, our morals, ethics, and basic principles are not necesarily connected to a divine authority, but are applied because we know what we "ought to do" and an educated human being would feel an obligation to do the right thing.

Answer 2

Because of this, I've seen some Christians (especially young ones) so ridiculously devoted to their parents that they refuse to believe that it's moral to disagree with them, even when the parents are wrong or flat out harmful or dangerous.

I find this sort of blind obedience creepy.


Hope: Nice straw man. Morals may be absolute or not (and I tend to think they're a little more subtle than any sort of categorical imperative view--the one many Christians take--would have them be), but that does not mean *anyone* thinks morals have to depend on a culture. You're conflating culture with evolution, but culture is a sort of local deal and humanity as a whole is not. Thus, we can say that certain cultural practices are immoral without resorting to claiming that a god gave us our morality.

C'mon! Your view of "morals *must* come from God" has been dead since at least Nietzsche, and your claim that otherwise anything is permissable is passe.

Answer 3

the modern Christian usually equates everything with obedience. The morals taught by the Christian sect are not even Christian or Jewish for that matter, the laws of Moses are laws that have been taken from other civilisations such as the Egyptians and Greeks, they do not own the rights to these laws, they have just taken them as their own and patented them, then anyone of who isn't ne of them is against the laws, so that makes Atheists immoral?
these sects should look at the ancient laws of England, they had no christian input but they came to the same conclusions

Answer 4

Oh, that was just vile.

Fancy bursting the peasants' bubble with such obvious logic.
Next you'll be suggesting they only 'obey' because of the threat of hell - their personal Sword of Damocles hanging by a horse-hair on a whim of their non-existent god.

They insist that their 'blind obedience' is free will.
It would be a brave man who spits in the face of hell.
That means that xians are cowards and atheists are brave.
I love logic.

Answer 5

Yes - many equate morality with obedience.
Isn't morality, however, linked to some sort of code that is dependent on society and religion? Societal taboos are often defined by religious and social stigmas, forcing one to conform and obey.

Case and point - what is moral in one area is taboo in another, often defined by religious lines.

Answer 6

The implication is that religion does not and cannot serve as a foundation for morality, and this is indeed the case. Atheism, on the other hand, allows for true morality ("the judgment of good and bad behaviour according to conscience").

Answer 7

that's true.

personally, i dont subscribe to the idea that morality is set by a divine entity. it would seem that every religions' law is set forth by a God of sorts, and so you're "question" is absolutely right.

i wouldnt say athiesm is the answer, to all those that have already answered and suggested it. just realize that you should be making choices because of what you believe and not because someone tells you to.

Answer 8

If my basis for belief in a divine authority were morality, I would agree. Morality is not the basis for my belief in a divine authority.

Answer 9

Yes

Answer 10

no morality exists independently of you subjective veiw of right and wrong.a is a it is wrong to kill ,steal ,lie, mislead etc.in fact i don't even need divinity to tell me these thing i consider mosaic law more as reminders than edicts.