• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Religious Authority and Authority in General

Howdy!



Recently I have been going through the David Graeber book called debt. It’s pretty neat and helped me put into words a few things that I believed but had not exactly articulated. It’s interesting to note for instance how debt and authority sort of comingle.

What I realized is I simply do not recognize any authority. At best someone can have more experience in a general subject but I just don’t feel the need to bend the knee to anyone other than God. I have seen far too much incompetence at the tops of hierarchies, seen far too many human mistakes in churches etc.

The thing that made this interesting to me on a theological level is that it just put into words something I believed. I just don’t accept any authority other than God. Whether we are talking about scripture, priests or prophets I simply don’t really believe in authority.

This made a lot of my complaints about organized religion more easy to talk about cause now I can just say “ The only authority I trust is God.” And it works. Of course I still consult swamis, philosophers, scholars etc but I will ultimately come to my own opinion on things.

This whole line of reasoning made me curious. Do you guys accept anyone as an authority over you? Is there anyone you feel like you can’t question or go against? Why or why not?
 

SalixIncendium

अहं ब्रह्मास्मि
Staff member
Premium Member
Do you guys accept anyone as an authority over you?
No. I don't even accept any god as an authority over me.

That said, I've gone through no formal education past high school, so there are those that know more than me in many subjects, and while I don't necessarily give them "authority" over me, I will listen and learn.
 

Hermit Philosopher

Selflessly here for you
Depends on what you mean by “authority”.

As a citizen, I have an obligation follow the laws of the country I live in and to understand that if I don’t, there are consequences for not doing so that I must accept. I don’t need to personally agree with all laws, but I do have to follow them.

This I recognise, yes. And that’s why, as citizens, it’s important to vote - especially as freedom of movement is limited and we can’t just up and leave if we don’t agree with the laws in our countries.

There are times, I suppose, when I would consider not following the law… If the country I lived in were to pass a blatantly inhumane law - like, spy on your fellow citizens and report them to the authorities so they can do god knows what with them. I may be willing to take the consequence of breaking a law like that… I’d like to think so anyhow.


Humbly,
Hermit
 

SalixIncendium

अहं ब्रह्मास्मि
Staff member
Premium Member
Also, any thread on authority is not complete without Cartman.

cartman-eric-cartman.gif
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
Humanity's greatest collective achievement lies not in medicine, science, philosophy or the arts. It is the prevalence of the Rule of Law in mature democracies. Because if the law doesn't rule, tyrants do.

Outside the Old Bailey in London, beneath the statue of Justice with her blindfold and scales, is the legend "Defend the Children of the Poor, and Punish the Wrongdoer."

No one is above the law, and in a civilised society no one has the right to be a law unto themselves; our actions impact on those around us, and the law exists to maintain the rights of us all. For this reason, I accept the authority of the courts in my country, regardless of how I may feel about individual laws and statutes.
 

vulcanlogician

Well-Known Member
Humanity's greatest collective achievement lies not in medicine, science, philosophy or the arts. It is the prevalence of the Rule of Law in mature democracies. Because if the law doesn't rule, tyrants do.

Outside the Old Bailey in London, beneath the statue of Justice with her blindfold and scales, is the legend "Defend the Children of the Poor, and Punish the Wrongdoer."

No one is above the law, and in a civilised society no one has the right to be a law unto themselves; our actions impact on those around us, and the law exists to maintain the rights of us all. For this reason, I accept the authority of the courts in my country, regardless of how I may feel about individual laws and statutes.

Nice reply. It might be a bit off-topic (or topic-adjacent maybe) but what's your take on civil disobedience? How does it fit into the values you listed in your post?
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
Nice reply. It might be a bit off-topic (or topic-adjacent maybe) but what's your take on civil disobedience? How does it fit into the values you listed in your post?


That's a good question, which is not easy for me to answer without opening myself up to accusations of hypocrisy. There may be times when one's conscience says a law is wrong, and it's application immoral. In those circumstances I have some sympathy with organised non-violent civil disobedience as a means of protest.

This is pertinent right now, because the UK government has recently passed, or is trying to pass, a raft of legislation making it more difficult to protest in public. Mainly in response to the Extinction Rebellion movement, who have staged a series of high profile disruptive protests; many of their members are prepared to go to gaol for the cause of resisting the climate catastrophe. I have some sympathy, but I also have sympathy for those people unable to get to work because of protestors stopping transport during rush hour.

Sorry if my answer is a bit of a fudge.
 

JustGeorge

Imperfect
Staff member
Premium Member
Howdy!



Recently I have been going through the David Graeber book called debt. It’s pretty neat and helped me put into words a few things that I believed but had not exactly articulated. It’s interesting to note for instance how debt and authority sort of comingle.

What I realized is I simply do not recognize any authority. At best someone can have more experience in a general subject but I just don’t feel the need to bend the knee to anyone other than God. I have seen far too much incompetence at the tops of hierarchies, seen far too many human mistakes in churches etc.

The thing that made this interesting to me on a theological level is that it just put into words something I believed. I just don’t accept any authority other than God. Whether we are talking about scripture, priests or prophets I simply don’t really believe in authority.

This made a lot of my complaints about organized religion more easy to talk about cause now I can just say “ The only authority I trust is God.” And it works. Of course I still consult swamis, philosophers, scholars etc but I will ultimately come to my own opinion on things.

This whole line of reasoning made me curious. Do you guys accept anyone as an authority over you? Is there anyone you feel like you can’t question or go against? Why or why not?
I think I have a similar thing going, really. Though, it doesn't come from an automatic rejection of authority, I simply haven't found any authority(outside of basic state or federal law) that I'm willing to submit to. Many people find some kind of authority helpful, and I see no problem with a person choosing to submit to one, if they find it helpful or meaningful.

Though, I have to ask, why do you recognize the authority of God, and which one? In my mind, they don't seem that they'd require a devotee in similar methods. Which one/s do you follow, and why? Or, have you used intuition to discern what you feel they might collectively want?
 
Top