Anthropomorphic God Concepts Engender Moral Judgment

Abstract

Violations of religious doctrine may not only be perceived to violate the laws of one’s religion, but also to be morally wrong. Just as actions considered acceptable outside of social contexts are often considered unacceptable when they affect other people, believers perceiving God in anthropomorphic terms were more likely to judge violations of their religious doctrine to be morally unacceptable than believers not perceiving God in anthropomorphic terms. Devout Christians reported the extent to which they endorsed the Christian theological God concept and an anthropomorphic God concept before rating the extent to which they considered actions prohibited by the Ten Commandments to be theologically and morally wrong. Endorsement of both God concepts influenced the extent to which those acts were perceived to violate the tenets of participants’ religion. Only endorsement of the anthropomorphic God concept, however, determined the extent to which those actions were considered morally wrong.