Had some thoughts about the history of religions last night. Strap in, I guess - but I'll try not to make this long.

What I was observing was that the values of religions that have lasted over long periods of time seem to have a lot to do with the socio-political climate in which they were initially instituted.

Consider China. Dynastic rule for long periods of time. Not a huge amount of conquest or invasion. Typically a very collectivist population. What religions thrived there? Ones that helped further pacify the people, emphasis on group meditation and little or no materialism. Not much emphasis on the greatness or goodness or paternality of a god, don't really view the higher power as a savior.

Then look at the Mediterranean region. Lots of wars, conquests, plenty of imperialism and conquests. Jewish tribes were beaten up by just about everyone that stopped by. Jewish religion reflects this by emphasizing a paternal god who will fight for them. Materialism is celebrated, as long as it is done for the temple. Victim mentality is literally bred in as original sin. I think Judaism is something of an offshoot of earlier Indus Valley religions (shares common roots with modern Hinduism) but was greatly changed and adapted to suit the cycle of conquering/conquered that defined the Jews.

During one of the relatively stable periods, the semi-nomadic Essenes find a leader who takes on the existing corruption of the Jewish temple state, and this leader becomes the symbol of a new religion - which appeals to Romans for many reasons, and soon becomes institutionalized as Christianity. Christianity is more geared to making individualists (as opposed to collectivists) more servile, while through its message of spreading the "good news" also supports conquest and war. The people already believe they are flawed, which makes them easy to enslave, if they are not already slaves. Any materialism is still only focused on the Church, which becomes the State. As Rome itself falls, the Church carries on throughout Europe and central Asia, splitting off and adapting where needed.

Then you have the Islamic story, which diverges early, in a war-torn and hotly contested area of the globe that had seen both wealth and poverty. It takes on similar characteristics to Christianity, but replaces a lot of the servile victim mentality with anger and aggression. War begets war, after all. In both Islam and Christianity there is a lot of focus on afterlife, salvation, a god that will kick ass and take names if it suits him - and it is definitely a him, for these cultures.

Christianity gets a major change with Martin Luther, as it splits into Protestantism and Catholicism. Again, someone fed up with corruption takes on the institution and makes a big change. The new Protestantism is even more individualist, has a renewed interest in conquest, and mates up nicely with the age of exploration and empiricism that is underway. Luther doesn't become a mythical figure like Christ, although operationally was likely very similar.

Then there is Hinduism - which also arose the Indus valley, but the leaders (Brahmas) soon took whatever ancient wisdom they had and made themselves untouchable by implementing castes and shrouding everything in superstition. Translations, retranslations, published notes, poems, and everything else done to the original Vedic lore created a solid mess, where almost anything could be justified by the religious leaders. However, once entrenched, they have been very good at staying in control, and Hindu values support that well.

Once you release yourself from belief in dogma (any dogma), it becomes much easier to see the paths through history that various belief systems have taken, and why they might have been instituted as they were. Believe whatever gets you to sleep at night, but the human story is much longer than most religions can account for, punctuated by cycles of violence, conquest, peace, building, high society, etc., and I believe these cycles have a lot to do with the beliefs borne out of them.

(above is extremely generalized, presented without appropriate nuance, and may be offensive to some. I could research and write chapters if not books on each region or belief system, and you probably wouldn't be any less offended.)