But we do on rational charitability. You know what’s right and what’s wrong. You can believe in good and evil without believing in the same God who put it there. Just how someone can also believe the summer is especially warm without believing in man-made climate change.
If your definition of truth includes religious texts in any capacity other than, perhaps, a very dated take on philosophy, then that’s a point we are simply not going to agree on.
The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds; there is none who does good.
Fuck you and fuck this take. Theists don’t have a monopoly on the capacity to be charitable and a positive influence.
But we do on rational charitability. You know what’s right and what’s wrong. You can believe in good and evil without believing in the same God who put it there. Just how someone can also believe the summer is especially warm without believing in man-made climate change.
I’m not a big fan of your book about imaginary friends that tell you what to do
If only truth was so easy to dismiss so we can follow our own selfish desires…
If your definition of truth includes religious texts in any capacity other than, perhaps, a very dated take on philosophy, then that’s a point we are simply not going to agree on.
What do you mean by “dated take” - does right or wrong change with time?
What would you say: is buying slaves from the nations that surround me still right, did god instruct people to do wrong or did right and wrong change?
God never instructed people to buy slaves. Concessions were once made to an adulterous nation because of their hardened hearts.
Yes. Yes it does. The bounds of what society considers acceptable or reprehensible changes with time, location, and culture.
So if morality is subjective, then who are we to judge the holocaust? It was acceptable in that time, location and culture.