its not a passionate disagreement. I'm just pointing out a flaw in your reasoning.
But whatever. You'll continue to pass off your passive aggression under the guise of you pretending not to care
thanks
its not a passionate disagreement. I'm just pointing out a flaw in your reasoning.
But whatever. You'll continue to pass off your passive aggression under the guise of you pretending not to care
This is the classic dilemma.
Is what god says to do good because god says it, or because its good already?
... nah, speak for yourself,breh. I'm a goody two shoes all the time.Actually all are evil bc we sin. You sure you know what he Bible says on that matter.
Bingo.
...we do.
But also you adopted this discipline but from whom, or did you develop it yourself?
We made the rules to benefit ourselves.
You as a person, these doctrines were imposed on you from infancy.
You as a person, by what mete do you choose what to accept and what to reject?
1. Accept? I accept whatever can be proven...
2....but when it comes to morality, you basically accept that you're making shyt up arbitrarily.
Napoleon said:Euthyphro Dilemma
I understand that. my question is, by ends of moral right what do you choose as mete to form your discipline?
Logically invalid argument is logically invalid.
Napoleon said:Its not invalid though
I don't know what you mean by "moral right"