(November 13, 2020 at 1:10 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Sounds like you've just told me how one interpretation is less valid than another - ironically, what you asked another poster to provide - but I think that you just can't get right on this, personally.
Did you even read what I wrote? The commandment isn't open to interpretation. All you have to do is read it and you'll see what I mean. There is no language commanding worship, not even anything synonymous with worship or that could be metaphorically referring to worship. So where in the world did the original statement/interpretation come from? There was no reason at all for it.
(November 13, 2020 at 1:10 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: That brings to mind a thought experiment, not entirely unlike angrboda's. Let's just imagine that everything I might think about your religion is true. Are you morally responsible for holding it, as you are, as a human being, as an entity currently incapable of not believing - can I hold you morally responsible for that false and bad belief? You don't intend to do harm by it, you don't control whether you believe it, and you don't control how your beliefs pan out in the world.
Are you or can you be held morally responsible for holding that belief..and, if so, how?
I honestly have no idea what you're saying here. Perhaps it's just me, but your writing seems, once again, incoherent.