It's a paradox that shows that the truth about personal beliefs is relative... not so in other cases such as mathematics for example, which is maintained despite beliefs
Discussion
Beliefs are either in accord with truth or not. There is no relativity of belief because there is no moral relativity in the cosmos. There is fixed moral truth just as there is fixed mathematical truth. Both find their source is Jesus Christ.
If there were no absolute moral truth you would have no real basis to be against anything you are against or for anything you are for. There would be no truly grounded moral argument against murder or government tyranny or theft. But because there is a God in heaven who established cosmic moral law, we have a firm foundation with which to oppose such violations of the moral law as I pointed out above.
Besides, saying that the "truth of personal beliefs is relative" is you making an absolute truth claim based on what you believe. You cannot escape moral absolutes. The question is not whether they exist but what they are.
I respect your belief. However, I believe morality can also stem from reason, empathy, and cultural context, not solely from a divine base. While many societies today agree on certain moral principles, the history shows that moral standards evolve, what was once accepted, like slavery, is now rejected. This suggests morality may adapt over time and it isn’t rigid
I agree. There are moral-cultural customs and norms that arise. My only point is that there is a divine moral law that is fixed and that undergirds everything. Any cultural morality that contradicts divine moral standards is in error. However, there are plenty of cultural moral norms that don't contradict divine moral law.
Simply put, divine moral law and cultural moral customs are coexistent realities. If morality is merely cultural morality, there is no basis with which to argue that any particular moral atrocities are actually atrocities.