Rachels points out that Socrates and many other thinkers who believe in God have shown that even if one accepts a religious picture of the world, rightness or wrongness of our actions cannot be understood merely in terms of conformity to divine commands. The same is true for sacred religious texts.
What is your understanding of how these religious thinkers arrived at the conclusion that we can understand right and wrong without the help of a divine being or reference to religious texts?
What reasons can be offered for the rightness or wrongness of an action that do not make reference to a divine being or command?