dog with goose

I hear this rhetoric all the time so let’s go through it… Atheist: “Strange to think you can draw objective morality from a book when countless other people in history drew very different morals from it.” That’s not strange at all. Objective morality means that something is true regardless of disagreement—it doesn’t require universal consensus. If the Bible truly tells us what is moral and immoral, then the fact that people have misinterpreted it is irrelevant. For example—there’s an objective fact about the shape of the Earth, even though people throughout history have disagreed about its size, shape, and structure. The existence of false conclusions and opinions doesn’t mean there is no objective truth about the matter. Atheist: “It either took 1700 years for Christians to learn to read the Bible or external forces influenced new interpretations finally banning slavery.” This is a very ignorant understanding of history. In reality slavery wasn’t some uniquely Christian institution—it was a universal human practice for thousands of years, unquestioned by nearly every culture. The only reason you even think of slavery as immoral today is because of Christianity. Christians—particularly those influenced by biblical principles—were the ones who led the charge to abolish it. It wasn’t that “Christians finally learned to read the Bible.” It was that Christianity, as it spread and gained influence, became strong enough to end slavery. No other worldview produced a movement to abolish it—Christianity did. You’re welcome btw