But getting back to God’s Word, don’t forget to move on to Deut. 17:2-7, where God gives us important instruction on enacting freedom of religion laws which we, His children, will be expected by Him to enact once we gain a majority in the Canadian government:

“If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant,
“And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;
“And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel:
“Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
“At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.”

I can’t wait to introduce God’s loving Laws to Canada’s atheist hordes!

In view of the militant hostility we have faced in recent days from atheists who have fraudulently maligned God and the message of Scripture, we want to bring you another aspect of God’s law which reflects His mercy and kindness: Deuteronomy 15:7-11.

This is a call to show generosity to the poor. It is not a call for the state to coercively extract money from taxpayers for the poor. It is a call to personal responsibility by individuals. It is a repudiation of Atheism’s coercive socialist ideology. It’s a call to individuals to do the right thing without being forced to do so by the state or by anybody else.

“If there is a poor man among your brothers in any of the towns of the land that the LORD your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward your poor brother. Rather be openhanded and freely lend him whatever he needs.

“Be careful not to harbor this wicked thought: ‘The seventh year, the year for canceling debts, is near,’ so that you do not show ill will toward your needy brother and give him nothing. He may then appeal to the LORD against you, and you will be found guilty of sin. Give generously to him and do so without a grudging heart; then because of this the LORD your God will bless you in all your work and in everything you put your hand to.

There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land.”

On the one hand they’ve got their magic book, their weird collection of fables, fairy-tales and quaint superstitions, so bizarre that even a dim child wouldn’t swallow the crap unless they’d been subjected to indoctrination and outright brain-washing from early childhood.

Look at what that book offers them, or at least at what they think it offers them…a very crafty selection of booby prizes, designed to appeal to their baser natures. It tells them they resemble god…now, reflect on what that tells you about their vanity, and about god’s lack of imagination, and the idea that god apparently also shares some ancestry with the apes. It tells them that they’re special, evidence to the contrary notwithstanding, and that they occupy a special place in the Universe, also false…in other words, it’s a pretty naked play on people’s arrogance. Or, at least, on the arrogance of people predisposed to accept such twaddle.

One by one the book plays on Human weaknesses. If nothing else it’s a brilliant job of selling snake oil to those uncritical enough to sense the cynicism because the simple are so entranced by the shiny prizes that they accept having to die to get them. It says nothing good about much of the population that generation after generation swallow this.

And yet there is hope for something like rationality. Even the catholic church is feeling the reins of power slipping from its grasp, sadly helped along by every new revelation about priests raping children. Christianity keeps splintering and each new cult makes itself even more bizarre so as to lure in the sheeple. I don’t think it necessary to comment on the wit of those unable to sense what they’re participating in.

So spare a bit of sympathy for the gullible and even for those who seek to manipulate them; in a sense they can’t help themselves. They’re wrapped up in a web of primitive hatefulness but time keeps moving along and no matter how lunatic they get, education and changing demographics will keep them on the fringe, which is the best we can hope for, apart from seeing them under psychiatric care. They could change but they don’t want to, or their arrogance won’t let them, and they’re pitiable for that as well.

It’s lack, not presence, of knowledge that makes them want to lead everybody back to the Dark Ages; they want everything reduced to a level even they can grasp. They don’t want to accept that Man created God, not the other way around for their world-view would collapse, and for some of them their income would dry up as well, were they compelled to stop selling fairy-tales to the simple. Surely all that merits an iota of pity.

For anyone coming to this site and actually believing any of this foul trash, stop now, please, for your own good and the good of society. Any one who has read the Bible (and I encourage everyone to do so to see how foul it is) can see how horrible it would be as a basis of government. The execution of everyone the Bible says should be executed would take up a huge amount of time alone.

It’s truly sad to see people like this site’s editor wasting their lives on harmful, false doctrines. I pity you all. I won’t be back to this cesspool.

I agree. It’s pathetic when atheists don’t bother to point out that there’s no physical evidence that Moses led a massive migration of about half of the population of Egypt (the Jewish populace was estimated at one million, of an entire Egyptian population of arournd two million), and that such a massive group of people wandered the desert for forty years. They won’t even mention that every scientific discipline that touches on the origin of the universe or life (such as physics, astronomy, geology, and biology) contradicts the Genesis account of creation taking place in six days less than ten thousand years ago. And you certainly never hear nonbelievers point out that archeological evidence shows that Jehoiakim was not the king of Judah when it was conquered by Nebuchadnezzar in 597 B.C., contradicting God’s Word in Daniel 1:1-2.

Thankfully, using Presuppositional apologetics allows us Christians to sidestep any conversations regarding difficult subjects involving actual evidence. Once you know the Bible is God’s Word, evidence can be hand-waved away easily by retreating into the safety of projecting our Jesus-based post-modern views of scientific endeavors onto the Satan-inspired knowledge crafted by some of Earth’s most brilliant scientists!

Praise Jesus, for even though He rarely gives us the answers to atheists’ rebuttals, He always gives us ways to completely ignore their questions!

You are using argumentation based on certain premises, which therefore reflect a particular philosophy. Many others hold to different philosophies of life and therefore different premises, and do not accept yours as credible. So that’s where the real debate lies. Whose premises stand up the best to logic, which are the most logically defensible. There are people who believe the material world is an illusion, so they won’t accept your claim about bullets providing their own proof as to being real. Are you going to dismiss them out of hand, or engage with their philosophy to demonstrate it’s absurdity?

Anyone who wishes to refute the proof of a bullet is free to do so (using their own life as collateral).

And I think I’ve demonstrated my willingness to engage with, and show the absurdity of the philosophy of others.

Contrary to what you claim my entire point was about the differences between philosophies. My example using homosexuals was paired with an equal example of women though you did not take offense to that. Despite what you think I believe quite fully in anyone’s right to “a particular interpretation of what objection to homosexuality implies”. What I object to is the notion that it should be legal to act on it. I have yet to hear an argument against homosexuality that has any merits. When I do, I’m more than willing to engage it based on it’s claims.

In terms of the current political debates, even your way of framing objections to homosexuality as “gays are of less value” reflects a particular interpretation of what objection to homosexuality implies, and one that is a derisive and condescending caricature, framing the argument in a way that makes it easier to dismiss it out of hand rather than actually engaging with arguments against homosexuality on their own merits. The idea that our society doesn’t object to homosexuality today is due to objections not holding up to scrutiny is not an objectively verifiable fact. It assumes all kinds of things that aren’t proven, such as the idea that the move in this direction is real and sincere, and not something cultivated by the propaganda of media bias or intimidation through peer pressure, etc. It assumes that humanity is moving in a line from less moral to more moral as time goes on, and always moves in the same direction, such that today, we’re not in a temporary reversal. This also assumes that there is an objective standard of morality somewhere against which we can measure ourselves to know that we are becoming more ethical than we were before. It’s all philosophy and theory – nothing objectively proven just because it’s survived the test of time, or for any other reason.