blackbird

Nonsense. I have firsthand knowledge of the kind of thing that happened. Social services put two indigenous kids in my home for a week or so and the little girl said a man in the indigenous home where she lived, perhaps a father, or grandfather, put her hand on the stove to teach her a lesson.

Why did God destroy Sodom and Gomorrah? "The sinful ways of Sodom and Gomorrah were so corrupt that God destroyed the two cities with fire sparing only the family of Lot." Why Did God Destroy Sodom and Gomorrah? Their Story of Sin in the Bible (christianity.com) "The Bible story of Sodom and Gomorrah is a cautionary tale of the destructive consequences of sin. Sodom and Gomorrah were cities mentioned in Genesis, notorious for their flagrant sin. Genesis 18:20-21 states, “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.” Why did God destroy everyone on earth with the flood except Noah and his family? Hint... "6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. {both…: Heb. from man unto beast} 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD. 9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God. {perfect: or, upright} 10 And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. 11 The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. 12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth." Genesis 6:6-12 KJV

Right-thinking Bible believers believe in real science that is empirical, i.e. that can be proven by the scientific method. Only blind atheists believe in unproven theories like the theory of evolution which has been rejected by many brilliant scholars and scientists. Everyone with a brain realizes things don't just happen without a cause. The universe was not an accident. It was designed and had to have an immensely intelligent designer Creator. One of the principles of all science is every effect has a cause. Darwinists are religionists because to them evolution is a kind of religion. There is no proof it even happened, but they believe it on blind faith. Even some mathematician scientists say there was not enough time in the universe for life to form by random chance processes. The mathematical law of probability is against evolution. They say the chances of life forming by random chance is like giving a monkey a typewriter and seeing how long it would take the monkey to type randomly and come up with the complete works of Shakespeare. It just couldn't happen. Yet people are so gullible they will believe anything. At least Bible believers have evidence on their side that the universe was created. The evidence is all around us in the existence and complexity of everything. Atoms, molecules, energy don't evolve. They had to have a designer Creator. See creation.com website

What? Children's aid taking neglected or abused kids into foster care and government putting kids in residential schools that would otherwise receive no education? That has always been the role of the government, provincial and federal. Why has it suddenly become wrong for the government to try to help the native kids for the last 150 years?

Because there is no proof of genocide. It is a fake claim. It is useful to claim endless compensation from the government.

The children had to be taken care of by the powers that be. Otherwise you would have had genocide by starvation. Then you would be whining about that.

There was no genocide.

Whatever God orders is moral. God is sovereign in everything. "He also gives him a reason for the command, that the severity he must use might not seem hard: I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, v. 2. God had an ancient quarrel with the Amalekites, for the injuries they did to his people Israel when he brought them out of Egypt. We have the story, Exod 17 8, etc., and the crime is aggravated, Deut 25 18. He basely smote the hindmost of them, and feared not God. God then swore that he would have war with Amalek from generation to generation, and that in process of time he would utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek; this is the work that Saul is now appointed to do (v. 3): "Go and smite Amalek. Israel is now strong, and the measure of the iniquity of Amalek is now full; now go and make a full riddance of that devoted nation." He is expressly commanded to kill and slay all before him, man and woman, infant and suckling, and not spare them out of pity; also ox and sheep, camel and ass, and not spare them out of covetousness." 1 Samuel 15 Commentary - Matthew Henry Commentary on the Whole Bible (Complete) (biblestudytools.com)

Taking the Bible out of context again.

Of course whoever would be teaching the Bible in schools would have to have a certain degree of knowledge of it and be qualified. We couldn't have you or Treebeard teaching it. There are a few historical passages in the Bible that could be taken out of context as Herbie or Treebeard do for their own reasons to try to discredit the Bible. Those kind of people could not teach it of course. Must be a Bible believer teaching it to begin with. We don't use teachers to teach subjects if they oppose the subject to begin with.

Just gave you a lengthy explanation of that and the link for more information. Apparently you don't read anything more than one or two lines. So of course you don't understand the answer.

You either trust God and his revelation and admit you don't understand everything in it but are willing to learn OR you reject it all and remain in darkness. There are two schools of thought. One is belief that God created the universe, revealed himself in his written word which we can study and learn. The other school of thought is unbelief which manifests itself in various ideologies such as secular humanism, Darwinism, Communism, etc.

You claim that because you don't understand the Bible. The Sabbath only applied to ancient Israel and never applied to the Church which began 2,000 years ago at the crucifixion. "If an old-covenant Israelite esteemed “all days alike,” he might be stoned to death (Numbers 15:32–36). Yet Paul evidently felt no need to impose the Sabbath command on his Gentile converts. Some in Rome, it seems, wanted to keep the Sabbath (and so esteem “one day as better than another”) — perhaps Jewish Christians eager to maintain the traditions of their fathers. Paul had no issue with those Christians, so long as they refrained from pressuring others to imitate them or suggested that salvation hinged on obedience to the Sabbath (compare Galatians 4:8–11). For the sake of Christian freedom and mutual love, Paul says simply and remarkably, “Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind” (Romans 14:5). Hebrews: ‘We who have believed enter that rest.’ The author of Hebrews brings us closer to the heart of why the new covenant does not require a literal seventh-day rest. Christ’s first coming did not abolish rest; rather, it ushered in a deeper kind of rest than the Sabbath could ever offer. According to Hebrews 4, Israel’s Sabbath day always pointed forward to a far greater day: the still-future day when all creation will enter fully into the rest foreshadowed and promised in Genesis 2:2–3, the very first seventh day. “So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God” (Hebrews 4:9). The ultimate Sabbath rest is coming, when God’s people will enjoy work without toil, hearts without sin, and an earth without thorns. Yet even now, Hebrews implies, we feel the first waves of the coming rest. In Christ, we “have [already] tasted . . . the powers of the age to come” (Hebrews 6:5), rest included. For, the author writes, “We who have believed enter that rest” (Hebrews 4:3) — not “will enter,” but “enter”: fully later, truly now. And how do we enter that rest? Not mainly by putting aside our weekly labors for one day in seven, but by believing: “We who have believed enter that rest.” Faith in Jesus Christ brings the rest of the seventh day into every day." For a full explanation: Should Christians Keep the Sabbath? | Desiring God

The aboriginals want all the advanced technology. They love it.

Of course humanism believes the traditional biblical definition of a family is obsolete. Firstly it rejects God-given absolutes and that means it rejects the definition of a family as being only between one man and one woman. That is why we have same-sex marriage and recognition of pride flags, etc. According to the Bible which is God's revelation to man, the only relationship God recognizes as legitimate is between man and woman as a husband and wife. Humanism rejects this. Your description of humanism which you posted states quite clearly what it believes. It is man-centred and rejects God. In humanism, man decides what a family is and believes individual freedom or liberty takes precedence over what God said in his written revelation.