Radio Streams
SA Radio
24/7 Radio Stream
VCY America
24/7 Radio Stream

My Favorite Things
Home
NewsroomALL
Events | Notices | Blogs
Newest Audio | Video | Clips
Broadcasters
Church Finder
Webcast LIVE NOW!
Sermons by Bible
Sermons by Category
Sermons by Topic
Sermons by Speaker
Sermons by Language
Sermons by Date
Staff Picks
CommentsALL -44 sec
Top Sermons
Online Bible
Hymnal
Daily Reading
Our Services
Broadcaster Dashboard
Members Only

 
USER COMMENTS BY “ WILL ”
Page 1 | Page 2 ·  Found: 123 user comments posted recently.
News Item1/17/14 10:12 AM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
23
comments
Without getting too involved,
Entropy is the word you're looking for Christopher.
And penny, I wouldn't even use the term microevolution. The word connotates that macro could be possible by years of micro, but I understand that what you mean is variation within a kind of species, but not gaining information evolution.

News Item1/12/14 8:22 PM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
31
comments
I just don't see my most of my reading as immersing myself. I usually see it as dissection. I usually start with the premise that the authors are wrong, then cherry pick the good parts. That is why I am usually pretty harsh on characters and authors. Although, anne, you are right that some books have no good, as leavened thoroughly.
This is all to say, most of this literature isn't my first choice, and most all of "classic" lit that I've read has been assigned.

News Item1/12/14 2:41 PM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
31
comments
Definitely did not see Anne's opinion in the Scarlet Letter.
Just because the literature is not explicitly christian doesn't make it bad. Besides well developed prose and plots, many of those books carry good themes. The danger of hypocrisy in Scarlett letter, horror of racism in Huck Finn, etc; No reason we can't keep the grain and discard the chaff on the famous literature.

News Item1/8/14 3:40 PM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
10
comments
Personally, I don't know how I would function at a public school as such. I attend a small private in the south, so it's not a deal down here. Still, my every essay, how I read textbooks and assigns books, how I think about all my classes is from a Christian perspective. (To be clear, I don't mean a perfected perspective, but that that the bible and it's message are my default way of handling and processing information, doesn't mean I always process exactly correctly though, but I try). Point is, if they asked me any question, especially in English classes, I can't answer without thinking that way.

News Item1/3/14 12:08 PM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
42
comments
Gs, SteveR is right in saying creation is important.
Consider: the wages of sin are death.
Death and sin are found in genesis 1-3.
Adam was the federal head of sin, but Jesus is called the last Adam.
Creation also addresses many atheists biggest (and understandable) complaint, the problem of evil.
Think Paul on mars hill as a creationist apologetic sermon.
I have a feeling ham will present the Gospel for sure.
My only problem with debates are that they are too rigid and focus on scoring and winning instead of sharing and talking.
There should be more friendly debates like the flew/habermas one where there are no time limits, just discussion point by point.

News Item1/1/14 3:03 AM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
33
comments
I've heard of that book Neil, but haven't gotten around to getting it. The explanation I attempted to proffer earlier was by Dr. John Hartnett.
Like you, I agree most of what I've read goes over my head, but that doesn't stop me from reading and at least trying to have a slight understanding so as to be ready to give a defense for whoever asks.
And Gs, I feel like you paint biblical scientists in a bad light.
Personally, It's not that I don't trust scripture, it is that I do is the reason I explore and try to understand scientfic things. I don't see it as discrediting God or his power, but for me, the study is a crediting to God and magnifies his power. It is not that someone is subjecting God to the laws of the universe, but rather exploring the laws he created. Because I have simple faith in what He has said, I want to know more of him through his creation (and word of course). I'm in agreement with Newton's statement that science is thinking God'a thought after him, and it is also exemplary of faith in his Word.

News Item12/31/13 9:12 PM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
33
comments
Well mike, you raise some questions I have too. I'm not an expert either, but I feel it's an important topic which is why in trying to learn.
Trying to answer your questions,
1) poor argument, but no scientist argues they are not as far as we say. We can't prove they aren't closer by going there, and while majority isn't a good argument, it's about all I know.
I'll try to think upon and answer the rest of your questions when I can get the chance, but for us lay men, those are good questions

News Item12/31/13 7:17 PM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
33
comments
You're welcome UPS, and thanks for the ear. Many people might gloss over a question, but some honestly see distant starlight as a reason for an old earth, like the first comment on this topic.
So, I like to have an answer for those asking, although it's not a great detailed answer when i say it, it's still a sensible and possible one.
Some people might think we overstep our bounds in asking how God did it in natural terms, but I think not. Coming up with a physics explanation to demonstrate God'a power and instituting the laws only makes me marvel at his power more. After all, this attitude of wanting to know more about God's creation and His sustaining it is what lead to Newton, Kepler, and Galileo's famous discoveries. As Newton said, science is thinking God'a thoughts after him. Because this cosmogony could be wrong and is theoretical, I'm not dogmatic. But still, it's possible and consistent with both Genesis and what we observe in creation., nor does it limit the Almighty.

News Item12/31/13 6:08 PM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
33
comments
Cont...
So the question remains, how do we see distant starlight that is millions of light years away?
That is why I proposed (albeit poorly and briefly) one such creationist cosmogony below.

News Item12/31/13 6:06 PM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
33
comments
Ok, God created created a mature Adam and a mature tree of life. This we agree on. We also agree that he created the stars on day 4.

The part that I find potentially deceptive is only in regards to distant starlight.
Consider: The question is how could adam see the light from stars, (and us) if stars were only created 2 days earlier and are often many millions of light years away. A common answer is that the light was created in transit, or already on its way. If God created starlight, in transit, then when we observe the lights and explosions from stars that are over 6500 light years away, then in a 6500 year universe, we are receiving false information. For instance, if we observe a star to explode at 20 million light years away, we can see that starlight, and that starlight and was carries information (neutrinos and time and other info.). It's not just light though, because that light and information is telling us that that star actually did explode, a historical actual event, but if the light was created already on its way, then we are receiving false information about that exploding star, which didn't explode or might not exist.
Some will say that the speed of light has changed, but there is nothing to support that theory.
So the question remains, how do we see


News Item12/31/13 2:43 PM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
33
comments
Well, UPS, it's primarily a semantic issue I think.
The phrase, "appearance of age" carries the connotation of deception, you can see why that would be problematic. Mature, to me, is a better description of how the item on earth were created.
The issue isn't so much with Adam and the tress and what not on earth, because we can observe those here in time. We don't have to pretend false info with Adam like we do with starlight in transit.
Thus, the phrase is primarily problematic (to me) with starlight, because that would indicate that the stars appear old but that they actually aren't, and the light we see is actually not conveying truthful information. I'm not a physics, astronomy, or cosmology expert, but I find no contradiction invoking cosmological relativity which I explained briefly as I could earlier.
Succinctly put, that phrase is misleading in regards to starlight, but not Adam and the trees. But like I said, mature and appearance of age (built in lexicon, etc convey the same idea, so maybe I am being overly semantic, but the eliptical portion of the words "it appears" is that is isn't, and that just carries a deceptive connotation to me..
Perhaps that clears my position a bit.

News Item12/31/13 12:39 PM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
33
comments
I wouldn't be so quick to write it off so dismissively, Jsc. The stats above suggest that 66% percent do believe it, and with the dogmatic teaching of it in classrooms, it's liable to get worse.
I personally think this is a quite important and serious issue.

News Item12/31/13 11:51 AM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
20
comments
Christopher, I believe it was spurgeon who said, the difference in the right and wrong isn't the difference in truth and not truth, but true. and almost true. Or something to that effect. But I concur that it is perplexing at times.

News Item12/31/13 11:46 AM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
33
comments
Cont...
Which is not seen or observed but proposed in order to have enough mass to even have a Big Bang. A guess it is.
Therefore, the creationist model makes much more sense astronomically and geologically (and other fields) as pointed out by a few commenters here.

News Item12/31/13 11:42 AM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
33
comments
I actually disagree with j4j and UPS a bit here. Appearace of age is a poor choice of words in my opinion, respectfully. It sounds deceiving. They were created mature, however. Yes, Adam and Eve were created old without navels and a built in lexicon, but the starlight question is valid.
First, however, old earthers have to account for starlight themselves, because in 14 billion year old universe (as currently proposed,) but we can see light in the universe from farther than that e.g. 50 billion light years.
So, as for a creationist model, which is confusing, it goes something like this from my understanding.
The way God stretched out the heavens the first four days made the clocks in space run faster than the 24 hour clocks on earth. This is known as time dilation and proved by einsteins general theory of relativity. So, the stars are actually old enough due to the way God stretched, but Adam and Eve the universe are still young. (Super simple explanation is best I can do)
Far as the start of the Big Bang, I'd like to know how a black hole of infinite density and no volume suddenly pops into time and space, which doesn't exist, and then someho destroys the infinitely dense black hole via a "quantum fluctuation." Not to mention the fudge factor of "dark matter" which is

News Item12/25/13 12:01 PM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
59
comments
By the light of nature we see God as a God above us, by the light of the law we see Him as a God against us, but by the light of the gospel we see Him as Emmanuel, God with us.
Matthew Henry

Omnipotence in swaddling clothes
Omniscience in a baby too small to talk
Omnipresence in a food manger
The creator depending upon a fallen human mother

Merry Christmas everyone!!


News Item12/23/13 8:49 PM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
8
comments
Mr b, I would say it is even sillier. We actually see some people who look like Santa at least, but nothing resembles soup to philosopher.
Good sense, dr Morris was quite the scientist, helped give rise to the modern creationism movement, which is very important, and is defended beautifully at creation ministries international by some brilliant scholars.

News Item12/19/13 2:24 PM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
39
comments
To repeat the clever headline of an article I read recently from CMI.
"Sticks and stones may break my bones but... Wait, your words really hurt me!"

News Item12/18/13 10:45 AM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
6
comments
If the museum is presenting evolution, then do remove God's name from the egregious lie. He didn't put billions of years of suffering under Adams perfect feet and call it good. Of course, there they go most definitely establishing their religion. It's impossible not to, because when you ban one, you encourage the others. (In this case, the misotheist and antitheist crowd.)

News Item12/17/13 3:15 PM
Will | Mississippi  Find all comments by Will
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
58
comments
Lets just all pick up a couple of dead languages and photocopy some old manuscrpits and we won't have this problem then.
Jump to Page : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7


Stanthorpe, Queensland, Australia
Granite Belt Baptist Church

Play! | More

Dr. Stephen Kim
When Do We Get The Holy Spirit

John 15:26-27
Sunday Service
Mustard Seed Church
Play! | MP3 | RSS


Tech Talk Zoom // Episode 06

Hourly:
God Honoring Music
Dr. J. Drew Conley
Hampton Park Baptist...
Staff Picks..

Dr. James M. Phillips
#16 Being Heavenly Minded

Philippians From Greek 2021
Discover The Word With Dr...
Video!Play! | MP4

Kevin Swanson
CA Schools Worship Aztec Gods

Generations Radio
Current Events
Play! | MP3

Sermon: #75 I Will Kill You,Make..
Dr. James M. Phillips

SPONSOR | 10,800+

SPONSOR




SA UPDATES NEWSLETTER Sign up for a weekly dose of personal thoughts along with interesting content updates. Sign Up
FOLLOW US


Gospel of John
Cities | Local | Personal

MOBILE
iPhone + iPad
ChurchOne App
Watch
Android
ChurchOne App
Fire Tablet
Wear
Chromecast TV
Apple TV
Android TV
ROKU TV
Amazon Fire TV
Amazon Echo
Kindle Reader


HELP
Knowledgebase
Broadcasters
Listeners
Q&A
Uploading Sermons
Uploading Videos
Webcasting
TECH TALKS

NEWS
Weekly Newsletter
Unsubscribe
Staff Picks | RSS
SA Newsroom
SERVICES
Dashboard | Info
Cross Publish
Audio | Video | Stats
Sermon Player | Video
Church Finder | Info
Mobile & Apps
Webcast | Multicast
Solo Sites
Internationalization
Podcasting New!
Listen Line New!
Events | Notices
Transcription
Billboards | Biz Cards
Favorites | QR Codes
Online Donations
24x7 Radio Stream
INTEGRATION
Embed Codes
Twitter
Facebook
Logos | e-Sword | BLB
JSON API

BATCH
Upload via RSS
Upload via FTP
Upload via Dropbox

SUPPORT
Advertising | Local Ads
Support Us
Stories
ABOUT US
The largest and most trusted library of audio sermons from conservative churches and ministries worldwide.

Our Services | Articles of Faith
Broadcast With Us
Earn SA COINS!
Privacy Policy

TECH TALK
Tech Talk Zoom // Episode 06
Copyright © 2021 SermonAudio.