members, click to sign in..

6,169 active users!!Bandwidth
JAN 25, 2015
Events & Blogs
New Audio & Video
BroadcastersNew Stuff!
Local Church Finder
Webcast LIVE NOW!
Sermons by Bible
Sermons by Topic
Sermons by Speaker
Sermons by Date
Staff Picks
CommentsALL -2 hrs
Top Sermons
Daily Log
Online Bible
Daily Reading
Our Services
Submit Sermon
Members Only

RELIGION, CURRENT EVENTS, TECHNOLOGY Subscribe to the breaking newsWhat is RSS?
FRONT PAGE  |  1/25/2015
MONDAY, NOV 13, 2006  |  23 comments
So what's with all the dinosaurs?
Just off the interstate, a couple of junctions down from Cincinnati's international airport, over the state line in rural Kentucky, the finishing touches are being put to an impressive-looking building. When it is finished and open to the public next summer, it may, quite possibly, be one of the weirdest museums in the world.

The Creation Museum - motto: "Prepare to Believe!" - will be the first institution in the world whose contents, with the exception of a few turtles swimming in an artificial pond, are entirely fake. It is dedicated to the proposition that the account of the creation of the world in the Book of Genesis is completely correct, and its mission is to convince visitors through a mixture of animatronic models, tableaux and a strangely Disneyfied version of the Bible story. ...

CLICK HERE to Read Entire Article

Was Darwin Right? Part 1
  Recommended sermons | more..
•  Genesis: Reclaiming Culture • Ken Ham | 5/22/2003
•  Was Darwin Right? Part 1Dr. Terry Mortenson | 1/15/2009
•  Six Creation Days: Rejected • Ken Ham | 11/27/2009
•  Answers Academy: Big BangJason Lisle | 6/1/2005

   01/20/15  |  Two more planets in our Solar System, say astronomers • 1 comments
   01/02/15  |  AIG has New Year's Eve Times Square message • 31 comments
   12/16/14  |  Ken Ham Argues Kentucky's Retraction of $18M Is 'Illegal' • 1 comments
   11/25/14  |  Ken Ham Affirms Creationists Do Not Deny Climate Change • 2 comments
   11/23/14  |  Pat Robertson attacks creationists again • 20 comments
   01/23/15  |  Saudi state TV reports King Abdullah, longtime US ally, has died... • 9 comments
   01/14/15  |  NI: Gay couple launch legal bid to redefine marriage • 6 comments
   01/14/15  |  Half of all children in the US will likely live with an... • 17 comments
   01/13/15  |  Graham: America's ‘Culture of Death’ Stems From a 'Sinful,... • 134 comments
   01/13/15  |  Dallas Abortion Clinic Becomes First Abortion Clinic to Close in... • 1 comments
   01/01/15  |  Happy New Year from SermonAudio! • 10 comments
   12/01/14  |  From Tyndale to Today: A New Study Bible • 34 comments
   06/02/14  |  A Letter to SermonAudio From a Missionary to Haiti • 10 comments
   02/07/14  |  Bringing the Gospel of John to Every Home in Austin, TX • 37 comments
   01/07/14  |  SermonAudio Partners with RFC for the 2014 Family Conference at... • 1 comments
   01/25/15  |  The 10 Most and Least ‘Bible-Minded’ Cities in America: Did... • 7 comments
   01/25/15  |  Only Christian Church in Indian Village Burned Down by Hindu... • 2 comments
   01/25/15  |  Pope urges families to talk, not text • 1 comments
   01/25/15  |  Al Gore: Spend $90 Trillion To Ban Cars From Every Major City In... • 2 comments
   01/24/15  |  Obama's Nominee fo AG Reveals Passion for Racial Justice • 4 comments

COMMENTS | show all | add new  
    Sorting Order:  
· Page 1 ·  Found: 23 user comment(s)
News Item11/19/06 12:12 AM
Chris M | Australia  Find all comments by Chris M
Sounds like fun! careful though, the 'Pacific' name is somewhat of an oxymoron at times, you probably already know this more than the rest of us though.

News Item11/18/06 10:34 PM
BWM | 200-miles farther East in the mid-pacific  Find all comments by BWM
Chris M,
I have a son somewhere in NC who is also a Chris M.
I found a website in Australia which has supplied me with some great sermons by J.C. Ryle.
I'm actually onboard a motor vessel out here in the mid-pacific.
Take care.
Proverbs 26 vs 9a.

News Item11/18/06 3:27 AM
Chris M | Australia  Find all comments by Chris M
Nice car - what's it doing in the mid-Pacific?

Sorry, couldn't resist! Ya probably right about the beastie(s) in Job too.


News Item11/17/06 11:37 PM
BWM | Mid Pacific  Find all comments by BWM
I just wanted to leave a comment because I read the first portion of the article "So, what's with all the the dinosaurs" I was halted when I read the following:

"Theological scholars may have noticed that there are, in fact, no dinosaurs mentioned in the Bible - and here lies the Creationists' first problem."

My comment, is just that I would like to refer the individual who made the above statement to Job 40 vs 15-24. I'm rather certain that those verses do indeed describe such a creature.



News Item11/14/06 10:20 PM
HaveYouNotRead | Iowa  Contact via emailFind all comments by HaveYouNotRead
neil wrote "The amount of care taken is no assurance of correctness, esp. since this method has been historically unreliable. Truth cannot be obtained by imperfect methods."

Your insistance on the conclusions being guarenteed true is impracticle at best. No where have I hinted that the scientific method guarentees truth, but it is the best tool we as imperfect humans have.

Your insistance on throwing it out because it is not a perfect method only serves to feed the evolutionist's cause. They constantly throw it out in favor of just-so 'science' since their so-called theories fail the scientific methods checks and balances.

However, when we actually use the method, it shows where nearly ALL the evidence confirms scripture. We don't have to believe 'just because' but we can actually DO as scripture commands and provide an actual reason for the faith within us.

without it, when you meet a person like my former self who completely rejects scripture because 'science has proven it wrong', you will be absolutely tooless to reach that person for Christ. Science, REAL science is the friend of the Christian. It works because God designed a world that works.

In His service... Arthur


News Item11/14/06 8:02 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
I've read parts, it's in my library and I have used it as a commentary. I have several of his works. I read thru "The Genesis Flood."

News Item11/14/06 8:00 PM
Mike | New York  Find all comments by Mike

Have you read Henry Morris' "The Genesis Record"? Just curious.


News Item11/14/06 7:23 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
"process that most carefully..." is not satisfactory as a basis for belief. The amount of care taken is no assurance of correctness, esp. since this method has been historically unreliable. Truth cannot be obtained by imperfect methods.

Though evolution isn't testable, neither is creation. As AiG says, we have no tags on the fossils telling us how they were put there (and even if so, that's still not logically adequate!). As a creationist I certainly *assume* they got there by the Flood or events related thereto, but I would not plead this with a skeptic. Everything I know for sure, I know by deduction from Scripture. All else is tentative.

Incidentally, the Scientific Method is NOT "neutral," it is a product of the philosophy of Empiricism, the reliability of which has been well challenged by secular philosophers. Empiricism is foreign to Scripture.


News Item11/14/06 7:08 PM
HaveYouNotRead | Iowa  Contact via emailFind all comments by HaveYouNotRead

I'm right there with you. Like I said, I was a believer in the lies. Technically a theistic evolutionist, I set out to prove creationists wrong by the overwhelming proof for evolution. Unfortunately (at the time) every icon of evolution I persued ended up with those holes. Holes that took more faith to believe than creation. But I still refused to give in!

So I changed my focus to showing the even larger holes in the creation story. Oops again, most of what I found actually fit the evidence, or at least the evidence minus the presupposition of evolution.

I can easilly have sen myself going to AiG's museum so the 'holes' I had been looking for would have been finally made clear. But if I know AiG, I'd have been as out of luck finding them as I was already. It would have simply been one more nail in the coffin of my disbelife.

My point here is, it may not take long to find those holes, but in cases like mine, it takes a long time to finally give up my truth and accept the real truth. And something like this could not only help people like me, but those who do not have the answers to strengthen and defend their faith.

In His service... Arthur


News Item11/14/06 7:06 PM
Chris M | Australia  Find all comments by Chris M
Neil I agree with you that the notion of "if we can only convince people of these facts they will then believe" is wrong. Like you I am not convinced that a dinosaur museum will be more effective than their current voluminous written information.

I tend to disagree with them on some points relating to age too however I feel that anything that challenges others faith in evolution is good and anything that could lead to someone examining scripture is also good. So I support them in this. I think if anyone genuinly desires to know the truth - and not just for mere mental satisfaction - God will lead that person to the truth by the Holy Spirit.


News Item11/14/06 6:55 PM
HaveYouNotRead | Iowa  Contact via emailFind all comments by HaveYouNotRead
"Even if you don't accept #1 as part of it, why should I logically believe results of the Scientific Method, however it's defined?"

Because it is the process that most carefully examines the testable evidence. If one test fails, so does the theory. And finishing initial testing doesn't end testing. someone years later can get that one time that makes the theory fail. And that's the other part, the scientific method does not make end with a law, it ends in a theory.

Even though we are taught differently, a theory is not a fact or a law. That's why evolution is not even a theory, it doesn't pass the scientific method. It actually fails BEFORE the hypothesis stage.

I by no means am saying the Scientific Method is the end all and be all. It however does seperate science from philosophy. The later being where evolution, and to be fair, creation both fall. What survives is the actual evidence, testable, provable, real evidence. 90% of which clearly points in the creationist's favor.

In His service... Arthur


News Item11/14/06 6:34 PM
TJUSA | USA  Find all comments by TJUSA
Hmmm! I wonder what side of the issue the Guardian is on?
Where the Creation Museum is said to take 'a little license' to fill in where the bible leaves off, it seems the Guardian is clear about all of the facts of the debate!
Which theory of evolution is the correct one? Oh, there's more than 1 theory out there?
Dinosaurs? The word wasn't even coined until the middle 1800's, so it couldn't have been written in the bible! But descriptive language is used in the Bible to describe some living creatures that don't seem to exist today (perhaps extinct)! Extinction does still happen!
When you read articles like this one in the Guardian and say to yourself, "Oh, that settles it, those Creationists are wacko!", you are failing to see the true debate and from a sadly inaccurate and biased point of view.
Sure, I'm biased too, but I've done far more research on both sides of the issue than a short 3 hour tour of an unfinished museum! I used to think evolution and old earth geology were accurate, but it doesn't take long to see gigantic holes in these systems of thought...just like the holes the Guardian perceives in the Creation Museum and the lives- past and present-of its staff. Do yourself a favor- now that you’ve read the Guardians article, go to

News Item11/14/06 6:21 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
I was not accusing AiG of "faith in science", but I do say they don't point out its fallacies strongly enough.

Children properly taught on how to think Biblically (and thus logically) won't need life-sized visual aids to further get the point. Anyway, AiG's books & website are a lot cheaper than trips to Kentucky & museum fees.

Want children to listen to God's word or anything else? That's what Mom & Dad are supposed to do.


News Item11/14/06 5:49 PM
Remo & Susan Graziotin | Adelaide, South Australia  Find all comments by Remo & Susan Graziotin
Neil said But even relativity is not really true; it just conforms to certain observations better than classical mechanics. But no such scientific law can be shown to work everywhere & at all times; that's a fallacious assumption since we aren't (like God) omniscient.

Even if you don't accept #1 as part of it, why should I logically believe results of the Scientific Method, however it's defined?

Neil Ibelive AIG willnever say that science is right therefore.. its the opposte the have stated many time that both groups are looking back to what has happened yet they always claim "I can tell you who was there and we have HIS Word" and do you want to listen" i think this is how the rest went. Its has favourite line foe children to there teachers who claim other wise.
The Musem in my veiw is just a common tool for children to get taught the opposite of error. Chilldren love going on excursions and now they have an excuss to some where of the opposite nature and have a way of getting them to hear Gods Word.
I think one can strain or be negative too much at things, at times with out looking to the whole picture.
They dont really on causality but The God who was there.


News Item11/14/06 5:02 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
I didn't say enough for #1. What is "confirmed?" When experimental results are adjudged to meet hypothetical expectations. But quantitatively, what should the error window be? 70%? 90%? 99%? The acceptance criteria is chosen arbitrarily. IMHO it is simply a value that is emotionally comforting to most scientists. But this can hardly be comforting to anyone seeking truth!

News Item11/14/06 4:44 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
#1 Wikipedia, presumably no enemy of science; "Science is a social enterprise, and scientific work tends to be accepted by the community when it has been confirmed." Still believe I argued a strawman? True, there may be more cautious stmts. elsewhere, but once a theory is accepted by the community, tremendous pressure bears on any dissenters, as with "global warming." Yet causality is a very thorny philosophical problem. And there's the issue of determining what a "fact" is, as Clark discussed.

#2 I am not disputing that it's more precise than Darwinian speculation which is not even testable, but it is not possible to guarantee that even a well-tested theory is always true. It took about two centuries before experiments were devised which contradicted Newton's laws & *appeared to* confirm Einstein's. But even relativity is not really true; it just conforms to certain observations better than classical mechanics. But no such scientific law can be shown to work everywhere & at all times; that's a fallacious assumption since we aren't (like God) omniscient.

Even if you don't accept #1 as part of it, why should I logically believe results of the Scientific Method, however it's defined?


News Item11/14/06 3:52 PM
HaveYouNotRead | Iowa  Contact via emailFind all comments by HaveYouNotRead
"1) commits the fallacy of affirming the consequent (e.g. "if the battery is dead, the car won't start. The car won't start; therefore, the battery is dead");
2) commits the fallacy of induction, or hasty generalization (e.g. "the last 1000 ducks have been white, therefore all ducks are white")"

# 1 assumes effect follows cause so is pointless because no one does science that way, evolutionist or creationist. It is an example of cause and effect, not a testable hypothesis. Cause and effect goes one way.

#2 is still a more precise method than evolutionary science which would be more along either duck 1 is white, duck 2 is white. Therefore ducks haven't changed color in millions of years. Or duck 1 is white, duck 2 is brown, so over millions of years white ducks have evolved the ability to become brown in color.

In His service... Arthur


News Item11/14/06 3:25 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
The Scientific Method is fallacious and thus cannot yield facts, for it either

1) commits the fallacy of affirming the consequent (e.g. "if the battery is dead, the car won't start. The car won't start; therefore, the battery is dead");
2) commits the fallacy of induction, or hasty generalization (e.g. "the last 1000 ducks have been white, therefore all ducks are white")

Also, there is the problem of measurement uncertainty (cf. sense perception) & the resulting arbitrary, invented equations. Atheists Bertrand Russell & Karl Popper, no dummies, have pointed out these inescapable problems. Too bad few Christians besides Gordon Clark have noticed.


News Item11/14/06 2:50 PM
HaveYouNotRead | Iowa  Contact via emailFind all comments by HaveYouNotRead
Real science - Science that is based on the Scientific Method (observe, make hypothesis, design test, test, retest until certain). Evolution fails every step; its not real science. Also, science where the conclusions are based on the facts. Not based on the facts, then added to assumptions and unprovable philosophies.

In His service... Arthur


News Item11/14/06 1:51 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
What do you mean by "real science?" Sound inferences from evidence?
There are a total of 23 user comments displayed | add new comment |Subscribe to these comments
Jump to Page : [1] 2 | last
Last PostTotal
Rev. Franklin Graham’s Non-PC Move on Live TV
bible doctrines: " bible teachings the elect of god. god saves the elect of..."
-2 hrs 169 
Christian Mom: Leggings Could Lead Men to ‘Think Lustful...
unproftiable servnat from georgia: " jessica dawson i agree, may god bless you!..."
-2 hrs 32 
The 10 Most and Least ‘Bible-Minded’ Cities in America: Did...
jamie from iowa: "cedar rpids is 39 miles north of egghead city jim"
-2 hrs 

Christopher Sidwell
Demonic Faith

Luke 8; James 2
Sunday Service
Bible Presbyterian of Apollo
Play! | MP3 | RSS

Douglas Salyer
The Sower and the Seed

Pastor - Sunday Morning Sermon
Princess Chapel Church
Transcript!Play! | MP3

E. A. Johnston
Salvation Without Holiness...

Evangelism Awakening
Special Meeting
Play! | MP3

Mark S. Case
Becoming a Glorious Church

Riverside Church
Sunday Service
Video!Play! | MP4

Ken Wimer
Hard of Hearing

Spiritual Deafness Described
Shreveport Grace Church
Play! | MP3

Paul Washer: "Most Useful Bible Study"

See what Paul Washer calls the most useful Bible study tool in hist­ory. Click here!

Sermon: Mistakes Of Modern Evangelism
E. A. Johnston

SPONSOR | 4,000+


A proud soul is content with nothing. ... Thomas Brooks

City: Las Vegas, NV
Gospel of John
Cities | Local | Personal
iPhone + iPad New!
Church App New!
Android New!
Church App New!
Kindle + Nook New!
Windows Mobile, Nokia
Chromecast TV
Pebble Smartwatch
Kindle Reader

Uploading Sermons
Uploading Videos
Tips & Tricks
YouTube Screencasts

Weekly Newsletter
Staff Picks Feed
Site Notices
RSS | Twitter | Facebook
Local Church Finder | Info
MP3 Play & Download
Mobile Apps
Video Support
Live Webcasting
Transcription Service
Business Cards
Domain Redirect
QR Codes
24x7 Radio Stream
Sermon Browser
HTML Codes
Logos | e-Sword

Transfer Agent
Protected Podcasts
Upload via Email
Auto-Upload Sermons
Auto-Blog Import
Picasa | FTP | Dropbox
ABOUT US is the largest library of audio sermons from conservative churches and ministries worldwide. All broadcasters must adhere to the Articles of Faith.

Our Services | Testimonials
Broadcast With Us!
Support Us
Advertising | Local Ads
Copyright © 2015