Sign in or signup
Radio Streams
SA Radio
24/7 Radio Stream
VCY America
24/7 Radio Stream

My Favorite Things
Events | Local | Blogs
New Audio | Video | Clips
Church Finder
Live Webcasts
Sermons by Bible
Sermons by Category
Sermons by Topic
Sermons by Speaker
Sermons by Date
Staff Picks
CommentsALL -17 sec
Top Sermons
Daily Log
Online Bible
Daily Reading
Our Services
Sermon DashboardNEW
Members Only

Sermon Funeral Service of Dr. Gail Gingery | Dr. Alan Cairns
B. McCausland
"Thank you Dr.Cairns for that Christ exalting word so fittingly followed by..."
-25 hrs 
Sermon The Gospel Of Gods Grace | Jeff Arthur
Philippus Schutte from Australia
-29 hrs 
Sermon The Bible is Not a Ouija Board | Dr. James M. Phillips
njfrompa from ERIE- PA
-29 hrs 
· Page 1 ·  Found: 13 user comments posted recently.
News Item12/13/16 11:02 AM
Well  Find all comments by Well
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
Mike wrote:
Truth is always true of its own accord, doctrines are what people believe to be true, but may not be.
Thanks for clarifying.

News Item12/13/16 9:46 AM
Well  Find all comments by Well
• Thread closed
• Report abuse
B. McCausland wrote:
Sorry, the doctrine of sin's remission (the covering of our sin) anchors from Eden's happenings to what all sound biblical circles adhere. It is perfectly right to view the applications of this doctrine in the context of dress also, as we use dress because of the Fall.
The fact of God providing the robes in Eden to cover Adam and Eve, points to the fact that the shame of our sin requires covering physically as spiritually
Someone doesn't understand dualism. Smh

God provided a covering because Adam and Eve knew they were naked viz. they felt ashamed. They were naked in innocence and it was no problem! So nakedness itself clearly was not the issue.

Also previously they just had a covering of leaves, which no doubt you'd be aghast at. Just think how immodest just to have leaves covering the parts that caused them shame.

Do you suppose Eve feared that some man would lust after her?

You're not proving anything biblically, but providing humanistic reasoning.



Since you're so sure I change my moniker, you have obviously read my posts enough to know who you are interacting with despite any change of monikers. BTW I am not affirming or denying, just pointing to your absurdity.

News Item12/13/16 9:37 AM
Well  Find all comments by Well
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
Mike wrote:
God's sovereignty isn't a doctrine, it's a fact, a truth.
You mean if it were doctrine it wouldn't be fact/truth?

News Item12/13/16 6:37 AM
Well  Find all comments by Well
• Thread closed
• Report abuse
B. McCausland wrote:
This way of looking at the matter might not be the one of your persuasion, neither the persuasion prevailing in your circles, yet, may it be assured that outside this Forum, there are people who gladly value the position as shared.
Take care
If there are other groups who believe false teaching then the false teaching must be right?

You hold to a limited dualism, limited only by you. Think on that for a moment and let it sink in.

Penned, Pennelope, Pennnnnned - whoever you are, why do you use so many monikers?

News Item12/12/16 4:33 PM
Well  Find all comments by Well
• Thread closed
• Report abuse
B. McCausland wrote:
It has been already done. Spiritual understanding is the matter.
It is common that people objecting to matters as this do it subject to personal disagreeable agendas of their own. So it is fine
As to becoming a fool this is nothing new:
Act 26:24
Sorry, but declaring Scripture's content should not be confused with 'Being wise in your own eyes'
Please, refrain your speech, this is a Christian virtue. Thanks
It is remarkable how much godly speech and respect is missing in opposing parties like yours. One has to suspect reasons why this is so.
Take care
Translated into plain English, I have tried and no one can agree, but I'm spiritual and everyone else holds to humanistic reasoning. Look how saintly and holy I am. You're all stupid, but please don't call me a fool because that's not very Christian. You're all hypocrites and you all name call because you have an agenda.

Take care or else.

News Item12/12/16 4:13 PM
Well  Find all comments by Well
• Thread closed
• Report abuse
B. McCausland wrote:
However, by correlation it applies to tangible dress also because the purpose of dress is not fashion, but the covering of shame.
Being wise in your own eyes you are become a fool.

Prove what you say from the Bible. All your "by correlations" etc are deductions but unless you support them with clear scripture then they are not valid.

News Item12/12/16 2:36 PM
Well  Find all comments by Well
• Thread closed
• Report abuse
B. McCausland wrote:
Matters deriving significance from theological concepts should not be disdained in derision or mocked with a laugh.
Please, do not show your ignorance.
You could tell all that from a post? You are the clever one.

Robe of righteousness, is not an actual physical robe, you realize right? Just as righteousness as filthy rags did not imply that our physical clothing is filthy.

Maybe oh mighty one, you should omit references to things that are not material?

News Item12/12/16 11:52 AM
Well  Find all comments by Well
• Thread closed
• Report abuse
Unprofitable Servant wrote:
Two things, BMac, my posts were not absent of Scriptural thought and in case you missed it I showed Scriptural precedent for the times I used what you called humanstic reasoning. We must learn to rightly divide the Word of Truth and recognize Biblical principles when they are presented. Thanks
Well, you missed the theology of garments for starters. A very big mistake when dealing with someone like BM. lol

News Item4/19/14 12:32 PM
Well  Find all comments by Well
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
That's fine by me; when the rapture takes place they can have all the government positions they want. I'll even chip in my house. ??

News Item3/27/14 1:30 PM
well  Find all comments by well
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
This article is about the sick and tragic death of aborted infants.

The posts below have focused on Mormonism, Roman Catholicism, disclaimers, lotion, idolatry and the statue of Liberty???

You may ask what the reason for that is? It has to do with 'priorities' for some people.

Judgment by some is about religious tolerance before the news comment!!!

News Item1/31/11 3:13 PM
well  Find all comments by well
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
Jim Lincoln wrote:
unfortunately the Anglican Church started out as syncretic and a compromise.

Charles Spurgeon wrote:
the State Church, which the great reformers had planted, and which some of them had watered with their blood, presented the spectacle which went far to justify the sarcasm of an eminent writer, that she possessed "A Popish Liturgy, a Calvinistic Creed, and an Arminian Clergy."

But Jim
Two ANGLICAN Liberal Bishops helped to write your NASB Greek text....

....even whilst CHS was preaching in the Tabernacle.

....then there is all that Popish influence coming into the modern versions, such as the NASB and the NIV from the Vaticanus text and Westcott and Hort's Popish convictions.

News Item1/31/11 3:05 PM
well  Find all comments by well
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
Jim Lincoln wrote:
Yes, gentlemen, you do need some reading material...

Dr. Daniel Wallace wrote: uphold as the only Holy Bible a translation that, as lucid as it was in its day, four hundred years later makes the gospel seem antiquated and difficult to understand. It takes little thought to see who is behind such a conspiracy.

But Jim
You are still avoiding the simple fact that GOD used the KING JAMES VERSION for 400 years - and continues to do so - to teach the truth and build His Church.

But Jim
You are still avoiding the simple fact that the Anglican Liberal Heretics Westcott andf Hort, who were very popish leaning - AND the Vaticanus RC text were used to form the NASB and other modern versions.

So you and Danny boy have failed to get your arguement off the ground.

BTW Tell Danny boy that the Word of God is never nor has ever been "antiquated"

News Item12/27/07 7:38 PM
Well | Praise God  Find all comments by Well
• Thread closed
• Report abuse
JD wrote:
I am going to admit that I just plain cannot read and comprehend the written language.

Sean E. Harris
Is Satan Bound Now or Later

The Revelation of Jesus Christ
Sunday - AM
Berean Baptist Church
Play! | MP4 | RSS

The Church Growing
Richard Caldwell Jr.
Founders Baptist Church
Staff Picks..

Larry Wessels
Early Church History #2

Christian Answers of Austin
Transcript!Play! | MP4

E. A. Johnston
When It Rained Hell Out Of..

Evangelistic Message
Evangelism Awakening
Transcript!Play! | MP3

A Secret Rapture?
Dr. Sacha Walicord

SPONSOR | 10,100+


The chief work of the Holy Spirit is to make men holy. ... J. Stuart Holden

Gospel of John
Cities | Local | Personal

iPhone + iPad
Church App
Church App
Fire Tablet
Chromecast TV
Apple TV
Android TV
Amazon Fire TV
Amazon Echo
Kindle Reader

Uploading Sermons
Uploading Videos
Tips & Tricks
YouTube Screencasts

Weekly Newsletter
Staff Picks Feed
SA Newsroom
RSS | Twitter | Facebook
Sermon Dashboard | Info
Audio | Video | Podcast
Sermon Player | Video
Church Finder | Info
Mobile & Apps
Live Webcasting
Listen Line
Events Support
Transcription | PowerClips
Business Cards
SOLO Sites New!
Favorites New! | QR Codes
Online Donations
24x7 Radio Stream
Embed Codes
Logos | e-Sword | BLB

Transfer Agent
Protected Podcasts
Auto-Upload Sermons
Upload via FTP
Upload via Dropbox
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! New!
Advertising | Local Ads
Privacy Policy | Support Us | Stories