Dennis Petersen vs. Answers in Genesis.
Dennis Petersen came out with a very well done book on creation. A book that was praised by many YEC creationist sites. But AIG took a different stance. Instead of saying they disagreed with certain subjects on creation on Petersen's book. They took each subject they disagreed with, debunked it, used demeaning words, etc... And at the end suggested that the reader of the AIG website not buy Petersen's book. I have to wonder how much money Petersen lost because of the wording AIG used? AIG hated Petersen's book so much, they wrote a 14 page detailed criticism condemning the book, which they placed as a feature article on their publicly accessible website.
Aig quote about Petersen's book:
| With heavy heart, AiG must give strong thumbs down to beautifully-presented new creationist book. |
1) First the appology for what AIG is about to do (with a heavy heart). What they are showing here, is not being kind or nice to do what they are fixing to do. They are showing that they know it's wrong. It's like appologizing right before you hit someone. With a heavy heart-POW- Did that hurt? I appologized before I did it, so it should not have hurt as bad. What a joke. Is this taught anywhere in the word of God? No? Funny how it does connect with the tactics of evolutionists.
2) Notice the word MUST. I really don't know why AIG thinks they must try and do this.
3) Strong 'thumbs down'. By using quotes, this shows how much they really 'hate' this book. This book totally disproves the YEC evidence AIG does not want you to use. Mind control over said evidence is a evolutionist tactic. You can't use this unless I say so. Sounds like someone is on a ego trip as far as the subject of creation is concerned.
4) Beautifully-presented new creationist book. And one AIG is going to totally destroy. This is what I call the softening effect. It's a atheistic-evolutionist tactic to pre-soften the blow of hateful words that are about to be said.
How much did they hate this book? Look at the wording used in this one paragraph:
| Despite its good intentions, it seemed to be focusing heavily on material that was incorrect, outdated by many decades, speculative, poorly documented, and usually not peer-reviewed by the creationist scientific journals. And it was precisely because the book was so well presented that we feared greatly for the many Christians who would be misled into thinking that at least most of its evidence and arguments would be sound. |
How many ways can AIG call Petersen a lying (incorrect etc..), decieving (misled) person? This is also a evolutionist tactic. Don't come out and say what you really mean. Just imply it. This way you always have an excuse, and a way to back peddle. But if you paint a nasty picture of the person your speaking of. The rest is easier to achieve. Read that quote above again. Now, does it sound like Petersen is a nice and honest person? Or a lying decieving person? Because if your goal is to mislead people, as AIG has said, then you have to lie to achieve it, correct?
One YEC attacking another? This is one reason I have named AIG the "Pope of creation". Here's another creation website that did not like the AIG comments:
http://www.tccsa.tc/articles/p3.html
Quote:
| We also note Ham is planning on running June seminars in Australia labeled "Unlocking the Mysteries". Plagiarism is not usually regarded as a compliment? |
This does not sound like a happy creationist to me.
Side note: You see AIG. What you are doing makes other creationists have to take sides. Even though we are supposed to be one in the body of Christ, your actions separate us by criticizing everyone you disagree with, in such great detail. You do it so well, it is as if we "like" what we see in Petersen's book, then we are traitors to the cause of creation. So if we decide we like the book, we also decide to separate from AIG. Or, if we decide we like AIG better, we have to separate from Petersen and his ministry. Forcing the body of Christ to choose also separates the body of Christ within itself. Truth for creation is found in the word, not through a creation ministry. We are only able to relay what, or how we understands things so far. We are not to present what we understand as it is an absolute, and then use it to destroy other ministries.
When Christ ran into Satan and asked Satan what he was up to, Satan replied: I go to and fro, trying to see who I can kill, steal, and destroy.
Here's a positive endorsement: http://www.creationresource.org/read_reviews.htm
On the AIG site, I want everyone reading this, that's a creationist, to see just how AIG takes Petersen's book and tares it down page by page, subject by subject. You see, it's just not good enough to just disagree. AIG is going to list their disagreements page by page. Because the folks at AIG don't want you to buy a book that might un-debunk what's on their "YEC do not use, hit list of creation evidence". Why? The AIG Popes are never wrong. So go see it for yourself, and notice they can't resist to link to that page about the YEC debunked evidence. It's around the middle of the page listed here: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/0113peterson.asp They have worked so hard at debunking all this evidence, no one better say other wise.
Here's one person responding to what AIG has said:
| Thank you for your article Unleashing the Storm. We had the first edition and would probably have bought the new one. |
"Probably" means they did not, after being convinced it had mostly lies in it. Now you might think that lies is a harsh word to use. But I don't like beating around the bush by using words that only imply it, like AIG does. If they did not believe Petersen was lying, why a 14 page full debunk of Petersen's book? AIG also received several written complaints about what they did, and how they went about doing it. But, did that change their mind? Nope: http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/feedback/2003/0131.asp What is on this page more or less shows it's readers: We are not wrong, you are.
It would seem that AIG has read what has been said here. They have taken the page above (the link to them) and reinforced with supporting responses. This was done to try and solidify their stance that they are not wrong about Dennis Pettersen. I get the feeling that they dislike Pettersen as much as they dislike Hovind.
And by the way AIG. I have spoken to Pettersen about what you have done. Without going into detail, which is not what he would want me to do. I'll just say that you have put a huge burden upon his ministry, with your comments. And with AIG's comments here to someone else who complained about what was said:
| I dont think that anything could persuade you that we were not trying to wipe anyone off the map. |
I suggest that AIG calls Petersen before making such a comment and see just how bad this debunk has affected his ministry. Their lack of doing this shows they are unaware of what they have done. Or that they do not care. Or that they live in some type of fantasy world where things are not what they seem.And this comment just really takes the cake as another reader of the AIG site complains.
| We would like to build up other creation ministries, and encourage them to join in peer review efforts. |
How do you peer review the word of God?
Side note: I had a friend who has decided to side with AIG on this issue. And because of this, he has decided not to be on speaking terms with me anymore. I was more or less told that I was commiting a sin by doing this.... Destroying, and separating the body of Christ is a sin that only makes Satan more powerful. And this relationship, that no longer exist, is just another example of the AIG separating power that is part of what they do as they administer their Pope judgement on creationists, and the ministries they disagree with. My friend made the comment: But who is going to keep creation true? I did not have an answer at the time, but I now do. For man to be able to keep creation true, he would have to be able to achieve absolute truth in it. I have not met anyone that has achieved this. So upon knowing this, what view should we all conform to? AIG or God's word? Or are we entitled to different opinions as we search for truth? Or is the only truth found through AIG?
Aig creates a truth box about creation. Then wants everyone inside that box so they can control the information that comes out of it. Anyone who does not conform to the box of AIG creation truth, gets treated like Petersen and his book. The tactics used by AIG for disagreeing, is more like the tactics used by political parties during an election. Because winning the election is not about truth, it is just about winning, and coming out on top. And that's the only out come I see through what AIG does. Integrity of God's creation is not about the destruction of other ministries, Ken Ham.
